spring gully aquifer injection management plan - aplng.com.au and... · figure 8 photographs of...

Spring Gully North-West and North-East Project – Preliminary Documentation REPORT

Appendix 11: Spring Gully Aquifer Injection Management Plan Precipice Sandstone (CDN/ID 11792487)

PLAN QLD 8200 P01 PLN

CDN/ID 11792487

THE THREE

WHATS What can go wrong? What could cause it to go wrong? What can I do to prevent it?

For internal Origin use and distribution only. Subject to employee confidentiality obligations.

Once printed, this is an uncontrolled document unless issued and stamped Controlled Copy or issued under a transmittal.

Integrated Gas

SPRING GULLY AQUIFER INJECTION MANAGEMENT PLAN This document constitutes the injection management plan for the operational aquifer injection scheme into the Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully. It describes the current understanding of the existing groundwater conditions; environmental and human receptors; injection scheme operation, monitoring and reporting; and potential impacts and risks.

Review record

Rev Date Reason for issue Reviewer/s Consolidator Approver

A 9/01/2013 Issued for Review R. Morris N. Littlewood

0 28/01/2013 Issued for Use B. Stuart N. Littlewood R. Morris

1 16/2/2015 Updated A. Moser R Morris M. Renfree

2 05/11/2015 Updated R. Morris L. Helm A. Moser

2A 05/07/2017 Updated to reflect current status of activities R. Morris L. Helm A. Moser

3 06/07/2017 Issued for Use R. Morris L. Helm A. Moser

Spring Gully Aquifer Injection Management Plan Precipice Sandstone CDN/ID 11792487

Released on 06/07/2017 - Revision 3 - Status Issued For Use Document Custodian is IG-Development - Groundwater

Origin Energy Resources Limited: ABN 66 007 845 338 Page 2 of 72 Once printed, this is an uncontrolled document unless issued and stamped Controlled Copy or issued under a transmittal

Table of contents

1. Introduction 7

1.1 Purpose 7 1.2 Release Notice 7 1.3 Background 7 1.4 Site Location 8 1.5 Aquifer Injection Trials 8 1.6 Other Aquifer Injection Operations 8 1.7 Groundwater Management Philosophy 8

2. Groundwater Conditions 10

2.1 Geological Setting 10 2.2 Hydrostratigraphy 13 2.3 Hydraulic Properties 13 2.4 Groundwater Levels and Flow Directions 15 2.5 Groundwater Quality 16 2.6 Groundwater Use 18

2.6.1 Landholder Bores 18 2.6.2 Potable Town Water Supply Bores 20 2.6.3 Groundwater Extraction 20

2.7 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems including Springs 21 2.8 Potential Effects of Coal Seam Gas Development 25 2.9 Environmental Values of the Target Aquifer 25

3. Injection System 26

3.1 Water Profile 26 3.2 Treatment System 26

3.2.1 Spring Gully Water Treatment Facility 26 3.2.2 Permeate Reinjection Plant 29 3.2.3 Summary of Chemicals Used in the Treatment Process 31 3.2.4 Summary of Process Monitoring 31

3.3 Injection Bores 32 3.3.1 Locations 32 3.3.2 Bore Design 33

4. Modelling and Potential Impacts 34

4.1 Geochemical Compatibility Modelling 34 4.2 Predicted Hydraulic Impact Zone 34 4.3 Predicted Water Quality Impact Zone 35 4.4 Injectate Migration 36

5. System Operation 39

5.1 Injectate Water Quality Limits 39 5.2 Pressure Limits 43 5.3 Maintenance 43

5.3.1 Spring Gully WTF and PRP 43 5.3.2 Injection Bores 43

5.4 Emergency Planning and Response 43 5.4.1 HSE System Directive 44 5.4.2 Incident Management Directive 44 5.4.3 Emergency Response Plan 44

7. Monitoring and Reporting 45

7.1 Flow and Pressure Monitoring 45




7.1.1 Injection Bores 45 7.1.2 Monitoring Bores 45

7.2 Water Quality Monitoring 46 7.2.1 Injection Bores 46 7.2.3 Monitoring Bores 47

7.3 Spring Monitoring 48 7.4 Data Assessment 49

7.4.1 Flow and Pressure Monitoring Data 49 7.4.2 Water Quality Monitoring Data 49 7.4.3 Springs Monitoring Data 49

7.5 Non-compliance Response 49 7.6 Reporting 50 7.7 Compliance Tracking 50 7.9 Risk Assessment 51

8. References 68

9. Document information and history 70

Appendix A : Material Safety Data Sheets 71

Appendix B Geochemical Assessment Report 72




Table of Figures

Figure 1 Site location plan 9

Figure 2 Surface and structural geology map 10

Figure 3 North-south cross section through project area (refer to Figure 2 for location) 11

Figure 4 East-west cross section through project area (refer to Figure 2 for location of cross section) 12

Figure 5 Precipice Sandstone potentiometric surface map (reduced water level m AHD) 15

Figure 6 Piper tri-linear diagram for the Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully 17

Figure 7 Landholder bores sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater 19

Figure 8 Photographs of Surat Basin mound spring taken in 2012 and 2013 22

Figure 9 Precipice Sandstone springs and potentially baseflow-connected watercourses 24

Figure 10 Historical and forecast rates of treated CSG water production and injection 26

Figure 11 Spring Gully water treatment facility process flow diagram 28

Figure 12 Spring Gully water permeate reinjection plant process flow diagram 30

Figure 13 Spring Gully operational injection scheme bore layout 32

Figure 14 Construction of DRP-WI-2R and DRP-WI-3R (schematic) 33

Figure 15 Predicted injection well (orange) and monitoring bore (blue) headrise 35

Figure 16 Predicted water quality impact zone by volume Injected 36

Figure 17 Inferred injectate migration 38

Figure 18 Monitoring locations 48




List of Tables

Table 1 Project team and qualifications 7

Table 2 Hydrostratigraphic column 14

Table 3 Water quality of the Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully prior to start of injection trial 16

Table 4 Surveyed Precipice Sandstone landowner and monitoring bores within 35 km of injection site 18

Table 5 Potable town water supply bores sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater 20

Table 6 Non-petroleum and gas groundwater extraction from the Precipice Sandstone 20

Table 7 Springs sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater 23

Table 8 Environmental values and associated Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) 25

Table 9 Chemicals used in the treatment process 31

Table 10 Injection and local monitoring bore co-ordinates 32

Table 11 PLC set points for injectate water quality 39

Table 12 Summary of injectate water quality compared to ADWG and ANZECC Guidelines for Livestock 40

Table 13 Flow and pressure monitoring program 45

Table 14 Water quality monitoring program 47

Table 15 Origin risk matrix 52

Table 16 Assessment of risks 53




Terms and Abbreviations

Abbreviation Description ADWG Australian Drinking Water Guidelines APLNG Australia Pacific LNG Pty Ltd DBNPA 2,2-dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide BSF Braided Stream Facies BTEX Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylene CCTV Closed-circuit television CMA Cumulative Management Area CSG Coal Seam Gas DF Disc Filtration EIS Environmental Impact Statement EV Environmental Value GAB Great Artesian Basin GABSI Great Artesian Basin Sustainability Initiative GDE Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem GWDB Queensland Government’s groundwater bore database HSE Health, Safety and Environment HSEMS Health, Safety and Environment Management System IAA Immediately Affected Areas KCB Klohn Crippen Berger Pty Ltd LAA Long-term Affected Area LCL Lower Control Limit LOR Limit of reporting mbgl metres below ground level MF Membrane Filtration MoC Management of Change MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet NATA National Association of Testing Authorities NDMA N-Nitrosodiumethylamine OGIA Office of Groundwater Impact Assessment ORP Oxidation-reduction potential PL Petroleum Lease PLC Programmable Logic Controller RO Reverse osmosis SCADA Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition SGPRP Spring Gully Permeate Reinjection Plant SGWTF Spring Gully Water Treatment Facility SOP Standard operating procedure TDS Total Dissolved Solids UCL Upper Control Limit USIT Ultrasonic Imager Tool UWIR Underground Water Impact Report WERD Water Entitlements Register Database WQO Water Quality Objective




1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose This document constitutes the injection management plan for the operational injection scheme into the Precipice Sandstone at Australia Pacific LNG Pty Limited’s (APLNG’s) Spring Gully development. APLNG’s current understanding of the existing groundwater conditions, environmental and human receptors, the planned injection scheme, potential impacts, system operation, proposed monitoring and reporting, and risks from injection into the Precipice Sandstone aquifer is described herein. It satisfies the requirements for an injection management plan as identified in the Spring Gully Environmental Authority (EPPG00885313).

1.2 Release Notice This management plan was prepared and reviewed by the team indicated in Table 1.

Table 1 Project team and qualifications

Role Name Position Qualifications Relevant

Experience

Author Nathan Littlewood Hydrogeologist BSc Hons (Geology)

MSc (Hydrogeology) 15 years

Author Lauren Helm Hydrogeologist BAppSc (Enviro. Science)

RPGeo (Hydrogeology) 11 years

Reviewer Ryan Morris Staff Hydrogeologist BScHons (Geology)


Reviewer Andrew Moser Groundwater Manager BSc (Applied Geology)


1.3 Background Origin Energy (Origin), on behalf of APLNG, operates the Spring Gully Coal Seam Gas (CSG) development. Historically, CSG water from the Spring Gully development was treated via reverse osmosis (RO), then either discharged to Eurombah Creek, or used to irrigate a Pongamia plantation, with some minor use for construction and other purposes. In 2012, APLNG assessed the technical feasibility of the injection of treated water from its CSG operations in to aquifers within the project area, in accordance with commitments made in APLNG’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), state and federal conditions for the project, and the Coal Seam Gas Water Management Policy (State of Queensland, 2012). This is consistent with current policy, which permits injection of water for aquifer augmentation at similar or better quality than in-situ groundwater.

Hydraulic and geochemical assessments confirmed the technical feasibility of injection into the Precipice Sandstone aquifer at the Spring Gully site. Following the completion of a successful injection trial in 2012, Origin revised the water management strategy. Operational aquifer injection is now the primary means of managing CSG water at the Spring Gully Development Area. Permeate in excess of the maximum capacity of the plant is managed through conjunctive Pongamia irrigation, storage in feed ponds for injection at a later date, construction water use or release to the Eurombah Creek as a lowest priority.

The treatment system installed for the trial had a capacity of approximately 2.3 ML/day. To convert the trial to an operational scheme, the treatment plant was expanded to a nominal maximum capacity of 8.1 ML/day and two additional injection bores were installed. One Precipice Sandstone monitoring bores is located within the injection borefield (refer Figure 1), with several additional Precipice Sandstone bores monitored further afield (refer Figure 18).




1.4 Site Location The Spring Gully site lies approximately 71 km northeast of Roma in central Queensland. The aquifer injection system is adjacent to the Spring Gully water treatment facility (SGWTF) on Wybara Road within PL195. The injection site is located between the RO plant and the water storage ponds. The site location and layout are shown in Figure 1. The nearest surface water feature is Bluff Creek 600 m to the southwest of the injection site. Bluff Creek flows southwards into Eurombah Creek, both of which are ephemeral water courses.

1.5 Aquifer Injection Trials An aquifer injection trial at the Spring Gully injection site was undertaken in accordance with the Spring Gully Environmental Authority (EPPG00885313) and the Exclusion Decision for the Spring Gully Aquifer Injection Trial (SRN00022). Data acquisition in support of the trials commenced in 2010 and injection commenced in April 2012, with authorisation for 12 months. The objectives of the aquifer injections trials were to:

Assess the hydraulic response of the injection bore and the target aquifer;

Appraise the potential for adverse chemical change due to injectate-groundwater and / or injectate-rockmass chemical reactions;

Appraise the potential for clogging of the aquifer; and,

Provide data to enable completion of a functional design and costing for an operational scheme (should injection prove technically feasible).

Extensive testing and assessment were undertaken as part of the injection trials. Wireline geophysical investigations were carried out during the drilling and construction of the injection trial well (DRP-WI-1), which provided information on lithological and hydraulic characteristics of the target aquifer and overlying units. Core was cut from monitoring bore (DMP01) at the site to allow detailed mineralogical and geochemical characterisation of the target formation. Sampling and analysis of injectate, native groundwater and target rock mineralogy allowed detailed geochemical modelling to forecast mixing reactions and geochemical compatibility. The injection tests provided information on the capacity for the target aquifer to accommodate forecast long-term injection volumes and to validate the geochemical modelling to assess potential impacts on the local groundwater system.

Details of the trials, the trial results and an assessment of feasibility are provided in the document Spring Gully Aquifer Injection Trial Technical Feasibility Assessment (Q-8200-95-TR-0015) (Origin, 2013). The geochemical compatibility report (KCB, 2011a) is presented in Appendix B.

The high transmissivity of the Precipice Sandstone BSF and favourable geochemical conditions indicated that a full scale injection program is technically feasible and a viable water management option at Spring Gully.

1.6 Other Aquifer Injection Operations

In addition to Spring Gully, APLNG has assessed the technical feasibility of the injecting treated water at two locations within the Surat Basin – Reedy Creek and Condabri. Pre-injection investigations were also undertaken at APLNG’s Talinga operations, however these did not proceed to an injection trial.

APLNG’s Reedy Creek injection site is located within the Combabula Development Area, approximately 50 km south-east of the Spring Gully injection site. The scheme operates 12 Precipice Sandstone injection bores, with a maximum treatment plant capacity of approximately 40 ML/day. APLNG carried out an injection trial into the Precipice Sandstone at its Condabri operations, located approximately 145 km south-east of the Spring Gully injection site. There are currently no plan for an operational injection scheme at this site.

The locations of the Reedy Creek and Condabri injection sites are shown on Figure 1. Origin is unaware of any other Precipice Sandstone aquifer injection operations occurring in the Surat Basin. Santos/GLNG has an injection scheme targeting the Gubberamunda Sandstone at its Roma operations, however the scheme is not currently operational.

1.7 Groundwater Management Philosophy

The groundwater management framework adopted by APLNG is based on the principles of performance assessment and adaptive management. Adaptive management is a structured, iterative process of decision-making with a focus on reducing uncertainty over time via systems monitoring and continuous improvement to achieve the desired environmental and operational outcomes of the project. This is implemented through a modelling-monitoring-management action approach, where each component of the approach is used to inform




the other. Should the monitoring and modelling indicate an increase in risk to potential receptors due to aquifer injection, the adequacy of the monitoring can be reviewed to assist in the management of that risk.

Figure 1 Site location plan

6900

000

6950

000

7000

000

7050

000

7100

000

7150

000




2. Groundwater Conditions

The following section provides a description of the geological and hydrogeological environment in the vicinity of the Spring Gully. The primary focus is the Precipice Sandstone aquifer, which is the target formation for the injection scheme. For further detail, refer to the Spring Gully Reinjection Management Plan (Origin, 2010) and the Spring Gully Aquifer Injection Trial Technical Feasibility Assessment (Origin, 2013).

2.1 Geological Setting

The Spring Gully injection site is situated close to the boundary between the surface outcrop of the Bowen and Surat Basins. The area overlies a basement high named the Comet Ridge. The Surat Basin is a sub-basin of the Great Artesian Basin (GAB), and while the uppermost aquifer of the Bowen Basin (Clematis Sandstone) has traditionally been included in the GAB hydrostatigraphy, it is not present at Spring Gully. The two basins are separated by a major unconformity, with the Bowen Basin sediments below the contact.

The surface geology of Spring Gully and the surrounding area is shown on Figure 2. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show cross-sections through the project area, with their traces shown on Figure 2. CSG and associated water are produced from the Permian age Bandanna Formation within the Bowen Basin sequence. Although both sequences dip to the south-east, the Bowen Basin sediments are more steeply dipping, and because of the unconformity, this results in a subcrop contact between the Bandana Formation and the Precipice Sandstone approximately 15 km west of the injection site (see Figure 4). The closest surface outcrop of Precipice Sandstone is approximately 30 km up dip (north) of the Spring Gully aquifer injection site.

No large regional scale faults are mapped within the immediate vicinity of the injection site (refer Figure 2). The Wallumbilla Fault, which defines the western margin of the Comet Ridge, is approximately 25 km to the west of the injection site. Numerous small scale faults have been interpreted both at the surface and in drill holes. Seismic surveys undertaken across the project area indicate that these structures are not continuous over significant distances in either horizontal or vertical directions. No faults have been interpreted to be vertically continuous from the Precipice Sandstone through to any other aquifer.

Figure 2 Surface and structural geology map




Figure 3 North-south cross section through project area (refer to Figure 2 for location)




Figure 4 East-west cross section through project area (refer to Figure 2 for location of cross section)




2.2 Hydrostratigraphy

Table 2 illustrates the hydrostratigraphy in the vicinity of Spring Gully. The target formation for injection is the Precipice Sandstone aquifer, which is the earliest deposit in the Surat Basin (Lower Jurassic), and is encountered at a depth of approximately 430 metres below ground level (mbgl). The Precipice Sandstone is overlain by the Evergreen Formation (Jurassic) and underlain by the Rewan Formation (Triassic) at the Spring Gully injection site. The Evergreen and Rewan Formations are considered to be significant regional aquitards that separate the target aquifer from other aquifers (OGIA, 2016). Overlying the Evergreen Formation is the Hutton Sandstone, which outcrops in the vicinity of Spring Gully, but may be covered by a thin veneer of Injune Creek Group rocks. The Rewan Formation separates the Precipice Sandstone from the underlying Permian age Bandanna Formation, which is the target CSG reservoir of the Spring Gully gas field.

At the formational level, apart from to the west of the Spring Gully field where the Bandanna Formation is in contact with the Precipice Sandstone (Section 2.1), there are generally significant aquitards separating the Precipice Sandstone from other aquifers. Thus, the potential for natural formational hydraulic interconnection with the Precipice Sandstone is limited to these subcrop contact areas, located approximately 15 km west of the injection site at the closest point. Two operational APLNG groundwater monitoring bores (SG-PB1 and SG-PB3) are located over the subcrop areas.

At a sub-formational level, each of the GAB aquifers tends to comprise sandier, higher permeability zones, with lower permeability zones surrounding. This is the most defined in the Precipice Sandstone, with the lower-most portion comprising the Braided Stream Facies (BSF), which is generally the highest permeability formation in the Surat Basin.

2.3 Hydraulic Properties

Hydraulic testing (pump out) was completed on the trial injection bore (DRP-WI–1) in November 2010. A constant rate test at 21 L/sec for 48 hours resulted in less than 0.2 m drawdown in groundwater level in the Precipice Sandstone monitoring bore (DMP01), located approximately 38 m from the pumped bore. This small amount of displacement confirms the extremely high transmissivity of the Precipice BSF, and reinforces observations elsewhere in the vicinity of Spring Gully (KCB, 2012) and from other bores installed in to the Precipice Sandstone within the basin (Quarantotto, 1989). KCB (2011b) provides a range in transmissivity of 10,000-14,000 m2/day and a storativity of 2.6 x 10-4 for the Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully. These results were confirmed during the injection trials.




Table 2 Hydrostratigraphic column

Province Age Spring Gully / Comet Ridge Stratigraphy Aquifer/Aquitard

Su

rat

Bas

in

Jura

ssi

c In

jun

e C

reek

G

rou

p

Walloon Coal Measures Minor coal and sandstone Aquifers with siltstone and mudstone Aquitards (very thin or not present at Spring Gully)

Bu

nd

amb

a G

rou

p

Hutton Sandstone Aquifer - outcropping formation at Spring Gully

Evergreen Formation Aquitard

Boxvale Sandstone Member Aquifer

Basal Evergreen Formation Aquitard

Precipice Sandstone Major Aquifer

Bo

wen

Bas

in

Tri

assi

c

Moolayember Formation Aquitard (not present at Spring Gully)

Clematis Group Sandstones Aquifer (not present at Spring Gully)

Rewan Group Upper Aquitard underlain by variable minor Aquifer

Per

mia

n

Bla

ckw

ate

r G

rou

p Bandanna Formation

(Coal Measures) Minor coal and sandstone Aquifers with siltstone and mudstone Aquitards

Kaloola Member Aquitard

Up

per

Bac

k C

k G

rou

p

Black Alley Shale Aquitard

Mantuan Formation Mixed Aquitards and very minor Aquifers

Upper Tinowon Formation Aquitard

Lower Tinowon Formation Mixed Aquitards and very minor Aquifers

Ingelara Formation Aquitard

Lo

wer

Bac

k C

reek

Gro

up

Aldebaran Sandstone Minor Aquifer

Reids Dome Beds Aquitard

Bas

emen

t

Dev

on

ian

Timbury Hills Formation Aquitard




2.4 Groundwater Levels and Flow Directions

Groundwater level information on a regional scale for Precipice Sandstone bores has been compiled from the Queensland Government’s groundwater bore database (GWDB), APLNG landholder bore baseline survey data, and APLNG monitoring bores, to assess groundwater elevations and infer groundwater flow directions. Figure 5 shows the potentiometric surface map for the Precipice Sandstone developed using aggregated water level data collected over many decades. Where multiple measurements exist for a bore, the most recent has been used.

The potentiometric surface shows a groundwater divide oriented northwest-southeast broadly along the axis of the APLNG tenure, which also broadly corresponds with the Great Dividing Range. Spring Gully is located to the north of the groundwater divide and regional groundwater flow in the Precipice Sandstone is expected to be towards the north-east in the vicinity of the injection site, but may differ on a local scale.

Prior to any operational injection, the standing groundwater level observed in the Precipice Sandstone at the Spring Gully injection site was approximately 20 metres below ground level (mbgl). The standing groundwater level in the Spring Gully Camp Bore was significantly deeper at approximately 104 mbgl, however the camp bore is located at a higher elevation than the injection site bore. The head difference between the two bores is approximately 1 m towards the Camp Bore, inferring a northerly component to the flow direction. To the east of the trial site on the Echo Hills property, the Precipice Sandstone is artesian and has a wellhead pressure of approximately 14 mH2O, with the hydraulic gradient towards the east.

Hutton Sandstone groundwater levels are monitored at the injection site in monitoring bore DMH01 (Refer Figure 1). Prior to any operational injection, the relative groundwater levels between the Precipice Sandstone and Hutton Sandstone at the Spring Gully injection site indicated an upward hydraulic gradient of approximately 3 m. Groundwater levels in DMH01 have shown a slow declining trend since mid-2012. This supports the conceptual model that the Precipice Sandstone is not in direct hydraulic connection with the overlying formations via potential vertical fracturing through the intervening Evergreen Formation aquitard in the Spring Gully area.

Figure 5 Precipice Sandstone potentiometric surface map (reduced water level m AHD)

Injune

Taroom

Roma

YulebaMiles

Chinchilla

Wandoan

Wallumbilla

600000 650000 700000 750000 800000 850000 900000

5075100125150175200225250275300325350375400425450475500525550575600625650675700

APLNG Lease

Roads

Reedy Creek Injection Site

Rivers

Towns

Precipice Sandstone Outcrop

Spring Gully Injection Site

Data point




2.5 Groundwater Quality

Background Precipice Sandstone groundwater quality samples were collected from monitoring and water supply bores accessing the Precipice Sandstone in the vicinity of Spring Gully. Analysis of these samples was undertaken to establish baseline conditions, provide input to geochemical modelling, and allow assessment of changes related to injection. Summary statistics of selected parameters are presented in Table 3. To calculate the median and 95th percentile, values below the detection limit were set at the detection limit, hence the statistics presented represent conservative values.

The data indicates that background total dissolved solids (TDS) in the Precipice Sandstone aquifer at Spring Gully ranges from 78 mg/L to109 mg/L, with a median concentration of 90 mg/L and a 95th percentile of 106 mg/L. Background field pH measurements of the Precipice Sandstone groundwater range from pH 6.5 to pH 8.5, with a median of pH 7.2.

The majority of the maximum values for the water quality parameters presented in Table 3 did not exceed relevant thresholds for potable use. The key exception to this is for iron, for which exceeded the Australia Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) 0.3 mg/L aesthetic value for drinking water (NHMRC, NRMMC, 2011). Slight exceedances were also noted over the ADWG aesthetic value for manganese of 0.1 mg/L and for the ADGW health value for lead of 0.01 mg/L.

Chemical species of concern for injection purposes include iron, which may result in precipitation, encrustation, fouling oxidation or stimulation of iron bacteria populations should geochemical conditions change. Other potential elements of concern include arsenic and lead as these may pose a health risk to human or stock health if present in concentrations exceeding guideline values.

The Piper tri-linear diagram presented as Figure 6 shows that the Precipice Sandstone groundwater in the vicinity of Spring Gully is strongly sodium dominant, with a higher bicarbonate concentration than chloride. Aqueous equilibrium speciation simulation results (KCB, 2011a) also show that groundwater in the Precipice Sandstone is close to thermodynamic equilibrium with the aquifer matrix minerals.

Table 3 Water quality of the Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully prior to start of injection trial

Parameter No. of results

No. of detects Range Median 95%ile

pH 18 18 6.5-8.5 7.2 8.3

Electrical Conductivity (µS/cm) 14 14 134-281 191 245

TDS (mg/L) 7 7 78-109 90 106

Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 15 9 <1-41 5 24

Total Organic Carbon (mg/L) 4 0 <1 1 1

Fluoride (mg/L) 18 18 <0.1-<0.5 0.1 0.3

Arsenic (total) (mg/L) 9 0 <0.001-<0.005 0.001 0.003

Boron (total) (mg/L) 9 1 <0.05-0.06 0.05 0.06

Barium (total) (mg/L) 9 9 0.01-0.35 0.07 0.25

Copper (total) (mg/L) 9 9 0.001-0.5 0.005 0.3

Iron (mg/L) 9 9 0.79-7.62 0.92 7.46

Manganese (mg/L) 9 9 0.01-0.21 0.051 0.21

Lead (mg/L) 9 6 <0.001-0.02 0.004 0.02

Strontium (total) (mg/L) 9 9 0.01-0.2 0.09 0.2

Nitrogen (total oxidised) (mg/L) 18 13 <0.01-0.06 0.02 0.04

Phosphorus (mg/L) 15 14 <0.01-0.1 0.05 0.09

Gross Alpha (Bq/L) 1 0 <0.2 0.2 0.2

Gross beta activity - 40K (Bq/L) 1 1 0.2 0.2 0.2




Figure 6 Piper tri-linear diagram for the Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully




2.6 Groundwater Use

2.6.1 Landholder Bores

A landholder bore inventory has been completed to locate and collect baseline information from existing water supply bores on APLNG tenure. A list of landowner Precipice Sandstone bores with 35 km of the Spring Gully injection site are provided in Table 4. With the exception of the bore that supplies water to the Spring Gully permanent camp, the bores are used for stock watering purposes.

The locations of landholder bores that tap the Precipice Sandstone within the Surat Basin are shown on Figure 7. For bores located off APLNG tenure, this information has been compiled with data from the Underground Water Impact Report (UWIR) for the Surat Cumulative Management Area (CMA) (OGIA, 2016). The majority of landholder bores are used for stock and domestic purposes.

Table 4 Surveyed Precipice Sandstone landowner and monitoring bores within 35 km of injection site

Distance from Spring Gully injection site (km) Bore Id / RN Bore primary purpose

5.6 Camp bore Camp water supply

13.3 Strathblane-WB1-B Stock

13.6 RN123348 Stock

14.6 RN58623 Stock

15.0 Not yet allocated* Stock

16.5 RN58428 Stock

19.2 RN58341 Stock




32.7 RN58726 Stock

33.1 RN123501 Stock

Notes:

* Landholder make good bore drilled 2016 / 2017




Figure 7 Landholder bores sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater

6750

000

6800

000

6850

000

6900

000

6950

000

7000

000

7050

000

7100

000

7150

000

7200

000

7250

000




2.6.2 Potable Town Water Supply Bores

There is currently no definitive register of potable town water supply bores for the study area. APLNG conducted a desktop assessment of the Queensland Government’s GWDB, the Water Entitlements Register Database (WERD), and the GAB WRP stock and domestic bore database, as well as contacting the local councils within the Surat Basin, to identify towns that utilise Precipice Sandstone groundwater for water supplies. Table 5 summarises these findings.

Table 5 Potable town water supply bores sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater

Town RN Entitlement (ML/year) Distance to Spring Gully Injection Site (km)

Wandoan 15793

58700 800 90

Taroom

89937

15793

32735

35740

500 85

Mitchell 13951

387 775 120

Miles 58410 400 135

2.6.3 Groundwater Extraction

The UWIR (OGIA, 2016) provides an estimate of the number of bores and annual extraction from each formation in the Surat CMA. Table 6 summarises the number of bores and groundwater extraction estimates for the Precipice Sandstone.

Table 6 Non-petroleum and gas groundwater extraction from the Precipice Sandstone

Aquifer Number of bores Total

Precipice Sandstone

Non-S&D S&D

29 293 322

Estimated Groundwater Extraction (ML/year)

Total (ML/year) Agricultural Industrial

Town Water Supply

S&D

1,970 2,092 1,704 672 6,438




2.7 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems including Springs

Groundwater dependant ecosystems (GDEs) are commonly associated with springs and are classified as ecosystems which have their species composition and natural ecological processes determined by and reliant on groundwater. The UWIR (OGIA, 2016) defines a spring vent as a single point in the landscape where groundwater is discharged at the surface and a spring complex is a group of spring vents located in similar geology and fed by the same source aquifer that are positioned in close proximity to each other.

Fensham and Fairfax (2002) define two distinct types of springs: recharge and discharge springs. Recharge springs are situated in the recharge zones of the GAB, which coincides with the outcrop of the aquifers. The water flow rates from recharge springs show variability relative to recent rainfall events, attesting to their proximity to the source of the recharge and local flow systems. Fensham and Fairfax (2002) suggest that all springs of the Springsure Supergroup, which incorporates the Surat Basin, are recharge springs. The closest GAB discharge springs, which are not affected by recent rainfall events, are outside of the Surat Basin at Eulo.

Although Fensham and Fairfax (2002) suggest all the Surat Basin springs are recharge springs, there tends to be two main types of spring morphology, which somewhat relate to the proximity to the formation outcrop. Habermehl (2002) identifies two main types of spring morphologies which apply to the Precipice Sandstone springs.

1. Springs located where the formation outcrops occur where rainfall infiltration exceeds the through-flow capacity of the rock and the infiltrated water flows of the formation via fractures and bedding plane joints. In this case, the infiltrating water does not reach the water table, and therefore cannot be affected by aquifer drawdown. These springs tend to have high temporal variability.

2. Where the aquifer is close to the ground surface and there is a conduit from the aquifer through the overlying aquitard to the ground surface, more typical of a discharge spring. These types of springs are commonly referred to as mound springs and in the Surat Basin are often expressed as an accumulation of peat from the cyclical growth and die-back of spring wetland vegetation. Flow and surface expression of these springs will change with changing aquifer pressures; however, even though they discharge where the source aquifer is overlain by a confining bed, their proximity to the outcrop of the source aquifer means that they show a wide range in variability.

The variability of water availability at the springs is highlighted with the photographs of one of the spring vents within the Dawson River spring complex, presented as Figure 8. Comparisons between a springs monitoring event in 2013 and previous events in 2012 and 2011 (SKM, 2013) indicate:

Evidence (salt scalding and collapsing of mound structures) to indicate that many springs are in a phase of shrinking in size.

Several springs had completely ceased flowing, and were almost not recognisable in the field.

Landholder information confirmed spring discharge was at the lowest in memory. Several landholders commented that spring discharge has been reducing since the 1940’s.

In relation to watercourse springs, the recent flooding has effectively removed much silt and gravel in the watercourses, such that groundwater discharge is less hindered and the discharge appears to be enhanced. This is an interesting note considering the springs away from the watercourses are in a state of decline

Observations during vegetation surveys indicated how resilient some species are, existing in some of the most degraded springs.

The vast majority of springs have no real management in place and are damaged by stock and / or drainage.

There appears to be considerable changes in spring discharge, leading to the conclusion that local flow systems which are directly influenced by recent climate conditions dominate spring flow changes.

DNRM indicates that pressure declines at the springs have been between 5 m and 15 m, although the decline is as great as 60 m in the Eulo spring area (State of Queensland, 2005). Fensham and Fairfax (2002) estimate that nearly 90% of springs have become inactive over the past 100 years. While the Great Artesian Basin Sustainability Initiative (GABSI) has had success in restoring aquifer pressures and reviving springs, the focus of this program has been around the discharge springs sourced from aquifers that are shallower than the Precipice




Sandstone, and will end in 2014 (ABC, 2013). Hence, while there is a high degree of short-term variability, there is an existing underlying long–term decline in spring health.

Figure 8 Photographs of Surat Basin mound spring taken in 2012 and 2013

2012 2013

Spring vents and potentially baseflow-connected watercourses within the Surat Basin, as identified using the UWIR (OGIA, 2016) and the Report on Great Artesian Basin Water Resource Plan River Baseflow from Aquifers of the GAB (AGE, 2005; updated by DERM in 2010) are shown on Figure 9.

There are no springs sourced from the Precipice Sandstone or potentially baseflow-connected watercourses in the vicinity of the injection site. The closest spring sourced from the Precipice Sandstone aquifer is Yebna 2 (Complex 591), located approximately 30 km to the north. More than half of the springs are located in outcrop areas, and are therefore likely be highly variable in flow regime due to their proximity to the recharge source.

The Spring Gully and Reedy Creek aquifer injection schemes have the potential to cause increases in water levels at springs and hence increased water availability to the vegetation at the spring. Groundwater availability influences growth, reproduction, recruitment, and mortality of individual plants or species, but severe changes in water availability are required for changes to ecosystem function and structure, such that there is a change in species composition (Eamus et al., 2006).

At an individual organism level, a 2009 study into the potential environmental impacts of managed aquifer recharge schemes found that aquatic organisms are unlikely to be adversely affected by the hydraulic effects associated with injection (Dillon et al., 2009). It was found that head variations are likely to be highly dampened in groundwater discharge zones; therefore, groundwater discharge rates are unlikely to be significantly affected (Dillon et al., 2009). Furthermore, for aquatic organisms and wetland vegetation, the study found no threshold above which water table increases would cause harm and no threshold rate of water level change (Dillon et al., 2009).

Eurombah Creek, a tributary of the Dawson River, is the closest surface water feature to the Spring Gully injection site. The Atlas of Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (BoM, 2012) identifies Eurombah Creek as having high potential for groundwater interaction, however the source aquifer is not identified. The UWIR (OGIA, 2016) reports that sections of the watercourse are fed by baseflow from the Upper Hutton Sandstone. They are therefore not connected to the Precipice Sandstone. The closest watercourse to Spring Gully that has the potential for baseflow interaction with the Precipice Sandstone is the Dawson River. This watercourse lies approximately 30 km to the north of the Spring Gully injection site.




Table 7 Springs sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater

Spring Complex Name Spring

Complex Number

Number of Spring

Vents in Spring

Complex

Distance from Nearest Mapped

Precipice Sandstone

Outcrop (km)

Distance to Spring Gully

Injection Site (km)

Responsible tenure holder (OGIA, 2016)

Yebna 2 591 1 0km (On outcrop) 30 Santos

311 311 17 0km (On outcrop) 30 Santos

Springrock Creek 561 1 15 40 Santos

Robin 327 1 0km (On outcrop) 55 NA

Lonely Eddie 339 4 0km (On outcrop) 65 NA

Crusoe 725 2 0km (On outcrop) 80 NA

Ital 331 2 0km (On outcrop) 100 NA

Carnassier 722 9 0km (On outcrop) 110 NA

Tucker 330 1 <1 110 NA

Boggomoss 5 41 5 110 NA

Dawson River 6 6 3 8.5 115 NA

Starling 370 1 9 115 NA

Sprocket 371 2 0km (On outcrop) 120 NA

Dawson River 4 4 1 2 120 NA

Dawson River 3 3 27 0km (On outcrop 120 NA

Gasman 332 1 0km (On outcrop) 120 NA

Prices 580 4 0km (On outcrop) 120 NA

Cockatoo 362 20 2.5 120 NA

Onkaparinga 383 3 0km (On outcrop) 125 NA

Carnarvon Gorge 296 5 0km (On outcrop) 135 NA

Wounded 304 3 0km (On outcrop) 160 NA

Notonly 736 1 <1 165 NA




Figure 9 Precipice Sandstone springs and potentially baseflow-connected watercourses

6750

000

6800

000

6850

000

690

0000

6950

000

7000

000

705

0000

710

0000

7150

000

7200

000

7250

000




2.8 Potential Effects of Coal Seam Gas Development

OGIA released the second iteration of the Surat CMA UWIR in September 2016, with updated groundwater flow modelling and updated predicted impacts to groundwater levels resulting from existing and planned CSG activities, including those at Spring Gully. Under the UWIR, affected areas were defined based on trigger thresholds of 5 m groundwater level decline in consolidated aquifers, such as the Precipice Sandstone, and 2 m groundwater level decline for unconsolidated aquifers. Immediately Affected Areas (IAA) (less than three years) and Long-term Affected areas (LAA) (greater than three years) were also defined. The IAA and LAA for the Precipice Sandstone, as reported in the UWIR (OGIA, 2016), are included on Figure 7 and Figure 9.

There are no bores identified inside of the Precipice IAA on APLNG tenure, either because none have ever been drilled or they had already been decommissioned prior to the release of the updated UWIR. The LAA for the Precipice Sandstone corresponds to a subcrop of the Bandanna Formation beneath the Precipice Sandstone. Nine bores are identified in the Precipice Sandstone LAA.

2.9 Environmental Values of the Target Aquifer

The environmental values (EVs) of water are the qualities that make it capable of supporting aquatic ecosystems and human uses. EVs and Water Quality Objectives (WQO) for the Dawson River sub-basin have been identified from DEHP (2011) Dawson River Sub-basin Environmental Values and Water Quality Objectives Basin No. 130 (part), including all waters of the Dawson River Sub-basin except the Callide Creek Catchment. This document is identified in the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009 as relevant for the Dawson River catchment within which Spring Gully is located. The Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (2009) defer to more local guidelines were they exist, therefore the guideline values identified in DEHP (2011) are relevant.

To identify EVs, groundwater within the Dawson River sub-basin area is subdivided into four categories – shallow groundwaters (e.g. windmill bores), Precipice Sandstone bores, CSG layer and Hutton Sandstone bores. The Precipice Sandstone bores category is considered the relevant category. EVs and associated WQOs as identified in DEHP (2011) are provided in Table 8.

This section should be considered in the context that there are no users of the Precipice Sandstone within the predicted water quality impact zone during the lifetime of the injection scheme.

Table 8 Environmental values and associated Water Quality Objectives (WQOs)

Environmental Value Relevant WQO (DEHP, 2011)

Aquatic ecosystems DEHP (2011) Table 14, Zone 29, Deep

Irrigation Not identified

Farm supply AWQG

Stock watering AWQG, DEHP (2011)

Aquaculture DEHP (2011) Table 6, Food Standard Code (Australia and New Zealand

Food Authority, 1996)

Human consumption Food Standard Code (Australia and New Zealand Food Authority, 1996)

Primary recreation Guidelines for Managing Risks in Recreational Waters (Australian

Government, 2008)

Drinking water DEHP (2011) Table 4

Cultural and spiritual values No recognized guidelines




3. Injection System

3.1 Water Profile

Historical water production (since the beginning of 2015 when the injection scheme commenced operation), injection volumes and the current water production and injection forecast for the Spring Gully field is shown on Figure 10. The injection treatment system has a nominal maximum design capacity of 8.1ML/day, however due to operational constraints has a reliable maximum operating rate of 4.5ML/day. The three injection bores have a combined maximum injection capacity of approximately 14 ML/day. For the purposes of forecasting the injection rate, both the reliable maximum (4.5ML/day) and the historical proportion of injected versus produced water (19%) have been used. Based on more recent injection rates, these rates provide a realistic range for the likely injection rate. The maximum total forecast volume to mid-2025 is approximately 14,500 ML, inclusive of the 1,370ML injected to 15 June 2017.

Figure 10 Historical and forecast rates of treated CSG water production and injection

3.2 Treatment System

The injectate for the Spring Gully injection scheme is reverse osmosis permeate. This is produced via the treatment of raw CSG water through the Spring Gully water treatment facility (SGWTF). Permeate is stored in the SGWTF permeate tank prior to transfer to the Spring Gully Permeate Reinjection Plant (SGPRP). The SGPRP further treats the permeate prior to injection into the Precipice Sandstone aquifer through the removal of dissolved gases and has the facility for disinfection (ultra-violet). Figure 11 provides a process flow diagram of the SGWTF and Figure 12 provides a process flow diagram of the SGPRP.

3.2.1 Spring Gully Water Treatment Facility

Gathering and storage

CSG water from the Spring Gully gas field is collected in a gathering system that is directed to the SGWTF. All CSG from the fields is directed to the ponds immediately south of the treatment facility (Pond A). The ponds are utilised to assist in the treatment process through homogenisation of the feed water and for contact with atmospheric oxygen, which allows for the precipitation of metals such as aluminium, iron and manganese. The feed pond of the SGWTF provides buffer storage capacity to be utilised as required when the SGWTF is operating at reduced capacity or during periods of plant shutdown. Saline effluent from the reverse osmosis plant is directed to different ponds (Pond B and Pond C) from which feed water is stored.




Disc Filtration

Feed water is screened to 400 m by the disc filtration (DF) unit to remove coarse solids prior to membrane filtration (MF). The turbidity of the water is monitored to ensure it is within the required limits for MF unit feed. Backwash from the DF is returned to the Feed pond.

Membrane Filtration

The MF unit is used to provide very low turbidity feed water to the downstream RO system. The MF system also includes a cleaning system which utilises sodium hypochlorite, sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) and sodium bisulphite on a daily basis to remove organic fouling and maintain the membranes. The cleaning system may also use citric acid to remove scale build-up when required. Spent cleaning solution can be directed to either of the brine pond or the Feed pond.

Batch Dose Biological Control

DBNPA (2,2-dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide) is applied to membrane filtered water for the control of biological fouling on the RO membranes. DBNPA is batch dosed for approximately 15 minutes once daily immediately before the RO unit. The average contact time for DBNPA prior to RO treatment is <0.1 hours with plant operating normally.

Reverse Osmosis

The RO system is used to remove dissolved solids from CSG water to produce a high-quality, low dissolved solids permeate stream. Dissolved solids are concentrated into a reject stream called saline effluent. Saline effluent is directed to the brine ponds (Pond B and Pond C).

The feed water to the RO system is adjusted for pH (if required) and dosed with a commercially available antiscalant (Permatreat PC-191) to reduce the scale that forms on the surface of the RO membranes. The feed water is monitored for conductivity and pH. If any of the critical limits for equipment protection are triggered, the RO feed water is recycled to the Filtrate Tank.

The RO system also includes a cleaning system which utilises citric acid and sodium hydroxide (caustic soda). Spent cleaning solutions are sent to feed or brine storage pond.

In order to ensure that the pH of treated CSG water meets the requirement for its end use, treated CSG from the RO system is blended with a small amount of filtrate from the MF unit. Continuous monitoring of pH and electrical conductivity between this dosing point and the downstream permeate tank will trigger an alarm in the event that either parameter exceeds a pre-defined alarm set-point.




Figure 11 Spring Gully water treatment facility process flow diagram

SGPRP

Pond 2Pond 1

Pond 3

Pond 4

Pond 5

Backwash

SalineEffluent

Spent cleaning solution

Sodium HydroxideSodium HypochloriteCitric AcidSodium Bisulphite

Citric AcidSodium Hydroxide

Filtered WaterConditioning Line

Untreated CSG Water

Calciumdosing

Turbidity

Disc FiltersBackwash

Membrane Filtration

MF Cleaning System

Filtrate Tank

RO Cleaning System

Reverse Osmosis

Biocide

TurbidityORP

Acid (pH control)

ConductivitypH

TemperatureORP

Antiscalant

Spent cleaningsolution

Permeate Tank

ConductivitypH

RO Feed Recycle

FiltrateRecycle

Permeate Recycle

EmergencySurface Water

Discharge

Pongamia Plantation

Minor Uses(e.g. Dust suppression,

construction, drilling)

To / from Pond 1

To / from Pond 5

Conductivity

FiltrateOverflowRecycle

pHDissolved oxygen

ConductivityTemperature

Monitoring locationAquifer




3.2.2 Permeate Reinjection Plant

Treatment components of the SGPRP are described below. The feed pumps that drive the process have a maximum pressure of approximately 350 kPa at full flow, which after pressure losses through the treatment system, equate to a maximum wellhead pressure in the order of 200 kPa. Booster pumps may be included if greater wellhead pressures are required.

Should excess injection treatment capacity be required, this may be attained by the installation of the portable treatment system used for the injection trials at Reedy Creek and Condabri. This system has the same treatment train and monitoring equipment as the system installed at Spring Gully.

Flow-Paced Biological Control

In the first stage in the SGPRP treatment process, monochloramine is added to the RO permeate to control biological fouling on the degasification membranes. Ammonium sulphate and sodium hypochlorite are mixed into the permeate to create the monochloramine. Excess ammonium sulphate is used to ensure all sodium hypochlorite is reacted to monochloramine and no free chlorine remains.

Monochloramine is dosed into the suction side of the reinjection plant feed pumps to meet a target concentration of 1 mg/L. Acceptable dosing concentrations are 0.5 mg/L to 3 mg/L. The biocide was initially be dosed in batch-mode with three batches of approximately 30 minutes each per day. A flow-paced dosing system is in the process of being installed for longer term operation.

Disinfection

Downstream of the feed pumps, the SGPRP has the capacity for disinfection of the permeate by ultra-violet. The purpose of this treatment step is to remove any biological risk associated with the RO permeate being temporarily stored in the permeate tank which is partially open to the atmosphere. Ultra-violet intensity monitoring (two sensors) ensures that the required dose rate is achieved, otherwise water is flushed to the feed pond for reprocessing.

The ultra-violet disinfection treatment step is currently not operational while samples of the injectate are collected and analysed for bacterial concentrations (refer Section 7.2). The Spring Gully EA (EPPG00885313) requires non-chemical disinfection if six-monthly testing of the injectate shows levels of bacteria which have potential to cause adverse impacts on the groundwater in the target formation. The necessity of using ultra-violet irradiation disinfection as part of the treatment system will be assessed subject to the outcomes of this monitoring.

Cartridge Filtration

Although the RO process removes all particulate matter, the potential exists for limited amounts of particulate matter to enter the permeate while it is stored in the permeate tanks. The cartridge filter will remove this particulate matter, but also serves to protect the degasification membranes should the ultra-violet lamp shatter and enter the water stream.

Degasification

The degasification membrane system utilises a vacuum pump and nitrogen gas sweep stream to lower the partial pressure of oxygen, drawing the oxygen out of solution from the water and across the membrane. The degasification membranes are designed to reduce dissolved oxygen concentrations to less than 50 µg/L.

Oxygen Scavenger and Corrosion Inhibitor

Sodium erythorbate (C6H7NaO6) is an anti-oxidant used in various foods and as a corrosion inhibitor in boiler feedwater. It has approval for use in foods in the European Union and is increasingly used in Australia (Versari et al. 2004). Sodium erythorbate (food grade, ≥99% purity) is added to the permeate at a concentration entering the injection bore of approximately 3 mg/L. The purpose of this additive is to inhibit the corrosion of the carbon steel bore casing.

Injectate Monitoring

The degassed permeate is continuously analysed for pH, dissolved oxygen (two sensors), and conductivity at the outlet of the SGPRP, prior to conveyance to the injection bores. Should the observed parameters deviate from engineer specified control points, automated isolation valves redirect the water back to either the SGPRP permeate tank via the recirculation line, or to the feed pond, depending on the operational mode of the water treatment plant at that time. Taps are installed downstream of all treatment processes to allow collection of injectate samples for laboratory analysis.




Figure 12 Spring Gully water permeate reinjection plant process flow diagram

WTF Feed Pond

Membrane Degasification

pHDissolved oxygen

ConductivityTemperature

Off-specification flush

Injectate

Monitoring location

Water quality sample point

DM

P01

Aquifer

DM

H01

Off-

spec

ifica

tion

flush

DR

P-W

I-3

DR

P-W

I-2

DR

P-W

I-1

PressurePressure Pressure PressurePressure

~75m ~40m

Ultra Violet Disinfection

Cartridge Filtration

Fee

d P

umps

Spring Gully WTF

Permeate Tank

Biocide




3.2.3 Summary of Chemicals Used in the Treatment Process

Table 9 provides a summary of the chemicals that may be used in the treatment process at the SGWTF and SGPRP. It is noted that most of these chemicals are used to clean the membranes and that the waste is redirected to the front end of the feed pond for biodegradation and then are part of the incoming feed to the WTF. It is recognised that chemical dosants DBNPA and anti-scalant may however pass through the treatment process if the RO membranes are damaged. Chemical indicators for laboratory analysis for these chemicals have been identified and are included in the water quality monitoring suite (Section 7.2). Material safety data sheets (MSDS) are provided in Appendix A.

Table 9 Chemicals used in the treatment process

Chemical Name Common Name Chemical Formula

Reason for Use

Analytical Indicator

Monochloramine - NH2Cl Membrane protection

N-Nitrosodiumethylamine (NDMA)

Sodium hydroxide Caustic Soda NaOH

Membrane cleaning / biocide

Sodium

Sodium hypochlorite Bleach NaClO Sodium, chloride

Citric acid - C6H8O7 -

Sodium bisulphite - NaHSO3 Sodium

2,2-dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide (DBNPA)

Permaclean® PC-11 C3H2Br2N2O Biocide Bromide

Proprietary non-hazardous mixture

Permatreat® PC-191T

NA Antiscalant NA

Hydrochloric acid - HCl pH adjustment Chloride

Sodium erythorbate Ascorbic acid (Vitamin C)

C6H7NaO6

Oxygen scavenger for corrosion inhibition

Sodium

Ammonium sulphate - (NH4)2SO4 Biocide Sulphate

3.2.4 Summary of Process Monitoring

Water quality parameters are monitored at several stages of the WTF to ensure that water remains within engineer specified control points that are commensurate with the intended end use of the water and to ensure that the plant is operating within design specification. Online monitoring generally occurs prior to and post each major treatment stage and includes:

Turbidity prior to and post membrane filtration

Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) post membrane filtration

Conductivity, pH, temperature and ORP prior to the RO skid

Conductivity at each of the three stages of the RO skid

Conductivity and pH of the final permeate

Conductivity, pH, temperature and dissolved oxygen of the injectate

The programmable logic controller (PLC) measures each of the sensors continuously to ensure rapid response of the system to off-specification waters (e.g. permeate). Data is stored by the SGWTF supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, and can be retrieved at a later date for interpretation or reporting.




3.3 Injection Bores

Injection bore DRP-WI-1 was installed in 2010 to allow an injection trial to be undertaken. It was drilled to a total depth of 515 mbgl and was constructed with fully cemented carbon steel buttress threaded casing. Its construction is described in detail in KCB (2010). Although the trial bore remains operational, the technical feasibility study indicated that to manage the maximum anticipated injection rates and ensure spare capacity, two additional injection bores would be required. Two new bores were completed in 2014 (KCB, 2014). During their installation, screens became stuck in one of the bores (DRP-WI-3) prior to reaching total depth and could not be retrieved, and in the second bore the hole collapsed (DRP-WI-2) prior to the screens reaching total depth. Due to the use of fibreglass casing in these new bores, it was deemed a low probability of success to rehabilitate the bores and a decision was made to decommission these bores and replace them. The replacement bores are less than 5m from their predecessors and are designated with an “R” in their suffix.

3.3.1 Locations

The injection bores are located within the current footprint of the WTF, between the SGPRP and Pond A, and on either side of DRP-WI-1. The bore locations are shown on Figure 13. Co-ordinates for the bores are provided in Table 10.

Table 10 Injection and local monitoring bore co-ordinates

Bore ID Longitude (GDA94) Latitude (GDA94) Status

DRP-WI-1 149.07109 -26.000209

Trial and ongoing injection

DRP-WI-2R 149.07068 -26.000305 Ongoing injection

DRP-WI-3R 149.07136 -25.99997 Ongoing injection

DMP01 149.07136 -26.000446 Monitoring

DMH01 149.07101 -26.000497 Monitoring

Figure 13 Spring Gully operational injection scheme bore layout




3.3.2 Bore Design

This section describes the design of the two new injection bores: DRP-WI-2R and DRP-WI-3R. A schematic construction diagram for these bores is provided as Figure 14.

All drilling activities were conducted in accordance with the Code of Practice for constructing and abandoning coal seam gas wells and associated bores in Queensland (State of Queensland, 2013a). The bores were drilled under provisions of the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004 (State of Queensland, 2013b), and notified through a ‘Notice of Intention to Drill a Petroleum Well or a Water Bore’.

The injection bores were drilled with mud rotary techniques using water-based polymers as additives to ensure adequate hole cleaning and maintain borehole stability. The bores were installed as a telescope design, i.e. the 6-5/8” production casing was cement grouted prior to drilling into the target zone (Precipice Sandstone and BSF). A cement sheath was then emplaced using pressure grouting techniques where the cement is pumped up the annulus from the casing shoe to surface. The cement grout was allowed to cure for 24 hours. 4-1/2” perforated pipe was installed to total depth overlapped the production casing by more than 10m. This was selected in lieu of stainless steel screens due to its robustness. The perforations achieve an open area of 10% across the length of the Braided Stream Facies to ensure velocities remain below turbulent flow at maximum anticipated injection rates. A cement bond log was run to ensure integrity of the cement sheath.

Figure 14 Construction of DRP-WI-2R and DRP-WI-3R (schematic)




4. Modelling and Potential Impacts

4.1 Geochemical Compatibility Modelling

Geochemical compatibility modelling was undertaken using the PHREEQC (Parkhurst & Appelo, 1999) chemical simulation program (KCB, 2011a). This assesses the potential for geochemical changes in the aquifer and the potential for precipitate clogging due to chemical mixing between the injectate, and the native groundwater and aquifer mineralogy. The modelling suggests that because of similar ionic strengths between the RO permeate (injectate) and the in-situ groundwater, the likelihood of precipitation and clay dispersion, which may lead to aquifer clogging, is negligible. The aquifer water quality is not expected to change significantly as a result of induced geochemical reactions from mixing. Differences in ionic composition, specifically relating to magnesium, calcium and chloride may occur as a result of injection. However, although concentrations may increase in the groundwater following injection, these concentrations were assessed to not exceed ADWG values (NHMRC, NRMMC, 2011) as a result of injection during the proposed operational lifetime of the system.

4.2 Predicted Hydraulic Impact Zone

A treated CSG water rate forecast is presented in Figure 10. For the purposes of predicting the extent of hydraulic impact, it has been assumed that the maximum reliable treatment plant capacity will be injected, 4.5 ML/day, from 16 June 2017 and actual injection rates to that date.

The hydraulic impact of injection on the groundwater system can be estimated using the same analytical method as was used to evaluate the aquifer parameters as part of the injection trials. The Theis (1935) solution, built-in as a mathematical function in the Aqtesolv™ hydraulic modelling software, has been used to predict the increase in hydraulic head caused by injection. The Theis solution assumes radial flow away from the injection bore.

Values of transmissivity (12 x 103 m2/d) and storage coefficient (2.6 x 10-4) have been established for the BSF target aquifer from a 48-hour constant rate pumping test carried out as part of the injection trials, and confirmed while injecting during the trial. For the purposes of estimating the extent of hydraulic impact zone, it has been assumed that all water is injected into a single injection bore. Figure 15 shows the increase in hydraulic head within the aquifer at the injection bore, which is estimated to be less than 0.1m for the forecast period through to June 2025. For comparison, the headrise in the monitoring, located the realistic distance of 38m from the central injection bore, would be less than 6cm. Sensitivity analysis undertaken for reduced values of transmissivity indicate that even when transmissivity is reduced by an order of magnitude, headrise at the injection bore would be less than 1m.

Natural background groundwater level fluctuations mean water level changes of less than 0.2 m cannot be attributed to specific sources of pressure perturbation (APLNG, 2016).

The hydraulic impact zone for the Spring Gully injection scheme is nominally 50 m from the injection bores.

The amount of head rise, even during maximum injection rate, is modelled to decreases quickly away from the injection point due to the highly transmissive nature of the BSF unit. Assessment of vertical connectivity, undertaken as part of the injection trials, indicated no pressure response through the overlying Evergreen Formation aquitard unit and resulting impact on the shallower Hutton Sandstone. The Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully is underlain by the Rewan Formation, which is also an aquitard. Therefore the hydraulic impact of injection is considered to be limited to the Precipice Sandstone only.




Figure 15 Predicted injection well (orange) and monitoring bore (blue) headrise

4.3 Predicted Water Quality Impact Zone

Assuming piston flow, the water quality impact zone (radius - r) for a given injection volume for a known aquifer thickness and effective porosity can be calculated using the following formula:

√∅

Where: 3

∅

Using the effective porosity value calculated from the trial data (10%), as well as the effective porosities calculated from geophysical log responses (12% and 18%) (Origin, 2013), Figure 16 shows the predicted radius of water quality influence as a function of volume injected.

Based on the graph, the predicted maximum radial extent of water quality change around the injection bores in June 2017 is between 330 to 455 m for 18% and 10% effective porosity respectively. If the maximum rate is injected through to June 2025 (14,500 ML), the maximum zone of water quality impact is estimated to be less than 1000 m in a radius from the injection site.

There are no identified receptors sourcing water from the Precipice Sandstone within this radius of the injection site.

0. 800. 1.6E+3 2.4E+3 3.2E+3 4.0E+30.

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

Time (day)

Dis

plac

emen

t (m

)

Aquifer Model

Confined

Solution

Theis

Parameters

T = 1.2E+4 m2/dayS = 0.00026Kz/Kr = 1.b = 61. m




Figure 16 Predicted water quality impact zone by volume Injected

4.4 Injectate Migration

The transport of dissolved constituents in the injectate water will be subject to varying retardation mechanisms depending on the individual properties of the dissolved constituents and aquifer dependant processes such as flow velocity and direction, absorption, adsorption, and dispersion.

Travel time calculations are presented below and are based on the following assumptions:

Hydrodynamic dispersion has not been accounted for. This mechanism would result in movement away from the down-gradient flow line. However, lateral dispersion would not reduce the overall down-gradient flux.

Injectate movement is considered to mimic background native groundwater movement. Linear velocity is based on the regional gradient and does not account for additional impressed hydraulic head from injection. This is considered to be applicable given the high transmissivity reported in the injection trials and the recovery of hydraulic heads post injection.

Bulk flow is considered to be inter-granular on a sub-regional scale, involving the target aquifer sandstone matrix primary porosity. Fracture flow has not been assessed because the lateral extent of open fractures is unknown. The extent of individual fractures is unlikely to exceed that of the water quality impact zone and therefore the system is more likely to behave as a porous medium on a sub-regional scale.

Linear groundwater velocity is calculated using the hydraulic conductivity derived from the injection trial pumping tests, the hydraulic gradient calculated from water level data in local wells, and the effective porosity of the target aquifer assessed from wireline geophysics testing (density and neutron logs).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Vo

lum

e in

ject

ed (

GL

)

Distance (m)

Porosity = 10%

Porosity = 12%

Porosity = 18%




Groundwater velocity (v) is given by:

v

where: v – velocity

K – hydraulic conductivity

n - effective porosity

dh/dl – hydraulic gradient (dh – change in water level dl – change in distance)

At the injection site the BSF aquifer unit is 64 m thick. Its effective porosity is in the range 0.12 to 0.18. Hydraulic conductivity has been assessed to be between 156 to 219 m/day, although this is likely to be significantly overestimated for a regional scale flow system. Using groundwater elevation from neighbouring bores (installed into the same unit) a hydraulic gradient of 0.001 has been calculated (in a northeast direction).

Using this data a range of groundwater velocities between 0.87 m/day and 1.83 m/day have been calculated. A plot of injectate migration distance over time has been generated for both velocity values (Figure 17). Although the Spring Gully Camp Bore is the nearest identified groundwater receptor, the general groundwater flow direction is to the northeast from the injection site. The nearest receptor situated down hydraulic gradient from the proposed injection site, is discharge to the Dawson River between Taroom and Wandoan, located approximately 60 km northeast of the site. Using the maximum estimated groundwater velocity, and assuming no retardation factors, injectate would reach this point after more than 90 years.

The groundwater velocities that have been calculated using the hydraulic parameters obtained for the Precipice Sandstone at Spring Gully are very much greater than those more typically published for the Great Artesian Basin. Habermehl and Lau (1997) have quoted groundwater flow velocities varying from 0.003 m/day to 0.014 m/day (1 m/year to 5 m/year) between the eastern and western margins of the Great Artesian Basin. Applying the upper bound of these published values, the travel time would be in the order of 12,000 years before the injected water discharged to the Dawson River.




Figure 17 Inferred injectate migration

7050

000

7100

000

7150

000

7200

000

7250

000




5. System Operation

This section describes the operation of a permanent, full-scale permeate injection scheme at Spring Gully.

5.1 Injectate Water Quality Limits

Table 11 summarises the engineer-specified quality requirements for injectate from the SGWTF and SGPRP. The operational target value is the preferred value for injection. Low and high alarms advise the operator that the water quality is outside of the target range. In this circumstance, the system will continue to inject but unscheduled maintenance may be required. Limits are control points that if approached, the plant injection will cease until the parameter returns to within an acceptable range. Specified limits are those prescribed in the EA (EPPG00885313).

Table 11 PLC set points for injectate water quality

Parameter Alarm Set Point Trip Set Point EA Limit

Spring Gully WTF Controlled

pH Lower – pH 6.65

Upper – pH 8.00

Lower – pH 6.50

Upper – pH 8.50

Lower – pH 6.5

Upper – pH 8.5

Electrical Conductivity Low – 0 µS/cm

High – 375 µS/cm

Low – 0 µS/cm

High – 450 µS/cm 460 µS/cm

TDS -- -- 300 mg/L

Spring Gully PRP Controlled

Dissolved Oxygen 175 ppb 200 ppb 500 ppb

CSG water quality samples collected from the Spring Gully WTF are summarised in Table 12. Those results that exceed the respective ADWG (NHMRC, NRMMC, 2011) and ANZECC stock watering guidelines (ANZECC 2000) are highlighted. Aluminium and iron exceeded the ADWG aesthetic guideline values for 1 out of 45 samples. Lead and nickel, which exceeded the ADWG health guidelines values for 1 out of 45 samples, however the median and 95th percentile values for all parameters were below guidelines values.




Table 12 Summary of injectate water quality compared to ADWG and ANZECC Guidelines for Livestock

Parameter Units

ANZECC Guideline (ANZECC, 2000)

Australian Drinking Water Guideline (NHMRC,

NRMMC, 2011) Results

Freshwater Ecosystems

Stock Watering

Health Aesthetic No. of

Results No. of

Detects Min Median Max 95%ile

Physical-Chemical

pH (lab) pH

units 6.5 – 7.5 - - 6.5 – 8.5 50 50 6.5 7.7 7.9 7.8

Electrical Conductivity µS/cm - 2,985 – 7,463

- - 46 46 101 286 377 351

TDS mg/L -

2,000 – 5,000

depending on the animal

- 600 19 19 90 138 194 190

Total Suspended Solids mg/L - - - - 50 7 <1 3 6 6

Nutrients

Nitrate (as N) mg/L 0.16 90.4 11.3 - 39 28 <0.01 0.02 0.26 0.12

Nitrite (as N) mg/L - 9.13 0.9 - 39 0 <0.01 <LOR <0.01 <LOR

Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) mg/L - - - - 39 28 <0.01 0.02 0.26 0.12

Nitrogen (total) mg/L 250 - - - 35 13 <0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2

Phosphorus (total) mg/L 20 - - - 39 29 <0.01 0.03 0.09 0.06

Total Organic Carbon as C mg/L - - - - 50 32 <1 1 4 3.6

Major Cations and Anions

Calcium (filtered) mg/L - 1,000 - - 48 5 0.05 0.5 3 2

Magnesium (filtered) mg/L - - - - 48 0 <0.01 <LOR <1 <LOR

Sodium (filtered) mg/L - - - 180 48 48 31 56.5 75 73.8

Potassium (filtered) mg/L - - - - 48 5 0.62 0.5 2 2

Chloride mg/L - - - 250 48 48 11 59 79 75




Parameter Units





Stock Watering


Results No. of


Fluoride mg/L - 2 1.5 - 49 43 <0.1 0.2 0.5 0.4

Sulphate as SO4 mg/L - 1,000 500 250 21 1 <1 0.5 3 1

Hardness as CaCO3 mg/L - - - 200 44 0 <1 <LOR <1 <LOR

Bicarbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3

mg/L - - - - 50 50 20 47 66 64

Carbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3

mg/L - - - - 43 0 <1 <LOR <1 <LOR

Hydroxide Alkalinity as CaCO3

mg/L - - - - 7 0 <1 <LOR <5 <LOR

Alkalinity (Total) as CaCO3 mg/L - - - - 50 0 <1 <LOR <5 <LOR

Metals and Metalloids (total)

Aluminium mg/L 0.055 5 - 0.2 45 14 <0.001 0.005 0.53 0.057

Arsenic mg/L 0.013 (As

V)C 0.024 (As III)

0.5 – 5 (As V)A 0.01C - 45 1 <0.0005 0.0005 0.001 0.001

Barium mg/L - - 2 - 45 45 0.02 0.058 0.123 0.086

Boron mg/L 0.370D 5 4 - 45 45 0.3 0.42 1 0.88

Cadmium mg/L 0.0002C 0.01 0.002 - 45 1 <0.0001 0.0001 0.0003 0.0001

Chromium (III+VI) mg/L 0.001C,D 1 0.05 - 45 3 <0.0005 0.0005 0.008 0.0018

Cobalt mg/L 0.09B 1 - - 45 0 <0.0002 <LOR <0.001 <LOR

Copper mg/L 0.0014

0.4 – 5 depending

on the animal

2 1 45 8 <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002




Parameter Units





Stock Watering


Results No. of


Iron mg/L 0.3B not

sufficiently toxic

- 0.3 45 6 0.01 0.025 0.34 0.068

Lead mg/L 0.0034C 0.1 0.01 - 45 1 <0.0002 0.0005 0.016 0.001

Manganese mg/L 1.9D not

sufficiently toxic

0.5 0.1 45 4 <0.0005 0.0005 0.004 0.0026

Molybdenum mg/L 0.034B 0.15 0.05 - 45 1 <0.001 0.0005 0.001 0.001

Nickel mg/L 0.011 1 0.02 - 45 9 <0.0005 0.0005 0.022 0.0028

Selenium mg/L 0.005C 0.02 0.01 - 45 0 <0.001 <LOR <0.01 <LOR

Silver mg/L 0.00005C - 0.1 - 45 0 <0.001 <LOR <0.005 <LOR

Strontium mg/L - - - - 45 45 0.025 0.074 0.115 0.097

Tin mg/L - - - - 45 2 <0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001

Zinc mg/L 0.008D 20 - 3 45 29 <0.005 0.006 0.020 0.017

Notes: Calculations for median were undertaken using the limit of reporting (LOR) when the values were below these limits. A May be tolerated if not provided as a food additive and natural levels in the diet are low B Low reliability trigger value from Section 8.3, Volume 2 of ANZECC (2000) C LOR is greater than the applicable ANZECC guideline D Figure may not protect key species from chronic toxicity (this refers to experimental chronic figures or geometric mean for species)




5.2 Pressure Limits

Testing carried out during the drilling of DRP-WI-1 provides fracture pressure at the top of the Precipice Sandstone of 8,274 kPa (1,200 psi), which equates to a wellhead pressure of 4,137 kPa (600 psi). 90% of the fracture pressure is 3,720 kPa (540 psi) measured at the wellhead.

The EA authorising the aquifer injection scheme specifies an injection pressure limit 3,700kPa, which is 90% of the formation fracture pressure at an injection depth greater than 100m. The maximum anticipated wellhead pressure is 400 kPa, which provides a very large factor of safety.

5.3 Maintenance

5.3.1 Spring Gully WTF and PRP

Routine maintenance of the SGWTF and the SGPRP is undertaken in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for the individual treatment components. These requirements are described in the Spring Gully Permeate Reinjection Plant - Operation & Maintenance Manual (Origin, 2012). Unplanned maintenance will typically be coordinated between the WTF and the PTF with consideration of production impacts.

5.3.2 Injection Bores

A regular maintenance program has been established to ensure efficient operation of the injection bores. The key components of the injection bores are the bore construction materials and their mechanical integrity, the injection pumps, instrumentation and the monitoring bores and related infrastructure. Each of these will have specific maintenance requirements that will be addressed on a scheduled basis, and also potential unscheduled requirements based on monitored performance.

5.3.2.1 Routine Maintenance

Bore integrity testing is undertaken as part of the bore construction program and thereafter on a 5-year basis, as is employed in the United States of America for Class I injection wells. Integrity testing may include cement bond logs, temperature logs, closed-circuit television (CCTV), or Ultrasonic Imager Tool (USIT) logging where applicable. Physical rehabilitation, especially of the screens, may be employed if there is evidence of chemical precipitation and / or fouling. Acids, caustic soda or biocontrol chemicals may be used during rehabilitation works.

Where possible, routine maintenance is scheduled so that only one injection bore is shut down while the others are still in operation.

It is expected that full rate injection will be possible through two bores, thus the system will have 100% availability during bore maintenance.

5.3.2.2 Performance Based Maintenance

Review of operational data (injection rate versus pressure) allows assessment of potential clogging over time. Should the efficiency of injection be shown to have reduced by a significant amount (nominally 30%) since the previous maintenance event (routine or performance based), a program of assessment will be instigated. This will nominally comprise:

Remove any downhole equipment;

Run a CCTV log;

Undertake physical rehabilitation (casing scraper, wire brush scrubbing, jetting, surging and airlifting, or acoustic rehabilitation with pumping);

Sample and analyse fouling materials; and,

Chemical treatment (e.g. chlorination, acidification, clay stabilisation, casing cleaning and passivation).

Sudden changes in injection pressures, indicative of a bore casing failure, will instigate a casing condition assessment.

5.4 Emergency Planning and Response

Origin and APLNG operate under an established Health, Safety and Environment Management System (HSEMS) to minimise and manage the impacts on employees, contractors, the environment, and the communities in which the company operates. The HSEMS is comprised of the Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) Policy and a set




of 20 standards, which interpret, support, and provide further details to the requirements of the HSE Policy. Within each standard, directive(s) have been developed which instruct the minimum requirements, responsibilities, and business rules that are needed to implement the HSE policy and HSEMS. Emergency planning and response are covered under two directives: the HSE System Directive (ORG-HSE-DVE-102) (Origin, 2016a) and the Incident Management Directive (ORG-RMS-DIR-006) (Origin, 2016b).

5.4.1 HSE System Directive

The HSE System Directive (Origin, 2016a) outlines the requirements to implement and maintain an integrated system for the management of health, safety and environment.

5.4.2 Incident Management Directive

The Incident Management Directive (Origin, 2016b) details the six stages in the incident management process for all incidents which fall within the responsibility of Origin Energy and APLNG:

Stage 1 – Mandatory response and notification

Stage 2 – Incident recording

Stage 3 – Incident investigation

Stage 4 – Corrective and preventative actions

Stage 5 – Incident sign-off

Stage 6 – Review, analysis, and reporting

This directive’s implementation includes the emergency management of CSG water within the Combabula Development Area to ensure that incidents and potential impacts are appropriately managed.

5.4.3 Emergency Response Plan

The Emergency Response Plan Spring Gully Operations (CDN/ID 3677536) (Origin, 2016c) describes how to effectively manage site emergencies. The ERP provides details of:

the Origin emergency response structure;

how to notify of and escalate an emergency;

key people and what they will do during an emergency;

important information about each pipeline / operational asset and other site;

infrastructure including:

o Location

o Geographic area

o Isolation points

o Exclusion zones

o Other technical information

responses for possible emergency scenarios;

important contact and communication details; and

tools and templates to use during an emergency.




7. Monitoring and Reporting

The predicted hydraulic and water quality impact zones, potential receptors and monitoring results from the injection trial were all taken into account when preparing this monitoring plan for the Spring Gully aquifer injection scheme. The injection bores are monitored most frequently, with the frequency of monitoring reducing with increasing distance away from the injection site. In addition to the Precipice Sandstone, the Hutton Sandstone (which is present above the Evergreen Formation aquitard that directly overlies the Precipice Sandstone) is also monitored at the injection site.

It is intended that this monitoring plan will be reviewed and updated as required.

7.1 Flow and Pressure Monitoring


The Spring Gully WTF and PRP utilise a SCADA system to control operations. Injection rates, volumes, and pressures (wellhead and downhole) are monitored through the treatment facility’s control system at each injection bore. Data from these sensors is monitored at 1 second intervals. Except for exceedences, daily averages of the flow and pressure data are reported. Should more detailed analysis of data be required, more frequent data can be retrieved from the PLC.

7.1.2 Monitoring Bores

Pressure monitoring occurs both within the injection borefield (in-field) and at regional monitoring bores.

The in-field monitoring bores include:

Precipice Sandstone: Spring Gully-DMP01

Hutton Sandstone: Spring Gully-DMH01

The regional monitoring bores include:

Precipice Sandstone: Spring Gully-Camp Bore (RN123098); Spring Gully-PB1 (RN160736); Spring Gully-PB3 (RN160737); Strathblane-WB1-P (RN123348); Echo Hills Flowing Bore (RN58623)

The locations of all in-field and regional monitoring bores are shown on Figure 18. Monitoring of the landholders bores is subject to their ongoing agreement.

Groundwater pressures are monitored with downhole pressure sensors. The in-field monitoring bores are monitored on an hourly basis during injection, with a minimum of twice daily monitoring at the regional bores. Pressure monitoring data is reported as a daily average to allow for diurnal variations due to barometric and other effects. Where access allows, groundwater levels are also measured with a manual dip meter to cross-check pressure transducer readings. Table 13 summarises the flow and pressure monitoring program.

Table 13 Flow and pressure monitoring program

Bore ID Longitude (GDA94)

Latitude (GDA94)

Aquifer Purpose

Monitoring interval

Pressure / Water level

Flow rate

DRP-WI-1 149.07109 -26.000209 Precipice Injection 1 second* 1 second*

DRP-WI-2R 149.07068 -26.000305 Precipice Injection 1 second* 1 second*

DRP-WI-3R 149.07136 -25.99997 Precipice Injection 1 second* 1 second*

Spring Gully-DMP01

149.07136 -26.000446 Precipice In-field

monitoring 1 second* NA

Spring Gully-DMH01

149.07101 -26.000497 Hutton In-field

monitoring Daily NA

Spring Gully-Camp Bore

149.07066 -25.951388 Precipice Regional

monitoring Daily NA





Latitude (GDA94)

Aquifer Purpose

Monitoring interval

Pressure / Water level

Flow rate

Spring Gully-PB1 148.85104 -25.837498 Precipice Regional

monitoring Daily NA


monitoring Daily NA

Strathblane-WB1-P 149.14792 -25.90142 Precipice Regional

monitoring Daily NA

Echo Hills Flowing Bore


monitoring Daily NA

Notes:

* Data recorded at 1 second intervals by the PLC; however, only a daily average is routinely reported

7.2 Water Quality Monitoring


Water quality parameters (pH, electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature) of the injectate are recorded at 1 second intervals by the PLC; however, only a daily average is routinely reported. Process analysers were calibrated at the time of installation in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations, and will continue to be calibrated at a frequency in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. Field monitoring equipment used when collecting samples of the injectate for analysis is used to cross-check the calibration of the process sensors. Injectate samples are collected at the export from the SGPTF to the injection bores. The samples are submitted to a National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accredited laboratory under chain-of-custody protocols.

Water quality analysis for injectate samples includes:

Field measurements: pH, electrical conductivity, and temperature;

Physicochemical parameters: pH, electrical conductivity, and TDS;

Major and minor ions: calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, chloride, bromide, fluoride, iodide,sulphate, bicarbonate, and carbonate ;

Total organic carbon;

Total metals: aluminium, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, boron, cadmium, chromium, cobalt,copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silica, silver, strontium, tin,uranium, vanadium, and zinc

NDMA

The suite of parameters takes into account pre-trial groundwater quality, the results of the injection trial, historical permeate water quality and chemicals used in the SGWTF and SGPRP. In a total of 81 samples of Spring Gully RO permeate from 2010 to 2012, there have been no concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene or xylenes (BTEX) reported in excess of the limit of reporting (all LORs are less than respective ADWG values (NHMRC, NRMMC, 2011) for those parameters), therefore these parameters have been excluded from the suite.

Separate to the standard water quality monitoring parameters listed above, a phase of monitoring for bacterial concentrations is currently being undertaken to assess the requirement, or otherwise, for non-chemical disinfection (ultra-violet treatment) of injectate. To comply with the EA, injectate samples are collected on a six-monthly basis and submitted for laboratory analysis of coliform, sulphate-reducing or iron-fixing bacteria, which may potentially have adverse impacts on groundwater in the target aquifer. The necessity of using ultra-violet irradiation disinfection as part of the treatment system will be assessed subject to the outcomes of this study.




7.2.3 Monitoring Bores

The in-field monitoring bores include:

Precipice Sandstone: Spring Gully-DMP01

The regional monitoring bores include:

Precipice Sandstone: Spring Gully-Camp Bore (RN123098); Spring Gully-PB1 (RN160736); Spring Gully-PB3 (RN160737); Strathblane-WB1-P (RN123348); Echo Hills Flowing Bore (RN58623) (field parameters only)

Water quality monitoring of the landholders bores is subject to their ongoing agreement.

Taking into consideration the Precipice Sandstone background groundwater quality and injectate water quality, analysis for in-field monitoring bore samples includes:

Field measurements: pH, electrical conductivity, and temperature;;

Physicochemical parameters: pH, electrical conductivity, and TDS;

Major and minor ions: calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, chloride, bromide, fluoride, iodide, sulphate, bicarbonate, and carbonate ; and

Dissolved metals: aluminium, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, boron, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silica, silver, strontium, tin, uranium, vanadium, and zinc.

Water quality samples are collected in accordance with Origin’s standard operating procedures (SOPs). All samples are submitted under chain-of-custody procedures to a National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accredited laboratory. Field monitoring equipment, such as electrical conductivity and pH meters, are calibrated prior to each use using appropriately ranged and preserved calibration solutions.

Table 14 Water quality monitoring program


Latitude (GDA94)

Aquifer Purpose

Water quality

DO / EC / pH /

Temperature

Laboratory

DRP-WI-1 149.07109 -26.000209 Precipice Injection 1 second* Quarterly

DRP-WI-2R 149.07068 -26.000305 Precipice Injection 1 second* Quarterly

DRP-WI-3R 149.07136 -25.99997 Precipice Injection 1 second* Quarterly

Spring Gully-DMP01

149.07136 -26.000446 Precipice In-field

monitoring Annually Annually

Spring Gully-Camp Bore







Strathblane-WB1-P



Flowing Bore (RN58623)


monitoring Annually NA

Notes:

* Data recorded at 1 second intervals by the PLC; however, only a daily average is routinely reported




7.3 Spring Monitoring

Springs complexes sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater are listed in Table 7 and shown on Figure 9 (Section 2.7). Ongoing monitoring of springs is an APLNG project requirement both under the Project’s Federal environmental approval and as a requirement of the UWIR (OGIA, 2016). Quarterly baseline spring monitoring events were undertaken during 2013-2015. Baseline springs monitoring included:

Measurement of flow or wetted area;

Water chemistry sampling and groundwater isotope analysis

Spring physical condition, including photographs; and

Flora and macro-invertebrate sampling.

Following the completion of the baseline monitoring events, quarterly springs monitoring continued, with the exception of the flora and macro-invertebrate sampling and groundwater isotopes, until the release of the updated UWIR in September 2016. From this time, the monitoring frequency was amended to six-monthly.

Ongoing monitoring requirements for spring complexes that Origin is listed as the responsible tenure holder are detailed in in APLNG’s Groundwater Management Plan (CDN/ID: 11788517) (APLNG, 2017) and Appendix H of the UWIR (OGIA, 2016). There are no springs sourcing Precipice Sandstone groundwater for which Origin is the responsible tenure holder.

Figure 18 Monitoring locations

70

50

000

71

00

000

71

50

000

72

00

000

72

50

000




7.4 Data Assessment

7.4.1 Flow and Pressure Monitoring Data

Pressure and flow data is collected and analysed in accordance with the monitoring requirements of this plan, which is guided by Origin’s performance optimisation guideline Aquifer Injection Monitoring and Data Analysis (OEUP-Q1000-GDL-OPS-033) (Origin, 2016d). Monthly review of injection rate and pressure data for each injection bore is undertaken, to identify changes in the efficiency of each injection bore over time. If required, non-routine maintenance related to changing bore performance will be undertaken in accordance with Origin’s performance optimisation guideline Aquifer Injection Maintenance Triggers to Ensure Optimum Injection Bore Performance (OEUP-Q1000-GDL-OPS-037) (Origin, 2016e).

Monthly review of pressure monitoring data is also undertaken to assess the transmittal of pressure effects to landholder bores and springs, and to assess the potential and likelihood for sub-artesian bores to start to flow within the future.

Pressure monitoring data from the overlying Hutton Sandstone aquifer is reviewed on a quarterly basis to assess whether pressure effects have transmitted across the intervening Evergreen Formation aquitard to verify that preferential pathways have not developed

7.4.2 Water Quality Monitoring Data

Injectate water quality data is reviewed on a quarterly basis to assess for non-compliance, including review of the analyser-recorded water quality parameters (pH, electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen). Water quality monitoring data from in-field and regional monitoring bores is reviewed annually to assess changes in water quality in response to injection. Data is compared to the in-situ groundwater quality prior to injection as well as ANZECC guidelines (ANZECC, 2000).

When a sufficiently large dataset exists, statistical control charting may be utilised to assess potential changes in key water quality indicators over time. Statistical control charting honours natural data variability and is commonly used to determine whether or not an observed value within a given set of data is significantly different from historical values (Gibbons et al., 2009). An Upper Control Limit (UCL) is calculated for each parameter to be assessed. Similarly, a Lower Control Limit (LCL) is calculated to determine the lower bounds on the temporal data set. A data point that exceeds either control limit is an indication of variations outside of natural conditions. Such an excursion can result from a false detection; therefore, verification of the data point is required and may be followed by a more in-depth review using more sophisticated techniques of analysis. The overall goal of control charting and trend analysis is to detect situations that may be heading in a direction and at a rate that is outside of natural variability (e.g. a gradual change in the injectate quality) and may result in potential environmental harm, prior to a guideline value being exceeded. Should a result fall outside of the expected range of water quality, the cause of the trend will be investigated and management actions implemented if required.

7.4.3 Springs Monitoring Data

Springs monitoring data is reviewed annually to assess potential changes in springs hydrology and morphology. Analysis of springs monitoring data includes:

Comparison of time series data of spring flow/wetted area; and

Analysis of pressure data in spring vents and monitoring bores and correlation between mound water pressures and rainfall or other climatic events.

The results of these studies are presented in APLNG’s Annual Groundwater Assessments (APLNG, 2014a,b; APLNG, 2015; APLNG, 2016).

7.5 Non-compliance Response

Non-compliances will be managed in accordance with the Management of HSE Regulatory Notifiable Incidents Procedure (CDN/ID: 5814101) (Origin, 2017). The following non-compliances, relevant to aquifer injection at the Spring Gully injection site only, will require the response procedure to be followed:

An injection fluid monitoring result that does not comply with any of the EA limits presented in Table 11 (Section 5.1);

Detection of a groundwater chemical parameters that results in the degradation of the environmental value of groundwater at Spring Gully;




Migration of injected fluid out of the Precipice Sandstone into the Hutton Sandstone;

A loss of hydraulic isolation of the Precipice Sandstone;

The potential for serious environmental harm exists; or

A specific condition of the EA relating to injection has been breached.

All incidents will be reported to the HSE risk assurance and compliance team (RAC team) for immediate investigation and notification to the regulator, where required.

7.6 Reporting

An operational fluid injection report is prepared as part of each annual return. As required by the EA, this report will include:

Results of the monitoring program;

Monthly summaries of injection conditions;

Commentary on changes to injection fluid characteristics or sources;

Mechanical integrity rests;

Pressure of the target formation;

Integrity of the overlying formation;

An updated risks assessment;

Quantity of fluid injected;

Quality parameters of fluid injected; and

Any fluid injection well closure plans.

7.7 Compliance Tracking

APLNG’s environmental, social and regulatory compliance reporting system, called the Atlas System, is used to manage and track compliance. Atlas provides APLNG with the capability to:

Record regulatory compliance conditions and environmental and social commitments;

Record required actions with due dates;

Assign tasks to users with due dates;

Link dependent conditions and actions;

Manage tasks; and,

Record evidence of compliance (documents, pictures, etc.).

The Atlas System is used to manage compliance related to:

Specific EA or other regulatory conditions;

Routine maintenance of the injection bores as per this plan;

Reporting requirements as per this plan; and,

Notifications of non-compliance within required timeframes.




7.9 Risk Assessment

Table 16 summarises the hazards, controls, and residual risk rating for the injection scheme at Spring Gully. The analysis is in conformance with the Origin Risk Management Directive (ORG-RMS-DIR- 001) (Origin, 2016f) and the procedure recommended in the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling: Managed Aquifer Recharge (NRMMC, 2009).

Hazards have been considered in the context of a source-pathway-receptor model, which is commonly used for assessment risks to groundwater systems. The injection scheme is the source, the pathway is the Precipice Sandstone aquifer, and the receptors are either human users of extracted groundwater from the Precipice Sandstone or ecosystems supported by groundwater discharge from Precipice Sandstone sourced springs. Since both pressure and water quality changes can be transmitted through the aquifer, risk has been assessed at the receptor. Hazards associated with water quality changes considered the potential for the installation of new groundwater bores within the water quality impact zone.

.




Table 15 Origin risk matrix




Table 16 Assessment of risks

Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol

Comment on inherent risk Controls

Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk

Validation / verification monitoring

Pathogens introduced through the injectate stream, degrading the environmental values of in-situ groundwater 2

Mod

erat

e

The presence of pathogens in the CSG water is unlikely due the depth and confined nature of the source formations.

The SGWTF feed pond receives CSG water directly from the water gathering system. The feed pond is lined and uncovered.

Contamination of SGWTF feed pond from bird faeces or other wildlife is the most likely source of pathogens.

No users of the Precipice Sandstone within the predicted water quality impact zone during the lifetime of the injection scheme.

Feed water protection:

Feed pond designed with no external catchment

There is negligible up-slope stormwater run-off influence on the site

Feed pond located above 1:100-year flood level

Fencing around the feed pond to reduce the potential for contamination from wildlife and stock

Treatment processes:

• Membrane filtration • Reverse osmosis • Disinfection of the permeate through

ultra-violet irradiation (when operational)

Attenuation in the aquifer: • Dilution, die off or deactivation of

biological contaminants in the aquifer

1 R

emot

e

Min

or 1

Lo

w

Monitor in accordance with monitoring plan




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Inorganic chemicals introduced through the injectate stream, or dissolution of metals from aquifer minerals, degrading the environmental value of in-situ groundwater

1 M

inor

The injectate and the in-situ groundwater are both sodium-chloride type water, although the groundwater has a greater bicarbonate concentration.

Geochemical compatibility modelling predicted slight increases/decreases in metals and pH from injection. These changes are predicted to have little effect on the overall water quality.

Based on the trial data, injection of deoxygenated permeate appears to be compatible with the native groundwater and mineralogy in the receiving aquifer. Arsenic and fluoride concentrations, elements of concern for human and bovine health respectively, did not increase in the aquifer during the trial, with arsenic concentrations below the laboratory detection limit in both injectate and groundwater. Magnesium and calcium concentrations do not appear to have increased.

Maintaining reducing conditions, as currently exist in the aquifer, is important to limiting the reaction of any minor traces of pyrite and other reactive minerals that may be present.

Monochloramine is added to the injectate to control biological fouling. Monochloramine is typical biocide used in potable water treatment.


Membrane filtration

Reverse osmosis

pH adjustment (if required)

Redox control to limit reaction in the aquifer (i.e. deoxygenation)

Monochloramine is dosed at a target concentration of 1 mg/L. Acceptable dosing concentrations are 0.5 mg/L to 3 mg/L.

Process control:

Analysers are used for continuous on-line monitoring of pH, dissolved oxygen, electrical conductivity, temperature, and oxygen reduction potential. Off-specification water is recycled to the WTF Feed Pond

Dosage rates will be optimised to limit concentration of chemicals added during treatment

MoC process to be developed to control new chemicals added or changes to chemical treatment

2 H

ighl

y U

nlik

ely

1 M

inor

Lo

w Monitor in accordance

with monitoring plan




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Increased salinity or sodicity introduced through the injectate stream degrading the environmental value of in-situ groundwater 2

Mod

erat

e

Precipice Sandstone / BSF:

Median salinity (TDS) is 90 mg/L (range 78 mg/L to 109 mg/L)

Injectate:

Median salinity (TDS) is 138 mg/L (range 90 mg/L to 194 mg/L)

Water Quality Impact Zone

The maximum zone of water quality impact is estimated at 975 m. There are no identified receptors sourcing water from the Precipice Sandstone within this radius of the injection site.


• Reverse osmosis

Process control

• PLC control of water quality • Limit injectate water quality to

95%ile of median formation water TDS

• Off-specification water directed back to WTF Feed Pond

2 H

ighl

y un

like

ly

1 M

inor

Lo






Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Nutrients (organic carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus) introduced through the injectate stream degrading the environmental value of in-situ groundwater

2 M

oder

ate


Median total organic carbon is 1 mg/L (range <1 mg/L to 1 mg/L)

Median nitrogen (total oxidised) 0.02 mg/L (range <0.01 to 0.04mg/L)

Median phosphorus 0.05 mg/L (range <0.01 mg/L to 0.09 mg/L)

Injectate:

Median total organic carbon is 1 mg/L (range <1 mg/L to 4 mg/L)

Median nitrogen (total) 0.1 mg/L (range <0.1 mg/L to 0.4 mg/L)

Median phosphorus 0.03 mg/L (range <0.01 to 0.09 mg/L)

Water Quality Impact Zone:


Removal using treatment processes:

• Membrane filtration and reverse osmosis

Feed water protection:

Feed Pond designed with no external catchment

There is negligible up-slope stormwater run-off

influence on the site Feed Pond located above 1:100-

year flood level Fencing around the WTF Feed Pond to reduce the potential for contamination

1 R

emot

e

1 M

inor

Lo






Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Organic chemicals, including disinfection by-products, degrading the environmental value of in-situ groundwater 2

Mod

erat

e

Injectate:

In a total of 81 samples of Spring Gully RO permeate from 2010 to 2012, there were no concentrations of BTEX reported in excess of the limit of reporting (all LORs are less than respective ADWG values (NHMRC, NRMMC, 2011) for those parameters).

Monochloramine, a disinfectant used in domestic water treatment facilities, is added during the treatment process to protect the treatment system. NDMA is a potential by-product of monochloramine use.




• SGPRP has capacity for disinfection using ultra-violet irradiation (i.e. no chlorinated disinfection agent)

• Excess ammonium sulphate is used to ensure all sodium hypochlorite is reacted to monochloramine and no free chlorine remains.

Natural attenuation:

NDMA may be bio-degraded in anoxic conditions (Bradley et al., 2005; Zhou et al., 2009)

Dispersion, dilution, retardation during transport will reduce down-gradient concentrations

2 H

ighl

y un

like

ly

1 M

inor

Lo


with monitoring plan.




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Turbidity and particulates introduced through the injectate stream degrading the environmental value of in-situ groundwater and/or well performance

1 M

inor


Median total suspended solids is 5 mg/L (range <1 mg/L to 24 mg/L)

Injectate:

Median total suspended solids is 3 mg/L (range <1 mg/L to 6 mg/L)


• Membrane filtration • Reverse osmosis

Process control:

Closed system downstream of Reedy Creek WTF (Export Tank has a fixed roof but is vented to the atmosphere)

Reedy Creek PTF tanks are all covered

Bore maintenance and redevelopment regime:

• 30% loss of performance is considered a nominal trigger for maintenance and redevelopment, however decision is at discretion of the groundwater team project manager upon review of the data

1 R

emot

e

1 M

inor

Lo


with monitoring plan.




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Radionuclides introduced through the injectate stream, or released from aquifer matrix, degrading the environmental value of in-situ groundwater

2 M

oder

ate


Gross Alpha concentration was below detection limit (1 sample)

Gross Beta concentration was 0.2 Bq/L 1 sample)

Injectate:

Radionuclides not analysed

Geochemical modelling:

Mineralogical and water quality compatibility assessment indicates a low risk of radionuclide release through mineral dissolution or oxidation of organic rich deposits




Retain reducing conditions in the aquifer through de-oxygenation

1 R

emot

e

1 M

inor

Lo

w

Not required




Over-pressurisation of injection well, causing rupture of aquitard 1

Min

or

Testing carried out during the drilling of DRP-WI-1 provides fracture pressure at the top of the Precipice Sandstone of 8,274 kPa (1,200 psi), which equates to a wellhead pressure of 4,137 kPa (600 psi). 90% of the fracture pressure is 3,720 kPa (540 psi) measured at the wellhead.

Groundwater Monitoring and Adaptive Response:

Adaptive management is implemented through a modelling-monitoring-management approach whereby each component is used to inform and refine the others. Should the monitoring and modelling indicate an increase in risk to potential receptors due to aquifer injection, the adequacy of monitoring can be reviewed to assist management of that risk.

Pressure and flow monitoring data is assessed monthly and used as follows:

to identify changes in the efficiency of each injection bore over time and allow optimised operation of the borefield over its lifetime; and,

groundwater level data from the overlying Hutton Sandstone aquifer is reviewed to assess whether pressure effects have transmitted across the intervening Evergreen Formation aquitard, and to ensure preferential pathways have not developed in grout

Bore completion:

Mechanical integrity of the casing and grout sheathe were assessed and documented during the construction of the injection bores

Leak off tests were carried out on injection bores to assess formation fracture pressures

Drilling was conducted in accordance with the Code of Practice for constructing and

1

Min

or 1

Lo

w

Pressure and flow monitoring in accordance with groundwater monitoring plan




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


abandoning coal seam gas wells and associated bores in Queensland (State of Queensland, 2013a). The bores were drilled under provisions of the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004 (State of Queensland, 2013b), and notified through a ‘Notice of Intention to Drill a Petroleum Well or a Water Bore’.

Process control

• Flow and pressure is controlled at the surface by the PLC

• The maximum anticipated wellhead pressure is 400 kPa

Contaminant migration in fractured rock and karstic aquifers 1

Min

or

The Surat Basin has few major structural features. No large regional faults have been mapped in the vicinity of the injection site.

Small scale faulting in the vicinity of the injection site has been interpreted in seismic surveys and in drill holes; however, these structures do not appear to be continuous over significant distances or depths.

No karstic strata identified.

Precipice Sandstone characterisation:

Limited fracturing not pervasive

1 R

emot

e

1 M

inor

Lo

w

Not required.




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Aquifer dissolution and aquitard and well stability 1

Min

or

Gross dissolution of the aquifer leading to aquitard instability and land subsidence is the primary concern.

pH in samples collected from the Precipice Sandstone aquifer, CSG water, and injectate is slightly alkaline, limiting the risk of aquifer dissolution. Precipice sandstone lithology (predominately quartzitic) not susceptible to dissolution.

Geochemical modelling:

Mineralogical and water quality compatibility assessment indicates the water quality of the injectate is unlikely to result in dissolution of aquifer minerals or dispersion of clays due to reducing or low pH conditions

Geochemical modelling indicates that the Precipice Sandstone aquifer has the capacity to buffer the pH of the injectate to a value similar to that of the in-situ groundwater (alkaline water is likely to precipitate rather than dissolve)


pH adjustment (if required)

De-oxygenation (redox control to limit reaction in the aquifer)

1 R

emot

e

1 M

inor

Lo

w

Monitor and document the corrosion rate of bore materials over the life of the injection bore as per the monitoring plan.




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Impacts on groundwater dependant ecosystems

3 S

erio

us

There are no springs sourced from the Precipice Sandstone or potentially baseflow-connected watercourses in the vicinity of the injection site.

The closest spring sourced from the Precipice Sandstone aquifer is Yebna 2 (Complex 591), located approximately 30 km to the north.

Groundwater Monitoring and Adaptive Response Plan: Adaptive management is

implemented through a modelling-monitoring-management action approach whereby each component is used to inform and refine the others. Should the monitoring and modelling indicate an increase in risk to potential receptors due to aquifer injection, the adequacy of the monitoring can be reviewed to assist in the management of that risk.

Spring Monitoring: Monitoring in accordance with the

APLNG Groundwater Management Plan, inclusive of OGIA (2016) requirements.

2 H

ighl

y un

like

ly

2 M

oder

ate

Lo

w Monitoring in accordance

with APLNG Groundwater Management Plan




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Energy and greenhouse gases

1 M

inor

Insignificant additional power consumption in relation to alternate water use options

Implementation of injection as a water treatment options has been based on the following selection criteria:

Regulatory compliance, specifically alignment to the CSG Water Management Policy (State of Queensland, 2012);

Execution complexity;

Operability;

Adaptability;

Social acceptability;

Health and safety;

Environment;

Net present cost; and

Water demands.

Energy demands of injection will reflect energy requirements for treatment process and pumping requirements

Infrastructure and setup:

Avoid energy wastage (irrigation and injection schemes to share pipeline distribution infrastructure)

Analysers to control operations

• Optimise recharge pressures to reduce energy costs

1 R

emot

e

1 M

inor

Lo

w

Not required.




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Bore failure causes injectate to enter non-target aquifer. In-situ groundwater of non-target aquifer has differing water quality to that of injectate.

3 S

erio

us

Caused by failure of injection bore.

All drilling activities were conducted in accordance with the Code of Practice for Constructing and Abandoning Coal Seam Gas Wells in Queensland (State of Queensland, 2013a)

The bores were installed as a telescope design, i.e. the carbon steel production casing was cement grouted prior to drilling into the target zone

Carbon steel production casing was selected as it has sufficient strength to withstand potential compressive pressures and burst pressures

The casing was pressure tested to 2,000 psi following cementing

A leak-off test was completed at the casing shoe to determine formation fracture pressures at each location

Operational wellhead discharge pressures are significantly less than the Precipice Sandstone wellhead formation fracture pressures

Bore integrity testing was undertaken as part of the bore construction program and thereafter once every 5 years

1 R

emot

e

3 S

erio

us

Lo

w

Monitoring in accordance with monitoring plan




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Clogging (including deposition of suspended solids from CSG water, air entrainment and gas binding, biological growth, and geochemical reactions)

2 M

oder

ate

Mineralogical and water quality compatibility assessment indicate limited potential for geochemical incompatibility between injectate and Precipice Sandstone aquifer.

Trial data suggests that clogging has not affected bore performance.

The potential for clogging by particulates is not considered to be a significant risk due to the nature of the source water and the treatment system prior to injection.

Total suspended solids in the injectate ranges from <1mg/L to 6 mg/L

Air entrainment and gas binding not considered a significant risk due to design of injection bores and the limited potential for cascading of the injectate into the bore.

Low risk of biological clogging due to the minimal concentrations of nutrients and organics in the Precipice Sandstone aquifer, CSG water, and injectate.

Bore Commissioning: • Airlift development of all injection

bores


• Membrane filtration • Reverse osmosis • pH adjustment (if required) • Redox control to limit reaction in the

aquifer (e.g. removal of organic carbon, de-oxygenation)

Process control

• Off-specification water directed back to WTF feed pond

Bore maintenance and redevelopment regime:

• Backflush bores if a significant loss of performance is encountered

4 P

ossi

ble

1 M

inor

Med

ium

Monitoring in accordance with monitoring plan.




Hazard Description

Co

nse

qu

ence

P

rio

r to

Co

ntr

ol


Lik

elih

oo

d

Co

nse

qu

ence

Res

idu

al R

isk


Impacts on existing entitlement holders

2 M

oder

ate

No landholder bore located closer to injection site than APLNG injection monitoring bore network. No landholder bores are located within predicted water quality impact zone

Groundwater Monitoring and Adaptive Response Plan: Adaptive management is

implemented through a modelling-monitoring-management action approach whereby each component is used to inform and refine the others. Should the monitoring and modelling indicate an increase in risk to potential receptors due to aquifer injection, the adequacy of the monitoring can be reviewed to assist in the management of that risk.

Pressure and flow monitoring data is assessed on a quarterly basis and used as follows: - To assess the transmission of

pressure effects towards landholder bores and springs; and,

- Groundwater level data from the overlying aquifers is reviewed to assess whether pressure effects have transmitted across the intervening Evergreen Formation aquitard, and to ensure preferential pathways have not developed in the grout sheath surrounding the casing of the injection bores or local monitoring bores.

Precipice Sandstone aquifer protection: Low risk of contamination in injectate

due to treatment processes (membrane filtration, RO, pH adjustment, de-oxygenation)

4 P

ossi

ble

1 M

inor

Lo

w

Monitoring in accordance with monitoring plan.




8. References

ABC (2013). Hidden Treasure. Landline, ABC News, Broadcast 3 November 2013.

AGE (2005). Report on Great Artesian Basin Water Resource Plan River Baseflow from Aquifers of the GAB. Report to Department of Natural Resources and Mines, June 2005.

APLNG (2014a). 2013 Groundwater Assessment Q-LNG01-15-TR-1801_Rev2. Component 1 of the APLNG Stage 2 CSG Water Monitoring and Management Plan Q-LNG01-15-MP-2105_Rev2. Submitted to Department of Environment 11 March 2014. https://www.aplng.com.au/content/dam/aplng/compliance/management-plans/2013_Groundwater_Assessment.pdf

APLNG (2014b). 2013-2014 Groundwater Assessment Report. Q-LNG01-75-RP-0001_Rev1. July 2014. https://www.aplng.com.au/content/dam/aplng/compliance/management-plans/Q-LNG01-75-RP-0001__Annual_GW__Report_Rev1_Final.pdf

APLNG (2015). 2014-2015 Groundwater Assessment Report. Q-1000-75-RP-001_Rev0. August 2015. https://www.aplng.com.au/content/dam/aplng/compliance/management-plans/2014-2015AnnualGroundwaterAssessment.pdf

APLNG (2016). Australia Pacific LNG Upstream Project 2015-2016 Groundwater Assessment Report. QLD-1000-E75-RPT_Rev0. August 2016. https://www.aplng.com.au/content/dam/aplng/compliance/management-plans/2015-2016_Groundwater_Assessment.pdf

APLNG (2017). Groundwater Management Plan (CDN/ID:11788517)

ANZECC (2000). Australia and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, Volume 3, Primary Industries. Australia and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand.

BoM (2012). Atlas of Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE Atlas), Phase 2 – Task 5 Report: Identifying and Mapping GDEs. National Water Commission.

Bradley, P.M., Carr, S.A., Baird, R.B., and Chapelle, F.H. (2005). Biodegradation of N-nitrosodimethylamine in soil from a water reclamation facility: Bioremediation Journal, v. 9, no. 2, p. 115-120.

DEHP (2011). Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009 Dawson River Sub-basin Environmental Values and Water Quality Objectives Basin No. 130 (part), including all waters of the Dawson River Sub-basin except the Callide Creek Catchment. Department of Environment and Resource Management, September 2011.

Dillon, P., Kumar, A., Kookana, T., Leijs, R., Reed, T., Parsons, S., Ingerson, G. (2009). Managed Aquifer Recharge – Risks to Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems – A Review. Water for a Healthy Country Flagship Report to Land & Water Australia, 2009.

Eamus, D., Hatton, T., Cook, P., and Colvin, C. (2006). Ecohydrology: vegetation function, water and resource management. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

Fensham, R.J. and Fairfax, R.J. (2002). Spring wetlands of the Great Artesian Basin, Queensland, Australia.

Gibbons, R.D., Bhaumik, D.K., Aryal, S. (2009). Statistical Methods for Groundwater Monitoring, Second Edition, Statistics in Practice, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Habermehl and Lau (1997). Hydrogeology of the Great Artesian Basin, Australia. (map at scale 1 : 2,500,000) Australian Geological Survey Organisation, Canberra.

Habermehl, M.A. (2002). Hydrogeology, hydrochemistry and isotope hydrology of the Great Artesian Basin, Bureau of Rural Sciences.

Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB) (2010), Drilling and Bore Completion Report Spring Gully DMP01, DMH01 and DRP-WI-1, report to APLNG.

Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB) (2011a). Hydrochemical assessment of treated CSG water into the Precipice Sandstone Aquifer at Spring Gully. Final Report. M09620A14.

Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB) (2011b). Hydraulic testing and analysis report DRP-WI-1, Spring Gully report to APLNG, 1 April 2011.

Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB) (2012). Drilling and Borehole Completion Report Spring Gully PB3 and MB4-H, report to APLNG, July 2012.

Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB) (2014). Drilling and Borehole Completion Report DRP-WI-2 and DRP-WI-3, report to APLNG, March 2014.




NHMRC, NRMMC (2011). Australian Drinking Water Guidelines Paper 6 National Water Quality Management Strategy. National Health and Medical Research Council. National Resource Management Ministerial Council, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

NRMMC (2009). Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling: Managing Health and Environmental Risks (Phase 2) Managed Aquifer Recharge. Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council, Environment Protection and Heritage Council, National Health and Medical Research Council.

OGIA (2016). Underground Water Impact Report for the Surat Cumulative Management Area. Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

Origin (2010). Spring Gully Reinjection Management Plan. Q-8200-10-MP-001.

Origin (2012). Spring Gully Permeate Reinjection Plant - Operation & Maintenance Manual.Q-8220-95-MN-001.

Origin (2013). Spring Gully Aquifer Injection Trial Technical Feasibility Assessment. Q-8200-95-TR-0015.

Origin (2016a). HSE System Directive (ORG-HSE-DVE-102).

Origin (2016b). Incident Management Directive (ORG-RSK-DVE-006).

Origin (2016c). Emergency Response Plan Spring Gully Operations (CDN/ID 3677536)

Origin (2016d). Optimisation Guide. Aquifer Injection Monitoring and Data Analysis (OEUP-Q1000-GDL-OPS-033).

Origin (2016e). Optimisation Guide. Aquifer Injection Maintenance Triggers to Ensure Optimum Injection Bore Performance (OEUP-Q1000-GDL-OPS-037).

Origin (2016f). Risk Management Directive (ORG-RMS-DIR- 001).

Origin (2017). Management of HSE Regulatory Notifiable Incidents (CDN/ID 5814101).

Parkhurst, D.L., Appelo, C. (1999) User's Guide to PHREEQC (Version 2) - A Computer Program for Speciation, Batch-Reaction, One-Dimensional Transport, and Inverse Geochemical Calculations. USGS, Denver, Colorado, USA, water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4259.

Quarantotto (1989). Hydrogeology of the Surat Basin, Queensland. Queensland Department of Mines Record Series 1989/26.

SKM (2013). Surat Basin Springs Monitoring Program Field Survey Completion Report. QE06816.100. 8 November 2013.

State of Queensland (2005). Hydrogeological Framework Report for the GAB WRP Area, Version 1.0. Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

State of Queensland (2012). Coal Seam Gas Water Management Policy. Energy Resources, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection.

State of Queensland (2013a). Code of Practice for constructing and abandoning coal seam gas wells and associated bores in Queensland, Version 2.0. Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

State of Queensland (2013b). Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004.

Theis, C.V. (1935). The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using groundwater storage, Am. Geophys. Union Trans., vol. 16, pp. 519-524.

Versari, A., Mattioli, A., Parilleo, G.P., and Galassi, S. (2004). Rapid analysis of ascorbic and isoascorbic acids in fruit juice by capillary electrophoresis, Food Control 15 (2004).

Zhou, Q., McCraven, S., Garcia, J., Gasca, M., Johnson, A. and Motzer, W.E. (2009) Field evidence of biodegradation of Nnitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) in groundwater with incidental and active recycle water recharge. Water Research 43, p. 793-805.




9. Document information and history

DOCUMENT CUSTODIAN GROUP

Title Name/s

IG-Development - Groundwater

DOCUMENT HISTORY

Rev Date Changes made in document Reviewer/s Consolidator Approver

Legacy no. Q-8200-95-MP-1008

A 9/01/2013 Issued for Review R. Morris N. Littlewood

0 28/01/2013 Issued for Use B. Stuart N. Littlewood R. Morris

1 16/2/2015 Updated A. Moser R Morris M. Renfree

2 05/11/2015 Updated R. Morris L. Helm A. Moser

CDN/ID 11792487

2A 05/07/2017 Updated to reflect current status of activities

R. Morris L. Helm A. Moser

3 06/07/2017 Issued for Use R. Morris L. Helm A. Moser




Appendix A: Material Safety Data Sheets

Material Safety Data Sheet

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE MATERIAL AND SUPPLIER

Product Name: CAUSTIC SODA - LIQUID (5%-45%)

Other name(s): Sodium hydroxide - liquid (20%-30%), Soda lye solution (20%-30%), Caustic soda solution (20%-30%), Sodium hydroxide solution (20%-30%), Liquid caustic soda (20%-30%), Caustic soda 10%, Caustic soda - liquid 17%, Caustic soda solution 17%, Liquid caustic soda 17%, Caustic soda 5%, Aluminux LL.

Recommended Use: Chemical and explosives manufacture; neutralising agent.

Supplier: Orica Australia Pty LtdABN: 004 117 828Street Address: 1 Nicholson Street,

Melbourne 3000Australia

Telephone Number: +61 3 9665 7111Facsimile: +61 3 9665 7937

Emergency Telephone: 1 800 033 111 (ALL HOURS)

2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

This material is hazardous according to criteria of ASCC; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE.

Classified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the Australian Dangerous Goods Code (ADG Code) for Transport by Road and Rail; DANGEROUS GOODS.

Risk Phrases: Causes severe burns. Risk of serious damage to eyes.

Safety Phrases: Avoid contact with skin and eyes. In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection. In case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label whenever possible).

Poisons Schedule:

S6 Poison.

3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTSComponents / CAS Number Proportion Risk PhrasesSodium hydroxide1310-73-2

5%-45% R35, R41

Water7732-18-5

55%-95% -

4. FIRST AID MEASURES

Product Name: CAUSTIC SODA - LIQUID (5%-45%)Substance No: 000033985001 Issued: 26/03/2007 Version: 3

Page 1 of 7


For advice, contact a Poisons Information Centre (Phone eg. Australia 131 126; New Zealand 0 800 764766) or a doctor.

Inhalation: Remove victim from area of exposure - avoid becoming a casualty. Remove contaminated clothing and loosen remaining clothing. Allow patient to assume most comfortable position and keep warm. Keep at rest until fully recovered. For all but the most minor symptoms arrange for patient to be seen by a doctor as soon as possible, either on site or at the nearest hospital.

Skin Contact: If spilt on large areas of skin or hair, immediately drench with running water and remove clothing. Continue to wash skin and hair with plenty of water (and soap if material is insoluble) until advised to stop by the Poisons Information Centre or a doctor.

Eye Contact: If in eyes, hold eyelids apart and flush the eye continuously with running water. Continue flushing until advised to stop by the Poisons Information Centre or a doctor, or for at least 15 minutes.

Ingestion: Immediately rinse mouth with water. If swallowed, do NOT induce vomiting. Give a glass of water. Seek immediate medical assistance.

Medical attention and special treatment:

Treat symptomatically. Can cause corneal burns.

5. FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

Hazards from combustion products:

Non-combustible material.

Precautions for fire fighters and special protective equipment:

Contact with metals may liberate hydrogen gas which is extremely flammable. Fire fighters to wear self-contained breathing apparatus and suitable protective clothing if risk of exposure to products of decomposition.

Suitable Extinguishing Media: Not combustible, however, if material is involved in a fire use: Water fog (or if unavailable fine water spray), foam, dry agent (carbon dioxide, dry chemical powder).

Hazchem Code: 2R

6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Emergency procedures: Clear area of all unprotected personnel. If contamination of sewers or waterways has occurred advise local emergency services.

Methods and materials for containment and clean up:

Slippery when spilt. Avoid accidents, clean up immediately. Wear protective equipment to prevent skin and eye contact and breathing in vapours. Work up wind or increase ventilation. Contain - prevent run off into drains and waterways. Use absorbent (soil, sand or other inert material). Collect and seal in properly labelled containers or drums for disposal. Caution - heat may be evolved on contact with water.


Page 2 of 7


7. HANDLING AND STORAGEThis material is a Scheduled Poison S6 and must be stored, maintained and used in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Conditions for safe storage: Store in cool place and out of direct sunlight. Store away from incompatible materials described in Section 10. Store away from foodstuffs. Do not store in aluminium or galvanised containers nor use die-cast zinc or aluminium bungs; plastic bungs should be used. At temperatures greater than 40°C, tanks must be stress relieved. Keep containers closed when not in use - check regularly for leaks.

Precautions for safe handling: Avoid skin and eye contact and breathing in vapour, mists and aerosols. Keep out of reach of children.

8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION

Occupational Exposure Limits:No value assigned for this specific material by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. However, Exposure Standard(s) for constituent(s):

Sodium hydroxide: Peak Limitation = 2 mg/m3

As published by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission.

Peak Limitation - a ceiling concentration which should not be exceeded over a measurement period which should be as short as possible but not exceeding 15 minutes.

These Exposure Standards are guides to be used in the control of occupational health hazards. All atmospheric contamination should be kept to as low a level as is workable. These exposure standards should not be used as fine dividing lines between safe and dangerous concentrations of chemicals. They are not a measure of relative toxicity.

Engineering controls:Ensure ventilation is adequate and that air concentrations of components are controlled below quoted Exposure Standards. If inhalation risk exists: Use with local exhaust ventilation or while wearing suitable mist respirator. Keep containers closed when not in use.

Personal Protective Equipment:The selection of PPE is dependant on a detailed risk assessment. The risk assessment should consider the work situation, the physical form of the chemical, the handling methods, and environmental factors.

Orica Personal Protection Guide No. 1, 1998: D - OVERALLS, RUBBER BOOTS, CHEMICAL GOGGLES, FACE SHIELD, SAFETY SHOES, GLOVES (Long), APRON.

Wear overalls, chemical goggles, face shield, elbow-length impervious gloves, splash apron and rubber boots. Always wash hands before smoking, eating, drinking or using the toilet. Wash contaminated clothing and other protective


Page 3 of 7


equipment before storage or re-use. If risk of inhalation exists, wear suitable mist respirator meeting the requirements of AS/NZS 1715 and AS/NZS 1716.

9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Physical state: LiquidColour: Water-white to Slightly TurbidOdour: No specific odourSolubility: Miscible with water.Specific Gravity: 1.23-1.33 @20°CRelative Vapour Density (air=1): Not availableVapour Pressure (20 °C): Not availableFlash Point (°C): Not applicableFlammability Limits (%): Not applicableAutoignition Temperature (°C): Not applicableBoiling Point/Range (°C): 119 (25%)pH: >10.5 (1% sol.)

10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Chemical stability: Stable under normal conditions. Absorbs carbon dioxide from the air.

Conditions to avoid: Avoid contact with foodstuffs.

Incompatible materials: Incompatible with acids , ammonium salts , aluminium , tin , and zinc .

Hazardous decomposition products:

None known.

Hazardous reactions: Corrosive to aluminium, tin, and zinc, liberating flammable hydrogen gas. Reacts violently with acids. Reacts with ammonium salts liberating ammonia gas. Reacts exothermically on dilution with water.

11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

No adverse health effects expected if the product is handled in accordance with this Safety Data Sheet and the product label. Symptoms or effects that may arise if the product is mishandled and overexposure occurs are:

Ingestion: Swallowing can result in nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, abdominal pain and chemical burns to the gastrointestinal tract.

Eye contact: A severe eye irritant. Corrosive to eyes; contact can cause corneal burns. Contamination of eyes can result in permanent injury.

Skin contact: Contact with skin will result in severe irritation. Corrosive to skin - may cause skin burns.

Inhalation: Breathing in mists or aerosols may produce respiratory irritation.


Page 4 of 7


Long Term Effects:No information available for the product.

Toxicological Data:No LD50 data available for the product. For the constituent Sodium hydroxide (1):

SKIN: Severe irritant (rabbit).

12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Ecotoxicity Avoid contaminating waterways.

13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Disposal methods: Refer to Waste Management Authority. Dispose of material through a licensed waste contractor. Decontamination and destruction of containers should be considered.

14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

Road and Rail TransportClassified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the Australian Dangerous Goods Code (ADG Code) for Transport by Road and Rail; DANGEROUS GOODS.

UN No: 1824Class-primary 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIProper Shipping Name: SODIUM HYDROXIDE SOLUTION

Hazchem Code: 2R

Marine TransportClassified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) for transport by sea; DANGEROUS GOODS.

UN No: 1824Class-primary: 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIProper Shipping Name: SODIUM HYDROXIDE SOLUTION

Air TransportClassified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations for transport by air; DANGEROUS GOODS.


Page 5 of 7


UN No: 1824Class-primary: 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIProper Shipping Name: SODIUM HYDROXIDE SOLUTION

15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

Classification: This material is hazardous according to criteria of ASCC; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE.

Hazard Category: C: Corrosive

Risk Phrase(s): R35: Causes severe burns.R41: Risk of serious damage to eyes.

Safety Phrase(s): S24/25: Avoid contact with skin and eyes.S26: In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice.S36/37/39: Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection.S45: In case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label whenever possible).

Poisons Schedule: S6 Poison.

All the constituents of this material are listed on the Australian Inventory of Chemical Substances (AICS).

16. OTHER INFORMATION

(1) `Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances'. Ed. D. Sweet, US Dept. of Health & Human Services: Cincinatti, 2006.

This material safety data sheet has been prepared by SH&E Shared Services, Orica.

Reason(s) for Issue:5 Yearly Revised Primary MSDS

This MSDS summarises to our best knowledge at the date of issue, the chemical health and safety hazards of the material and general guidance on how to safely handle the material in the workplace. Since Orica Limited cannot anticipate or control the conditions under which the product may be used, each user must, prior to usage, assess and control the risks arising from its use of the material.

If clarification or further information is needed, the user should contact their Orica representative or Orica Limited at the contact details on page 1.

Orica Limited's responsibility for the material as sold is subject to the terms and conditions of sale, a copy of which is available upon request.


Page 6 of 7



Page 7 of 7

Aldrich - 496332 www.sigma-aldrich.com Page 1 of 4

SIGMA-ALDRICH

SAFETY DATA SHEET according to Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006

Version 4.0 Revision Date 20.07.2010 Print Date 19.04.2011

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBSTANCE/MIXTURE AND OF THE COMPANY/UNDERTAKING

Product name : Sodium D-isoascorbate monohydrate

Product Number : 496332 Brand : Aldrich Company : Sigma-Aldrich Pty. Ltd.

12 Anella Avenue CASTLE HILL NSW 2154 AUSTRALIA

Telephone : +61 2 9841 0555 (1800 800 097) Fax : +61 2 9841 0500 (1800 800 096) Emergency Phone # : +44 (0)8701 906777 (1800 448 465)


Not classified as hazardous according to criteria of NOHSC. Not a hazardous substance or mixture according to EC-directives 67/548/EEC or 1999/45/EC.

3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Synonyms : Sodium erythorbate monohydrate D-Isoascorbic acid sodium salt monohydrate

Formula : C6H7NaO6 · H2O

Molecular Weight : 216.12 g/mol

CAS-No. EC-No. Index-No. Classification Concentration

2,3-Didehydro-3-O-sodio-D-erythro-hexono-1,4-lactone monohydrate

63524-04-9 228-973-9 - - -


If inhaled If breathed in, move person into fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration.

In case of skin contact Wash off with soap and plenty of water.

In case of eye contact Flush eyes with water as a precaution.

If swallowed Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Rinse mouth with water.

5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES

Suitable extinguishing media Use water spray, alcohol-resistant foam, dry chemical or carbon dioxide.


Special protective equipment for fire-fighters Wear self contained breathing apparatus for fire fighting if necessary.


Personal precautions Avoid dust formation. Avoid breathing vapors, mist or gas.

Environmental precautions Do not let product enter drains.

Methods for cleaning up Sweep up and shovel. Keep in suitable, closed containers for disposal.

7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Handling Provide appropriate exhaust ventilation at places where dust is formed. Normal measures for preventive fire protection.

Storage Keep container tightly closed in a dry and well-ventilated place. Store in cool place.


We are not aware of any national exposure limit.

Personal protective equipment

Respiratory protection Respiratory protection is not required. Where protection from nuisance levels of dusts are desired, use type N95 (US) or type P1 (EN 143) dust masks. Use respirators and components tested and approved under appropriate government standards such as NIOSH (US) or CEN (EU).

Hand protection Handle with gloves. Gloves must be inspected prior to use. Use proper glove removal technique (without touching glove's outer surface) to avoid skin contact with this product. Dispose of contaminated gloves after use in accordance with applicable laws and good laboratory practices. Wash and dry hands. The selected protective gloves have to satisfy the specifications of EU Directive 89/686/EEC and the standard EN 374 derived from it.

Eye protection Use equipment for eye protection tested and approved under appropriate government standards such as NIOSH (US) or EN 166(EU).

Skin and body protection Choose body protection in relation to its type, to the concentration and amount of dangerous substances, and to the specific work-place., The type of protective equipment must be selected according to the concentration and amount of the dangerous substance at the specific workplace.

Hygiene measures General industrial hygiene practice.


Appearance

Form powder

Colour white

Safety data

pH no data available

Melting point 165 °C


Boiling point no data available

Flash point no data available

Ignition temperature no data available

Lower explosion limit no data available

Upper explosion limit no data available

Water solubility no data available


Storage stability Stable under recommended storage conditions.

Materials to avoid Strong oxidizing agents

Hazardous decomposition products Hazardous decomposition products formed under fire conditions. - Carbon oxides, Sodium oxides


Acute toxicity

no data available

Irritation and corrosion

no data available

no data available

Sensitisation

no data available

Chronic exposure

IARC: No component of this product present at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as probable, possible or confirmed human carcinogen by IARC.

no data available

no data available

Potential Health Effects

Inhalation May be harmful if inhaled. May cause respiratory tract irritation. Skin May be harmful if absorbed through skin. May cause skin irritation. Eyes May cause eye irritation. Ingestion May be harmful if swallowed.


Elimination information (persistence and degradability) no data available

Ecotoxicity effects no data available


Further information on ecology

no data available


Product Offer surplus and non-recyclable solutions to a licensed disposal company. Contaminated packaging Dispose of as unused product.


ADR/RID Not dangerous goods IMDG Not dangerous goods IATA Not dangerous goods


Labelling according to EC Directives

Further information: The product does not need to be labelled in accordance with EC directives or respective national laws.


Further information Copyright 2010 Sigma-Aldrich Co. License granted to make unlimited paper copies for internal use only. The above information is believed to be correct but does not purport to be all inclusive and shall be used only as a guide. The information in this document is based on the present state of our knowledge and is applicable to the product with regard to appropriate safety precautions. It does not represent any guarantee of the properties of the product. Sigma-Aldrich Co., shall not be held liable for any damage resulting from handling or from contact with the above product. See reverse side of invoice or packing slip for additional terms and conditions of sale.



Product Name: SODIUM BISULFITE SOLUTION

Other name(s): Sodium hydrogen sulfite solution; Sodium bisulphite solution 25-40%.Recommended Use: Dechlorination of waste water.

Supplier: Orica Australia Pty LtdABN: 99 004 117 828Street Address: 1 Nicholson Street,


Telephone Number: +61 3 9665 7111 Facsimile: +61 3 9665 7937 Emergency Telephone: 1 800 033 111 (ALL HOURS)


This material is hazardous according to criteria of Safe Work Australia; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE.


Risk Phrases: Harmful if swallowed. Contact with acids liberates toxic gas. Irritating to eyes, respiratory system and skin.

Safety Phrases: Do not breathe spray. Avoid contact with skin and eyes. In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection.

Poisons Schedule: None allocated.


Components CAS Number Proportion Risk Phrases

Sodium bisulfite 7631-90-5 25-40% R22, R31, R36/37/38

Water 7732-18-5 to 100% -


Inhalation:Remove victim from area of exposure - avoid becoming a casualty. Remove contaminated clothing and loosen remaining clothing. Allow patient to assume most comfortable position and keep warm. Keep at rest until fully recovered. Seek medical advice if effects persist.

Skin Contact:If skin or hair contact occurs, immediately remove any contaminated clothing and wash skin and hair thoroughly with running water. If swelling, redness, blistering or irritation occurs seek medical assistance.

Eye Contact:If in eyes, hold eyelids apart and flush the eye continuously with running water. Continue flushing until advised to stop by a Poisons Information Centre or a doctor, or for at least 15 minutes.

Product Name: SODIUM BISULFITE SOLUTION Issued: 04/12/2009Substance No: 000034437601 Version: 4

Page 1 of 6


Ingestion:Rinse mouth with water. If swallowed, give a glass of water to drink. If vomiting occurs give further water. Seek medical advice.

Medical attention and special treatment: Treat symptomatically.


Hazards from combustion products: Non-combustible material.

Precautions for fire fighters and special protective equipment: Non-combustible material. Decomposes on heating emitting toxic fumes, including those of oxides of sulfur . Fire fighters to wear self-contained breathing apparatus and suitable protective clothing if risk of exposure to products of decomposition.

Suitable Extinguishing Media:Not combustible, however, if material is involved in a fire use: Fine water spray, normal foam, dry agent (carbon dioxide, dry chemical powder).

Hazchem Code: 2X


Emergency procedures: If contamination of sewers or waterways has occurred advise local emergency services.

Methods and materials for containment and clean up: Wear protective equipment to prevent skin and eye contact. Contain - prevent run off into drains and waterways. Use absorbent (soil, sand or other inert material). Collect and seal in properly labelled containers or drums for disposal.


Conditions for safe storage: Store in a cool, dry, well ventilated place and out of direct sunlight. Store away from incompatible materials described in Section 10. Suitable packaging materials include polyethylene, polypropylene, and/or poly-lined containers. Keep containers closed when not in use - check regularly for leaks.

Precautions for safe handling: Avoid skin and eye contact and breathing in vapour, mists and aerosols.


Occupational Exposure Limits: No value assigned for this specific material by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. However, Exposure Standard(s) for constituent(s):

Sodium bisulfite: 8hr TWA = 5 mg/m3


Page 2 of 6



TWA - The time-weighted average airborne concentration over an eight-hour working day, for a five-day working week over an entire working life.


Engineering controls: Ensure ventilation is adequate and that air concentrations of components are controlled below quoted Exposure Standards. Keep containers closed when not in use.

Personal Protective Equipment:The selection of PPE is dependant on a detailed risk assessment. The risk assessment should consider the work situation, the physical form of the chemical, the handling methods, and environmental factors.

Orica Personal Protection Guide No. 1, 1998: H - OVERALLS, SAFETY SHOES, CHEMICAL GOGGLES, GLOVES, RESPIRATOR.

Wear overalls, chemical goggles and impervious gloves. Use with adequate ventilation. If inhalation risk exists wear organic vapour/particulate respirator or air supplied mask meeting the requirements of AS/NZS 1715 and AS/NZS 1716. Always wash hands before smoking, eating, drinking or using the toilet. Wash contaminated clothing and other protective equipment before storage or re-use.


Physical state: LiquidColour: Pale YellowOdour: Pungent , Sulfur - likeSolubility: Soluble in water.Specific Gravity: 1.37 @20°CRelative Vapour Density (air=1): Not availableVapour Pressure (20 °C): Not availableFlash Point (°C): Not applicableFlammability Limits (%): Not applicableAutoignition Temperature (°C): Not availableBoiling Point/Range (°C): Not availablepH: 3.8


Page 3 of 6



Chemical stability: Stable under normal ambient and anticipated storage and handling conditions of temperature and pressure.

Conditions to avoid: Avoid exposure to extreme heat.

Incompatible materials: Incompatible with acids , strong oxidising agents , and materials that react violently with water .


Sulfur dioxide.

Hazardous reactions: Hazardous polymerisation will not occur. Corrosive to mild steel .



Ingestion: Swallowing can result in nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and gastrointestinal irritation.

Eye contact: An eye irritant.

Skin contact: Contact with skin will result in irritation.

Inhalation: Material is irritant to the mucous membranes of the respiratory tract (airways).

Long Term Effects:Not a listed carcinogen.

Toxicological Data: No LD50 data available for the product. For the constituent SODIUM BISULFITE:Oral LD50 (rat): 2,000 mg/kg.SKIN: Irritant.EYES: Irritant.Estimated fatal dose in humans is 10 g.

The sodium bisulfite constituent in this product can sensitise the skin and/or respiratory tract of some susceptible individuals.




Disposal methods: Refer to Waste Management Authority. Dispose of material through a licensed waste contractor.



Page 4 of 6



CORROSIVE

8

UN No: 2693Class-primary 8 Corrosive Packing Group: IIIProper Shipping Name: BISULPHITES, AQUEOUS SOLUTION, N.O.S. (CONTAINS SODIUM BISULPHITE) Hazchem Code: 2X


UN No: 2693Class-primary: 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIIProper Shipping Name: BISULFITES, AQUEOUS SOLUTION, N.O.S. (CONTAINS SODIUM BISULFITE)

IMDG EMS Fire: F-AIMDG EMS Spill: S-BAir TransportClassified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations for transport by air; DANGEROUS GOODS.

UN No: 2693Class-primary: 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIIProper Shipping Name: BISULFITES, AQUEOUS SOLUTION, N.O.S. (CONTAINS SODIUM BISULFITE)


Classification: This material is hazardous according to criteria of Safe Work Australia; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE.

Hazard Category: Xn: Harmful Xi: Irritant

Risk Phrase(s): R22: Harmful if swallowed.R31: Contact with acids liberates toxic gas.R36/37/38: Irritating to eyes, respiratory system and skin.

Safety Phrase(s): S23: Do not breathe vapour/mist/aerosol.S24/25: Avoid contact with skin and eyes.S26: In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice.S36/37/39: Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection.



Page 5 of 6




American Conference of Governmental and Industrial Hygienists. In: `Threshold Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices'. American Conference of Governmental and Industrial Hygienists Inc., 2001.Private Correspondence with supplier. 1996.In: `Handbook of Poisoning'. 12th Edition. Ed. Driesbach R.H., Lang Medical Publications, 1987.`Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances'. Ed. D. Sweet, US Dept. of Health & Human Services: Cincinatti, 2007.


Reason(s) for Issue:Change in Handling & Storage RequirementsChange in Stability and Reactivity requirements





Page 6 of 6


Not classified as hazardous according to criteria of NOHSC

PERMATREAT® PC-191TInfosafe™ No.

HXTY2 Issue Date June 2009 Status ISSUED by NALCO

BS: 1.10.9


Product Name PERMATREAT® PC-191T

Company Name NALCO AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ABN 41 000 424 788)

Address 2 Anderson Street Botany NSW 2019

Emergency Tel. 1800 205 506

Telephone/Fax Number

Tel: (02) 9316 3000 Fax: (02) 9666 5292

Recommended Use APPLICATION: REVERSE OSMOSIS ANTISCALANT

Other Names None Listed


Hazard Classification

NON-HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. NON-DANGEROUS GOODS. Hazard classification according to the criteria of NOHSC. Dangerous goods classification according to the Australia Dangerous Goods Code.

Safety Phrase(s)S45 In case of accident or if you feel unwell seek medical advice immediately (show the label where possible). S24/25 Avoid contact with skin and eyes. S37/39 Wear suitable gloves and eye/face protection.

Sensitization of Product This product is not expected to be a sensitizer.

Other Information

Not classified as hazardous according to the Australian Safety & Compensation Council (ASCC). This product is not classified as a dangerous good according to national or international

Page 1 of 9MSDS: PERMATREAT® PC-191T (Not classified as hazardous according t...

5/03/2011http://www.msdsonline.com.au/origin/msds/msdsview.asp?SynonymCode=HXTY200...

regulations.


Chemical CharacterizationLiquid

Ingredients Name CAS Proportion

Ingredients

determined not to be hazardous

100 %w/w


Inhalation Remove to fresh air, treat symptomatically. If symptoms develop,

seek medical advice.

Ingestion Get medical attention. Do not induce vomiting without medical advice. If conscious, washout mouth and give water to drink. If reflexive vomiting occurs, rinse mouth and repeat administration of water.

Skin Immediately flush with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. If symptoms persist, call a physician.

Eye Immediately flush eye with water for at least 15 minutes while holding eyelids open. If symptoms persist, call a physician.

Advice to Doctor

Based on the individual reactions of the patient, the physician's judgement should be used to control symptoms and clinical condition.


Suitable Extinguishing Media

Use extinguishing media appropriate for surrounding fire. This product would not be expected to burn unless all the water is boiled away. The remaining organics may be ignitable.

Special Protective Equipment for fire fighters

In case of fire, wear a full face positive-pressure self contained breathing apparatus and protective suit.

Specific Hazards

May evolve oxides of carbon (COx) under fire conditions. May evolve oxides of nitrogen (NOx) under fire conditions. May evolve oxides of phosphorus (POx) under fire conditions.

Sensitivity to Static Discharge Not expected to be sensitive to static discharge.




Personal Precautions

Restrict access to area as appropriate until clean-up operations are complete. Use personal protective equipment recommended in Section 8 (Exposure Controls/Personal Protection). Stop or reduce any leaks if it is safe to do so. Do not touch spilled material. Ventilate spill area if possible.

Clean-up Methods - Small Spillages

Soak up spill with absorbent material. Place residues in a suitable, covered, properly labeled container. Wash affected area.

Clean-up Methods - Large Spillages

Contain liquid using absorbent material, by digging trenches or by diking. Reclaim into recovery or salvage drums or tank truck for proper disposal. Contact an approved waste hauler for disposal of contaminated recovered material. Dispose of material in compliance with regulations indicated in Section 13 (Disposal Considerations).

Environmental Precautions

Do not contaminate surface water. Do not allow material to contaminate ground water system. Prevent material from entering sewers or waterways.


Precautions for Safe Handling

Do not get in eyes, on skin, on clothing. Do not take internally. Ensure all containers are labeled. Keep the containers closed when not in use. Avoid eye and skin contact. Keep away from acids and oxidizing agents.

Conditions for Safe Storage

Protect product from freezing. Store the containers tightly closed.

Recommended Materials

SUITABLE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL: HDPE (high density polyethylene), Stainless Steel 304, Compatibility with Plastic Materials can vary; we therefore recommend that compatibility is tested prior to use. Polyethylene, Polypropylene, PVC, 100% phenolic resin liner, Epoxy phenolic resin

Unsuitable Materials

UNSUITABLE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL: Brass, Buna-N, EPDM, Neoprene, Polyurethane, Viton, Hypalon


National Exposure Standards

None of the components have been assigned an exposure standard by ASCC (Australia) or OSH (New Zealand).

Engineering Controls

General ventilation is recommended. Local exhaust ventilation may be necessary when dusts or mists are generated.

Respiratory Protection Respiratory protection is not normally needed. If significant

mists, vapours or aerosols are generated an approved respirator is recommended, selected and used in accordance with AS/NZS 1715



and AS/NZS 1716. If respiratory protection is required, institute a complete respiratory protection program including selection, fit testing, training, maintenance and inspection.

Eye Protection Wear chemical splash goggles.

Hand Protection Nitrile gloves Butyl gloves PVC gloves Neoprene gloves

Personal Protective Equipment

GENERAL ADVICE: The use and choice of personal protection equipment is related to the hazard of the product, the workplace and the way the product is handled. In general, we recommend as a minimum precaution that safety glasses with side-shields and workclothes protecting arms, legs and body be used. In addition any person visiting an area where this product is handled should at least wear safety glasses with side-shields.

Body Protection Wear standard protective clothing. Wear impervious apron.

Hygiene Measures

Keep a safety shower available. If clothing is contaminated, remove clothing and thoroughly wash the affected area. Launder contaminated clothing before reuse. Keep an eye wash fountain available. Always wash thoroughly after handling chemicals. When handling this product never eat, drink or smoke.


Form Liquid

Appearance Clear Amber - Green

Odour Ammoniacal

Melting Point No data available.

Boiling Point No data available.

Solubility in Water Complete

Specific Gravity 1.36

pH Value 10.5 (100 %)

Vapour Pressure No data available.

Vapour Density (Air=1) No data available.

Density No data available.

Flash Point None

Auto-Ignition Temperature No data available.

Explosion Limit - Upper No data available.

Explosion Limit



- Lower No data available.

Other Information

Note: These physical properties are typical values for this product and are subject to change.


Chemical Stability Stable under normal conditions.

Conditions to Avoid Freezing temperatures.

Incompatible Materials Strong oxidizing agents Strong acids

Hazardous Decomposition Products

Under fire conditions: Oxides of carbon, Oxides of nitrogen, Oxides of phosphorus

Hazardous Polymerization Hazardous polymerization will not occur.


Toxicology Information

ACUTE TOXICITY DATA: The following results are for a similar product.

Inhalation Not a likely route of exposure. May cause irritation of mucous membranes.

Ingestion Not a likely route of exposure. May cause gastrointestinal irritation.

Skin May cause irritation with prolonged contact.

Eye May cause irritation with prolonged contact.

Chronic Effects No adverse effects expected other than those mentioned above.

Carcinogenicity None of the substances in this product are listed as carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP) or the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).

Acute Toxicity - Oral

Species: Rat LD50: > 17,800 mg/kg Test Descriptor: Similar Product

Acute Toxicity - Dermal

Species: Rabbit LD50: > 15,800 mg/kg Test Descriptor: Similar Product

Eye Irritation Species: Rabbit Draize Score: 3.7 /110.0 Test Descriptor: Product



Skin Irritation Species: Rabbit Draize Score: 0.3 /8.0 Test Descriptor: Similar Product

Human Effects Based on our hazard characterization, the potential human hazard is: Low

Other Information

For additional information on the hazard of the preparation, please consult section 3 (Hazards Identification) and 12 (Ecological Information).


Ecological Information

MOBILITY AND BIOACCUMULATION POTENTIAL: The environmental fate was estimated using a level III fugacity model embedded in the EPI (estimation program interface) Suite TM, provided by the US EPA. The model assumes a steady state condition between the total input and output. The level III model does not require equilibrium between the defined media. The information provided is intended to give the user a general estimate of the environmental fate of this product under the defined conditions of the models. If released into the environment this material is expected to distribute to the air, water and soil/sediment in the approximate respective percentages; Air Water Soil/Sediment <5% 30 - 50% 50 - 70% The portion in water is expected to be soluble or dispersible. This preparation or material is not expected to bioaccumulate.

Ecotoxicity No toxicity studies have been conducted on this product.

Persistence / Degradability

The organic portion of this preparation is expected to be inherently biodegradable.

Environmental Fate

Based on our hazard characterization, the potential environmental hazard is: Low


Disposal Considerations

Dispose of wastes in an approved waste treatment / disposal site, in accordance with all applicable regulations. Do not dispose of wastes in local sewer or with normal garbage. Triple rinse (or equivalent) all containers and offer for recycling or reconditioning, or puncture and dispose of in a sanitary landfill, or by other procedures approved by state and local authorities. Empty drums should be taken for recycling, recovery, or disposal through a suitably qualified or licensed contractor.

Special precautions for landfill or incineration No additional special precautions have been identified.




Transport Information

The information in this section is for reference only and should not take the place of a shipping paper (bill of lading) specific to an order. Please note that the proper Shipping Name / Hazard Class may vary by packaging, properties, and mode of transportation. Typical Proper Shipping Names for this product are as follows. LAND TRANSPORT: Proper Shipping Name: PRODUCT IS NOT REGULATED DURING TRANSPORTATION AIR TRANSPORT (ICAO/IATA): Proper Shipping Name: PRODUCT IS NOT REGULATED DURING TRANSPORTATION MARINE TRANSPORT (IMDG/IMO): Proper Shipping Name: PRODUCT IS NOT REGULATED DURING TRANSPORTATION


Regulatory Information

AUSTRALIA: NICNAS: All substances in this product comply with the National Industrial Chemicals Notification & Assessment Scheme (NICNAS). INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS NSF INTERNATIONAL: This product has received NSF/International certification under NSF/ANSI Standard 60 in the reverse osmosis antiscalant category. The official name is 'Miscellaneous Water Supply Products.' Concentration 15 mg/l INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL CONTROL LAWS: JAPAN: All substances in this product comply with the Law Regulating the Manufacture and Importation Of Chemical Substances and are listed on the Existing and New Chemical Substances list (ENCS). CHINA: All substances in this product comply with the Provisions on the Environmental Administration of New Chemical Substances and are listed on the Inventory of Existing Chemical Substances China (IECSC). KOREA: All substances in this product comply with the Toxic Chemical Control Law (TCCL) and are listed on the Existing Chemicals List (ECL). NEW ZEALAND: All substances in this product comply with the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act 1996,and are listed on or are exempt from the New Zealand Inventory of Chemicals.



Poisons Schedule Not Scheduled

EINECS/ELINCS (EC)

The substance(s) in this preparation are included in or exempted from the EINECS or ELINCS inventories.

TSCA (USA) The substances in this preparation are included on or exempted from the TSCA 8(b) Inventory (40 CFR 710)

DSL (Canada) The substance(s) in this preparation are included in or exempted from the Domestic Substance List (DSL).

PICCS (Philippines)

All substances in this product comply with the Republic Act 6969 (RA 6969) and are listed on the Philippines Inventory of Chemicals & Chemical Substances (PICCS).


Literature References

Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents and Biological Exposure Indices, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, OH., (Ariel Insight� CD-ROM Version), Ariel Research Corp., Bethesda, MD. Hazardous Substances Data Bank, National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Man, Geneva: World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. Integrated Risk Information System, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO. Annual Report on Carcinogens, National Toxicology Program, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910, Subpart Z, Toxic and Hazardous Substances, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), (Ariel Insight� CD-ROM Version), Ariel Research Corp., Bethesda, MD. Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH, (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO. Ariel Insight� (An integrated guide to industrial chemicals covered under major regulatory and advisory programs), North American Module, Western European Module, Chemical Inventories Module and the Generics Module (Ariel Insight� CD-ROM Version), Ariel Research Corp., Bethesda, MD. The Teratogen Information System, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO.

Signature of Preparer/Data Service

Prepared By: Nalco Asia Pacific, Safety, Health and Environment (SHE) Specialist, (02) 9316 3162



Revisions Highlighted

Significant changes to regulatory or health information for this revision is indicated by a bar in the left-hand margin of the SDS.

Other Information

Version Number: 1.2 This product material safety data sheet provides health and safety information. The product is to be used in applications consistent with our product literature. Individuals handling this product should be informed of the recommended safety precautions and should have access to this information. For any other uses, exposures should be evaluated so that appropriate handling practices and training programs can be established to insure safe workplace operations. Please consult your local sales representative for any further information. This MSDS has been transcribed into Infosafe NOHSC format from an original issued by the manufacturer on the date shown. Any disclaimer by the manufacturer may not be included in the transcription.

End of MSDS

(C) Copyright ACOHS Pty Ltd Copyright in the source code of the HTML, PDF, XML, XFO and any other electronic files rendered by an Infosafe system for Infosafe MSDS displayed is the intellectual property of Acohs Pty Ltd. Copyright in the layout, presentation and appearance of each Infosafe MSDS displayed is the intellectual property of Acohs Pty Ltd. The compilation of MSDS's displayed is the intellectual property of Acohs Pty Ltd. Copying of any MSDS displayed is permitted for personal use only and otherwise is not permitted. In particular the MSDS's displayed cannot be copied for the purpose of sale or licence or for inclusion as part of a collection of MSDS without the express written consent of Acohs Pty Ltd.

Print Date: 05/03/2011 BS: 1.10.9




Classified as hazardous according to criteria of NOHSC

PERMACLEAN® PC-11Infosafe™ No.

HXTXO Issue Date June 2009 Status ISSUED by NALCO

BS: 1.10.9


Product Name PERMACLEAN® PC-11

Company Name NALCO AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ABN 41 000 424 788)

Address 2 Anderson Street Botany NSW 2019

Emergency Tel. 1800 205 506

Telephone/Fax Number

Tel: (02) 9316 3000 Fax: (02) 9666 5292

Recommended Use APPLICATION: BIOCIDE

Other Names Not Available


Hazard Classification

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. DANGEROUS GOODS. Hazard classification according to the criteria of NOHSC. Dangerous goods classification according to the Australia Dangerous Goods Code.

Risk Phrase(s) R38 Irritating to skin. R41 Risk of serious damage to eyes. R43 May cause sensitization by skin contact. R20/22 Harmful by inhalation and if swallowed.

Safety Phrase(s)S23 - Do not breathe vapor. S26 - In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. S28 - After contact with skin, wash immediately with plenty of water. S36/37/39 - Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and

Page 1 of 12MSDS: PERMACLEAN® PC-11 (Classified as hazardous according to crite...

5/03/2011http://www.msdsonline.com.au/origin/msds/msdsview.asp?SynonymCode=HXTXO00...

eye/face protection. S46 - If swallowed, seek medical advice immediately and show this container or label. S57 - Use appropriate containment to avoid environmental contamination.

Other Information

HAZARD CLASSIFICATION: HARMFUL This product is classified as hazardous according to the Australian Safety & Compensation Council (ASCC). This product is classified as a dangerous good according to national and/or international regulations.


Chemical CharacterizationLiquid

Information on Composition

The balance of the substances in this product are not classified as hazardous or are present below hazard cut-off limits.

Ingredients Name CAS Proportion

2,2-Dibromo-3-

nitrilopropionamide10222-01-2 10-30 %w/w

Dibromoacetonitrile 3252-43-5 0.1-1 %w/w


Inhalation Get immediate medical attention. Remove to fresh air, treat

symptomatically.

Ingestion DO NOT INDUCE VOMITING. If conscious, washout mouth and give water to drink. If reflexive vomiting occurs, rinse mouth and repeat administration of water. Contact the Poison's Information Centre (eg Australia 13 1126; New Zealand 0800 764 766).

Skin Immediately flush with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. Contaminated leather articles such as shoes or belts must be discarded. If symptoms develop, seek medical advice.

Eye Get immediate medical attention. PROMPT ACTION IS ESSENTIAL IN CASE OF CONTACT. Immediately flush eye with water for at least 15 minutes while holding eyelids open.

Advice to Doctor

Aspiration may cause lung damage. Probable mucosal damage may contraindicate the use of gastric lavage. Based on the individual reactions of the patient, the physician's judgement should be used to control symptoms and clinical condition.


Suitable This product would not be expected to burn unless all the water



Extinguishing Media

is boiled away. The remaining organics may be ignitable. Use extinguishing media appropriate for surrounding fire.

Special Protective Equipment for fire fighters

In case of fire, wear a full face positive-pressure self contained breathing apparatus and protective suit.

Specific Hazards

May evolve oxides of carbon (COx) under fire conditions. May evolve bromine, cyanogen bromide and dibromoacetonitrile under fire conditions. May evolve oxides of nitrogen (NOx) under fire conditions.

Hazchem Code 2X

Sensitivity to Static Discharge Not expected to be sensitive to static discharge.


Personal Precautions

Restrict access to area as appropriate until clean-up operations are complete. Ensure clean-up is conducted by trained personnel only. Ventilate spill area if possible. Do not touch spilled material. Stop or reduce any leaks if it is safe to do so. Use personal protective equipment recommended in Section 8 (Exposure Controls/Personal Protection). Notify appropriate government, occupational health and safety and environmental authorities.

Clean-up Methods - Small Spillages

Soak up spill with absorbent material. Place residues in a suitable, covered, properly labeled container. Wash affected area.

Clean-up Methods - Large Spillages

Contain liquid using absorbent material, by digging trenches or by diking. Reclaim into recovery or salvage drums or tank truck for proper disposal. Wash site of spillage thoroughly with water. Contact an approved waste hauler for disposal of contaminated recovered material. Dispose of material in compliance with regulations indicated in Section 13 (Disposal Considerations).

Environmental Precautions

Prevent material from entering sewers or waterways., If drains, streams, soil or sewers become contaminated, notify local authority.

Other Information INITIAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE GUIDE NO: 37


Precautions for Safe Handling

Do not get in eyes, on skin, on clothing. Do not take internally. Use with adequate ventilation. Avoid generating aerosols and mists. Keep the containers closed when not in use. Have emergency equipment (for fires, spills, leaks, etc.) readily available.

Conditions for Store in suitable labeled containers. Store the containers



Safe Storage tightly closed. Store separately from oxidizers. Store separately from bases. Containers require venting.

Recommended Materials

SUITABLE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL: PVC, Polypropylene, Polyethylene, PTFE, Hastelloy C-276, HDPE (high density polyethylene), EPDM, Plexiglass, Teflon, Viton, Kalrez, Alfax

Unsuitable Materials

UNSUITABLE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL: Copper, Brass, Aluminum, Mild steel, Buna-N, Ethylene propylene, Neoprene, Polyurethane, Hypalon, Stainless Steel 304, Stainless Steel 316L


National Exposure Standards

The following component(s) have been assigned an exposure standard by ASCC (Australia) and/or other Agencies: Country/Source Substance(s) Category: ppm mg/m3 Manufacturer's 2,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide TWA Recommendation CEILING 2 * A skin notation refers to the potential significant contribution to overall exposure by the cutaneous route, including mucous membranes and the eyes.

Engineering Controls General ventilation is recommended.

Respiratory Protection

If significant mists, vapours or aerosols are generated an approved respirator is recommended, selected and used in accordance with AS/NZS 1715 and AS/NZS 1716. An organic vapor cartridge with dust/mist prefilter may be used. In event of emergency or planned entry into unknown concentrations a positive pressure, full-facepiece SCBA should be used. If respiratory protection is required, institute a complete respiratory protection program including selection, fit testing, training, maintenance and inspection.

Eye Protection Wear a face shield with chemical splash goggles.

Hand Protection PVC Neoprene Viton or Butyl rubber Gloves should be replaced immediately if signs of degradation are observed. Breakthrough time not determined as preparation, consult PPE manufacturers.

Personal Protective Equipment

GENERAL ADVICE: The use and choice of personal protection equipment is related to the hazard of the product, the workplace and the way the product is handled. In general, we recommend as a minimum precaution that safety glasses with side-shields and workclothes protecting arms, legs and body be used. In addition any person visiting an area where this product is handled should at least wear safety glasses with side-shields.

Body Protection Wear chemical resistant apron, chemical splash goggles, impervious gloves and boots. A full slicker suit is recommended if gross exposure is possible.

Hygiene Eye wash station and safety shower are necessary. If clothing is



Measures contaminated, remove clothing and thoroughly wash the affected area. Launder contaminated clothing before reuse.

Other Information

MONITORING MEASURES: A small volume of air is drawn through an absorbant or barrier to trap the substance(s) which can then be desorbed or removed and analyzed as referenced below: Substance(s) Method Analysis Absorbant 2,2-Dibromo-3- In-house method: 99 High pressure liquid Silica gel nitrilopropionamide chromatography ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE CONTROL PRECAUTIONS: Consider the provision of containment around storage vessels.


Form Liquid

Appearance Clear Amber

Odour Mild

Freezing Point -50°C

Boiling Point > 70°C Decomposes

Solubility in Water Partially miscible

Specific Gravity 1.20 - 1.30 (23°C) ASTM D-1298

pH Value 1.5 - 5.0 ASTM E-70 (100 %)

Vapour Pressure < 0.01 kPa (21°C)

Vapour Density (Air=1) No data available.

Viscosity 138 cps (20°C)

Pour Point -45°C ASTM D-97

Density No data available.

Flash Point > 182°C COC

Auto-Ignition Temperature No data available.

Explosion Limit - Upper No data available.

Explosion Limit - Lower No data available.

Other Information

Note: These physical properties are typical values for this product and are subject to change.




Chemical Stability Stable under normal conditions.

Conditions to Avoid

Heat Keep at temperature not exceeding 35°C

Incompatible Materials

Contact with strong alkalies (e.g. ammonia and its solutions, carbonates, sodium hydroxide (caustic), potassium hydroxide, calcium hydroxide (lime), cyanide, sulfide, hypochlorites, chlorites) may generate heat, splattering or boiling and toxic vapors. Contact with reducing agents (e.g. hydrazine, sulfites, sulfide, aluminum or magnesium dust) may generate heat, fires, explosions and toxic vapors. Contact with strong oxidizers (e.g. chlorine, peroxides, chromates, nitric acid, perchlorate, concentrated oxygen, permanganate) may generate heat, fires, explosions and/or toxic vapors.


Cyanogenbromide and dibromoacetonitrile, Bromine, Oxides of carbon Oxides of nitrogen

Hazardous Polymerization Hazardous polymerization will not occur.


Toxicology Information

ACUTE TOXICITY DATA: The following results are for the product along with results on the active substances.

Inhalation Harmful if inhaled. Irritating, in high concentrations, to the eyes, nose, throat and lungs. Trace levels of cyanogen bromide and dibromoacetonitrile vapors may be present in unvented containers and may be irritating. Vapours and/or aerosols which may be formed at elevated temperatures or during agitation may cause systemic effects.

Ingestion May be harmful if swallowed. There may be irritation to the gastro-intestinal tract. Kidney effects and/or damage may occur.

Skin Can cause severe irritation. May cause sensitization by skin contact.

Eye Severely irritating. If not removed promptly, will injure eye tissue and may result in permanent eye damage. Vapors can cause watering of the eyes.

Chronic Effects Kidney

Mutagenicity Negative in the Ames Test.

Carcinogenicity None of the substances in this product are listed as carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP) or the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).



Acute Toxicity - Oral

Species: Rat LD50: 510 mg/kg Test Descriptor: Product

Acute Toxicity - Dermal

Species: Rabbit LD50: > 2,000 mg/kg Test Descriptor: Product

Acute Toxicity - Inhalation

Species: Rat LD50: 1.4 mg/l (4 hrs) Test Descriptor: Product Species: Rat LD50: 1.25 mg/l (4 hrs) Test Descriptor: Product

Skin Sensitisation May cause sensitization by skin contact.

Human Effects Based on our hazard characterization, the potential human hazard is: High

Other Information

For additional information on the hazard of the preparation, please consult section 3 (Hazards Identification) and 12 (Ecological Information).


Ecological Information

MOBILITY AND BIOACCUMULATION POTENTIAL: The environmental fate was estimated using a level III fugacity model embedded in the EPI (estimation program interface) Suite TM, provided by the US EPA. The model assumes a steady state condition between the total input and output. The level III model does not require equilibrium between the defined media. The information provided is intended to give the user a general estimate of the environmental fate of this product under the defined conditions of the models. If released into the environment this material is expected to distribute to the air, water and soil/sediment in the approximate respective percentages; Air Water Soil/Sediment <5% 10 - 30% 70 - 90% The portion in water is expected to be soluble or dispersible. This substance has a low potential to bioconcentrate.

Ecotoxicity The following results are for the product along with results on the hazardous components. The following results are for the active components. ACUTE FISH RESULTS: Species Exposure LC50 Test Descriptor Rainbow Trout 96 hrs 3.6 mg/l Product Bluegill Sunfish 96 hrs 8.9 mg/l Product Gold Orfe 96 hrs 4.7 mg/l Product Sheepshead Minnow 96 hrs 7.5 mg/l Product Fathead Minnow 96 hrs 1.36 mg/l Active SubstanceBluegill Sunfish 96 hrs 1.3 mg/l Active SubstanceSheepshead Minnow 96 hrs 1.4 mg/l Active Substance



ACUTE INVERTEBRATE RESULTS: Species Exposure LC50 EC50 Test Descriptor Daphnia magna 48 hrs 4.3 mg/l 3.8 mg/l Product Ceriodaphnia dubia 48 hrs 6.67 mg/l Product Mysid Shrimp 96 hrs 4.2 mg/l 3.2 mg/l Product (Mysidopsis bahia) Acartia tonsa 48 hrs 1.78 mg/l Product AQUATIC PLANT RESULTS: Species Exposure EC50/LC50 NOEC Test Descriptor Marine Algae 72 hrs 0.53 mg/l Product(Skeletonema costatum) AQUATIC MICROORGANISM RESULTS: Species Exposure EC50/LC50 Test Descriptor Pseudomonas putida > 2.0 mg/l Product

Persistence / Degradability

Total Organic Carbon (TOC): 280,000 mg/l Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD): 1,110,000 mg/l Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD): Incubation Period Value Test Descriptor 5 d 1,100 mg/l Product The organic portion of this preparation is expected to be readily biodegradable.

Environmental Fate

Based on our hazard characterization, the potential environmental hazard is: Moderate

Other Information

ADDITIONAL ECOLOGICAL DATA: Product contains organic halogens, may contribute to AOX.


Disposal Considerations

Hazardous wastes must be transported by a licensed hazardous waste transporter and disposed of or treated in a properly licensed hazardous waste treatment, storage, disposal or recycling facility. Consult local, state, and federal regulations for specific requirements. Empty drums should be taken for recycling, recovery, or disposal through a suitably qualified or licensed contractor.

Special precautions for landfill or incineration No additional special precautions have been identified.




Transport Information

The information in this section is for reference only and should not take the place of a shipping paper (bill of lading) specific to an order. Please note that the proper Shipping Name / Hazard Class may vary by packaging, properties, and mode of transportation. Typical Proper Shipping Names for this product are as follows. LAND TRANSPORT: Proper Shipping Name: CORROSIVE LIQUID, ACIDIC, ORGANIC, N.O.S. Technical Name(s): 2,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide UN/ID No: UN 3265 Hazard Class - Primary: 8 Packing Group: III IERG No: 37 HAZCHEM CODE: 2X SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS FOR USER: Dangerous goods of Class 8 (Acids) are incompatible in a placard load with any of the following: Class 1 Explosives Class 4.3 Dangerous when wet substances Class 5.1 Oxidising agents Class 5.2 Organic peroxides Class 6 Cyanides only Class 7 Radioactive substances and are incompatible with food or food packaging in any quantity. AIR TRANSPORT (ICAO/IATA): Proper Shipping Name: CORROSIVE LIQUID, ACIDIC, ORGANIC, N.O.S. Technical Name(s): 2,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide UN/ID No: UN 3265 Hazard Class - Primary: 8 Packing Group: III IATA Cargo Packing Instructions: 820 IATA Cargo Aircraft Limit: 60 L (Max net quantity per package) IATA Passenger Packing Instructions: Y818 / 818 IATA Passenger Aircraft Limit: 1 L / 5 L MARINE TRANSPORT (IMDG/IMO): Proper Shipping Name: CORROSIVE LIQUID, ACIDIC, ORGANIC, N.O.S. Technical Name(s): 2,2-Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide UN/ID No: UN 3265 Hazard Class - Primary: 8 Packing Group: III EmS-Nr.: F-A, S-B

U.N. Number 3265

Proper Shipping Name CORROSIVE LIQUID, ACIDIC, ORGANIC, N.O.S.

DG Class 8

Hazchem Code 2X

Packaging Method 3.8.8

Packing Group III

EPG Number 8A1



IERG Number 37


Regulatory Information

AUSTRALIA: NICNAS: All substances in this product comply with the National Industrial Chemicals Notification & Assessment Scheme (NICNAS). INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS: FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA) Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act: When use situations necessitate compliance with FDA regulations, this product is acceptable under: 21 CFR 176.300 Slimicides, 21 CFR 176.170 Components of paper and paperboard in contact with aqueous and fatty foods and 21 CFR 176.180 Components of paper and paperboard in contact with dry foods. It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling. For use at a maximum level of 0.005% of dry weight fiber. Limitation for compliance with 176.170 and 176.180: For use only as a preservative at a level not to exceed 100 parts per million (as active)in coating formulations and in component slurries and emulsions, used in the production of paper and paperboard and coatings for paper and paperboard. INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL CONTROL LAWS: CANADA: Substances regulated under the Pest Control Products Act are exempt from CEPA New Substance Notification requirements. JAPAN: All substances in this product comply with the Law Regulating the Manufacture and Importation Of Chemical Substances and are listed on the Existing and New Chemical Substances list (ENCS). CHINA: All substances in this product comply with the Provisions on the Environmental Administration of New Chemical Substances and are listed on the Inventory of Existing Chemical Substances China (IECSC). KOREA: All substances in this product comply with the Toxic Chemical Control Law (TCCL) and are listed on the Existing Chemicals List (ECL). NEW ZEALAND: All substances in this product comply with the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act 1996,and are listed on or are exempt from the New Zealand Inventory of Chemicals.

Poisons Schedule Not Scheduled

Hazard Category Harmful,Irritant

EINECS/ELINCS (EC)

The substances in this preparation have been reviewed for compliance with the EINECS or ELINCS inventories.

Page 10 of 12MSDS: PERMACLEAN® PC-11 (Classified as hazardous according to cr...


TSCA (USA) This product is exempted under TSCA and regulated under FIFRA. The inerts are on the Inventory List.

PICCS (Philippines)

All substances in this product comply with the Republic Act 6969 (RA 6969) and are listed on the Philippines Inventory of Chemicals & Chemical Substances (PICCS).


Literature References

Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents and Biological Exposure Indices, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, OH., (Ariel Insight� CD-ROM Version), Ariel Research Corp., Bethesda, MD. Hazardous Substances Data Bank, National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Man, Geneva: World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. Integrated Risk Information System, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO. Annual Report on Carcinogens, National Toxicology Program, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910, Subpart Z, Toxic and Hazardous Substances, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), (Ariel Insight� CD-ROM Version), Ariel Research Corp., Bethesda, MD. Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH, (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO. Ariel Insight� (An integrated guide to industrial chemicals covered under major regulatory and advisory programs), North American Module, Western European Module, Chemical Inventories Module and the Generics Module (Ariel Insight� CD-ROM Version), Ariel Research Corp., Bethesda, MD. The Teratogen Information System, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (TOMES CPS� CD-ROM Version), Micromedex, Inc., Englewood, CO.

Signature of Preparer/Data Service

Prepared By: Nalco Asia Pacific, Safety, Health and Environment (SHE) Specialist, (02) 9316 3162

Revisions Highlighted

Significant changes to regulatory or health information for this revision is indicated by a bar in the left-hand margin of the SDS.

Other Information

Version Number: 1.3 This product material safety data sheet provides health and safety information. The product is to be used in applications consistent with our product literature. Individuals handling



this product should be informed of the recommended safety precautions and should have access to this information. For any other uses, exposures should be evaluated so that appropriate handling practices and training programs can be established to insure safe workplace operations. Please consult your local sales representative for any further information. This MSDS has been transcribed into Infosafe NOHSC format from an original issued by the manufacturer on the date shown. Any disclaimer by the manufacturer may not be included in the transcription.

End of MSDS

(C) Copyright ACOHS Pty Ltd Copyright in the source code of the HTML, PDF, XML, XFO and any other electronic files rendered by an Infosafe system for Infosafe MSDS displayed is the intellectual property of Acohs Pty Ltd. Copyright in the layout, presentation and appearance of each Infosafe MSDS displayed is the intellectual property of Acohs Pty Ltd. The compilation of MSDS's displayed is the intellectual property of Acohs Pty Ltd. Copying of any MSDS displayed is permitted for personal use only and otherwise is not permitted. In particular the MSDS's displayed cannot be copied for the purpose of sale or licence or for inclusion as part of a collection of MSDS without the express written consent of Acohs Pty Ltd.

Print Date: 05/03/2011 BS: 1.10.9





Product Name: HYDROCHLORIC ACID - 20% OR GREATER

Other name(s): Hydrogen chloride solution; Spirits of salts; Chlorohydric acid; Muriatic acid; Hydrochloric acid solution; Hydrochloric acid 20%; Hydrochloric acid 33%; Hydrochloric acid 42%; Hydrochloric acid Concentrate.

Recommended Use: Precursor for generation of chlorine dioxide gas used in water treatment.

Supplier: Orica Australia Pty LtdABN: 004 117 828Street Address: 1 Nicholson Street,


Telephone Number: +61 3 9665 7111Facsimile: +61 3 9665 7937

Emergency Telephone: 1 800 033 111 (ALL HOURS)


This material is hazardous according to criteria of ASCC; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE.


Risk Phrases: Causes burns. Irritating to respiratory system. Risk of serious damage to eyes.

Safety Phrases: Keep container in a well ventilated place. Do not breathe vapour. Avoid contact with skin and eyes. In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection. In case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label whenever possible).

Poisons Schedule:

S6 Poison.

3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTSComponents / CAS Number Proportion Risk PhrasesHydrochloric acid-

>=20% R34 R37 R41

Product Name: HYDROCHLORIC ACID - 20% OR GREATERSubstance No: 000031061101 Issued: 01/08/2008 Version: 4

Page 1 of 7

Material Safety Data SheetWater7732-18-5

to 100% -


For advice, contact a Poisons Information Centre (Phone eg. Australia 131 126; New Zealand 0 800 764766) or a doctor.

Inhalation: Remove victim from area of exposure - avoid becoming a casualty. Remove contaminated clothing and loosen remaining clothing. Allow patient to assume most comfortable position and keep warm. Keep at rest until fully recovered. If patient finds breathing difficult and develops a bluish discolouration of the skin (which suggests a lack of oxygen in the blood - cyanosis), ensure airways are clear of any obstruction and have a qualified person give oxygen through a face mask. Apply artificial respiration if patient is not breathing. Seek immediate medical advice.

Skin Contact: If spilt on large areas of skin or hair, immediately drench with running water and remove clothing. Continue to wash skin and hair with plenty of water (and soap if material is insoluble) until advised to stop by the Poisons Information Centre or a doctor.

Eye Contact: If in eyes, hold eyelids apart and flush the eye continuously with running water. Continue flushing until advised to stop by the Poisons Information Centre or a doctor, or for at least 15 minutes. Continue to wash with large amounts of water until medical help is available.

Ingestion: Immediately rinse mouth with water. If swallowed, do NOT induce vomiting. Give a glass of water. Seek immediate medical assistance.

Medical attention and special treatment:

Treat symptomatically. Can cause corneal burns.


Hazards from combustion products:

Non-combustible material.

Precautions for fire fighters and special protective equipment:

Decomposes on heating emitting toxic fumes. If safe to do so, remove containers from path of fire. Fire fighters to wear self-contained breathing apparatus and suitable protective clothing if risk of exposure to products of decomposition.

Suitable Extinguishing Media: Not combustible, however, if material is involved in a fire use: Fine water spray, normal foam, dry agent (carbon dioxide, dry chemical powder).

Hazchem Code: 2R


Page 2 of 7



Emergency procedures: Clear area of all unprotected personnel. If contamination of sewers or waterways has occurred advise local emergency services.

Methods and materials for containment and clean up:

Slippery when spilt. Avoid accidents, clean up immediately. Wear protective equipment to prevent skin and eye contact and breathing in vapours. Work up wind or increase ventilation. Contain - prevent run off into drains and waterways. Use absorbent (soil, sand or other inert material). Neutralise with lime or soda ash. Collect and seal in properly labelled containers or drums for disposal. Wash area down with excess water.

7. HANDLING AND STORAGEThis material is a Scheduled Poison S6 and must be stored, maintained and used in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Conditions for safe storage: Store in cool place and out of direct sunlight. Store away from incompatible materials described in Section 10. Store away from foodstuffs. Keep containers closed when not in use - check regularly for leaks.

Precautions for safe handling: Avoid skin and eye contact and breathing in vapour, mists and aerosols. Keep out of reach of children.


Occupational Exposure Limits:No value assigned for this specific material by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. However, Exposure Standard(s) for constituent(s):

Hydrogen chloride: Peak Limitation = 7.5 mg/m3 (5 ppm)




Engineering controls:Ensure ventilation is adequate and that air concentrations of components are controlled below quoted Exposure Standards. If inhalation risk exists: Use with local exhaust ventilation or while wearing suitable mist respirator. Keep containers closed when not in use.


Page 3 of 7

Material Safety Data SheetPersonal Protective Equipment:The selection of PPE is dependant on a detailed risk assessment. The risk assessment should consider the work situation, the physical form of the chemical, the handling methods, and environmental factors.

Orica Personal Protection Guide No. 1, 1998: J - OVERALLS, RUBBER BOOTS, AIR MASK , GLOVES (Long), APRON.* Not required if wearing air supplied mask.

Wear overalls, full face shield, elbow-length impervious gloves, splash apron and rubber boots. Use with adequate ventilation. If inhalation risk exists, wear air-supplied mask meeting the requirements of AS/NZS 1715 and AS/NZS 1716. Always wash hands before smoking, eating, drinking or using the toilet. Wash contaminated clothing and other protective equipment before storage or re-use.


Physical state: Clear Liquid

Colour: Colourless to Slightly YellowOdour: Pungent

Solubility: Miscible with water.Specific Gravity: 1.14 @ 20°C (for 28% concentration)Relative Vapour Density (air=1): Not availableVapour Pressure (20 °C): Not availableFlash Point (°C): Not applicableFlammability Limits (%): Not applicableAutoignition Temperature (°C): Not applicableBoiling Point/Range (°C): 98 (for 28% concentration)pH: ca. 1


Chemical stability: Corrosive to many metals with the liberation of extremely flammable hydrogen gas.

Conditions to avoid: Avoid contact with foodstuffs.

Incompatible materials: Incompatible with alkalis , oxidising agents , sodium hypochlorite , cyanides , and many metals .


Hydrogen chloride.

Hazardous reactions: Reacts violently with alkalis . Reacts with oxidising agents and sodium hypochlorite


Page 4 of 7

Material Safety Data Sheetliberating toxic chlorine gas.



Ingestion: Swallowing can result in nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, abdominal pain and chemical burns to the gastrointestinal tract.

Eye contact: A severe eye irritant. Corrosive to eyes; contact can cause corneal burns. Contamination of eyes can result in permanent injury.

Skin contact: Contact with skin will result in severe irritation. Corrosive to skin - may cause skin burns.

Inhalation: Breathing in mists or aerosols will produce respiratory irritation.

Long Term Effects:Repeated exposure to low levels of hydrochloric acid may produce discolouration and erosion of teeth and ulceration of the nasal passages.

Toxicological Data:No LD50 data available for the product. However, for constituent(s) HYDROGEN CHLORIDE:Oral LD50 (rat): >900 mg/kg.Inhalation LC50 (rat): 3124 ppm/1h.







CORROSIVE

8

UN No: 1789Class-primary 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIProper Shipping Name: HYDROCHLORIC ACID


Page 5 of 7

Material Safety Data SheetHazchem Code: 2R


UN No: 1789Class-primary: 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIProper Shipping Name: HYDROCHLORIC ACID

Air TransportClassified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations for transport by air; DANGEROUS GOODS.

UN No: 1789Class-primary: 8 CorrosivePacking Group: IIProper Shipping Name: HYDROCHLORIC ACID


Classification: This material is hazardous according to criteria of ASCC; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE.


Risk Phrase(s): R34: Causes burns.R37: Irritating to respiratory system.R41: Risk of serious damage to eyes.

Safety Phrase(s): S9: Keep container in a well ventilated place.S23: Do not breathe vapour/mist/aerosol.S24/25: Avoid contact with skin and eyes.S26: In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice.S36/37/39: Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection.S45: In case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label whenever possible).

Poisons Schedule: S6 Poison.




Page 6 of 7

Material Safety Data Sheet`Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances'. Ed. D. Sweet, US Dept. of Health & Human Services: Cincinatti, 2008.


Reason(s) for Issue:5 Yearly Revised Primary MSDS





Page 7 of 7

Safety Data Sheet 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE MATERIAL AND SUPPLIER

Product Name: CITRIC ACID SOLUTION

Other name(s): Reflux R440Recommended Use: Preparation of citrates, soft drinks, effervescent salts; food acidulant and antioxidant;

detergent builder.

Supplier: Orica Australia Pty LtdABN: 99 004 117 828 Street Address: 1 Nicholson Street,





Not classified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the Australian Dangerous Goods Code (ADG Code) for transport by Road and Rail; NON-DANGEROUS GOODS.

Risk Phrases: Risk of serious damage to eyes.

Safety Phrases: Avoid contact with skin and eyes. In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection.



Components CAS Number Proportion Risk PhrasesCitric acid 77-92-9 20-60% R41Water 7732-18-5 to 100% - 4. FIRST AID MEASURES

Inhalation:Remove victim from area of exposure - avoid becoming a casualty. Remove contaminated clothing and loosen remaining clothing. Allow patient to assume most comfortable position and keep warm. Keep at rest until fully recovered. Seek medical advice if effects persist. Skin Contact:If skin contact occurs, remove contaminated clothing and wash skin with running water. If irritation occurs seek medical advice. Eye Contact:If in eyes, hold eyelids apart and flush the eye continuously with running water. Continue flushing until advised to stop by a Poisons Information Centre or a doctor, or for at least 15 minutes.

Product Name: CITRIC ACID SOLUTION Issued: 17/09/2010Substance No: 000034423701 Version: 4

Page 1 of 5

Safety Data Sheet Ingestion:Rinse mouth with water. If swallowed, do NOT induce vomiting. Give a glass of water. Seek medical advice. Medical attention and special treatment: Treat symptomatically. Can cause corneal burns.


Hazards from combustion products: Non-combustible material. Precautions for fire fighters and special protective equipment: Not combustible, however following evaporation of the water component of the material, the residual material can burn if ignited. On burning will emit toxic fumes, including those of oxides of carbon . Fire fighters to wear self-contained breathing apparatus and suitable protective clothing if risk of exposure to vapour or products of combustion. Suitable Extinguishing Media:Not combustible, however, if material is involved in a fire use: Fine water spray, normal foam, dry agent (carbon dioxide, dry chemical powder).


Emergency procedures: Clear area of all unprotected personnel. If contamination of sewers or waterways has occurred advise local emergency services. Methods and materials for containment and clean up: Slippery when spilt. Avoid accidents, clean up immediately. Wear protective equipment to prevent skin and eye contact and breathing in vapours. Work up wind or increase ventilation. Contain - prevent run off into drains and waterways. Use absorbent (soil, sand or other inert material). Neutralise with lime or soda ash. Collect and seal in properly labelled containers or drums for disposal. Wash area down with excess water.


Conditions for safe storage: Store in a cool, dry, well ventilated place and out of direct sunlight. Store away from incompatible materials described in Section 10. Keep containers closed when not in use - check regularly for leaks. Precautions for safe handling: Avoid skin and eye contact and breathing in vapour, mists and aerosols.


Occupational Exposure Limits: No value assigned for this specific material by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. Engineering controls: Use in well ventilated areas. If inhalation risk exists: Use with local exhaust ventilation or while wearing suitable mist respirator. Keep containers closed when not in use.


Page 2 of 5

Safety Data Sheet Personal Protective Equipment:The selection of PPE is dependant on a detailed risk assessment. The risk assessment should consider the work situation, the physical form of the chemical, the handling methods, and environmental factors.

Orica Personal Protection Guide No. 1, 1998: C - OVERALLS, SAFETY SHOES, CHEMICAL GOGGLES, GLOVES.

Wear overalls, chemical goggles and impervious gloves. Always wash hands before smoking, eating, drinking or using the toilet. Wash contaminated clothing and other protective equipment before storage or re-use. If risk of inhalation exists, wear suitable mist respirator meeting the requirements of AS/NZS 1715 and AS/NZS 1716.


Physical state: Clear , Slightly Turbid LiquidSolubility: Miscible with water.Specific Gravity: 1.082-1.25 @20°CRelative Vapour Density (air=1): Not availableVapour Pressure (20 °C): Not availableFlash Point (°C): Not applicableFlammability Limits (%): Not applicableAutoignition Temperature (°C): Not applicableBoiling Point/Range (°C): Not availablepH: 1.8 (1% w/v)


Chemical stability: Stable under normal ambient and anticipated storage and handling conditions of temperature and pressure.

Conditions to avoid: None known.

Incompatible materials: Incompatible with alkalis , strong oxidising agents , and mild steel .


Oxides of carbon.

Hazardous reactions: Corrosive to mild steel .


No adverse health effects expected if the product is handled in accordance with this Safety Data Sheet and the product label. Symptoms or effects that may arise if the product is mishandled and overexposure occurs are: Ingestion: Swallowing may result in irritation of the gastrointestinal tract. Frequent or large oral

doses can cause tooth erosion. Eye contact: A severe eye irritant. Contamination of eyes can result in permanent injury.


Page 3 of 5

Safety Data Sheet Skin contact: Contact with skin will result in mild irritation. Inhalation: Breathing in mists or aerosols may produce respiratory irritation. Long Term Effects:No information available for the product. Toxicological Data: No LD50 data available for the product. For Citric acid :Oral LD50 (rat): 3000 mg/kg.




Disposal methods: Refer to local government authority for disposal recommendations. Dispose of material through a licensed waste contractor. Normally suitable for disposal at approved land waste site.


Road and Rail TransportNot classified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the Australian Dangerous Goods Code (ADG Code) for transport by Road and Rail; NON-DANGEROUS GOODS. Marine TransportNot classified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) for transport by sea; NON-DANGEROUS GOODS. Air TransportNot classified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations for transport by air; NON-DANGEROUS GOODS.



Hazard Category: Xi: Irritant

Risk Phrase(s): R41: Risk of serious damage to eyes.

Safety Phrase(s): S24/25: Avoid contact with skin and eyes.

S26: In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice.S36/37/39: Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection.

Poisons Schedule: None allocated. All the constituents of this material are listed on the Australian Inventory of Chemical Substances (AICS). Product Name: CITRIC ACID SOLUTION Issued: 17/09/2010Substance No: 000034423701 Version: 4

Page 4 of 5

Safety Data Sheet 16. OTHER INFORMATION

`Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances'. Ed. D. Sweet, US Dept. of Health & Human Services: Cincinatti, 2009.

This safety data sheet has been prepared by SH&E Shared Services, Orica.

Reason(s) for Issue:Change in Formulation

This SDS summarises to our best knowledge at the date of issue, the chemical health and safety hazards of the material and general guidance on how to safely handle the material in the workplace. Since Orica Limited cannot anticipate or control the conditions under which the product may be used, each user must, prior to usage, assess and control the risks arising from its use of the material.




Page 5 of 5

Safety Data Sheet 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE MATERIAL AND SUPPLIER

Product Name: SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION (10-15% AVAILABLE CHLORINE)

Recommended Use: Dairy, food and beverage industries: Sanitising processing equipment. Textile industry: Bleaching agent. Water treatment: Sanitising agent. Available chlorine = 10 - 15%.

Supplier: Orica Australia Pty LtdABN: 99 004 117 828 Street Address: 1 Nicholson Street,






Risk Phrases: Contact with acids liberates toxic gas. Causes burns. Risk of serious damage to eyes. Very toxic to aquatic organisms.

Safety Phrases: Avoid contact with skin and eyes. In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. After contact with skin, wash immediately with plenty of water (or soap and water if product is water insoluble). Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection. In case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label whenever possible). Do not mix with acids . Avoid release to the environment. Refer to special instructions safety data sheets.

Poisons Schedule: S5 Caution.


Components CAS Number Proportion Risk PhrasesSodium hypochlorite 7681-52-9 10-<30% R31, R34, R41, R50Sodium hydroxide 1310-73-2 <1% R35, R41Water 7732-18-5 >60% - 4. FIRST AID MEASURES

For advice, contact a Poisons Information Centre (e.g. phone Australia 131 126; New Zealand 0800 764 766) or a doctor.


Issued: 03/11/2010

Substance No: 000034421401 Version: 8Page 1 of 7

Safety Data Sheet Inhalation:Remove victim from area of exposure - avoid becoming a casualty. Remove contaminated clothing and loosen remaining clothing. Allow patient to assume most comfortable position and keep warm. Keep at rest until fully recovered. If patient finds breathing difficult and develops a bluish discolouration of the skin (which suggests a lack of oxygen in the blood - cyanosis), ensure airways are clear of any obstruction and have a qualified person give oxygen through a face mask. Apply artificial respiration if patient is not breathing. Seek immediate medical advice. Skin Contact:If spilt on large areas of skin or hair, immediately drench with running water and remove clothing. Continue to wash skin and hair with plenty of water (and soap if material is insoluble) until advised to stop by the Poisons Information Centre or a doctor. Eye Contact:Immediately wash in and around the eye area with large amounts of water for at least 15 minutes. Eyelids to be held apart. Remove clothing if contaminated and wash skin. Urgently seek medical assistance. Transport to hospital or medical centre. Continue to wash with large amounts of water until medical help is available. Ingestion:Immediately rinse mouth with water. If swallowed, do NOT induce vomiting. Give a glass of water. Seek immediate medical assistance. Medical attention and special treatment: Treat symptomatically. Can cause corneal burns. Delayed pulmonary oedema may result.


Hazards from combustion products: Non-combustible material. Precautions for fire fighters and special protective equipment: Decomposes on heating emitting toxic fumes, including those of chlorine . Fire fighters to wear self-contained breathing apparatus and suitable protective clothing if risk of exposure to products of decomposition. Suitable Extinguishing Media:Not combustible, however, if material is involved in a fire use: Fine water spray, normal foam, dry agent (carbon dioxide, dry chemical powder). Hazchem Code: 2X


Emergency procedures: Clear area of all unprotected personnel. If contamination of sewers or waterways has occurred advise local emergency services. Methods and materials for containment and clean up: Slippery when spilt. Avoid accidents, clean up immediately. Wear protective equipment to prevent skin and eye contact and breathing in vapours. Work up wind or increase ventilation. Contain - prevent run off into drains and waterways. Use absorbent (soil, sand or other inert material). Collect and seal in properly labelled containers or drums for disposal.


This material is a Scheduled Poison S5 and must be stored, maintained and used in accordance with the relevant regulations.


Issued: 03/11/2010


Safety Data Sheet Conditions for safe storage: Store in cool place and out of direct sunlight. Store away from foodstuffs. Store away from acids. Store away from incompatible materials described in Section 10. Keep containers closed when not in use - check regularly for leaks. Precautions for safe handling: Avoid skin and eye contact and breathing in vapour, mists and aerosols. Keep out of reach of children.


Occupational Exposure Limits: No value assigned for this specific material by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. However, Exposure Standard(s) for constituent(s): Chlorine: Peak Limitation = 3 mg/m3 (1 ppm)

Sodium hydroxide: Peak Limitation = 2 mg/m3




Engineering controls: Ensure ventilation is adequate and that air concentrations of components are controlled below quoted Exposure Standards. If inhalation risk exists: Use with local exhaust ventilation or while wearing air supplied mask. Keep containers closed when not in use. Personal Protective Equipment:The selection of PPE is dependant on a detailed risk assessment. The risk assessment should consider the work situation, the physical form of the chemical, the handling methods, and environmental factors.

Orica Personal Protection Guide No. 1, 1998: D - OVERALLS, RUBBER BOOTS, CHEMICAL GOGGLES, FACE SHIELD, SAFETY SHOES, GLOVES (Long), APRON.

Wear overalls, chemical goggles, face shield, elbow-length impervious gloves, splash apron and rubber boots. Always wash hands before smoking, eating, drinking or using the toilet. Wash contaminated clothing and other protective equipment before storage or re-use. If risk of inhalation exists, wear air supplied respirator meeting the requirements of AS/NZS 1715 and AS/NZS 1716.


Physical state: Liquid


Issued: 03/11/2010


Safety Data Sheet 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIESColour: Pale Yellow - GreenOdour: ChlorineSolubility: Miscible in water.Specific Gravity: 1.2 @20°CFlash Point (°C): Not applicableFlammability Limits (%): Not applicableSolubility in water (g/L): CompletepH: 12.5 (1% w/w)


Chemical stability: Stable under normal ambient and anticipated storage and handling conditions of temperature and pressure. The amount of available chlorine diminishes over time.

Conditions to avoid: Avoid contact with foodstuffs. Avoid exposure to heat, sources of ignition, and open flame. Avoid exposure to light. Avoid contact with other chemicals. Avoid contact with acids .

Incompatible materials: Incompatible with acids , metals , metal salts , peroxides , reducing agents , and ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid . Incompatible with ammonia and ammonium coumpounds such as amines and ammonium salts.


Chlorine.

Hazardous reactions: Hazardous polymerisation will not occur. Reacts exothermically with acids . Reacts with acids liberating toxic gas. (Chlorine) Reacts with ammonia, amines and ammonium salts to product chloramines. Decomposes on heating to produce chlorine gas.


No adverse health effects expected if the product is handled in accordance with this Safety Data Sheet and the product label. Symptoms or effects that may arise if the product is mishandled and overexposure occurs are: Ingestion: Swallowing can result in nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, abdominal pain and chemical

burns to the gastrointestinal tract. Eye contact: A severe eye irritant. Corrosive to eyes; contact can cause corneal burns.

Contamination of eyes can result in permanent injury. Skin contact: Contact with skin will result in severe irritation. Corrosive to skin - may cause skin

burns. Inhalation: Breathing in mists or aerosols may produce respiratory irritation. Delayed (up to 48

hours) fluid build up in the lungs may occur. Long Term Effects:No information available for the product. Toxicological Data: No LD50 data available for the product. For the constituent SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE:Oral LD50 (mice): 5800 mg/kg

EYES: Moderate irritant (rabbit). Standard Draize test Product Name: SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION (10-15% AVAILABLE CHLORINE)

Issued: 03/11/2010


Safety Data Sheet 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Ecotoxicity Avoid contaminating waterways. For SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE:

Persistence/degradability and mobility

This material is biodegradable.

Aquatic toxicity: Very toxic to aquatic organisms. 48hr LC50 (fish): 0.07 - 5.9 mg/L.

Terrestrial toxicity: Expected to be harmful to terrestrial species.





UN No: 1791

Class-primary 8 Corrosive

Packing Group: III

Proper Shipping Name: HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION

Hazchem Code: 2X Marine TransportClassified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) for transport by sea; DANGEROUS GOODS. UN No: 1791

Class-primary: 8 Corrosive

Packing Group: III

Proper Shipping Name: HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION IMDG EMS Fire: F-A

IMDG EMS Spill: S-B

Air TransportClassified as Dangerous Goods by the criteria of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations for transport by air; DANGEROUS GOODS. UN No: 1791

Class-primary: 8 Corrosive


Issued: 03/11/2010


Safety Data Sheet Packing Group: III

Proper Shipping Name: HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION




N: Dangerous for the Environment

Risk Phrase(s): R31: Contact with acids liberates toxic gas.

R34: Causes burns.R41: Risk of serious damage to eyes.R50: Very toxic to aquatic organisms.

Safety Phrase(s): S24/25: Avoid contact with skin and eyes.

S26: In case of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice.S28: After contact with skin, wash immediately with plenty of soap and water.S36/37/39: Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection.S45: In case of accident or if you feel unwell, seek medical advice immediately (show the label whenever possible).S50: Do not mix with acids. S61: Avoid release to the environment. Refer to special instructions Safety Data Sheets.

Poisons Schedule: S5 Caution. All the constituents of this material are listed on the Australian Inventory of Chemical Substances (AICS).


`Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances'. Ed. D. Sweet, US Dept. of Health & Human Services: Cincinatti, 2009.

This safety data sheet has been prepared by SH&E Shared Services, Orica.

Reason(s) for Issue:Revised Primary SDSAlignment to HSNO requirements


Issued: 03/11/2010


Safety Data Sheet This SDS summarises to our best knowledge at the date of issue, the chemical health and safety hazards of the material and general guidance on how to safely handle the material in the workplace. Since Orica Limited cannot anticipate or control the conditions under which the product may be used, each user must, prior to usage, assess and control the risks arising from its use of the material.




Issued: 03/11/2010


1800-1274060800-243622+64-4-9179888

AustraliaNew Zealand

Telephone

+61-2-97333000

+64-9-2506222

0800-764766

MSDS Officer

1800-251525131126

Ask For

Chemical Name

Chemical Formula

Chemical Family

Other Names

New Zealand

Product Name

Uses

Ammonium Sulphate

Laboratory chemicals, Manufacture of substances

Product Description

No Data Available

H8N2O4S

Ammonium Sulphate

No Data Available

Ammonium Sulfate (2:1); Diammonium Sulfate; Diammonium Sulphate; Sulfuric Acid, Diammonium Salt

Contact Information Organisation Location

Poisons Information Centre

Redox Pty Ltd 2 Swettenham RoadMinto NSW 2566Australia11 Mayo RoadWiri Auckland 2104New Zealand

Westmead NSW

Chemcall

National Poisons Centre

1. IDENTIFICATION

This Material Safety Data Sheet may not provide exhaustive guidance for all HSNO Controls assigned to this substance. The EPA (New Zealand) web site should be consulted for a full list of triggered controls and cited regulations.

No Data AvailablePoisons Schedule (Aust)

Risk Phrases

Safety Phrases

Categories

Non-Dangerous Goods according to the criteria of the Australian Dangerous Goods Code (ADG Code).ADG Code

Non-Hazardous according to the criteria of ASCC [NOHSC:1008(2004)]ASCC Hazard Classification

2. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

HSNO Hazard Classification 6.1D; 9.1D; 9.3C

Chemical Entity Formula CAS Number Proportion

Ammonium Sulphate No Data Available 7783-20-2 >99.0 %

Ingredients


Material Safety Data SheetAmmonium Sulphate

Revision 2, Date 13 Apr 2013

Form 21047, Revision 3, Page 1 of 8, Document 7609504, Printed 03 Nov 2015 11:01 AM

50ANNIVERSARY

TH

1965 – 2015

AustraliaAdelaideBrisbaneMelbournePerthSydney

New ZealandAucklandChristchurchHawke’s Bay

MalaysiaKuala Lumpur

USALos Angeles

PhoneFaxE-mailWebABN

+61 7 3268 1555+61 7 3268 [email protected] com92 000 762 345

Redox Pty LtdBrisbane OfficePO Box 848 Mount Ommaney QLD 4074 Australia776 Boundary Road Richlands QLD 4077 Australia

http://www.epa.govt.nz/

Description of necessary measures according to routes of exposure


Swallowed Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Rinse mouth with water. Consult a physician. Show this safety data sheet to the doctor in attendance.

Advice to Doctor Treat symptomatically based on judgement of doctor and individual reactions of patient.

Inhaled If breathed in, move person into fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. Consult a physician. Show this safety data sheet to the doctor in attendance.

Medical Conditions Aggravated by Exposure

No information available on medical conditions aggravated by exposure to this product.

Eye Flush eyes with water as a precaution. Consult a physician. Show this safety data sheet to the doctor in attendance.

Skin Wash off with soap and plenty of water. Consult a physician. Show this safety data sheet to the doctor in attendance.


General Measures Clear fire area of all non-emergency personnel. Stay upwind. Keep out of low areas. Eliminate ignition sources. Move fire exposed containers from fire area if it can be done without risk.

Flammability Conditions The product itself does not burn.

Extinguishing Media Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local circumstances and the surrounding environment. Water, Water spray, Carbon dioxides and dry chemical powder.

Fire and Explosion Hazard Product is a non-flammable solid.

Hazardous Products of Combustion

In case of combustion, toxic fumes are emitted: Nitrogen oxides (NOx), Sulphur oxides , Ammonia gas.

Special Fire Fighting Instructions Do NOT allow fire fighting water to reach waterways, drains or sewers. Store fire fighting water for treatment.

Personal Protective Equipment Fire fighters should wear a positive-pressure self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and protective fire fighting clothing (includes fire fighting helmet, coat, trousers, boots and gloves).

Flash Point No Data Available

Lower Explosion Limit No Data Available

Upper Explosion Limit No Data Available

Auto Ignition Temperature No Data Available

Hazchem Code No Data Available


General Response Procedure Avoid accidents, clean up immediately. Slippery when spilt. Eliminate all sources of ignition. Increase ventilation. Avoid generating dust. Stop leak if safe to do so. Isolate the danger area. Use clean, non-sparking tools and equipment. Avoid breathing vapours, mist or gas. Ensure adequate ventilation. Avoid breathing dust.

Clean Up Procedures Contain and sweep/shovel up spills with dust binding material or use an industrial vacuum cleaner. Transfer to a suitable, labelled container and dispose of promptly.

Containment Stop leak if safe to do so. Isolate the danger area.

Decontamination Cover with waterproof sheet and avoid raising dust. Be careful not to produce dust as much as possible.

Environmental Precautionary Measures

Do NOT let product reach drains or waterways. If product does enter a waterway, advise the Environmental Protection Authority or your local Waste Management. Due to NH4+ and its high water solubility, it may be harmful to aquatic organisms.

Evacuation Criteria Evacuate all unnecessary personnel.

Personal Precautionary Measures Personnel involved in the clean up should wear full protective clothing as listed in section 8.


Handling Avoid formation of dust and aerosols. Provide appropriate exhaust ventilation at places where dust is formed. Wear proper protective equipment to avoid inhalation of dust. Good local exhaust ventilation. Avoid rough handling.

Material Safety Data Sheet Ammonium Sulphate Revision 2, Date 13 Apr 2013


Storage Store in a cool, dry, well-ventilated area. Keep containers tightly closed when not in use. Inspect regularly for deficiencies such as damage or leaks. Protect against physical damage. Store away from incompatible materials as listed in section 10. Not be exposed to the air long time because this product has little hygroscopic. Store in dry place with low humidity. This product is not classified dangerous for transport according to The Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods By Road and Rail.

Container Store in original packaging as approved by manufacturer.Poly ethylene, Poly propylene, Paper, hemp and chloroethylene are resistant as containers and packaging.

8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS / PERSONAL PROTECTION

General No exposure standard has been established for this product by the Australian Safety and Compensation Council (ASCC). However, the exposure standard for dust not otherwise specified is 10mg/m3 (for inspirable dust) and 3mg/m3 (for respirable dust).NOTE: The exposure value at the TWA is the average airborne concentration of a particular substance when calculated over a normal 8 hour working day for a 5 day working week.These exposure standards are guides to be used in the control of occupational health hazards. All atmospheric contamination should be kept to as low a level as is workable. These exposure standards should not be used as fine dividing lines between safe and dangerous concentrations of chemicals. They are not a measure of relative toxicity.

Exposure Limits No Data Available

Biological Limits No information available on biological limit values for this product.

Engineering Measures A system of local and/or general exhaust is recommended to keep employee exposures as low as possible. Local exhaust ventilation is generally preferred because it can control the emissions of the contaminant at its source, preventing dispersion of it into the general work area.

Personal Protection Equipment RESPIRATOR: Respiratory protection is not required. Where protection from nuisance levels of dusts are desired, use type N95 or type P1 dust masks (AS1715/1716).EYES: Safety glasses with side shields (AS1336/1337).HANDS: Nitrile gloves (AS2161).CLOTHING: Chemical-resistant coveralls and safety footwear (AS3765/2210).

Further details on Personal protective equipment:Eye/face protection:Use equipment for eye protection tested and approved under appropriate government standards such as NIOSH (US) or EN 166(EU).

Skin protection:Handle with gloves. Gloves must be inspected prior to use. Use proper glove removal technique (without touching glove's outer surface) to avoid skin contact with this product. Dispose of contaminated gloves after use in accordance with applicable laws and good laboratory practices. Wash and dry hands.

Full contact:Material: Nitrile rubberMinimum layer thickness: 0.11 mmBreak through time: 480 min

Splash contact:Material: Nitrile rubberMinimum layer thickness: 0.11 mmBreak through time: 480 min

If used in solution, or mixed with other substances, and under conditions which differ from EN 374, contact the supplier of the CE approved gloves. This recommendation is advisory only and must be evaluated by an industrial hygienist and safety officer familiar with the specific situation of anticipated use by our customers. It should not be construed as offering an approval for any specific use scenario.

Body Protection:Choose body protection in relation to its type, to the concentration and amount of dangerous substances, and to the specific work-place., The type of protective equipment must be selected according to the concentration and amount of the dangerous substance at the specific workplace.

Special Hazards Precaustions

Work Hygienic Practices Handle in accordance with good industrial hygiene and safety practice. Wash hands before breaks and at the end of workday.


Physical State Solid

Appearance Crystalline (rhombic or grained crystal)

Odour Odourless



Colour White

pH 5 - 6 132 g/L (25 deg C)

Vapour Pressure No Data Available

Relative Vapour Density No Data Available

Boiling/Melting Point No Data Available

Solubility 132 g/L (Completely Soluble) °C

Freezing Point No Data Available

Specific Gravity No Data Available

Flash Point No Data Available

Auto Ignition Temp No Data Available

Evaporation Rate No Data Available

Bulk Density No Data Available

Corrosion Rate No Data Available

Decomposition Temperature No Data Available

Density 1.77 g/cm3 Relative

No Data AvailableSpecific Heat

Molecular Weight 132.14 g/mol

Net Propellant Weight No Data Available

Octanol Water Coefficient -5.1 (25 deg C)

Particle Size No Data Available

Partition Coefficient No Data Available

Saturated Vapour Concentration No Data Available

Vapour Temperature No Data Available

Viscosity No Data Available

Volatile Percent No Data Available

VOC Volume No Data Available

Additional Characteristics Fat solubility : Insoluble to acetone, ethyl alchol and carbon disulphide.

Potential for Dust Explosion No Data Available

Fast or Intensely Burning Characteristics

No Data Available

Flame Propagation or Burning Rate of Solid Materials

No Data Available

Non-Flammables That Could Contribute Unusual Hazards to a Fire

No Data Available

Properties That May Initiate or Contribute to Fire Intensity

No Data Available

Reactions That Release Gases or Vapours

Decomposition may emit flammable ammonia gas.

Release of Invisible Flammable Vapours and Gases

No Data Available


Chemical Stability Product is stable under normal conditions of use, storage and temperature.

Conditions to Avoid no data available

Materials to Avoid Strong oxidizing agents (chlorates, nitrites and nitrates), Strong bases.


Start decomposition at 120 deg C, Melting at 357 deg C then ammonium hydrogen sulphide and ammonia occur. Form ammonia gas with strong alkalis. Ammonia gas and sulphur dioxide

Hazardous Polymerisation No Data Available




General Information Acute toxicity : Oral LD50 Rat: 2840 mg/kg

Skin corrosion/irritation:Skin - rabbitResult: No skin irritation

Skin - HumanResult: Mild skin irritationSerious eye damage/eye irritation

Eyes - rabbitResult: No eye irritation

Eyes - HumanResult: Mild eye irritation

Mutagenicity : Ames test : NegativeChromosome abnormal test : Negative

Reproductive toxicity : Inhalation toxicity test (Rats, 0.3 mg/l, 8h/day, for 14 days) : Negative

Carcinogenicity:IARC: No component of this product present at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as probable, possible or confirmed human carcinogen by IARC.

To the best of our knowledge, the chemical, physical, and toxicological properties have not been thoroughly investigated.

Carcinogen Category 0


Ecotoxicity Toxicity to fish - Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout):LC50: 36.7 mg/l - 96 hLD50: 420 mg/L 96 hToxicity to daphnia and other aquatic invertebrates:LC50: 433 mg/l 50 hEC50: 129 mg/L 48 h

No Data AvailablePersistence/Degradability

Mobility No Data Available

Environmental Fate Do NOT contaminate waterways, drains or sewers. Harmful to aquatic life.

Bioaccumulation Potential No Data Available

Environmental Impact No Data Available


General Information Dispose of in accordance with all local, state and federal regulations. All empty packaging should be disposed of in accordance with Local, State, and Federal Regulations or recycled/reconditioned at an approved facility.

Contact a specialist disposal company or the local waste regulator for advice. Recycling and recovery the product if possible as fertilizer or effectively used for farm crops to diluted with water. Do not dispose near reactive substance like sodium hydroxide and high temperature place.Disposal must be in accordance with current national and local regulations or ask authorized industrial waste treatment agents which have capability of treatment. Do not dump this material into sewers, on the ground or into any body of water.

Special Precautions for Land Fill



Air

IATA

Proper Shipping Name AMMONIUM SULPHATE

Class No Data Available

Subsidiary Risk(s) No Data Available

UN Number No Data Available

Hazchem No Data Available

Pack Group No Data Available

Special Provision No Data Available

Land

Australia: ADG Code




No Data Available





New Zealand: NZS5433




No Data Available





United States of America: US DOT




No Data Available






Non-Dangerous Goods according to the criteria of the Australian Dangerous Goods Code (ADG Code).ADG Code



Sea

IMDG Code








EMS No Data Available

Marine Pollutant No

EPA (New Zealand)

Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO)

Approval Code: HSR002770


General Information No Data Available

Poisons Schedule (Aust) No Data Available

SULFURIC ACID, DIAMMONIUM SALTAICS Name


Related Product Codes AMSULB0400, AMSULB0600, AMSULB1000, AMSULB1001, AMSULB1002, AMSULB1003, AMSULB1004, AMSULB1800, AMSULB3100, AMSULB3101, AMSULB4500, AMSULB4501, AMSULB7300, AMSULB8000, AMSULG0400, AMSULG0600, AMSULG0700, AMSULG1000, AMSULG1001, AMSULG1002, AMSULG1003, AMSULG1004, AMSULG1005, AMSULG2600, AMSULG2800, AMSULG3200, AMSULG3300, AMSULG3400, AMSULG3600, AMSULG5300, AMSULG5400, AMSULG6000, AMSULG6001, AMSULP0200, AMSULP0400, AMSULP0500, AMSULP0600, AMSULP0700, AMSULP0800, AMSULP0900, AMSULP0901, AMSULP1000, AMSULP1001, AMSULP1002, AMSULP1003, AMSULP1004, AMSULP1005, AMSULP1006, AMSULP1007, AMSULP1008, AMSULP1009, AMSULP1010, AMSULP1011, AMSULP1012, AMSULP1013, AMSULP1014, AMSULP1015, AMSULP1016, AMSULP1017, AMSULP1018, AMSULP1019, AMSULP1020, AMSULP1021, AMSULP1022, AMSULP1023, AMSULP1024, AMSULP1025, AMSULP1026, AMSULP1027, AMSULP1028, AMSULP1029, AMSULP1030, AMSULP1031, AMSULP1032, AMSULP1033, AMSULP1034, AMSULP1035, AMSULP1036, AMSULP1037, AMSULP1038, AMSULP1039, AMSULP1040, AMSULP1041, AMSULP1042, AMSULP1043, AMSULP1044, AMSULP1045, AMSULP1046, AMSULP1047, AMSULP1048, AMSULP1049, AMSULP1050, AMSULP1051, AMSULP1052, AMSULP1100, AMSULP1101, AMSULP1200, AMSULP1201, AMSULP1300, AMSULP1301, AMSULP1400, AMSULP1401, AMSULP1500, AMSULP1600, AMSULP1601, AMSULP1700, AMSULP1701, AMSULP1800, AMSULP1900, AMSULP2000, AMSULP2001, AMSULP2100, AMSULP2101, AMSULP2200, AMSULP2201, AMSULP2300, AMSULP2400, AMSULP2500, AMSULP2501, AMSULP2600, AMSULP2601, AMSULP2602, AMSULP2700, AMSULP2701, AMSULP2702, AMSULP2800, AMSULP2801, AMSULP2802, AMSULP2900, AMSULP3000, AMSULP3001, AMSULP3002, AMSULP3003, AMSULP3004, AMSULP3100, AMSULP3101, AMSULP3200, AMSULP3300, AMSULP3400, AMSULP3500, AMSULP3501, AMSULP4000, AMSULP4500, AMSULP4501, AMSULP4600, AMSULP4700, AMSULP4800, AMSULP5000, AMSULP5100, AMSULP5200, AMSULP5300, AMSULP5400, AMSULP6000, AMSULP6001, AMSULP6100, AMSULP6300, AMSULP6500, AMSULP6600, AMSULP6800, AMSULP6900, AMSULP7000, AMSULP7300, AMSULP7400, AMSULP7500, AMSULP7600, AMSULP7700, AMSULP7701, AMSULP7800, AMSULP8000, AMSULP8001, AMSULP8100, AMSULP8500, AMSULP8600, AMSULP8700, AMSULP9000, AMSULP9500, AMSULP9501, AMSULP9502, AMSULP9503, AMSULP9600, AMSULP9700, AMSULP9800, AMSULP9900, AMSULP3900, AMSULP7501, AMSULP3505, AMSULG2605, AMSULG3405, AMSULG1044, AMSULG1042, AMSULG1046, AMSULP3405, AMSULP1146, AMSULP3507, AMSULP1148, AMSULG0701, AMSULP1801, AMSULP1802, AMSULP1803, AMSULP1804, AMSULP1805, AMSULP1806, AMSULP1807, AMSULP1808, AMSULP1809, AMSULP1810, AMSULP1811, AMSULP1812, AMSULP1813, AMSULP1814, AMSULP1815, AMSULP1816, AMSULP1817, AMSULP1818, AMSULP1819, AMSULP1820, AMSULP3510,



Revision 2

Revision Date 13 Apr 2013

< Less Than> Greater ThanAICS Australian Inventory of Chemical Substancesatm AtmosphereCAS Chemical Abstracts Service (Registry Number)cm² Square CentimetresCO2 Carbon DioxideCOD Chemical Oxygen Demanddeg C (°C) Degrees CelciusEPA (New Zealand) Environmental Protection Authority of New Zealanddeg F (°F) Degrees Farenheitg Gramsg/cm³ Grams per Cubic Centimetreg/l Grams per LitreHSNO Hazardous Substance and New OrganismIDLH Immediately Dangerous to Life and Healthimmiscible Liquids are insoluable in each other.inHg Inch of MercuryinH2O Inch of WaterK Kelvinkg Kilogramkg/m³ Kilograms per Cubic Metrelb PoundLC50 LC stands for lethal concentration. LC50 is the concentration of a material in air which causes the death of 50% (one half) of a group of test animals. The material is inhaled over a set period of time, usually 1 or 4 hours.LD50 LD stands for Lethal Dose. LD50 is the amount of a material, given all at once, which causes the death of 50% (one half) of a group of test animals.ltr or L Litrem³ Cubic Metrembar Millibarmg Milligrammg/24H Milligrams per 24 Hoursmg/kg Milligrams per Kilogrammg/m³ Milligrams per Cubic MetreMisc or Miscible Liquids form one homogeneous liquid phase regardless of the amount of either component present.mm MillimetremmH2O Millimetres of WatermPa.s Millipascals per SecondN/A Not ApplicableNIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and HealthNOHSC National Occupational Heath and Safety CommissionOECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentOz OuncePEL Permissible Exposure LimitPa Pascalppb Parts per Billionppm Parts per Millionppm/2h Parts per Million per 2 Hoursppm/6h Parts per Million per 6 Hourspsi Pounds per Square InchR RankineRCP Reciprocal Calculation ProcedureSTEL Short Term Exposure LimitTLV Threshold Limit Valuetne Tonnetorr Millimetre of MercuryTWA Time Weighted Averageug/24H Micrograms per 24 HoursUN United Nationswt Weight

Key/Legend

AMSULP3515, AMSULG0098, AMSULP1055, AMSULP1060, AMSULP1062, AMSULG1062, AMSULP3506, AMSULP1144, AMSULP1142, AMSULG0003, AMSULG0005, AMSULG0001, AMSULP0001, AMSULP0003, AMSULP0005, AMSULG1017, AMSULG0015, AMSULP1053, AMSULP3508, AMSULG6015, AMSULP3517, AMSULP3509, AMSULP3525, AMSULP3504, AMSULP1125, AMSULG0020, AMSULP1147, AMSULP1054, AMSULB0005, AMSULP1127, AMSULP7505, AMSULP1126, AMSULP0042, AMSULP1140, AMSULP1250, AMSULG1020, AMSULP0090, AMSULP1253, AMSULP1256, AMSULP0093, AMSULP0096, AMSULP0043, AMSULP0099, AMSULP0091, AMSULP1149






Appendix B Geochemical Assessment Report

ORIGIN ENERGY RESOURCES LTD

Australia Pacific LNG

Spring Gully

Hydrochemical assessment of treated CSG water

into the Precipice Aquifer at Spring Gully

Final Report

M09620A14

ORIGIN ENERGY RESOURCES LTD April 5, 2011 Origin Aquifer Injection Geochemistry Support

111102R SpringGully Re-injection geochemistry

File: M09620A14.700 Page i

KLOHN CRIPPEN BERGERKLOHN CRIPPEN BERGERKLOHN CRIPPEN BERGERKLOHN CRIPPEN BERGER

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Aquifer injection has been identified as a preferred management option for disposal of

excess coal seam gas (CSG) water under the Queensland Government’s CSG Water

Management Policy The feasibility of aquifer injection will depend on a number of

issues, including the ability to manage any potential risks to the environmental, economic

and social values of the receiving aquifers (DERM, 2010).

This report provides details of the hydrogeochemical assessment related to the activities

to meet Environmental approval Origin’s in 2011 and for the proposed injection trials for

Spring Gully. The assessment included:

• Characterisation of the mineralogy at the injection target.

• Characterisation of the hydrochemistry of Spring Gully Precipice aquifer

groundwater (target aquifer) and RO permeate (injectate).

• Identification of the potential water quality issues associated with mixing different quantities of RO permeate with Spring Gully Precipice aquifer

groundwater (i.e. receiving ground water), including the assessment of

potential mineral precipitates.

• Determination of the effects of different mixing ratios of the injection fluid with the receiving ground water (GW) under different partial pressures.

• Simulation of reactive solute transport within the aquifer using 1D transport

modelling with PHREEQC.

• Assessment of PHREEQC results against managed aquifer recharge guidelines (DERM, 2010).

According to XRD results provided by Origin and a previous report by Carmichael

(1989), the Spring Gully Precipice mineralogical assemblage is composed of mainly

quartz, with minor amounts of K - feldspar, plagioclase, kaolinite, dickite and illite. There

is a significant constituent of amorphous materials that needs further characterisation.



File: M09620A14.700 Page ii


This amorphous constituent is likely composed of disordered clay minerals. Based on the

PHREEQC receiving GW saturation index (SI) values, we expect the water quality

controlling minerals (i.e. equilibrium minerals) to be Ca - montmorilonite, K - feldspar,

illite, K - mica, calcite, chlorite and siderite.

The hydrochemistry analysis and the entry-level assessment showed that both the RO

injectate and the receiving GW are within the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines

(ADWG). Under the aquifer conditions provided by the client, and assuming the RO

treatment facility produces a chemically reducing RO permeate, then the model results

suggest the mixing of RO permeate into the receiving GW (rations from 90:10 to 50:50,

receiving GW: RO permeate) results in a slightly different water quality. However, the

PHREEQC predicted water quality mixture complies with the ADWG. The mixture is

composed mainly of magnesium (Mg), sodium (Na), calcium (Ca) and chloride (Cl).

Generally, magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), chloride (Cl) and pe slightly increase with

increasing portions of RO injectate, while the pH slightly decreased. These slight

increases / decreases in metals and pH have little effect on the general water quality.

However, under “extreme” aquifer pressures and for mixing ratios of 70:30 (receiving

GW: RO injectate ≥ 30), there is a substantial increase in aluminum (Al) concentration

which are above Australian Drinking Water Regulations (ADWG) limits. These increases

are related to a decrease in pH and the subsequent dissolution of alumino - silicate

minerals. It needs to be noted that these ‘extreme’ conditions are outside of the

parameters provided by the client, and may only occur if the aquifer pressure is

substantially increased. Another potential issue arising from mixing solutions in the

presence of clay minerals is clay dispersion. However, due to the compatibility of the two

solutions, particularly the similar ionic strengths, clay dispersion has been ruled out.

Generally, there is very limited impact as a result of mixing receiving GW with RO

permeate because these solutions have very similar redox conditions, pH, ionic strengths

and salinity.



File: M09620A14.700 Page iii


Based on this assessment, the following recommendations can be made for the proposed

re - injection trial:

• Regular monitoring of the RO injectate is required prior to, and during operation of trial. The chemical compatibility in terms of salinity, pH and

redox as well as the chemical quality of the injectate will determine the applicability and success of the injection.

• Ongoing monitoring of the water quality at the injection bore (DRP-W1-1)

and the nearby monitoring bores (DMPO1) over the duration of the trial will be required to ensure that the impacts to the receiving water requirement as as

suggested by the first - order modelling undertaken for this assessment . Further monitoring requirements have been outlined elsewhere in Origin’s

Re - injection plan but should include consideration of the head variation, monitoring of upstream bores and pre-injection, in test and post - injection

monitoring of bores considered to be outside the expected zone of influence.

• Finalization of the post - treatment RO injectate quality and comparison to the receiving aquifer water quality will be a pre - requisite to the trial having

minimum water quality impact on the receiving aquifer.

• Close adherence of the pH, dissolved oxygen and redox conditions of the

system.

• This is an initial assessment and should be linked to a mass transport numerical groundwater model. This may require additional assessment of

hydraulic and mass transport.

• Some of the limitations should be addressed prior to injection. Particularly, whole rock analysis to identify potential contaminants of concern (which can

be achieved prior to the commencement of the trial). Detailed characterisation

of the unidentified amorphous content and kinetic leach testwork should be

conducted as part of the injection trial.

• Results of a microbiological study on the water from the receiving environment and potential source waters is underway. The findings of this

investigation, particularly in terms of bio-clogging or enhanced reactivity should be assessed and taken into account for the injection trial operation.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE


File: M09620A14.700 Page iv


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... I

1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ...................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Hydrogeological Setting ................................................................................. 2

1.3 Scope of the work ............................................................................................ 4

2. MINERALOGY OF THE INJECTION TARGETS ................................................. 5

2.1 QUT XRD analysis ......................................................................................... 5

2.2 Carmichael (1989) XRD results summary .................................................... 7

3. SPRING GULLY PRECIPICE AQUIFER WATER QUALITY ............................ 9

3.1 HYDROCHEMISTRY RESULTS .............................................................. 10

3.1.1 RO injectate (permeate).................................................................... 10

3.1.2 Spring Gully Precipice aquifer......................................................... 10

3.1.3 Entry - Level Assessment of Injection Suitability .......................... 11

3.1.4 Hydrochemistry conclusions ............................................................ 14

4. GEOCHEMICAL MODELING ............................................................................... 15

4.1 Mineralogical controls on water quality ...................................................... 15

4.1.1 Redox controls .................................................................................. 16

4.2 Mixing fractions: Aquifer water / RO permeate ......................................... 19

4.3 1D transport modeling .................................................................................. 22

5. LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................... 25

6. CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 26

7. CLOSURE.................................................................................................................. 28

8. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 29

Tables

Table 1 Stratigraphic Sequence at Spring Gully (Origin, 2010) ........................................... 3

ORIGIN ENERGY RESOURCES LTD April 5, 2011 Origin Injection Geochemistry

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

PAGE


File: M09620A14.700 Page v


Table 2. Bulk Precipice mineralogy determined by quantitative Rietveld analysis of XRD

patterns. ..................................................................................................................................... 6

Table 3. Combined bulk and clay mineralogy ....................................................................... 7

Table 4. Water quality – related Entry - Level Assessment of Injection Suitability ......... 12

Table 5. Entry - Level Assessment of RO permeate and Spring Gully Precipice aquifer

water. ....................................................................................................................................... 13

Table 6. Saturation Index (SI) values relating to RO permeate and receiving GW under

different redox (pe) conditions. ............................................................................................. 18

Table 7. PHREEQC modeling results for different mixing ratios for RO permeate in

Spring Gully aquifer groundwater under different partial pressures. ................................. 21

Figures

Figure 1 KCB Aquifer Injection Study Bores

Figure 2 Piper and Durov Diagram for RO Permeate and receiving GW

Figure 3 Conceptual design for Spring Gully RO Treatment System

Figure 4 PHREEQC Geochemical Simulations for Spring Gully Precipice injected

with RO permeate

Figure 5 PHREEQC 1 D solute transport simulations for Spring Gully Precipice

aquifer injected with RO permeate

Figure 6 PHREEQC geochemical model simulations showing change in saturation

index (SI) values for Spring Gully Precipice aquifer injected with RO

permeate

Figure 7 1 D solute transport simulations for Spring Gully Precipice aquifer injected with RO permeate

Appendices

Appendix I Water Quality and Modeling Results



File: M09620A14.700 Page 1


1. INTRODUCTION

Klohn Crippen Berger Ltd. (KCB) was commissioned by Origin Energy Resources Ltd.

(Origin) to provide a hydrogeochemical compatibility assessment associated with the re -

injection of RO permeate into Spring Gully Precipice aquifer.

Aquifer injection has been identified as a preferred management option for disposal of

excess coal seam gas (CSG) water under the Queensland Government’s CSG Water

Management Policy. As well as providing a water disposal option, injection could also be

a means of recharging depleted aquifers, storing water for later beneficial use, or

mitigating impacts that may be caused by CSG water extraction. The feasibility of aquifer

injection will depend on a number of issues, including the ability to manage any potential

risks to the environmental, economic and social values of the receiving aquifers (DERM,

2010).

This report provides hydrogeochemical aspects related to the activities to meet

Environmental approval Origin’s in 2011 and for the proposed injection trials for Spring

Gully.

1.1 Background

Origin operates the Spring Gully coal seam gas (CSG) development project

approximately 90 km north west of Miles in central Queensland. Associated water, which

is produced from the target coal seams in order to liberate the CSG is currently treated by

reverse osmosis (RO), resulting in a fresh permeate water stream, and a saline brine

stream. Origin intends to develop an aquifer injection capability in the vicinity of the

Spring Gully RO Plant to provide an alternative for existing permeate use / management

options. Reinjection will target the Precipice Sandstone.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 2


1.2 Hydrogeological Setting

Spring Gully is situated close to the boundary of the Bowen and Surat Basins of the Great

Artesian Basin (GAB). The Surat Basin predominantly comprises Jurassic clastic

terrigenous sedimentary rocks and lower Cretaceous marine facies. The stratigraphic

units of this basin are separated by a major unconformity with the underlying Bowen

Basin units. More complete detail on the hydrogeology of the area can be found in KCB,

2010.

The target injection unit for this investigation is the Precipice Sandstone of the Surat

sequence (See Table 1). This unit is a fluvial transgressive sequence consisting mainly of

quartzose sandstone occurring as a fining upwards sequence, with a coarse lower basal

member (the Braided Sands Formation (BSF)), and a finer grained upper sequence that

contains some siltstone (generally referred to as the Precipice Sandstone). The BSF has

been previously identified as highly permeable. At the proposed injection site the

Precipice Sandstone was intersected at approximately 436 mbGL and comprises a series

of planar to inclined cross laminated, to finely bedded, fine to coarse grained sandstones

and conglomerates with interbedded siltstones and mudstones, to a depth in excess of

510 mbGL. These sediments tend to have high strength and are predominately clast

supported and poorly cemented, although carbonaceous cementing (siderite / calcite) was

observed. Several confining aquitards separate the Precipice Sandstone from other

aquifers. The closest local water use to the trial injection bore is the Origin camp which is

~4.5 km up hydraulic gradient from the proposed injection bore. The Precipice sandstone

is utilised elsewhere for stock and domestic use, usually at shallower depths where it

more accessible than the trial bore.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 3


Table 1 Stratigraphic Sequence at Spring Gully (Origin, 2010)

Province Geological Age Spring Gully / Comet Ridge

Stratigraphy Hydrgeological Properties

Su

rat

Bas

in

Ju

rassic

Late

Inju

ne C

ree

k G

rou

p

Westbourne Fm Aquitard (not present at Spring Gully)

Springbok Sandstone Aquifer (not present at Spring Gully)

Middle

Walloon CM Minor coal and sandstone Aquifers with siltstone and mudstone Aquitards (not present at Spring Gully)

Bu

nd

am

ba G

rou

p Hutton Sandstone

Major Aquifer - outcropping formation at Spring Gully

Early

Evergreen Fm Aquitard

Boxvale Sandstone Mbr Aquifer

Basal Evergreen Fm Aquitard

Precipice Sandstone Major Aquifer

Bo

wen

Bas

in

Tri

ass

ic

Early Rewan Fm Upper Aquitard underlain by variably developed Aquifer

Perm

ian

Late

Bla

ck

wate

r G

rou

p Bandanna Formation

(Coal Measures) Minor coal and sandstone Aquifers with siltstone and mudstone Aquitards

Kaloola Mbr Aquitard

Up

per

Ba

ck

Ck G

rou

p Black Alley Shale Aquitard

Mantuan Fm Mixed Aquitards and Marginal Aquifers

Upper Tinowon Formation

Aquitard

Lower Tinowon Formation

Mixed Aquitards and Marginal Aquifers

Ingelara Fm Aquitard

Lo

wer

Bac

k

Ck G

rou

p

Aldebaran Sandstone Minor Aquifer

Early

Reids Dome Beds Aquitard

Basement Devonian Timbury Hills Fm Aquitard



File: M09620A14.700 Page 4


1.3 Scope of the work

This report provides an outline of the assessment of potential water quality and aquifer

impacts from injection of reverse osmosis (RO) injectate (permeate) into the Precipice

aquifer at Spring Gully. This report therefore comprises:

• Characterisation of the mineralogy at the injection target.

• Characterisation of the hydrochemistry of Spring Gully Precipice aquifer

groundwater (target aquifer) and RO permeate (injectate).

• Identification of the potential water quality issues associated with mixing different quantities of RO permeate with Spring Gully Precipice aquifer

groundwater (i.e. receiving ground water), including the assessment of potential mineral precipitates.

• Determination of the effects of different mixing ratios of the injection fluid

with the receiving ground water (GW) under different partial pressures.

• Simulation of reactive solute transport within the aquifer using 1D transport modelling with PHREEQC.

• Assessment of PHREEQC results against managed aquifer recharge

guidelines (DERM, 2010).



File: M09620A14.700 Page 5


2. MINERALOGY OF THE INJECTION TARGETS

2.1 QUT XRD analysis

X - ray diffraction (XRD) analysis was performed by the X - ray Analysis Facility,

Faculty of Science and Technology, Queensland University of Technology (QUT). Three

100 mm core sections were obtained from a monitoring bore (DMP01-006, DMP01-007

and DMP01 - 008) approximately 38m south east of the proposed injection bore (DRP-

W1-1) (Figure 1). According to field logs, the core sections were very similar sandstones,

composed of quartz, they were poorly cemented and clast supported. The core sections

varied from coarse grained (DMP01-006), to fine / medium grained (DMP01-007) to

fine / coarse grained (DMP01-008). DMP01-008 was also porous to very porous. The

cores were sub-sampled by cutting a 30 mm section, dried, jaw crushed to 2 mm size and

then further reduce to < 100 µm using a swing mill. These samples were micronised in a

McCrone mill with 10 wt.% corundum to provide an internal standard (for calculation of

crystalline phases and subsequent amorphous content). A small portion of the 2 mm

powder was disaggregated in a mortar and pestle then dispersed ultrasonically to provide

a clay suspension. The suspension was allowed to settle for a short period to enable the

< 5 µm fraction to be transferred to a low background silicon plate.

X - ray diffraction patterns were collected using CuKα radiation and the data was

interpreted using Jade (V8.0, Materials Data Inc.) for phase identification and SiroQuant

(V3 Sietronics Pty Ltd) for semi - quantitative XRD analysis via a Rietveld analysis

based technique. The clay sized material (< 5 µm) was treated with ethylene glycol and

examined with CoKα radiation. Smectite and smectite containing mixed layers (e.g.

smectite / illite) react with the ethylene glycol and allow these phases to be identified.

The bulk mineralogy (‘whole rock’) varied little between the three cores. The cores were

dominated by quartz, with minor amounts of K-feldspar (possibly adularia), plagioclase



File: M09620A14.700 Page 6


(albite), kaolinite and dickite. The relative contribution of each mineral was determined

by quantitative Rieltveld analysis and is displayed in Table 2.

Table 2. Bulk Precipice mineralogy determined by quantitative Rietveld analysis of

XRD patterns.

*Note: amorphous content was calculated from the difference between 100% and the SUM of all crystalline phases.

A substantial constituent of the cores were considered amorphous. The amorphous

constituent for each sample is computed as the difference between the sum of all the

crystalline phase s and 100%. Therefore, the amorphous constituent may include minerals

that did not diffract (i.e. X - ray amorphous) as well as any minerals not identified and

therefore not included in the Rietveld model. It is anticipated the residual between the

predicted and experimental results is small (i.e. all phases were accounted for); therefore

confirming the presence of a significant X - ray amorphous constituent. The X - ray

amorphous content may include amorphous minerals and minerals too small to diffract

(< 5 nm). However, the existence of crystallite sizes < 5 nm is unlikely.

The mineralogy of the clay size fraction (< 5 µm) was also very similar amongst cores.

Kaolinite was the dominant clay phase with > 40 wt.% and contained a minor amount of

illite and/or mica (~1 - 10 wt.%). Illite and mica are difficult to discern via XRD. There

was no effect of the ethylene glycol treatment on the XRD patterns indicating smectite

and / or mixed layer smectites were apparently absent.

Molecular

Formula

DMP01-006

(%)

DMP01-

007 (%)

DMP01-008

(%)

Quartz SiO2 73.0 75.3 81.3

Plagioclase (albite) NaAlSi3O8 1.3 1.2 1.2

K-feldspar (Adularia) KAlSi3O8 1.9 2.0 1.9

Kaolinite Al2Si2O5(OH)4 2.1 1.7 1.3

Dickite Al2Si2O5(OH)4 3.6 1.8 1.2

Amorphous N/A 18.0 18.1 13.0



File: M09620A14.700 Page 7


Although not detected in the samples tested, field and core observations indicate that

isolated occurrences of pyrite may be present as a very minor constituent in the BSF in

certain facies of the BSF.

2.2 Carmichael (1989) XRD results summary

The combined bulk mineralogy and clay fraction of five stratigraphical units (including

the Birkhead Formation; Westbourne Formation; Hutton Sandstone; Hooray Sandstone;

and the ‘basal Jurassic’ interval) of the Eromanga Basin, bordering Spring Gully, were

previously described by Carmichael (1989). The ‘whole - rock’ mineralogy was

determined form the analysis of 347 sub - surface cores with bulk powder XRD. The

< 2 µm clay fraction was separated and treated with ethylene glycol salvation after

heating at 375ºC, followed by analysis with XRD to determine the clay minerals present.

The combined mineralogy (bulk and clay fraction) is summarised in Table 3.

Table 3. Combined bulk and clay mineralogy

Mineral Molecular Formula

Calcite CaCO3

Chlorite (Mg,Fe)3(Si,Al)4O10(OH)2·(Mg,Fe)3(OH)6

Dickite Al2Si2O5(OH)4

Dolomite CaMg(CO3)2

Halite NaCl

Illite/ smectite (K,H3O)(Al,Mg,Fe)2(Si,Al)4O10[(OH)2,(H2O)]

Kaolinite Al2Si2O5(OH)4

Illite (K,H3O)(Al,Mg,Fe)2(Si,Al)4O10[(OH)2,(H2O)]

K-feldspar KAlSi3O8

Mica/ illite

Mica

Plagioclase (Na,Ca)(Si,Al)4O8

Pyrite FeS2

Quartz SiO2

Siderite FeCO3

Smectites

Generally quartz was the dominant mineral with substantial contributions of kaolinite,

mica and / or illite, kaolinite and / or dickite, plagioclase, smectite and mixed layered



File: M09620A14.700 Page 8


illite / smectites. Siderite, calcite, chlorite, K - feldspar, dolomite, pyrite and halite were

sometimes present at trace levels. Barite and sylvide were also detected at trace levels,

however their presence is most likely due to contamination from the drill mud, and is

therefore not included in Table 3.

The clay fraction (< 2 µm) was dominated by kaolinite, however illite, smectite, mixed -

layered illite / smectite and chlorite were also major constituents. The smectite group

minerals are likely to include (inter alia): montmorillonite, nontronite and saponite,

which are common minerals in sandstones.

It needs to be highlighted that the mineralogical assemblages suggested by Carmichael

(1989) are not site - specific to the Spring Gully Precipice injection target (i.e. DRP-W1-

1, Figure 1) or to the Precipice Sandstone unit. Rather, the data was obtained from nearby

stratigraphical units and therefore was only used cautiously as a guide to possible

unidentified minerals.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 9


3. SPRING GULLY PRECIPICE AQUIFER WATER QUALITY

Groundwater sampling of the BSF was undertaken via the direct collection of discharge

water during the test pumping program at Spring Gully (KCB, 2011).

The quality of the RO permeate was characterised through an ongoing program of

sampling and analysis. Samples were collected in appropriate sample containers for the

required analytical parameters. Samples were dispatched to ALS Laboratory Group for

analytical testing, within the required holding times, under strict chain - of - custody

protocols and with the required parameter preservatives.

The following parameters were analysed / measured:

• physio - chemical parameters – pH, total dissolved solids, total suspended

solids;

• major ionic constituents – calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, chloride, sulphate, bicarbonate, carbonate and total alkalinity;

• minor anions – bromide, fluoride, and iodide;

• dissolved metals and metalloids – aluminium, boron, barium, cobalt, iron,

manganese, molybdenum, selenium, silver, strontium, tin, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, zinc, mercury, and silica;

• dissolved sulphide;

• dissolved organic carbon;

• total organic carbon;

• nutrients – nitrate, nitrite and total phosphorous;

• phenols and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs);

• dissolved methane;



File: M09620A14.700 Page 10


• field parameters – temperature, electrical conductivity, oxidation reduction potential and dissolved oxygen (measured using a flow-through cell);

• BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes);

• gross alpha and beta (activity); and,

• groundwater microbiology survey.

3.1 HYDROCHEMISTRY RESULTS

3.1.1 RO injectate (permeate)

The hydrochemistry results for the Spring Gully Precipice RO injectate (October 14,

2010 to December 14, 2010) are displayed in Table A1, Appendix I. The water quality is

consistent over the sampling period, with a mean TDS of 70.6 mg / L and a neutral pH

range of 6.86 to 7.92 (average pH = 7.35). The RO permeate was mostly composed of

sodium (Na) and chloride (Cl) ions with subordinate bicarbonate (HCO3) (Figure 2). The

hydrochemistry of the RO permeate meets all Australian drinking water requirements,

however, some values for 17 – α - Ethynylestradiol were < 2 mg / L, where the value

should be < 1.5 mg / L to reach Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG). This is

due to method detection limits which were not sensitive enough to differentiate

0.5 mg / L from 1 mg / L; therefore, the value is expected to be below the required

1.5 mg / L.

3.1.2 Spring Gully Precipice aquifer

The hydrochemistry results corresponding to the receiving GW are displayed in Table

A2, Appendix I. The groundwater quality is consistent over the sampling period

(November 13, 2010 to November 15, 2010), with a mean TDS of 99 mg / L and a

slightly acidic to neutral pH range of 6.51 to 7.13 (average pH = 6.77). The pH measured

in the field was 6.3 (fixed). The receiving GW was mostly composed of bicarbonate

(HCO3), sodium (Na) and chloride (Cl) ions, with silica (SiO2) and subordinate sulphate



File: M09620A14.700 Page 11


(SO4) and calcium (Ca) ions (Figure 2). The aquifer groundwater meets all Australian

drinking water requirements with the exception of the pH value measured in situ which

falls just below the required value of 6.5. The laboratory tested pH values are all within

ADWG.

3.1.3 Entry - Level Assessment of Injection Suitability

A specific set of questions known as an entry - level assessment has been developed by

the National Water Quality Management Strategy (2009), to assist in determining the

degree of difficulty of a proposed project (Table 4). The entry - level assessment serves

as a preliminary indicator of human health and environmental risks. Therefore, the

assessment is implemented here to assess the risks involved with the re - injection of RO

permeate into the receiving GW.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 12


Table 4. Water quality – related Entry - Level Assessment of Injection Suitability

Entry-Level Assessment Questions and indicators of degree of difficulty

Source - water quality with respect to

groundwater environmental values

Q1. Does source water meet the water-quality requirements for

the environmental value of ambient groundwater?


recovered water end-use environmental

values

Q2. Does source water meet the water-quality requirements for

the environmental values of the intended end uses of the water

on recovery?


clogging

Q3. Does source water have low quality; for example:

Total suspended solids >10 mg / L

Total organic carbon >10 mg / L Total nitrogen >10 mg / L?

Also, is the soil or aquifer free of macropores?

Groundwater quality with respect to recovered water end - use environmental

values

Q4. Does ambient groundwater meet the water - quality requirements for the environmental values of intended end uses

of water on recovery?

Groundwater and drinking water quality Q5. Is either drinking water supply, or protection of aquatic ecosystems with high conservation or ecological values, an

environmental value of the target aquifer?

Groundwater salinity and recovery

efficiency

Q6. Does the salinity of native groundwater exceed either of the following:

10 000 mg / L

The salinity criterion for uses of recovered water?

Reactions between source water and

aquifer

Q7. Is redox status, pH, temperature, nutrient status and ionic

strength of groundwater similar to that of source water?

Proximity of nearest existing groundwater

users, connected ecosystems and property

boundaries

Q8. Are there other groundwater users, groundwater-connected

ecosystems or a property boundary within 100 – 1000 m of the

MAR site?

The entry - level assessment (Table 5) is based on hydrochemistry analysis displayed in

Table A1 and Table A2, Appendix I. Note there was little variation in the hydrochemistry

results and therefore standard deviations were small.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 13


Table 5. Entry - Level Assessment of RO permeate and Spring Gully Precipice

aquifer water.

Entry-level Assessment

Questions Permeate injectate Precipice Spring Gully

Q1. Does source water meet the

water - quality requirements for

the environmental value of

ambient groundwater?

Yes

N / A.

Q2. Does source water meet the water - quality requirements for

the environmental values of the intended end uses of the water on

recovery?

Yes Yes.

Q3. Does source water have low quality; for example:

Total suspended solids >10 mg/L Total organic carbon >10 mg/L

Total nitrogen >10 mg/L? Also, is the soil or aquifer free of

macropores?

Total suspended solids <10 mg / L

Total organic carbon <10 mg / L

Total nitrogen mg / L <10 mg / L

N / A

Total suspended solids <10 mg / L

Total organic carbon

<10 mg / L Total nitrogen

mg / L <10 mg / L

Aquifer has relatively high

primary porosity and secondary permeability in the

form of transmissive fracture

Q4. Does ambient groundwater meet the water-quality

requirements for the

environmental values of intended

end uses of water on recovery?

N / A Yes

Q5. Is either drinking water

supply, or protection of aquatic

ecosystems with high conservation or ecological

values, an environmental value

of the target aquifer?

N / A

The environmental value of

the target aquifer is for ‘drinking water supply’

quality.

Q6. Does the salinity of native groundwater exceed either of the

following:

10 000 mg / L The salinity criterion for uses of

recovered water?

No No

Q7. Is redox status, pH,

temperature, nutrient status and ionic strength of groundwater

similar to that of source water?

Yes, after the appropriate pre-

treatment, deoxygenation and additives be included..

N / A



File: M09620A14.700 Page 14


Q8. Are there other groundwater users, groundwater-connected

ecosystems or a property

boundary within 100 – 1000 m

of the MAR site?

No N/A

3.1.4 Hydrochemistry conclusions

According to the hydrochemistry data provided by Origin, and the corresponding entry -

level assessment, both the RO injectate and receiving GW are within the Australian

Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG). However, for the RO injectate, this outcome

assumes 17 – α - Ethynylestradiol is < 1.5 mg / L, which were outside of instrumental

detection limits (see section 3.1.1).

There is limited information on dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration and redox

conditions (particularly for the RO permeate). According to information relating to the

RO treatment facility (provided by Origin), it is expected that the DO concentration (and

the nitrogen concentrations) of the RO permeate to be low, due to the deoxygenation

process, and therefore likely chemically reducing. It needs to be highlighted that based on

the assumption of low DO levels and the presence of nitrate as an electron donor (i.e.

organic matter, which reduces nitrate), the conditions may be conducive to bacterial

growth. Limiting DO and electron acceptors will reduce the likelihood of microbial

growth. Similarly, according to a recent microbiology survey (Origin, 2011), a diverse

number of chemically reducing microbes were present in the aquifer water. The

conditions of the receiving GW are conducive to cell growth (e.g. temperature of 36ºC).



File: M09620A14.700 Page 15


4. GEOCHEMICAL MODELING

Geochemical modeling was performed using PHREEQC software (Parkhurst, 1995) to

predict the various hydrogeochemical interactions that may occur due to the injection of

RO permeate into the receiving GW. Steps include determining:

• The mineralogical controls on Spring Gully Precipice aquifer hydrochemistry.

• The effect of mixing ratios (RO permeate: receiving GW) on the

hydrochemistry.

• The effect of injection pressure on the hydrochemistry.

• The likely water quality changes as a result of linear transportation and

distribution of solutes within the aquifer (1D dispersion and transportation

modeling).

4.1 Mineralogical controls on water quality

As an initial step, geochemical modeling was used to assess the potential mineralogical

controls on the current aquifer water quality. This provides a basis for identifying the

likely mineral phases which play a role in limiting concentrations or act as buffers in the

aquifer. This is achieved by comparing the measured concentrations to the theoretical

solubility limits of different minerals under the pH, redox and temperature conditions of

the aquifer. A so - called saturation index is calculated; this index shows whether

groundwater from the aquifer will tend to dissolve or precipitate a particular mineral. Its

value is negative when the mineral may be dissolved, positive when it may be

precipitated, and zero when the water and mineral are at chemical equilibrium.

The geochemical PHREEQC model utilised for determining the mineralogical controls

on the hydrochemistry includes the known mineralogical data (e.g. XRD, Section 2.1),

and the most recent Spring Gully Precipice aquifer hydrochemistry data (December 14,

2010). The saturation state of these minerals were calculated from the saturation index



File: M09620A14.700 Page 16


(SI) determined by PHREEQC modelling (Table 6). The minerals included silicates and

carbonates which are known to act as buffering agents in groundwater (through pH

buffering, solubility control and adsorption), and therefore substantially influence

solution pH - Eh and thus metal solubilities and mobility within the aquifer. Although

some of the minerals included in the model were not identified in the corresponding XRD

results for the core samples (Section 2.1), they were, however, identified in XRD patterns

by Carmichael (1989) (Section 2.2). Therefore these minerals are included in the model

(i.e. calcite, chlorite and siderite). There is also some flexibility in adding other expected

minerals to the model due to the significant amorphous content. The minerals included in

the model, which are believed to control the quality of the receiving GW, include: Ca -

montmorilonite, K - feldspar, illite, K - mica, calcite, chlorite and siderite. The influence

of CO2 is also included in the model which substantially influences the pH - Eh (inter

alia) of the system.

4.1.1 Redox controls

As the pilot treatment plant has not been completed, there was no data provided on the

redox potential (pe1) of the RO permeate and insufficient chemical analysis to calculate

the pe from a redox couple (e.g. N(3) / N(5)). The effect of different pe values on a

particular mineral’s saturation index (SI) for the injectate solution and receiving GW is

shown in Table 6. These values reflect oxidising (e.g. pe = 10) and reducing (e.g. pe = -

4) environments. The PHREEQC modeling indicates that there is a significant effect of

changing redox conditions on mineral saturation. As an example, a change in aquifer

environment from reducing to oxidising conditions may result in the precipitation of Fe

(oxy) hydroxides and amorphous Fe, which is important to note for determining an ideal

RO treatment system or for potential reactions that may occur as part of the injection.

1 pe is used to define the relative redox state of the water. This would often be measured expressed as Eh

and measured in mV ( the theoretical oxidation potential relative to the standard hydrogen electrode)



File: M09620A14.700 Page 17


Based on the conceptual model for the injectate treatment system (Figure 3, provided by

Origin), the RO permeate will be de-oxygenated, treated with sodium erythorbate (to

scavenge residual oxygen) and dosed with excess nitrogen. Therefore, it is anticipated the

re-injection fluid will be chemically reducing. Accordingly, for any further PHREEQC

modeling, a pe of - 4 (indicative of mildly reducing conditions) was used in the model

(for the RO permeate). The pe value can be updated when an actual value is provided at

the conclusion of the pilot treatment testing, if this is substantially different to the

assumed value. As part of the monitoring and pre-inejction assessment the final water

quality from the suggested pre-treatment will be assessed for the redox state to confirm

the validity of this assumption.

The pe value of the receiving groundwater was measure in situ to be - 3.4. This value was

verified with PHREEQC modelling whereby the pe was calculated from the redox couple

C (- 4) / (C (4) (i.e. CH4 / CO2). The results were almost identical (i.e. PHREEQC

calculated pe = - 3.4054), therefore this value was utilised for the receiving GW

throughout the PHREEQC modeling.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 18


Table 6. Saturation Index (SI) values relating to RO permeate and receiving GW

under different redox (pe) conditions.

*Note: highlighted values indicate the likely precipitation of these minerals with increasing pe.

* The actual measured pe value for the receiving GW is - 3.4.

Mineral -4 4 10 Mineral -4 4 10

Al(OH)3(a) -1.66 -1.66 -1.66 Al(OH)3(a) -1.19 -1.19 -1.19

Aragonite -2.04 -2.04 -2.04 Albite -3.47 -3.47 -3.47

Calcite -1.89 -1.89 -1.89 Alunite -2.5 -2.5 -2.5

Cerrusite -3.06 -3.06 -3.06 Anhydrite -4.17 -4.17 -4.17

CO2(g) -3.16 -3.16 -3.16 Anorthite -5.23 -5.23 -5.23

Dolomite -4.08 -4.08 -4.08 Aragonite -2.65 -2.65 -2.65

Fe(OH)3(a) -6.73 0.75 0.91 Barite -1.38 -1.38 -1.38

Fluorite -4.37 -4.37 -4.37 Ca-Montmorillonite 1.23 1.23 1.23

Gibbsite 1.06 1.06 1.06 Calcite -2.52 -2.52 -2.52

Goethite -0.95 6.54 6.7 Celestite -4.21 -4.21 -4.21

H2(g) -6.76 -22.76 -34.76 CH4(g) -0.18 -0.18 -0.18

H2O(g) -1.59 -1.59 -1.59 Chalcedony -0.44 -0.44 -0.44

Halite -7.5 -7.5 -7.5 Chlorite(14A) -22.58 -22.58 -22.58

Hausmannite -35.82 -19.82 -7.82 Chrysotile -17.25 -17.25 -17.25

Hematite 0.1 15.07 15.39 CO2(g) -1.31 -1.31 -1.31

Manganite -15.56 -7.56 -1.56 Dolomite -6.06 -6.06 -6.06

O2(g) -70.69 -38.69 -14.69 Fe(OH)3(a) -8.03 -0.04 1.33

Pb(OH)2 -3.17 -3.17 -3.17 Gibbsite 1.4 1.4 1.4

Pyrochroite -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 Goethite -1.76 6.22 7.6

Pyrolusite -28.71 -12.71 -0.71 Gypsum -4 -4 -4

Rhodochrosite -3.8 -3.8 -3.8 H2(g) -4.6 -20.6 -32.6

Siderite -2.57 -3.09 -8.93 H2O(g) -1.24 -1.24 -1.24

Strontianite -3.78 -3.78 -3.78 Halite -7.95 -7.95 -7.95

Witherite -5.09 -5.09 -5.09 Hausmannite -35.71 -19.71 -7.71

Hematite -1.46 14.51 17.26

Hydroxyapatite -11.58 -11.58 -11.57

Illite -0.8 -0.8 -0.8

Jarosite-K -31.34 -7.4 -3.26

K-feldspar -2.49 -2.49 -2.49

K-mica 5.99 5.99 5.99

Kaolinite 3.59 3.59 3.59

Manganite -17.01 -9.01 -3.01

Melanterite -7.56 -7.58 -12.2

O2(g) -70.4 -38.4 -14.4

Pyrochroite -9.17 -9.17 -9.17

Pyrolus ite -29.05 -13.05 -1.05

Quartz -0.04 -0.04 -0.04

Rhodochrosite -2.25 -2.25 -2.25

Sepiolite -12.83 -12.83 -12.83

Sepiolite(d) -16.01 -16.01 -16.01

Siderite -1.16 -1.18 -5.8

SiO2(a) -1.24 -1.24 -1.24

Smithsonite -2.77 -2.77 -2.77

Strontianite -4.06 -4.06 -4.06

Talc -14.29 -14.29 -14.28

Vivianite -5.07 -5.13 -18.99

Willemite -5.19 -5.19 -5.19

Witherite -5.11 -5.11 -5.11

Zn(OH)2(e) -4.93 -4.93 -4.93

SGPAW

peSI SI

pe

RO Permeate



File: M09620A14.700 Page 19


4.2 Mixing fractions: Aquifer water / RO permeate

PHREEQC geochemical modeling was employed to simulate the effects of mixing

different fractions of RO permeate with the receiving GW. The PHREEQC simulations

were conducted in the presence of the minerals determined to be in control of Spring

Gully aquifer hydrochemistry (i.e. the equilibrium phases) (Section 4.1).

An increase in partial pressure within an aquifer corresponds to an increase in the

saturation index (SI) for CO2. Therefore, the SI for CO2 (in equilibrium with the

receiving GW) in the PHREEQC model was slowly increased to simulate the effects of

increasing the pressure within the aquifer. These pressure gradients were applied to all

the different mixing fractions (90:10…50:50, receiving GW: RO permeate), with: SI = -

3, representing atmospheric conditions; SI= - 2, representing a ~1 m pressure head

(obtained from the design criteria and subsequent calculations undertaken by Origin); and

SI = - 1, representing extreme increases in aquifer pressure (it is not expected that this

pressure would be reached within the aquifer according to the data provided by the

client).

The results from PHREEQC mixing simulations (with different mixing ratios and

different partial pressures) are displayed in Table 7. There are significant differences in

values for different mixing ratios and for different aquifer pressures (variation in CO2

SI’s). However, for all the mixed solutions, magnesium (Mg), sodium (Na), calcium (Ca)

and chloride (Cl) were dominant. The trends in metal concentration associated with

different mixing ratios were the same for different aquifer pressures, with Mg, Ca, Cl and

pe (slightly) decreasing with increasing ratios of RO injectate added to the Spring Gully

aquifer. The pH decreased for CO2 with a SI of - 3 and - 2, but remained constant for

different mixing ratios with a CO2 SI of - 1. There were also significant variations in

hydrochemistry due to different aquifer pressures, with Ca, pH and pe decreasing with



File: M09620A14.700 Page 20


increasing partial pressure, while Mg concentration increased with increasing partial

pressure. Both Na and Cl remained constant.

Although not included in the mineral assemblage, the contribution of pytire may be

important if oxygenated or potential oxidising water is injected into the aquifer. Under

these conditions it is possible that pyrite could oxidise (particularly if the water is

oxygenated) to release acidity and, potentially, liberate metals. Several aspects are

present in the proposed injection to minimize the likelihood of this situation arising- the

injectate water is expected to be reducing in nature, as is the Precipice aquifer currently,

there is a significantly proportion of calcite in the aquifer (currently acting to cement the

grains together or infill pores) which will limit the acidification by acting as a coexisting

neutralizer, and the proportion of pyrite has been determined to be very low from the

testing undertaken and the visual inspection of the core from this site. The most important

control to limit this will be the reducing nature of the injectate water. Only under

‘extreme’ aquifer pressure conditions (i.e. outside of the values provided by Origin), it is

anticipated that for mixing ratios of 70:30 (receiving GW: RO injectate ≥ 30), there is a

substantial increase in aluminum (Al) concentration to above Australian Drinking Water

Guidelines (ADWG), and therefore would not be deemed safe to drink. The increase in

aluminum is due to a decrease in pH, driven down by the increase in aquifer pressure,

with the associated increase in pCO2. The pH change results in the dissolution of alumino

- silicate minerals. This ‘extreme’ scenario only needs to be considered if aquifer pressure

is substantially increased. Apart from the aforementioned ‘extreme’ scenario, the results

suggest the mixed solutions meet ADWG and the Australian Guidelines for Water

Recycling (Managed Aquifer Recharge) (NWQMS, 2009), and due to the compatibility

of the waters chemical impacts are expected to be limited.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 21


Table 7. PHREEQC modeling results for different mixing ratios for RO permeate in Spring Gully aquifer groundwater under

different partial pressures.

90:10 80:20 70:30 60:40 50:50 ADWR 90:10 80:20 70:30 60:40 50:50 ADWR 90:10 80:20 70:30 60:40 50:50 ADWR

pH 8.16 8.14 8.12 8.10 8.08 6.5-8.5 pH 7.51 7.50 7.50 7.49 7.49 6.5-8.5 pH 7.24 7.24 7.24 7.24 7.24 6.5-8.5

pe -5.47 -5.44 -5.42 -5.39 -5.36 pe -4.69 -4.68 -4.67 -4.65 -4.64 pe -4.34 -4.33 -4.33 -4.32 -4.31

Ionic s trength 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Ionic strength 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 Ionic strength 0.017 0.017 0.016 0.016 0.016

Total alkalinity (eq/kg) 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 Total alkalinity (eq/kg) 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 Total alkalinity (eq/kg) 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.011

Total CO2 (mol/kg) 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 Total CO2 (mol/kg) 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Total CO2 (mol/kg) 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.012

Al (mg/L) 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.2 Al (mg/L) 0.027 0.033 0.041 0.041 0.053 0.2 Al (mg/L) 0.083 0.129 0.217 0.217 0.367 0.2

B (mg/L) 0.037 0.074 0.111 0.111 0.148 4 B (mg/L) 0.037 0.074 0.111 0.111 0.148 4 B (mg/L) 0.037 0.074 0.111 0.111 0.148 4

Ba (mg/L) 0.025 0.023 0.022 0.022 0.021 2 Ba (mg/L) 0.025 0.023 0.022 0.022 0.021 2 Ba (mg/L) 0.025 0.023 0.022 0.022 0.021 2

Br (mg/L) 0.050 0.045 0.039 0.039 0.034 Br (mg/L) 0.050 0.045 0.039 0.039 0.034 Br (mg/L) 0.050 0.045 0.039 0.039 0.034

C (mg/L) 31.71 29.93 28.17 28.17 26.39 C (mg/L) 65.65 64.15 62.66 62.66 61.18 C (mg/L) 163.35 159.63 156.02 156.02 152.30

Ca (mg/L) 10.02 10.86 11.80 11.80 12.87 Ca (mg/L) 22.34 22.94 23.56 23.56 24.20 Ca (mg/L) 21.24 21.58 21.94 21.94 22.32

Cl (mg/L) 15.40 18.80 22.20 22.20 25.60 250 Cl (mg/L) 15.40 18.80 22.20 22.20 25.60 250 Cl (mg/L) 15.40 18.80 22.20 22.20 25.60 250

F (mg/L) 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.015 0.020 1.5 F (mg/L) 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.015 0.020 1.5 F (mg/L) 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.015 0.020 1.5

Fe (mg/L) 0.1395 0.1359 0.1329 0.1329 0.1310 0.30 Fe (mg/L) 0.252 0.240 0.230 0.230 0.221 0.30 Fe (mg/L) 0.238 0.231 0.224 0.224 0.219 0.30

K (mg/L) 0.60406 0.43868 0.28514 0.28514 0.15463 K (mg/L) 0.00003 0.00003 0.00002 0.00002 0.00002 K (mg/L) 0.00001 0.00001 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

Mg (mg/L) 6.10 6.40 6.64 6.64 6.78 Mg (mg/L) 30.10 30.80 31.51 31.51 32.19 Mg (mg/L) 118.92 117.83 116.74 116.74 115.67

Mn (mg/L) 0.0180 0.0161 0.0141 0.0141 0.0121 0.50 Mn (mg/L) 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.014 0.012 0.50 Mn (mg/L) 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.014 0.012 0.50

N (mg/L) 0.0360 0.0320 0.0280 0.0280 0.0240 N (mg/L) 0.036 0.032 0.028 0.028 0.024 N (mg/L) 0.036 0.032 0.028 0.028 0.024

Na (mg/L) 32.90 31.80 30.71 30.71 29.61 180 Na (mg/L) 32.90 31.80 30.71 30.71 29.61 180 Na (mg/L) 32.90 31.80 30.71 30.71 29.61 180

P (mg/L) 0.0540 0.0480 0.0420 0.0420 0.0360 P (mg/L) 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 P (mg/L) 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04

Pb (mg/L) 0.00002 0.00003 0.00005 0.00005 0.00006 0.01 Pb (mg/L) 0.00002 0.00003 0.00005 0.00005 0.00006 0.01 Pb (mg/L) 0.00002 0.00003 0.00005 0.00005 0.00006 0.01

S (mg/L) 1.502 1.335 1.168 1.168 1.001 500 S (mg/L) 1.50 1.34 1.17 1.17 1.00 500 S (mg/L) 1.50 1.34 1.17 1.17 1.00 500

Si (mg/L) 4.781 4.427 4.059 4.059 3.669 Si (mg/L) 4.74 4.17 3.61 3.61 3.06 Si (mg/L) 1.75 1.31 0.94 0.94 0.67

Sr (mg/L) 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 Sr (mg/L) 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 Sr (mg/L) 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034

Zn (mg/L) 0.108 0.096 0.084 0.084 0.072 3 Zn (mg/L) 0.108 0.096 0.084 0.084 0.072 3 Zn (mg/L) 0.108 0.096 0.084 0.084 0.072 3

SI for CO2 = -3 SI for CO2 = -2 SI for CO2 = -1Mixing ratio (SGPAW: RO injectate) Mixing ratio (SGPAW: RO injectate) Mixing ratio (SGPAW: RO injectate)

ADWG= Australian drinking water guidelines.

Note: values highlighted (i.e. Al) are above ADWG.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 22


4.3 1D transport modeling

One dimensional solute transport modeling was conducted with PHREEQC geochemical

modeling to simulate the spatial distribution of solutes from the injection bore within the

Spring Gully Precipice aquifer. This was limited to instantaneous mixing reactions and

equilibrium mineral:water reactions occurring as there is currently no laboratory or field

kinetic data available to the Spring Gully site specifically. Nonetheless this is expected to

provide a conservative, first - order, indication of the potential geochemical reactions that

may occur under the conditions of the injection trial. No assessment of potential

biochemical / microbial reactions has been included in this modeling.

In order to fix the redox potential at pe - 3.4 (the value measured in situ for the receiving

GW), the SI value for CH4 was adjusted until the pe value, calculated from the redox

couple (CH4 / CO2), was equal to pe - 3.4. Gibbsite was added as a potential mineral that

may influence the quality of the receiving GW. Although gibbsite was not detected by

XRD, it may be in an amorphous form and therefore contribute to concentration changes

in aluminium (Al), and was identified as a possible phase from the modeling of the

receiving aquifer groundwater. The addition of gibbsite in the PHREEQC model

explained in Section 4.2 had very little influence on the water qualities for the various

mixing portions.

For the 1D transport modeling, 20 cells (each 5 m in length), was used as analogue to the

expected injection flow path. Over the course of the model, twenty steps or “shifts” were

included. The initial cell represents the point of injection, with the aquifer initially in

equilibrium with the mineral assemblage discussed previously. Over the twenty shifts, the

fluid in each cell is transferred to the next, resulting in a reaction front. The solution

reactions were set to equilibrium response, therefore assuming instantaneous reaction

when the solutions are mixed. These parameters discretised the reactions paths

sufficiently to show migration of the reaction front across 100 m of the aquifer; this is



File: M09620A14.700 Page 23


provided as an indicative simulation of the nature of the reactions that could occur, and

additional assessment of the mass transport within the aquifer and the kinetic response of

the different minerals, which was not available at the time of reporting, would be required

to confirm the assumptions made. As mentioned above, the pe was fixed at - 3.4 and the

aquifer temperature was 36ºC (measured in situ). The results for pH and pe are displayed

in Figure 4. The corresponding solute transport results and saturation index (SI) values

for various minerals are displayed in Figure 5 and Figure 6 respectively. The time step

was increased to 1hour, however this had no influence on the results as non kinetic rates

were considered in the modelling. By increasing the number of shifts to 100 (to increase

the rate of transport and equilibration between the injectate and aquifer water quality)

more forward modeling data is shown. However, the general results outcome were the

same (e.g. for pH, Figure 7).

In the first few cells the pH immediately equilibrates at pH ~ 7; however as the reaction

front moves laterally through the aquifer the pH shifts from the initial pH of 6.3 to

equilibrate at pH ~ 7 (due to the lag in the reaction front). When the solutions had mixed

over the whole extent of the aquifer (100 m in the model), the pH equilibrates at about

6.4 (source) to 6.46 (endpoint). The inverse effect is evident for the pe values, with a final

equilibrium pe at around - 2.86.

The results for the solute transport and are summarised as follows:

• Only minor changes in concentration and hydrochemistry are observed from

the results.

• Iron (Fe), magnesium (Mg) and chloride (Cl) decrease in concentration.

• Potassium (K), sodium (Na) and calcium (Ca) increase in concentration.

• For aluminium (Al), as the reaction front moves from the injection, there is a small increase in concentration, possibly relating to the dissolution of

amorphous gibbsite (if present), followed by a decrease back to the initial



File: M09620A14.700 Page 24


concentration. Aluminium may re - precipitate due to small variations in pH

or pe. Eventually away from the source, Al only increases in concentration.

The changes in pH and pe described earlier influences the saturation index (SI) value for

a particular mineral. Minerals with a SI value near 0 are modeled to approach equilibrium

with the groundwater. Minerals with a negative SI value are undersaturated and therefore

dissolved in water. Minerals with a positive SI value are supersaturated, and are therefore

likely to precipitate out of solution. With this in mind, and under the current aquifer

conditions, goethite is the only mineral (within the suite of selected minerals determined

by XRD) to potentially precipitate out of solution. This may be particularly important

because goethite (FeOOH) is known to act as a ‘sink’ for trace and heavy metals via

adsorption and through structural incorporation (isomorphous substitution of a particular

metal for Fe). However, it should also be noted that the levels of iron (Fe) in the

receiving GW are particularly low. Therefore, if goethite were to precipitate out, then the

concentration of goethite forming can only be very low (< 0.25 mg / L).

Clay dispersion is a common problem associated with mixing different waters. The net

negatively charged clay particles attract cations, namely Na+, which attracts non - saline

water molecules. The water molecules move between the clay particles and push the clay

particles apart, reducing their attractive forces. The dispersion of fine clay particles may

clog up small pores in the aquifer, and subsequently decrease hydraulic conductivity.

However, mixing solutions with similar ionic strengths, generally have no issues

associated with clay dispersion, therefore the risk of clay dispersion is expected to be low

for mixing RO permeate in the receiving GW at under the modeled conditions.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 25


5. LIMITATIONS

Several knowledge gaps were identified including:

• The high amorphous contribution to the bulk mineralogy needs further

consideration. Suggested analytical methods include electron microscopy with

spectroscopy (SEM-EDS or TEM-EDS) to characterise the amorphous content. Other, more robust XRD Rietveld analysis software such as TOPAS

or BGMN can account for potential XRD instrumental effects and incorporates crystal structure information for the calculation of the amorphous

content, therefore being more accurate.

• RO permeate redox potential measurements (Eh, pe) and dissolved oxygen (DO) measurements which provide more accurate PHREEQC modeling.

• Batch / column experiments which would be directly comparable to the

PHREEQC modeling results.

• Instrumental detection limits are not sensitive enough to determine if the value is within ADWG (e.g. 17 – α - Ethynylestradiol within the report). This is not

considered to materially impact on the findings of this assessment.

In terms of the modelling, several limitations are associated with this modelling:

• The limitations to mineralogical characterisation as highlighted above.

• There precise water quality of the injectate after final amendment was not

available at time of writing. As a conservative measure, the modelling has

considered changes to redox state, overall injection pressure and potential

additional alumino-hydroxides and the effect these changes may have on the

injection reaction. However, the post - amendment water quality and the specific

reactions this will result can only be assessed when this quality is available.

• The modelling undertaken has focussed only on the likely geochemical reactions

under the assumption of chemical equilibrium being achieved in the system. No

kinetic testing (though columns testing for example) or mass transport modelling

of the injection was available to test the sensitivity of these results.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 26


6. CONCLUSIONS

Based on the assessment undertaken, the following are the most important conclusions

that could be drawn from this assessment:

• Consideration of the proposed injecate and receiving environment indicates that the proposed injection should be able to meet the basic requirements of success

outlined in the National Water Quality Management Strategy’s 2009 Managed Aquifer Recharge guidelines, if the injection is done according to the

specifications provided.

• The RO injectate and the receiving GW are within the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) and the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling:

Managed Aquifer Recharge (NWQMS, 2009).

• Based on available information, the proposed injectate is of overall equivalent or

better quality than the receiving Precipice groundwater quality.

• Despite the slight difference in water quality, the PHREEQC predicted water

quality mixture complies with the ADWG

• The modeling suggests that slight increases/decreases in metals and pH may arise from the injection but that these changes have little effect on the overall general

water quality.

• Under “extreme’ conditions” outside of the expected operational parameters provided by the client some impact on metals (particularly Al) and pH may arise.

This is only expected to occur if the aquifer pressure is substantially increased

beyond the proposed operational conditions for the test.

• Maintaining reducing conditions, as currently exist in the aquifer, will be

important to limiting the reaction of any minor traces of pyrite and other reactive

minerals that may be present.

• The presence of potentially dispersive clays raises the potential of clay dispersion

occurring. However, due to the compatibility of the two solutions, particularly the

similar ionic strengths, clay dispersion is considered unlikely.

• Based on this assessment, provided good control of the injection quality is

maintained and the system is operated according to the proposed specifications,

limited impact as a result of mixing receiving GW with RO permeate because



File: M09620A14.700 Page 27


these solutions have very similar redox conditions, pH, ionic strengths and

salinity.

Based on this assessment, the following recommendations can be made for the proposed

re-injection trial:

• Regular monitoring of the RO injectate is required prior to, and during operation of trial. The chemical compatibility in terms of salinity, pH and

redox as well as the chemical quality of the injectate will determine the

applicability and success of the injection.

• Ongoing monitoring of the water quality at the injection bore (DRP-W1-1)

and the nearby monitoring bores (DMPO1) over the duration of the trial will

be required to ensure that the impacts to the receiving water requirement as as

suggested by the first - order modelling undertaken for this assessment.

Further monitoring requirements have been outlined elsewhere in Origin’s

Re - injection plan but should include consideration of the head variation,

monitoring of upstream bores and pre - injection, in test and post - injection

monitoring of bores considered to be outside the expected zone of influence.

• Finalization of the post - treatment RO injectate quality and comparison to the receiving aquifer water quality will be a pre-requisite to the trial having

minimum water quality impact on the receiving aquifer.

• Close adherence of the pH, dissolved oxygen and redox conditions of the system.

• This is an initial assessment and should be linked to a mass transport

numerical groundwater model. This may require additional assessment of

hydraulic and mass transport.

• Some of the limitations should be addressed prior to injection. Particularly,

whole rock analysis to identify potential contaminants of concern (which can

be achieved prior to the commencement of the trial). Detailed characterisation of the unidentified amorphous content and kinetic leach testwork should be

conducted as part of the injection trial.

• Results of a microbiological study on the water from the receiving

environment and potential source waters is underway. The findings of this

investigation, particularly in terms of bio-clogging or enhanced reactivity

should be assessed and taken into account for the injection trial operation.



File: M09620A14.700 Page 28


7. CLOSURE

We trust that the information contained within this report meets your requirements. If you

require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.

Yours truly,

KLOHN CRIPPEN BERGER LTD

Matt Landers Geochemist

Mining Environmental Group

Brent Usher

Senior Hydrogeochemist / Project Manager

Mining Environmental Group



File: M09620A14.700 Page 29


8. REFERENCES

Carmichael, D.C. (1989) The mineralogy of the Hooray Sandstone, Westbourne

Formation, Birkhead Formation, Hutton Sandstone, and the “Basal Jurassic’ unit in the

Southern Eromanga Basin, Queensland. Queensland Government

DERM (2010): Feasibility assessment of injecting coal seam water into the Central

Condamine Alluvium. Request for Proposal for Activity 6.1 of the Healthyn HeadWaters

Coal Seam Gas Water Feasibility Study, Offer Number CSG GRA2. August 2010

NWQMS (2009) National Water Quality Management Strategy (NWQMS), : Managing

Health & Environmental Risks (Phase 2), Managed Aquifer Recharge. NWQMS

Document 24, Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council, Environment

Protection and Heritage Council, National Health and Medical Research Council. July

2009.

http://www.nepc.gov.au/sites/default/files/WQ_AGWR_GL__Managed_Aquifer_Rechar

ge_Final_200907.pdf

Parkhurst, D.L., Appelo, C. (1999) User's Guide to PHREEQC (Version 2) -

A Computer Program for Speciation, Batch-Reaction, One-Dimensional Transport,

and Inverse Geochemical Calculations. USGS, Denver, Colorado, USA, water-Resources

Investigations Report 99-4259.

Origin (2011) Microbiology Survey Report: Research Report 1. Prepared by Professor

Bharat Patel, School of Biomolecular and Physical Sciences, Griffith University,

Brisbane, Australia, for Origin Energy Limited.

ORIGIN ENERGY RESOURCES LTD Origin Injection Geochemistry

FIGURES

Figure 1 KCB Aquifer Injection Study Bores

Figure 2 Piper and Durov Diagram for RO Permeate and receiving GW

Figure 3 Conceptual design for Spring Gully RO Treatment System

Figure 4 PHREEQC Geochemical Simulations for Spring Gully Precipice

injected with RO permeate

Figure 5 PHREEQC 1 D solute transport simulations for Spring Gully

Precipice aquifer injected with RO permeate

Figure 6 PHREEQC geochemical model simulations showing change in

saturation index (SI) values for Spring Gully Precipice aquifer


Figure 7 1 D solute transport simulations for Spring Gully Precipice aquifer



Figu

re 2

.M

09

62

0A

14

Pip

er a

nd

Du

rov

dia

gra

m fo

r RO

pe

rme

ate

an

d re

ceivin

g g

rou

nd

wa

ter

(GW

).

Orig

in A

qu

ifer In

jectio

n G

eo

che

mistry S

up

po

rt

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

Mg

SO

4

Con

d

6.8

6.9

7.0

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

pH_lab

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

Na

Ca

HC

O3+

CO

3C

l

Mg

SO

4

SG

PA

WR

O p

ermeate

Rece

ivin

gG

WR

O p

erm

eate


Figure 3. Conceptual design for Spring Gully RO Treatment System (provided by Origin).

Feed Pumps

Cartridge Filters(4.5µm)

Ultra Violet Disinfection

Degas Membranes(typical O2 < 10ppb, max O2 < 100ppb)

Analyser Indicator

Transmitter

Oxygen Scavenger/Corrosion

Inhibitor Dosing(Sodium Erythorbate - typical downhole dose 0.5mg/L, high

downhole dose 1mg/L)

RO Permeate Buffer Tank

•WTF – Spring Gully & Talinga•Portable - Condabri/Reedy Creek

Flow Control Valve

Nitrogen Blanket

Off Spec Flush


Figure 4.M09620A14

PHREEQC geochemical modeling

simulations for Spring Gully Precipice


Origin Aquifer Injection Geochemistry Support

Note: Parameters = 20 shifts and 20 cells. Ca-montmorillonite, calcite, chlorite, illite, K-feldspar, gibbsite and

siderite are the anticipated equilibration phases. The different colours relate to different shifts (not all are

shown) with the first shift starting from the far left and sequentially shifting right.


Figure 5.M09620A14

PHREEQC 1D solute transport

simulations or Spring Gully Precipice



Note: Parameters = 20 shifts and 20 cells. Ca-montmorillonite, calcite,

chlorite, illite, K-feldspar, gibbsite and siderite are the anticipated equilibration

phases. The different colours relate to different shifts (not all are shown) with

the first shift starting from the far left and sequentially shifting right.


Figure 6.M09620A14

PHREEQC geochemical model simulations

showing changes in saturation index (SI) values

for Spring Gully Precipice aquifer injected with

RO permeate



siderite are the anticipated equilibration phases. The different colours relate to different shifts (not all are shown)

with the first shift starting from the far left and sequentially shifting right.


Figure 7.M09620A14

1D solute transport simulations for

Spring Gully Precipice aquifer injected

with RO permeate



siderite are the anticipated equilibration phases. The different colours relate to different shifts (not all are shown)

with the first shift starting from the far left and sequentially shifting right.


APPENDIX I

Table A1. RO permeate hydrochemistry results for various sampling dates (14th

Oct, 2010 to 14th

Dec, 2010).

Table A2. Hydrogeochemistry results for Spring Gully Precipice aquifer water.

Table A3. Saturation index (SI) values for receiving GW and RO permeate

determined by PHREEQC according to hydrochemistry.


Table A1. RO permeate hydrochemistry results for various sampling dates (14th

Oct, 2010 to 14th

Dec, 2010). Qld CSG

Water Std

(mg/L) 14-October-2010 20-October-2010 27-October-2010 03-November-2010 09-November-2010 15-November-2010 24-November-2010 02-December-2010 09-December-2010 14-December-2010 MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEDIAN MEAN Standard Deviation

Alkalinity mg/L CaCo3 - 14 14 12 16 17 17 16 18 18 14 12 18 16 15.600 2.011

Aluminium mg/L 0.2 < 0.003 < 0.003 <0.003 0.011 < 0.003 < 0.003 0.005 0.007 0.004 0.016 0.004 0.016 0.007 0.009 0.005

Ammonia mg/L as N 0.5 0.005 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.15 <0.002 0.005 0.15 0.0775 0.078 0.103

Antimony mg/L 0.003 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 <0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0 0 0 0 0

Arsenic mg/L 0.007 < 0.0003 < 0.0003 <0.0003 < 0.0003 < 0.0003 < 0.0003 < 0.0003 < 0.0003 < 0.0003 < 0.0003 0 0 0 0 0

Barium mg/L 0.7 0.0083 0.0074 0.0053 0.012 0.0084 0.0083 0.0075 0.0099 0.0086 0.013 0.0053 0.013 0.00835 0.009 0.002

Bicarbonate mg/L - 18 17 15 20 20 20 19 21 21 17 15 21 19.5 18.800 1.989

Boron mg/L 4 0.52 0.52 0.45 0.43 0.68 0.48 0.38 0.35 0.38 0.37 0.35 0.68 0.44 0.456 0.100

Bromate by IC mg/L 0.02 < 0.01 < 0.01 <0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Bromide by IC mg/L 7 0.089 0.094 0.07 0.11 0.099 0.1 0.084 0.1 0.11 0.07 0.11 0.099 0.095 0.013

Cadmium mg/L 0.002 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 <0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0 0 0 0 0

Calcium mg/L - 0.2 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0.2 7.7 0 7.7 0.1 0.944 2.534

Carbonate mg/L - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.1 0 0.4 0 0.090 0.137

Chloramine mg/L 3000 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorate by IC mg/L - < 0.05 < 0.05 <0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0 0 0 0 0

Chloride mg/L - 25 26 20 29 27 24 25 28 28 46 20 46 26.5 27.800 6.893

Chlorite by IC mg/L 300 < 0.05 < 0.05 <0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0 0 0 0 0

Chromium mg/L 0.05 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0003 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.00025 0.000 0.000

Conductivity uS/cm - 117 124 98 147 135 124 130 157 146 201 98 201 132.5 137.900 27.851

Copper mg/L 2 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0 0 0 0 0

Cyanide (Colourimetric) mg/L 0.08 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Figure of Merit mg/L - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 0.050 0.158

Fluoride mg/L 1.5 0.05 < 0.1 <0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.15 0.1 <0.1 0.05 0.05 0.15 0.075 0.088 0.048

Free Chlorine mg/L 5 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0 0 0 0 0

Hydrogen mg/L - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hydroxide mg/L - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iodide by IC mg/L 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 0 0 0 0

Iron mg/L 0.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.053 0.036 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.021 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.009 0.009 0.053 0.0285 0.030 0.019

Lead mg/L 0.01 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 <0.0001 0.0002 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 0.0008 < 0.0001 0.0003 0.0002 0.0008 0.00025 0.000 0.000

Magnesium mg/L - 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9 0 1.9 0 0.200 0.598

Manganese mg/L 0.5 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0004 0.0004 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0003 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003 0.0004 0.00035 0.000 0.000

Mercury by Cold Vapour mg/L 0.001 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 < 0.0001 0 0 0 0 0

Mole Ratio mg/L - 3.3 3.1 3.1 3.6 3.7 3.1 2.2 2.3 2.1 3 2.1 3.7 3.1 2.950 0.566

Molybdenum mg/L 0.05 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 <0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0 0 0 0 0

Nickel mg/L 0.02 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.000 0.000

Nitrate mg/L 50 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0 0 0 0 0

Nitrite - <0.002 <0.002

pH 6 - 9 7.06 7.23 7.2 7.01 6.86 7.43 7.73 7.68 7.92 7.38 6.86 7.92 7.305 7.350 0.344

pH (Saturation)* mg/L - 10.9 12.3 12.3 11.3 11.2 11.1 11.3 11.7 11 9.4 9.4 12.3 11.25 11.250 0.820

Potassium mg/L - 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.310 0.137

Residual Alkalinity meq/L - 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0 0 0.4 0.3 0.270 0.106

Saturation Index mg/L - -3.8 -5.1 -5.1 -4.3 -4.4 -3.7 -3.6 -4 -3 -2 -5.1 -2 -3.9 -3.900 0.935

Selenium mg/L 0.01 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 <0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 0 0 0 0 0

Silica mg/L - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0.100 0.316

Silver mg/L 0.1 < 0.001 < 0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0 0 0 0 0

Sodium mg/L - 21 22 17 27 25 23 21 24 23 23 17 27 23 22.600 2.675

Sodium Absorption Ratio mg/L - 8.7 37 46 22 23 17 17 30 13 1.9 1.9 46 19.5 21.560 13.233

Strontium mg/L 4 0.012 0.01 0.0069 0.014 0.012 0.011 0.0095 0.012 0.012 0.018 0.0069 0.018 0.012 0.012 0.003

Sulphate mg/L 3 - 9 < 1 < 1 <1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 <1 <1 0 0 0 0 0

Temperature deg C - 22 - - 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22.000 0.000

Temporary Hardness mg/L as CaCo3 - 1.1 0.1 0 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.6 14 0 14 0.3 1.700 4.333

Thallium mg/L - < 0.0001 < 0.0001 <0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0 0 0 0 0

Titanium mg/L - < 0.001 < 0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0 0 0 0 0

Total Dissolved Ions mg/L - 64 65 51 77 73 68 65 74 73 96 51 96 70.5 70.600 11.578

Total Dissolved Solids mg/L - 56 57 44 67 63 58 56 64 63 88 44 88 60.5 61.600 11.266

Total Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 - 1.1 0.1 0 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.6 27 0 27 0.3 3.000 8.439

True Colour Hazen - <1 <1 <1 1 2 1 <1 4 4 4 1 4 3 2.667 1.506

Turbidity NTU - <1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1.222 0.441

Uranium mg/L 0.02 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 <0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0 0 0 0 0

Vanadium mg/L 0.05 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 <0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0 0 0 0 0

Zinc mg/L 3 < 0.001 0.001 0.049 0.024 0.001 < 0.001 0.024 0.008 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.001 0.049 0.016 0.018 0.018

NDMA‡ 10 10 - - - - - - - <5 0 0 0 0 0

NDEA 10 10 - - - - - - - <10 0 0 0 0 0

Nitroso-piperidine - - - - - - - - - <20 0 0 0 0 0

Nitroso-pyrrolidine - - - - - - - - - NA 0 0 0 0 0

NDBA - - - - - - - - - <20 0 0 0 0 0

Nitroso-morpholine 1 1 - - - - - - - NA 0 0 0 0 0

4-t-Octylphenol 50000 <10 <10 <10 <10 <20 <20 - - 0 0 0 0 0

QHSS DATA Units StatisticsSpring GUlly RO Permeate Discharge (sample date)


Table A1. Continued. Nonylphenol 500000 <100 <100 <100 <100 <200 <200 <100 <100 0 0 0 0 0

Bisphenol A 200000 <10 <10 <10 <10 <20 <20 19 <10 19 19 19 19 0

Estrone 30 <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

17-β-Estradiol 175 <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Estriol 50 <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

17-α-Ethynylestradiol 1.5 <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Norgestrel - <10 <10 <20 <20 <20 <20 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Testosterone 7000 <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Androsterone 14000 <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Etiocholanolone - <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Cholesterol (not an EDC) 7000 <10 <10 <10 <10 <20 <20 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Predicted estradiol - <1 <1 <2 <2 <2 <2 - - 0 0 0 0 0

Monochloroacetic Acid 150 - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0

Dichloroacetic Acid 100 - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0

Trichloroacetic Acid 100 - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0

Bromochloroacetic Acid 0.014 - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0

Monobromoacetic Acid 0.35 - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0

Dibromoacetic Acid 0.014 - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0

Benzene 1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0 0 0 0 0

Toluene 800 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Ethylbenzene 300 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Meta & Para -Xylenes 600 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

Ortho-Xylene 600 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Styrene 30 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Isopropylbenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

n-Propylbenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

sec-Butylbenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

te rt-Butylbenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

p-Isopropyltoluene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

n-Butylbenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Acetone - <10 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

Vinyl acetate - NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 0

2-Butanone (MEK) - <4.0 [NT] <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

4-Methyl-2-pentanone - <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

2-Hexanone (MBK) - <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

Methyl t-butyl ether - <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

Methyl methacrylate - <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

Ethyl methacrylate - <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

Carbon disulfide - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

2,2-Dichloropropane - <4.0 [NT] NA NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 0

1,2-Dichloropropane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

trans-1,3- - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) - <2.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0 0 0 0 0

Dichlorodifluoromethane - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 0 0 0 0 0

Vinyl Chloride 0.3 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 0 0 0 0 0

Trichlorofluoromethane - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 0 0 0 0 0

1,1-Dichloroethene 30 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Iodomethane - <10 <2.0 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 0 0 0 0 0

Dichloromethane 4 <10 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 60 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,1-Dichloroethane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 60 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,1,1-Trichloroethane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,1-Dichloropropene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Carbon te trachloride 3 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,2-Dichloroethane 3 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Trichloroethene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Dibromomethane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,1,2-Trichloroethane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Tetrachloroethene 50 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1-Chlorobutane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Allyl chloride - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Bromochloromethane 40 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,3-Dichloropropane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 NA 0 0 0 0 0

trans-1,4-Dichloro-2- - <2.0 [NT] <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane - <2.0 <2.0 NA NA NA NA <2.0 0 0 0 0 0


Table A1. Continued. 1,2,3-Trichloropropane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Hexachloroethane - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Pentachloroethane - <2.0 <2.0 NA NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 0

1,2-Dibromo-3- - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Hexachlorobutadiene 0.7 <2.0 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 0 0 0 0 0

Chlorobenzene 300 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Bromobenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

2-Chlorotoluene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

4-Chlorotoluene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,3-Dichlorobenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1500 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene - <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Chloroform 200 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Bromodichloromethane 6 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Dibromochloromethane 100 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Bromoform 100 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0 0 0 0

Naphthalene 70 <4.0 <4.0 <0.01 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 0 0 0 0 0

Chloroform 200 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <1 0 0 0 0 0

Bromodichloromethane 6 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <1 0 0 0 0 0

Dibromochloromethane 100 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <1 0 0 0 0 0

Bromoform 100 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <1 0 0 0 0 0

Benzo[ghi]perylene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Dibenz[a,h]anthracene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Benzo[a]pyrene 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Benzo[b+k]fluoranthene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Chrysene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Benz[a]anthracene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Pyrene 150 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Fluoranthene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Anthracene 150 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Phenanthrene 150 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Fluorene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Acenaphthene - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Acenaphthylene 0.014 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Naphthalene 70 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0 0 0 0

Phenol 150 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0

2-Chlorophenol 300 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0

2-Methylphenol - <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0

4-Methylphenol 600 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0

2-Nitrophenol - <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0

2,4-Dimethylphenol - <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0

2,4-Dichlorophenol 200 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

2,6-Dichlorophenol 10 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol - <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 20 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

2,4,5- Trichlorophenol 350 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

2,4-Dinitrophenol - <1 <0.5 <0.5 <1 <1 <1 <1 0 0 0 0 0

4-Nitrophenol 30 <1 <0.5 <0.5 <1 <1 <0.5 <1 0 0 0 0 0

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol - <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

2-Methyl-4,6- - <0.5 <0.25 <0.25 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

Pentachlorophenol 10 <0.25 <0.5 <0.5 <0.25 <0.25 <1 <0.25 0 0 0 0 0

TPH (C6-C9) <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 0 0 0 0 0

TPH (C10-C14) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 0 0 0 0 0

TPH (C15-C28) 35 37 <10 39 35 <10 <10 35 39 36 36.5 1.914854216

TPH (C28-C36) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 0 0 0 0 0

E.Coli mpn/100ml - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Clostridium perfringens - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Somatic coliphages - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

F-RNA (male-specific) - 1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Enterococci cfu/100ml - ND ND ND ND lab error ND - 5 ND ND

Alpha Emitte rs mSv/yr 0.5 <0.1 <0.08 <0.08 <0.1 <0.1 <0.09 <0.08 <0.08 0 0 0 0 0

Beta Emitte rs mSv/yr 0.5 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.15±0.02 <0.2 0 0 0 0 0

<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0 0 0 0 0

uncertainty +/-

200 (TOTAL)

Radon ( Bq.L-1)


Table A2. Hydrogeochemistry results for Spring Gully Precipice aquifer water.

DMW-W1

(11/13/2010)

DMW-W1

(11/14/2010)

DMW-W1

(11/15/2010)

DMW-W1

(11/15/2010)

DMW-W1

(11/13/2010)

SG

(11/15/2010)

Number of

Results

Number of

Detects

Minimum

Concentration

Minimum

Detect

Maximum

Concentration

Maximum

Detect

Average

Concentration

Median

Concentration

Standard

Deviation

Bicarbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 1 66 65 59 - 63 17 5 5 17 17 66 66 54 63 21

Carbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Dissolved Organic Carbon mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 6 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Iodide mg/L 0.01 0.1 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 0.026 5 1 <0.01 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.0092 0.005 0.0094

Benzene µg/L 1 1 950 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 6 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Ethylbenzene µg/L 2 300 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 6 0 <2 ND <2 ND 1 1 0

Toluene µg/L 2 800 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 6 0 <2 ND <2 ND 1 1 0

Xylene (m & p) µg/L 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 6 0 <2 ND <2 ND 1 1 0

Xylene (o) µg/L 2 350 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 6 0 <2 ND <2 ND 1 1 0

Xylene Total µg/L 600 <4 <4 <4 - <4 <4 5 0 <4 ND <4 ND 2 2 0

2,4,5-trichlorophenol µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

2,4,6-trichlorophenol µg/L 1 20 20 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

2,4-dichlorophenol µg/L 1 200 160 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

2,6-dichlorophenol µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

2-chlorophenol µg/L 1 300 490 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Pentachlorophenol µg/L 2 10 10 <2 <2 <2 - <2 <2 5 0 <2 ND <2 ND 1 1 0

Alkalinity (Hydroxide) as CaCO3 µg/L 1000 <1000 <1000 <1000 - <1000 <1000 5 0 <1000 ND <1000 ND 500 500 0

Alkalinity (total) as CaCO3 mg/L 1 66 65 59 - 63 17 5 5 17 17 66 66 54 63 21

Anions Total meq/L 0.01 1.74 1.74 1.58 - 1.66 1.13 5 5 1.13 1.13 1.74 1.74 1.6 1.66 0.25

Bromide µg/L 10 56 57 57 - 56 92 5 5 56 56 92 92 64 57 16

Cations Total meq/L 0.01 1.69 1.66 1.66 - 1.68 1.08 5 5 1.08 1.08 1.69 1.69 1.6 1.66 0.27

Chloride mg/L 1 12 11 11 - 11 28 5 5 11 11 28 28 15 11 7.5

Fluoride mg/L 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.1 <0.1 - 0.1 <0.1 5 3 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.08 0.1 0.027

Nitrate (as N) mg/L 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.03 - 0.03 0.03 5 5 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.038 0.03 0.013

Nitrite (as N) mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 5 0 <0.01 ND <0.01 ND 0.005 0.005 0

Nitrogen (Total Oxidised) mg/L 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.03 - 0.03 0.03 5 5 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.038 0.03 0.013

pH (Lab) pH_Units 0.01 7.13 6.68 6.51 - 6.52 7.16 5 5 6.51 6.51 7.16 7.16 6.8 6.68 0.32

Silica µg/L 100 17600 17300 17300 - 17500 100 5 5 100 100 17600 17600 13960 17300 7749

Sodium (Filtered) mg/L 1 34 34 35 - 36 25 5 5 25 25 36 36 33 34 4.4

Sulphate (Filtered) mg/L 1 500 5 6 4 - 4 <1 5 4 <1 4 6 6 3.9 4 2.1

Sulphide mg/L 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - <0.1 <0.1 5 0 <0.1 ND <0.1 ND 0.05 0.05 0

TDS mg/L 1 109 90 98 - 98 76 5 5 76 76 109 109 94 98 12

TOC mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

TSS mg/L 1 3 4 2 - <1 <1 5 3 <1 2 4 4 2 2 1.5

Lead (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.01 0.0034 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Aluminium (Filtered) mg/L 0.01 0.055 0.02 0.02 0.01 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 6 4 <0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.012 0.01 0.0068

Arsenic (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.007 0.002 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 2 <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.00083 0.0005 0.00061

Barium (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.7 0.026 0.022 0.02 <0.001 0.02 0.009 6 5 <0.001 0.009 0.026 0.026 0.016 0.02 0.0096

Boron (Filtered) mg/L 0.05 4 0.37 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.44 6 1 <0.05 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.094 0.025 0.17

Cadmium (Filtered) mg/L 0.0001 0.002 0.0002 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 6 0 <0.0001 ND <0.0001 ND 0.00005 0.00005 0

Calcium (Filtered) mg/L 1 3 2 2 - 2 <1 5 4 <1 2 3 3 1.9 2 0.89

Chromium (III+VI) (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Cobalt (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Statistics

ANZECC 2000

FW 95%

Sample (sampling date)

ChemName Units EQL ADW 2004


Table A2. Continued. Copper (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 2 0.0014 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Iron (Filtered) mg/L 0.05 0.41 0.41 0.42 <0.05 0.43 <0.05 6 4 <0.05 0.41 0.43 0.43 0.29 0.41 0.2

Magnesium (Filtered) mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Manganese (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.5 1.9 0.02 0.019 0.016 <0.001 0.016 <0.001 6 4 <0.001 0.016 0.02 0.02 0.012 0.016 0.009

Mercury (Filtered) mg/L 0.0001 0.001 0.0006 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 6 0 <0.0001 ND <0.0001 ND 0.00005 0.00005 0

Molybdenum (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.05 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Nickel (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.02 0.011 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Phosphorus mg/L 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.06 - 0.04 0.02 5 5 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.046 0.05 0.017

Potassium (Filtered) mg/L 1 2 2 2 - 2 <1 5 4 <1 2 2 2 1.7 2 0.67

Selenium (Filtered) mg/L 0.01 0.01 0.011 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 6 0 <0.01 ND <0.01 ND 0.005 0.005 0

Silicon (Filtered) µg/L 50 8210 8080 8060 - 8170 60 5 5 60 60 8210 8210 6516 8080 3610

Silver (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.1 0.00005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Strontium (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 0.034 0.029 0.025 <0.001 0.025 0.011 6 5 <0.001 0.011 0.034 0.034 0.021 0.025 0.013

Tin (Filtered) mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 6 0 <0.001 ND <0.001 ND 0.0005 0.0005 0

Zinc (Filtered) mg/L 0.005 0.008 0.086 0.099 0.089 <0.005 0.067 <0.005 6 4 <0.005 0.067 0.099 0.099 0.058 0.0765 0.044

Methane mg/L 0.01 12 11.9 11.3 - 12.4 0.021 5 5 0.021 0.021 12.4 12.4 9.5 11.9 5.3

2,4-dimethylphenol µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

2-methylphenol µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

2-nitrophenol µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

3-&4-methylphenol µg/L 2 <2 <2 <2 - <2 <2 5 0 <2 ND <2 ND 1 1 0

4-chloro-3-methylphenol µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Acenaphthene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Acenaphthylene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Anthracene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Benz(a)anthracene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Benzo(a) pyrene µg/L 0.5 0.01 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 - <0.5 <0.5 5 0 <0.5 ND <0.5 ND 0.25 0.25 0

Benzo(b)fluoranthene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Benzo(k)fluoranthene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Chrysene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Fluoranthene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Fluorene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Naphthalene µg/L 1 16 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Phenanthrene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Phenol µg/L 1 320 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

Pyrene µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 - <1 <1 5 0 <1 ND <1 ND 0.5 0.5 0

TPH C6 - C9 µg/L 20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 6 0 <20 ND <20 ND 10 10 0

TPH C10 - C14 µg/L 50 <50 <50 <50 - <50 <50 5 0 <50 ND <50 ND 25 25 0

TPH C15 - C28 µg/L 100 <100 <100 <100 - <100 <100 5 0 <100 ND <100 ND 50 50 0

TPH C29-C36 µg/L 50 <50 <50 <50 - <50 <50 5 0 <50 ND <50 ND 25 25 0

TPH+C10 - C36 (Sum of total) µg/L 50 <50 <50 <50 - <50 <50 5 0 <50 ND <50 ND 25 25 0


Table A3 Saturation index (SI) values for receiving GW and RO permeate

determined by PHREEQC according to hydrochemistry.

Note: Highlighted values relate to minerals that may influence receiving GW.

SGPAW Ro permeate

SI SI

Al(OH)3(a) -1.19 -0.41

Albite -3.47 -5.95

Alunite -2.5 -6.02

Anhydrite -4.17 -6.13

Anorthite -5.23 -5.6

Aragonite -2.65 -2.8

Barite -1.38 -2.54

Ca-Montmorillonite 1.23 -1.82

Calcite -2.52 -2.66

Celestite -4.21 -5.49

Chalcedony -0.44 -1.89

Chlorite(14A) -22.58 -12.51

Chrysotile -17.25 -12.2

CO2(g) -1.31 -3.22

Dolomite -6.06 -5.07

Fe(OH)3(a) -7.43 -4.19

Gibbsite 1.4 2.3

Goethite -1.16 1.64

Gypsum -4 -5.9

H2(g) -5.8 -7.14

H2O(g) -1.24 -1.56

Halite -7.95 -7.55

Hausmannite -34.51 -30.1

Hematite -0.26 5.28

Hydroxyapatite -11.58 -8.81

Illite -0.8 -2.76

Jarosite-K -29.54 -27.54

K-feldspar -2.49 -5.29

K-mica 5.99 4.9

Kaolinite 3.59 2.51

Manganite -16.41 -13.69

Melanterite -7.56 -8.3

O2(g) -68 -69.52

Pyrochroite -9.17 -7.12

Pyrolusite -27.85 -26.45

Quartz -0.04 -1.45

Rhodochrosite -2.25 -2.17

Sepiolite -12.83 -11.42

Sepiolite(d) -16.01 -14.28

Siderite -1.16 -0.3

SiO2(a) -1.24 -2.73

Smithsonite -2.77 -2.62

Strontianite -4.06 -3.5

Talc -14.29 -12.3

Vivianite -5.07 -0.32

Willemite -5.19 -3.4

Witherite -5.11 -4.62

Zn(OH)2(e) -4.93 -2.73

Mineral

Registration Body: Registration Number: , Registration Name: Andrew Moser

Origin Energy

Electronic Signature Certificate

This document has been checked and approved by:

UserName: Lauren Helm Title: Hydrogeologist (40009924) Date: Thursday, 06 July 2017, 02:30 PM AUS Eastern Daylight Time Meaning: Checker ================================================

UserName: Andrew Moser Title: Groundwater Manager (40033933) Date: Friday, 07 July 2017, 10:27 AM AUS Eastern Daylight Time Meaning: Approver ================================================

spring gully aquifer injection management plan - aplng.com.au and... · figure 8 photographs of...

Documents