synotts clay extractive pit · environmental assessment report tasmanian irrigation pty ltd –...

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Synotts Clay Extractive Pit

“Synotts” 90 Youngs Road, Cranbrook

Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd

Board of the Environment Protection Authority

June 2016

Environmental Assessment Report

Proponent Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd

Proposal Synotts Clay Extractive Pit

Location 90 Youngs Road, CRANBROOK TAS 7190

NELMS no. PCE No. 9374

Permit application no. 2016 / 00030 (Glamorgan-Spring Bay Council)

Folder EN-EM-EV-DE-244903

Document. H537760

Class of Assessment 2A

Assessment process milestones

30 September 2015

Notice of Intent lodged

26 November 2015 EER Guidelines issued

1 March 2016 Permit application submitted to Council

24 March 2016 Application/Referral received by Board

9 April 2016 Start of public consultation period

23 April 2016 End of public consultation period

Environmental Assessment Report Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd – Synotts Clay Extractive Pit, Cranbrook

I

Acronyms

APIA Guidelines

The Australian Pipeline Industry Association Ltd – Code of Environmental Practice – Onshore Pipelines 2013

Board Board of the Environment Protection Authority

CEMP Construction & Environmental Management Plan

DPIPWE Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

EER Environmental Effects Report

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMPC Act Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994

EMPCS Environmental Management and Pollution Control System

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)

EPGs Environmental Protection Guidelines (Appendix 1 of the EER)

EPRs Environmental Protection Requirements for Construction (Appendix 1 of the EER)

LUPA Act Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993

MRT Mineral Resources Tasmania

PCAB Policy and Conservation Advice Branch

QCoP Quarry Code of Practice 1999

RMPS Resource Management and Planning System

SD Sustainable Development

TSP Act Threatened Species Protection Act 1995


II

Report summary This report provides an environmental assessment of Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd’s proposed clay extractive pit. The proposal involves the extraction of up to a total of 15,000 cubic metres of clay material over a period of approximately 6 months from a temporary pit. The purpose of the pit is to supply construction material to the proposed Melrose Dam, which forms part of the Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme. This report has been prepared based on information provided by the proponent in the Environmental Effects Report (EER). Relevant government agencies and the public have been consulted and their submissions and comments considered as part of this assessment. Further details of the assessment process are presented in section 1 of this report. Section 2 describes the statutory objectives and principles underpinning the assessment. Details of the proposal are provided in section 3. Section 4 reviews the need for the proposal and considers the alternatives to the proposal. Section 5 summarises the public and agency consultation process. The detailed evaluation of environmental issues is contained in section 6. The report conclusions are contained in section 7. Appendix 1 contains details of comments made and issues raised in the consultation process. Appendix 2 contains the environmental permit conditions for the proposal.


III

Table of Contents

1 Approval process ..................................................................................... 1

2 SD objectives and EIA principles .............................................................. 2

3 The proposal ............................................................................................ 3

4 Need for the proposal and alternatives ..................................................... 9

5 Public and agency consultation .............................................................. 10

6 Evaluation of environmental issues ........................................................ 11

7 Report conclusions ................................................................................. 27

8 Report approval...................................................................................... 28


IV

1 Approval process A Notice of Intent in relation to the proposal was received by the Board of the Environment Protection Authority (the Board) on 30 September 2015. An application for a permit under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPA Act) in relation to the proposal was submitted to Glamorgan-Spring Bay Council on 1 March 2016. The proposal is defined as a ‘level 2 activity’ under clause 5(b), schedule 2 of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 (EMPC Act), being an extractive pit. Section 25(1) of the EMPC Act required Council to refer the application to the Board of the Environment Protection Authority (the Board) for assessment under the Act. The application was received by the Board on 24 March 2016. The assessment has been undertaken by the Director, Environment Protection Authority under delegation from the Board. The Board required that information to support the proposal be provided in the form of a Environmental Effects Report (EER). Two drafts of the EER were submitted to the Department for comment prior to its finalisation and acceptance on behalf of the Board. The final EER was submitted to Council with the permit application. The EER was released for public inspection for a 14-day period commencing on 9 April 2016. An advertisement was placed in The Examiner and a notice was placed on the EPA website. The EER was also referred at this time to relevant government agencies for comment. No public submissions were received.


1

2 SD objectives and EIA principles The proposal must be considered by the Director in the context of the objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania (RMPS), and in the context of the objectives of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control System (EMPCS) (both sets of objectives are specified in Schedule 1 the EMPC Act). The functions of the Board are to administer and enforce the provisions of the Act, and in particular to use its best endeavours to further the RMPS and EMPCS objectives. The Director must undertake the assessment of the proposal in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Principles defined in Section 74 of the EMPC Act.


2

3 The proposal The proposal, located approximately 5km north-east of the township of Cranbrook, is for an open-cut clay extractive pit to extract up to 15,000mᵌ of clay material by excavating to a depth of approximately 2m. The footprint of the extractive pit will be approximately 13.8ha and is to be located 700m north-east of the Melrose Dam inundation area. The proposed extractive pit is a “one off” operation specifically for the construction of the Melrose Dam as part of the Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme (SWAN Project) to service primary production in the local area and will be rehabilitated after completion of the SWAN project, approximately 18 months from the SWAN project commencement. The proponent intends to source the majority of the Melrose Dam wall material from within the area of inundation, however, they may require additional material which they intend to source from the proposed clay extractive pit, if required. The main characteristics of the proposal are summarised in Table 1. A detailed description of the proposal is provided in Section 1 of the EER. Table 1: Summary of the proposal’s main characteristics

Activity Extraction of a maximum of 15,000 cubic metres of clay as a one off short term operation.

Location and planning context Location 90 Youngs Road, CRANBROOK TAS 7190. Certificate of Titles: 124550/2 and

117789/1.

Land zoning Rural Resource

Land tenure Private Freehold

Mining lease MRT have advised that the proponent has lodged a mining lease application. However, the proponent is required to provide additional information to satisfy MRT’s requirements prior to the mining lease being issued and an appropriate bond set.

Existing site

Land Use Currently utilised for grazing of livestock.

Topography The proposed pit is located within a shallow grassland basin surrounded by low rocky undulating hills that contain remnant native vegetation.

Geology Jurassic dolerite (tholeiitic) with locally developed granophyre.

Soils Silts and clays derived from the underlying dolerite material with the occasional Quaternary alluvial accumulations.

Hydrology Two ephemeral drainage lines run through the proposed extractive pit, which both report to the instream dam on Blacks Creek located approximately 250m north-west of the pit. Blacks Creek then travels west for some 2.0kms until it intersects the Swan River as it flows south to Moulting Lagoon.


3

Fauna No threatened fauna species were detected during on-ground surveys, however, potential foraging habitat for the following species has been identified (Appendix 2 of the EER):

• Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii); • Spotted-tailed quoll (Dasyurus maculatus subsp. maculatus); • Tasmanian masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae subsp. castanops); • White-bellied sea eagle (Aquila audax fleayi); and • Wedge-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster).

Flora The warty paperbark (Melaleuca pustulata), which is a state listed threatened flora species, has been identified within the proposed pit area.

Local region

Climate Rainfall is approximately 719.6mm per annum. Wind direction is predominantly from the west in the mornings with north to north-easterly and south westerly sub-dominant winds. Afternoon winds are predominantly from the north-east with subdominant south easterly winds during the summer months and ranging from the south-west to the north-east during the winter months.

Surrounding land zoning, tenure and uses

The site is located 15km east of the coastline contained within the Freycinet National Park. Moulting Lagoon lies 5km south-east of the site which has a Game Reserve over parts and enters into Great Oyster Bay.

The area surrounding the site is zoned rural resource under the Glamorgan-Spring Bay Interim Planning Scheme 2015. Further to the south-west and west the land is zoned significant agriculture.

Approximately 1.8km east of the site is the Cherry Tree Hill Nature Reserve and 1.9km to the north is the Apslawn Regional Reserve. A conservation covenant on a parcel of land located 2.1km south-east of the site also exists.

The land immediately surrounding the proposed pit is all private freehold.

Species of conservation significance

In addition to the above mentioned flora and fauna species, the LISTmap identifies the Tasmanian smelt (Retropinna tasmanica) as a species of conservation significance that is located in the instream dam on Blacks Creek.

Proposed infrastructure

Major equipment The type/model of equipment used will be determined by a contractor prior to commencement, however, extraction will involve the use of:

• Dozers; • Excavators; and • Haulage trucks.

Other infrastructure

None.

Inputs

Water Water for dust suppression may be used.

Energy Fuel for the equipment noted above will be brought onto the site in utility vehicles / trailers.

Other raw materials

No other raw materials will be used.

Wastes and emissions

Liquid Stormwater runoff from extraction and stockpile areas may be generated.

Atmospheric Dust from internal traffic and blow-off from stockpiles / extractive pit area is possible.


4

Solid Wastes such as used grease cartridges and general refuse will be generated.

Controlled wastes

No controlled wastes will be generated.

Noise Excavators, dozers and haulage trucks carting material between the pit and the dam site via an internal road will create noise emissions.

Greenhouse gases

Mobile equipment (excavators, dozers, cars, trucks) will produce greenhouse gas emissions.

Construction, commissioning and operations

Proposal timetable

The Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme was due to commence during the first quarter of 2016 and to be completed within 18 months of commencement. If clay material from the Synotts Clay Extractive Pit is required, it will be extracted during the dam construction phase. It is anticipated that extraction of clay material would occur over a 6 month period.

Operating hours (ongoing)

The activity will operate between 0700 hours and 1900 hours Monday to Friday.


5

Figure 1: Site location (from LISTmap 4/05/2016).


6

Figure 2: Site location with zoning (Figure 2 of the EER).


7

Figure 3: Site plan, including test pit locations (Figure 4 of the EER).


8

4 Need for the proposal and alternatives Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd has developed a preliminary design for the proposed Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme on Tasmania's east coast. According to the EER the area to be serviced by this scheme is a significant producer of high value horticulture crops, in particular walnuts and cool‐climate wines. The EER states that the proposed scheme would improve the reliability of water supply in a region that traditionally has been starved of reliable water, with current irrigation practices reliant upon localised rainfall events for on‐farm storage in dams or direct take from the rivers and streams and that the improved water reliability would enable substantial increase in the production of horticulture crops. The EER indicates that the scheme will consist of a construction phase and an operational phase and that the construction phase will lay 38km of distribution pipeline, install two pump stations and construct a 3,000ML dam that will inundate an area of 35.6 hectares (ha). The EER notes that the total construction footprint for the scheme will be approximately 160ha. The operational phase will establish an irrigation scheme that will provide an additional 2,000ML per annum of irrigation water to a gazetted 26,607ha irrigation district. According to the EER water for the scheme will be sourced from the Swan River primarily in winter in accordance with a water licence from the Department of Primary Industries Parks and Environment (DPIPWE) and that the sourced water will be stored in the proposed Melrose Dam and supplied to scheme irrigation rights holders via the distribution pipeline during a 150‐day summer (September to January) irrigation season. In order to construct the Melrose Dam, Tasmanian Irritation needs to source clay material for the core of the Melrose Dam wall. According to the EER the proponent has conducted extensive geotechnical investigations within the vicinity of the proposed construction footprint for the dam and has identified appropriate material within the proposed construction footprint. However, the clay quantities within the inundation area of the Melrose Dam are likely to be insufficient to complete the dam, hence the proponent has identified a contingency source of clay at this site and another nearby site “North Borrow”. Tasmanian Irrigation has commenced the assessment process for this additional extractive pit as well.


9

5 Public and agency consultation A summary of the government agency/body submissions is contained in Appendix 1 of this report. No public representations were received. The EER was referred to a number of government agencies/bodies with an interest in the proposal, including:

• Mineral Resources Tasmania; • WorkSafe Tasmania; • State Growth; and • Glamorgan Spring Bay Council.

The following Divisions/areas of the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment were also consulted on the EER:

• Regulator, EPA Division; • Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania; and • Policy and Conservation Advice Branch.

According to the EER extensive public consultation by the proponent regarding the construction and operation of the Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme has been undertaken over the last 3 years. The EER states that an inaugural public meeting was convened by the Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association in November 2012 with 20 community members attending and that this meeting was advertised locally and through individual landholder invitations to all landholders with greater than 4ha of land from the greater Swansea region. The EER states that a six person working group was elected to represent the interested community members and work with the proponent to develop the irrigation scheme for the district. According to the EER the irrigators continue to be represented by this group and meetings with individual land owners, the irrigator working group as a whole and other interested parties are held as required. During the development of the scheme design, the working group committee met formally several times. The EER also states that indigenous stakeholder bodies have been consulted including Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania, and various Aboriginal community representative groups including the interim Aboriginal Heritage Council, The Elders group, Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre and the Tasmanian Aboriginal Land Council of Tasmania. According to the EER, consultation with the Aboriginal community included the involvement of an Aboriginal Heritage Officer in both the identification of artefacts and presentation of initial findings to the local Aboriginal community to assist with the determination of their significance. The EER states that this consultation included incorporating input from the community into the scope of surveys, appropriate team composition and review of the survey findings.


10

6 Evaluation of environmental issues The environmental issues considered relevant to the proposal have been evaluated by the EPA Division. Details of this evaluation, along with the permit conditions required by the Director, are discussed below. Issue 1: Flora, fauna and habitat

Description of potential impacts

According to the EER two vegetation communities were identified within the proposed extractive pit area, being cleared agricultural land and lowland grassland complex. A single warty paperbark (Melaleuca pustulata), which is listed as rare under the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSP Act), was identified within the proposed extractive pit area. Remnant native vegetation is present on the hill slopes that border the extractive pit area, including other warty paperbarks.

The proposed extractive pit area was identified in the Flora and Fauna Survey (Appendix 2 of the EER) as providing potential foraging habitat for the Tasmanian devil, spotted‐tailed quoll, Tasmanian masked owl, white‐bellied sea eagle and the wedge‐tailed eagle, all of which are listed species under the TSP Act.

Management measures proposed in EER

EER Commitment 1 – Any previously unidentified animal burrows that may provide denning habitat for Tasmanian devils or spotted‐tailed quolls will be managed in accordance with EPG 1 Disturbance to Terrestrial and Aquatic Flora and Fauna, the Burrow Monitoring and Decommissioning Protocol (November 2015) and threatened flora permit DA15256.

EER Commitment 2 – Clearing of vegetation to establish the proposed extractive pit will be undertaken in accordance with EPG 1 Disturbance to Terrestrial and Aquatic Flora and Fauna and conditions outlined in threatened flora permit DA15264.

Public and agency comment

The Policy and Conservation Advice Branch (PCAB) noted that the proponent’s current permit to take (DA15264) does not cover quarrying works and requested that the proponent contact them to discuss amendment of their permit. This advice was passed on to proponent.

No public representations were received.

Evaluation

The proponent has a number of Environmental Protection Guidelines (EPGs) in Appendix 1 of the EER for managing particular aspects of the entire Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme project, including guidelines for the ‘Disturbance to Terrestrial and Aquatic Flora and Fauna’. While the guidelines relate more broadly to the Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme, it is considered generally applicable to the proposed extractive pit.

The on-ground Flora and Fauna Survey (detailed in Appendix 2 of the EER) confirmed that the site does not support the nationally threatened vegetation community Lowland Native Grassland of Tasmania.

According to the EER the single warty paperbark specimen that was identified within the proposed extractive pit area will be removed. However, as noted by PCAB, the proponent will need to discuss amendment of their current threatened flora permit (DA15264) to allow removal of this specimen.


11

While the Flora and Fauna Survey identified the extractive pit area as being potential foraging habitat for a number of threatened fauna species, it also stated that no evidence (i.e. tracks or scats) of these species was identified during the on-ground survey. Additionally, the survey noted that the disturbance area for the proposed extractive pit will be confined to the cleared land and will not disturb any of the remnant vegetation on the low hill sides adjacent to the extractive pit area.

Commitments 1 and 2 are supported and considered appropriate in the event that a species or potential habitat be encountered that was not identified in the flora and fauna assessment (e.g. a denning burrow).

Conclusion

No specific flora or fauna permit conditions are considered necessary for this proposal.


12

Issue 2: Weed and disease management


According to the Flora and Fauna Survey (Appendix 2 of the EER) no declared weeds were identified within the proposed extractive pit area. However, it did note that thistles, gorse and blackberry are scattered across the wider district.

In addition, PCAB also noted that a number of records of declared weed species and the disease Phytophthora cinnamomi have been identified within 5km of the site.

There is potential for plant and equipment to transport weeds and diseases to and from the site and between the extractive pit area and Melrose Dam site if appropriate management measures are not put in place.


EER Commitment 3 – Weed control during the operation of the pits will be in accordance with APIA Guidelines and the Quarry Code of Practice (QCoP).

EER Commitment 4 – The Tasmanian Wash‐down Guidelines for Weed and Disease Control will be applied to trucks and machinery entering the site, in accordance with the EPRs.


PCAB noted that there are records of several declared weed species listed under the Weed Management Act 1999 and the disease Phytophthora cinnamomi within 5km of the proposed extractive pit area and recommended that a weed and disease hygiene plan be developed accordance with DPIPWE (2015) Weed and Disease Planning and Hygiene Guidelines – Preventing the spread of weeds and diseases in Tasmania.

Additionally, Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT) queried who will be declaring the status of any materials extracted from the extractive pit (as far as being weed free) and whether they will be appropriately qualified to do this.


Evaluation

Proposed weed / disease management measures were not discussed in detail in the EER. The overarching Environmental Protection Requirements for Construction (Appendix 1 of the EER) contains some broad commitments relating to weed management and the Environmental Protection Guideline 5 – Weed and Hygiene Control (Appendix 1 of the EER) provides a more detailed outline of proposed weed and disease hygiene management, however, this is a broader guideline for the entire Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme and not specific to this proposed extractive pit.

While the proponent has proposed to undertake weed control measures in accordance with the QCoP and the APIA Guidelines, it is considered appropriate to require the proponent, through permit condition FF1, to manage weed and disease hygiene in accordance with the Weed and Disease Planning and Hygiene Guidelines – Preventing the spread of weeds and diseases in Tasmania DPIPWE (2015) to ensure that weed and disease control measures are appropriate for the site. In addition, the proponent is also required to keep The Land substantially free of weeds as detailed in permit condition OP1.

The proponent will also be required to undertake the activity in accordance with the QCoP through permit condition G7.


13

Conclusion

The proponent will be required to comply with the following standard (generic) conditions:

G7 Quarry Code of Practice OP1 Weed Management The proponent will also be required to comply with the following site-specific condition:

FF1 Washdown Guidelines


14

Issue 3: Air emissions


The proposed extractive pit will have a total footprint of 13.8ha which will ultimately be all exposed on completion of extraction because progressive rehabilitation is not considered by the proponent to be feasible for an operation of this nature and duration. During operation, machinery such as trucks and excavators will be moving on and off the site as well as within the proposed extractive pit area itself.

There is also likely to be stockpiled material (topsoil/clay) located on site.

While the EER states that screening will occur, additional information provided by the proponent on 18 May 2016 confirms that no screening of material will actually occur.

If these activities are not managed appropriately, there is potential for dust emissions to leave the site that may cause environmental nuisance.


EER Commitment 5 – Dust generation will be minimised in accordance with the EPRs.

In addition, the proponent has indicated that a contractor (yet to be appointed) will be responsible for the development of a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which must comply with the APIA Guidelines (2013) and the proponents’ Construction ERPs (as detailed in Appendix 1 of the EER).


No public or agency representations were received in relation to air emissions.

Evaluation

While the nearest land in other ownership is located 300m to the east of the proposed extractive pit and the nearest sensitive receptors are located in excess of 2kms from the proposed extractive pit, a large area (13.8ha) will be exposed on completion of extraction and it is therefore considered appropriate to include permit condition A1 which will require the proponent to control dust emission to the extent necessary to prevent environmental nuisance beyond the boundary of the land. While the risk of air emissions creating nuisance for nearby residents is considered to be low, condition A1 will ensure that the proponent will be required to implement additional measures to control emissions, if necessary.

The EER has not provided details on the specific management measures that will be employed to manage potential air emissions. However, as noted above, the proponent has indicated that a CEMP will be developed for the site, as is normal practice for the proponent, this is supported. However, given the lack of detail provided in the EER, it is considered appropriate to require the proponent, through permit condition G8, to submit the CEMP to the Director for approval prior to extractive activities occurring to ensure that air emissions are adequately addressed and that environmental harm or nuisance is not likely to be caused. The EER notes that typical controls outlined in the APIA Guidelines include restriction of vehicle speeds and suppression measures on sources of air emissions.

Conclusion The proponent will be required to comply with the following standard (generic) condition: A1 Control of dust emissions The proponent will also be required to comply with the following site-specific condition: G8 Management Plans


15

Issue 4: Stormwater and sediment management


The proposed extractive pit will have a total footprint of 13.8ha. Two ephemeral drainage lines run through the proposed extractive pit and report to the instream dam on Blacks Creek some 250m downstream of the proposed extractive pit, Blacks Creek then reports to the Swan River a further 2.8km downstream. According to the EER the total catchment area above the proposed extractive pit is estimated to be in the order of 150ha. Topsoil and clay material will also be stockpiled at the site.

If appropriate measures are not put in place by the proponent, there is potential for stormwater to flood the proposed extractive pit which would likely cause erosion and entrain a significant sediment load that may enter the Blacks Creek in-stream dam and then Blacks Creek itself. This could potentially cause the dam and creek to become blocked with sediments and cause environmental harm or nuisance to downstream receptors.


EER Commitment 6 – Controls will be put in place to prevent erosion and sedimentation in accordance with EPG 3 Erosion, Sedimentation and Surface Run‐off.

The proponent has also indicated that a contractor (yet to be appointed) will be responsible for the development of a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which must comply with the APIA Guidelines (2013) and the proponent’s Construction ERPs (as detailed in Appendix 1 of the EER). Additionally, the proponent will also require a contractor to submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for the construction zone excluding the Melrose Dam.


MRT stated that the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be submitted to MRT for assessment and approval prior to earthworks commencing within the mining lease area.


Evaluation

The EER does not provide specific details of how sediment and erosion control will be managed at the proposed extractive pit. The proponents state that this is due to this normally being the responsibility of a contractor undertaking the works and a contractor is yet to be appointed. However, as stated above, the proponent has committed to requiring a contractor to develop a CEMP and an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. The proponent will require the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to be developed in accordance with the Tasmanian Irrigation ERPs contained in Appendix 1 of the EER.

In addition, the proponent will also require a contractor to develop a Construction Water Quality Monitoring Program which will include monitoring for impacts to the water quality of the Swan River. According to the EER this will include turbidity monitoring with turbidity triggers developed using baseline data for the Swan River.

The development of the above mentioned plans is supported. The plans will be required to be submitted to the Director for approval under permit condition G8 to ensure that the proposed activity will be managed appropriately and comply with the relevant permit conditions. Given the short term nature of the proposal and the relatively low risk of environmental harm occurring due to improper stormwater and sedimentation control, combined with standard stormwater and sediment control permit conditions, this is considered the most appropriate way to ensure the proponent is managing the risks associated with the extraction activities.

While rainfall for the general area is relatively low (720mm per annum), the estimated catchment


16

area above the proposed extractive pit is 150ha and could capture a significant amount of water during a storm event. According to the EER drainage lines were observed to be grassy and dry at the time of assessment (winter 2015) and noted that they are likely to flow only during times of heavy rainfall. However, without appropriate diversion and settlement measures in place, this water has the potential to enter the proposed extractive pit and entrain a significant sediment load that could then impact on downstream receptors (i.e. Blacks Creek and Swan River).

Permit condition E3 requires that any polluted stormwater that will be discharged from the land be collected and treated prior to discharge to the extent necessary to prevent environmental harm or nuisance, which may include sediment settling ponds or retention basins. It also requires that stormwater discharged from the land must not carry pollutants or sediments in such concentrations as to degrade the visual quality of receiving waters outside of the land.

Additionally, permit condition E1 requires the proponent to construct and maintain perimeter cut-off drains to prevent stormwater from entering the working area or other disturbed areas that have sufficient capacity to handle a 1 in 20 year storm event. Furthermore, permit condition E2 requires sediment settlement ponds to be constructed that have sufficient capacity to settle sediments out during a 1 in 20 year storm event.

Permit condition DC3 also requires that stockpiles of topsoil must be protected from erosion or other disturbance.

In addition to the above permit conditions, the activity undertaken on the land must comply with the acceptable standards provision of the QCoP by permit condition G7.

While the risks to the environment are considered to be of a relatively low probability and likely to be minor in consequence, and the proposal is for a short-term operation only (as opposed to an ongoing operation, for which this lack of detail would not be acceptable), it is considered appropriate to include the permit conditions mentioned above to ensure that these risks are managed appropriately and that the activity does not cause environmental harm.

It is noted that the EER does not provide the same level of detail regarding stormwater and sediment control at an extractive activity that would normally be required for a similar sized proposal and this reduces, somewhat, the ability to make an assessment of whether the risks to the environment associated with the proposal will be adequately managed. It is recognised that a considerable amount of relevant higher-level management prescriptions are in place for the wider irrigation scheme development, however specific management measures for this particular activity at this specific location have not been provided.

Nevertheless, requiring the proponent to submit the plans mentioned above (to be developed by a contractor) for the Director’s approval through permit condition G8 will ensure that the Director is able to be satisfied that the proposed management measures are adequate to manage the potential risks.

It is expected that the issues raised here will assist the proponent in developing documentation for future irrigation-scheme related extractive activities.

It should also be noted that while the proponent has indicated a contractor will be appointed to develop the appropriate plans for the site, the proponent remains the holder of the permit (if granted) and is therefore ultimately responsible for compliance with the permit conditions.

Conclusion The proponent will be required to comply with the following standard (generic) condition: G7 Quarry Code of Practice DC3 Stockpiling of surface soils E1 Perimeter drains E2 Design and maintenance of settling ponds E3 Stormwater


17

The proponent will also be required to comply with the following site-specific condition: G8 Management Plans


18

Issue 5: Solid and Liquid Waste Management


Solid wastes will include general rubbish and grease cartridges, inappropriate collection, storage or disposal of wastes has the potential to cause environmental harm or nuisance.

No liquid wastes will be produced at the proposed extractive pit; all amenities will be located at the dam construction site and therefore are not part of this proposal.


EER Commitment 7 – Solid wastes will be managed in accordance with EPRs.

Additionally, the proponent has stated that wastes, such as grease cartridges and general rubbish will be managed in accordance with section 9.9 of the APIA Guidelines (2013).


No public of agency representations were received in relation to waste management.

Evaluation

According to the EER waste receptacles will be appropriate to the nature and volume of waste(s) being produced on-site and will be emptied regularly to prevent overloading or overflow of waste materials. The EER also states that waste materials will be secured to prevent any material blowing off‐site prior to removal to an approved disposal site.

Given the short term nature of the activity and the likely types and low volume of waste generated at the site, specific permit conditions in regards to waste management are not considered necessary.

Nevertheless, permit condition G7 is included which requires that the activity undertaken must comply with the acceptable standards provisions of the QCoP (which includes waste management). In addition, OI1 outlines the appropriate manner in which to manage wastes (i.e. reduce, re- use or recycle wastes where possible).

Conclusion

The proponent will be required to comply with the following standard (generic) condition:

G7 Quarry Code of Practice The following information is included in the permit:

OI1 Waste management hierarchy


19

Issue 6: Noise emissions


According to the EER noise will be generated by machinery (excavators, dozers and haulage trucks) involved in excavating material and removing topsoil and overburden, as well as the loading and haulage operations. No blasting, crushing or screening is proposed (note that on 18 May 2016 the proponent advised that no screening of material will be undertaken).

If not managed appropriately, there is potential for nuisance noise emission to occur from the activity.


EER Commitment 8 – Noise will be managed in accordance with EPRs.

EER Commitment 12 – During construction the landowner or representatives of 'Synotts' and wider community in the vicinity of Cranbrook will be advised on the nature of operations and working hours prior to commencement.


No public of agency representations were received in relation to noise emissions.

Evaluation

The proponent has again referenced the EPRs as their management guide on noise emissions, which in turn largely refers to the APIA Guidelines (2013), while this approach is broadly supported, it must be noted that the guidelines main focus is on pipelines. The QCoP remains the most appropriate guideline for this proposal. Accordingly permit condition G7 requires that the activity undertaken must comply with the acceptable standards provisions of the QCoP.

Furthermore, permit condition N1 specifies the hours of operation for the activity, these reflect the hours proposed by the proponent (0700 hours to 1900 hours Monday to Friday) which are in line with those recommended by the QCoP. According to the EER there will be no extraction works undertaken on weekends.

The EER does not provide details on the specific noise generating equipment that will be used at the site (as a contractor will select the actual machinery used), and states that the noise generated by the likely equipment will be of a nominal nature. It also states that plant will be fitted with industry standard noise reduction mechanisms and that during normal operation, equipment will only be moving between the proposed extractive pit and the dam wall site via a temporary road (which does not form part of this proposal) that will be constructed (i.e. trucks will not be driving along public roads or past residences during operations once they are on-site).

While the specific type and model of machinery that will be used is unknown, given the location of the site with the nearest sensitive receptor being located approximately 2.3km north-west of the proposed extractive pit (located on the same land parcel) as well as the short term operation of the pit, it is not anticipated that the machinery likely to be used would generate a significant or unacceptable noise impact on the nearest sensitive receptors, therefore, no additional noise conditions are considered necessary to those mentioned above. Furthermore, the proponent has committed to advising the wider Cranbrook community of the operations and hours of operation so they are aware of the activity being undertaken.


20

Conclusion


G7 Quarry Code of Practice The proponent will also be required to comply with the following site-specific condition:

N1 Operating hours


21

Issue 7: Dangerous goods and environmentally hazardous material


The EER states that machinery used for the excavation, loading and haulage of materials will require a relatively small quantity of hazardous materials for operation and maintenance (e.g. fuels and grease), should these materials be stored/handled incorrectly or a spill to the environment occurs there is potential for contamination of soil, groundwater and waterways that could cause environmental harm or nuisance.


EER Commitment 9 – Onsite fuel storage will be in accordance with Australian Standard 1940‐2004 and no other hazardous materials will be stored on-site.

In addition to the above commitment, the EER states that:

• An area will be set up in or near the extractive pit floor where vehicles carrying fuel tanks may be parked;

• Fuel tanks will be either self-bunded or the parking area will be bunded in accordance with Australian Standard 1940‐ 2004;

• Machinery will not be serviced on-site;

• A spill kit for any trailer‐mounted fuel tank unit will be located on-site; and

• Wherever possible machinery will be refuelled off-site.


No public of agency representations were received in relation to dangerous goods and environmentally hazardous materials.

Evaluation

The EER states that no servicing of machinery will be undertaken on-site and that where possible machinery will be refuelled off-site. According to the EER, where fuel is brought on-site (tanks on utility vehicles or trailers), a spill kit will be located on-site and vehicles will either be parked in a designated area that is bunded in accordance with Australian Standard 1940-2004 or will be self-bunded, this approach is supported. The total fuel capacity is unknown as a contractor will make the final selection on the machinery required for the activity, but it is anticipated to be relatively minor volumes.

The proponent states that an emergency response plan will be included in the CEMP, this is also supported.

Permit condition H1 requires that appropriate spill kit(s) are located on-site to contain any spills that may occur. Additionally, permit condition H2 requires that any environmentally hazardous materials located on-site must be located within impervious bunded areas, spill trays or other containment systems and that the environmentally hazardous materials are managed to prevent emission, discharge or deposition to the environment. The QCoP also has general acceptable standards for the storage of hazardous materials, therefore permit condition G7 is also relevant and LO2 is included which provides information on the proponent’s responsibilities under other relevant legislation.

These conditions along with the proponent’s commitments are considered appropriate to manage the potential risk from the relatively minor volumes of hazardous materials that may be located on-site from time to time to refuel equipment.


22

Conclusion


G7 Quarry Code of Practice H1 Spill kits H2 Storage and handling of hazardous materials The following legal information is included in the permit:

LO2 Storage and handling of Dangerous Goods, Explosives and dangerous substances


23

Issue 8: Cultural heritage


The EER states that no Aboriginal sites were identified during desktop or on‐ground assessment at the proposed extractive pit site. There are no places listed on statutory or non‐statutory lists in the vicinity of the proposed extraction pit and the nearest known site is more than 2km distant (CHMA 2015b). Nevertheless, there is potential that Aboriginal sites could be encountered when the topsoil is disturbed.


EER Commitment 10 – Aboriginal heritage, including the discovery of unanticipated sites, will be managed in accordance with EPG 4 Aboriginal Artefacts – Unanticipated Discovery Plan.


Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania advised that there are no Aboriginal heritage sites recorded within or close to the proposed extractive pit and believe that there is a low probability of Aboriginal heritage being present in the vicinity of the proposed extractive pit.

Nevertheless, Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania recommend that an Unanticipated Discovery Plan should be available on-site during ground disturbing works to help aid the proponent in meeting their requirements under the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 should suspected Aboriginal heritage be discovered.


Evaluation

The EER states that Aboriginal heritage, including the discovery of unanticipated sites, will be managed in accordance with their ‘EPG 4 – Aboriginal Artefacts – Unanticipated Discovery Plan’, this document broadly follow the steps outlined in the pro-forma Unanticipated Discover Plan Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania provided and the proponent’s approach is supported.

The proponent is made aware of the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 via the legal obligation clause LO3.

Conclusion

The following legal information is included in the permit:

LO3 Aboriginal relics requirements


24

Issue 9: Decommissioning and rehabilitation


Due to the nature of the proposal (a short term (6 month) clay extractive pit) progressive rehabilitation will not be feasible and it is likely that the entire proposed extractive pit area will be disturbed (13.8ha) before any rehabilitation occurs, therefore, the potential for dust and erosion impacts are increased due to the large area being disturbed. Additionally, should the rehabilitation not be conducted appropriately and in a timely manner after completion of extraction those risks are likely to further increase.


EER Commitment 11 – The proposed extractive pit will be rehabilitated in accordance with EPRs.

In addition, the EER states that a rehabilitation plan will be developed and implemented by a contractor.


No public of agency representations were received in relation to decommissioning and rehabilitation.

Evaluation

The EER states that the rehabilitation objective is to return the worked area to pre-extraction conditions (i.e. grazing / agricultural land) to the satisfaction of the landowner.

The proposed extractive pit has a total disturbed area of 13.8ha, the EER states that on completion of construction of the Melrose Dam the proposed extractive pit will be rehabilitated. While it is standard practice to require progressive rehabilitation to be undertaken for a typical extractive pit, the purpose and nature (i.e. only 6 months of operation) of the proposed extractive pit does not make progressive rehabilitation feasible.

The EER states that stockpiles of topsoil will generally be less than 1m in height, will not be compacted by machinery and handling/movement of the stockpiles will be minimised, this approach is supported. Furthermore, the stockpiling and protection of topsoils is required by permit condition DC3. According to the EER it is intended that the on‐site topsoil containing local seed will be respread to facilitate the return of the site to pre-extraction conditions. If seed contained in the topsoil is insufficient, sowing will be undertaken using seed collected from on-site or from an appropriate seed supplier with the same species composition observed prior to disturbance, the approach outlined by the proponent is supported.

The EER also states that upon completion of extraction, all excavated slopes will be restored to a maximum grade of 15% and drainage will be restored to existing watercourses and current dams will be reinstated, this will then be monitored and remedial planting and weed control undertaken, if required, by a contractor.

It is considered that the short operational time, simple nature of the extraction and proposed end use (a return to grazing / agricultural land) will result in fairly basic remediation being required, however, it is considered appropriate to require the proponent to provide, in accordance with any guidelines issued by the Director, a Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan within 3 months of the date of the permit (if granted) for the Director’s approval. Therefore permit conditions DC4 and DC5 are included.

Additionally the proponent is required to notify the Director, EPA of the permanent cessation of the activity (DC1) or where a temporary suspension of activity (DC2) is likely to occur.


25

Conclusion


G7 Quarry Code of Practice DC1 Notification of cessation DC2 Temporary suspension of activity DC4 Rehabilitation following cessation The proponent will also be required to comply with the following site-specific condition:

DC3 Stockpiling of surface soil DC5 Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan


26

7 Report conclusions This assessment has been based on the information provided by the proponent, Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd, in the permit application, EER and in correspondence and discussion between the EPA Division and the proponent and the proponent’s representatives. This assessment has incorporated specialist advice provided by EPA Division scientific specialists and regulatory staff, other Divisions of DPIPWE and other government agencies. It is concluded that:

1. the RMPS and EMPCS objectives have been duly and properly pursued in the assessment of the proposal; and

2. the assessment of the proposed activity has been undertaken in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Principles.

It is concluded that the proposed activity is capable of being managed in an environmentally acceptable manner such that it is unlikely that the objectives of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 (the RMPS and EMPCS objectives) would be compromised, provided that the Permit Conditions - Environmental No. 9374 appended to this report are imposed and duly complied with, including commitments made by the proponent in the EER.


27

8 Report approval Environmental Assessment Report and conclusions, including permit conditions, adopted:

Wes Ford DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY Delegate for the Board of the Environment Protection Authority Date: 3 June 2016


28

9 References Cultural Heritage Management Australia – SWAN Irrigation Scheme Pipeline Distribution Corridor Additional Survey Areas ‐ Aboriginal Heritage Assessment Addendum Report, dated 2015 (CHMA 2015b). DPIPWE (2015); Weed and Disease Planning and Hygiene Guidelines – Preventing the spread of weeds and diseases in Tasmania, dated March 2015 (the Washdown Guidelines). Pugh, Kathryn; Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme – Flora & Fauna survey – Synotts clay Borrow, dated September 2015, Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd (the Flora and Fauna Survey). Pugh, Kathryn; Swan Valley Irrigation Scheme – Synotts clay Borrow – Environmental Effects Report, dated January 2016, Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd (the EER). The Australian Pipeline Industry Association Ltd (2013); Code of Environmental Practice – Onshore Pipelines, dated October 2013 (the APIA Guidelines).


29

10 Appendices Appendix 1 Summary of public and agency submissions Appendix 2 Permit conditions


30

Appendix 1 Summary of public and agency submissions TABLE 1: MATTERS RAISED DURING THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PERIOD Note that no public representations were received during the public consultation period.

Agency EER

section no Comments and issues Further Info

requested [yes/no]

PCAB PCAB noted that the threatened flora species warty paperbark (Melaleuca pustulata), which is identified as rare under the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 has been identified within the extractive pit works area on the property and that the threatened flora permit currently issued to the proponent (DA15264) does not cover extractive works. PCAB has requested that the proponent contact them on (03) 6216 4381 or [email protected] to discuss amendment of the permit.

PCAB also indicated that a weed and disease hygiene plan should be developed for the site in accordance with DPIPWE (2015) Weed and Disease Planning and Hygiene Guidelines – Preventing the spread of weeds and diseases in Tasmania.

No

MRT MRT noted that a mining lease must be in force and a current land use planning permit must have also been issued prior to the commencement of earthworks on the mining lease.

They also queried who will be declaring the weed-free status of any material sourced from quarries or extractive pits? They were concerned that a contractor may not be a suitably qualified person.

MRT also indicated that the drainage, erosion and sediment control plan for the construction zone excluding the Melrose Dam must be submitted to them for assessment and be approved prior to earthworks commencing within the mining lease.

No


Appendix 1

mailto:[email protected]

Appendix 2 Permit conditions – Environmental No. 9374


Appendix 2

PERMIT PART BPERMIT CONDITIONS - ENVIRONMENTAL No. 9374

Issued under the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994

Activity: The operation of a quarry (ACTIVITY TYPE: Extractive Pits)SYNOTTS CLAY QUARRY, 90 YOUNGS RDCRANBROOK TAS 7190

The above activity has been assessed as a level 2 activity under the Environmental Managementand Pollution Control Act 1994 under delegation from the Board of the Environment ProtectionAuthority.

Acting under Section 25(5)(a)(i) of the EMPCA, the Board of the Environment ProtectionAuthority has required that this Permit Part B be included in any Permit granted under the Land UsePlanning and Approvals Act 1993 with respect to the above activity.

Municipality: GLAMORGAN/SPRING BAYPermit Application Reference: DA 2016 / 00030EPA file reference: 244903

Date conditions approved: ______________________________________________

Signed: ______________________________________________

DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY

PCE 9374 (r1) 1/15


3 June 2016

3 June 2016

gvaszocz

Stamp

DEFINITIONS

Unless the contrary appears, words and expressions used in this Permit Part B have the meaninggiven to them in Schedule 1 of this Permit and in the EMPCA. If there is any inconsistencybetween a definition in the EMPCA and a definition in this Permit Part B, the EMPCA prevails tothe extent of the inconsistency.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

The person responsible for the activity must comply with the conditions contained in Schedule 2 ofthis Permit Part B.

INFORMATION

Attention is drawn to Schedule 3, which contains important additional information.

PCE 9374 (r1) 2/15

DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY 3 June 2016

Table Of Contents

Schedule 1: Definitions....................................................................................................................... 4

Schedule 2: Conditions........................................................................................................................6Maximum Quantities................................................................................................................. 6

Q1 Regulatory limits ..............................................................................................6General.......................................................................................................................................6

G1 Access to and awareness of conditions and associated documents.................. 6G2 Incident response...............................................................................................6G3 No changes without approval............................................................................6G4 Change of responsibility................................................................................... 6G5 Change of ownership........................................................................................ 6G6 Notification prior to commencement................................................................ 6G7 Quarry Code of Practice....................................................................................7G8 Management Plans............................................................................................ 7

Atmospheric...............................................................................................................................8A1 Control of dust emissions..................................................................................8

Decommissioning And Rehabilitation.......................................................................................8DC1 Notification of cessation.................................................................................8DC2 Temporary suspension of activity.................................................................. 8DC3 Stockpiling of surface soil..............................................................................8DC4 Rehabilitation following cessation................................................................. 8DC5 Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan.................................................... 9

Effluent Disposal....................................................................................................................... 9E1 Perimeter drains.................................................................................................9E2 Design and maintenance of settling ponds........................................................ 9E3 Stormwater...................................................................................................... 10

Flora And Fauna...................................................................................................................... 10FF1 Washdown Guidelines...................................................................................10

Hazardous Substances..............................................................................................................10H1 Spill kits.......................................................................................................... 10H2 Storage and handling of hazardous materials................................................. 10

Noise Control...........................................................................................................................10N1 Operating hours...............................................................................................10

Operations................................................................................................................................11OP1 Weed management........................................................................................11

Schedule 3: Information.................................................................................................................... 12Legal Obligations.....................................................................................................................12

LO1 EMPCA........................................................................................................ 12LO2 Storage and handling of dangerous goods, explosives and dangeroussubstances............................................................................................................. 12LO3 Aboriginal relics requirements..................................................................... 12

Other Information.................................................................................................................... 13OI1 Waste management hierarchy........................................................................13OI2 Notification of incidents under section 32 of EMPCA .................................13OI3 Commitments.................................................................................................13

Attachments

Attachment 1: The Land (modified: 02/06/2016 11:07)..............................................................1 page

Attachment 2: The Land - Coordinates (modified: 02/06/2016 11:05)....................................... 1 page

PCE 9374 (r1) 3/15


Schedule 1: Definitions

In this Permit Part B:-

Aboriginal Relic has the meaning described in section 2(3) of the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975.

Activity means any environmentally relevant activity (as defined in Section 3 of EMPCA) to whichthis document relates, and includes more than one such activity.

Best Practice Environmental Management or 'BPEM' has the meaning described in Section 4 ofEMPCA.

Director means the Director, Environment Protection Authority holding office under Section 18 ofEMPCA and includes a person authorised in writing by the Director to exercise a power or functionon the Director's behalf.

DRP means Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan.

EMP means the EER prepared by Kathryn Pugh of Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd dated 12 January2016, and includes any amendment to or substitution of this document, including an EMPOperations, approved in writing by the Director.

EMPCA means the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994.

Environmental Harm and Material Environmental Harm and Serious Environmental Harmeach have the meanings ascribed to them in Section 5 of EMPCA.

Environmental Nuisance and Pollutant each have the meanings ascribed to them in Section 3 ofEMPCA.

Environmentally Hazardous Material means any substance or mixture of substances of a natureor held in quantities which present a reasonably foreseeable risk of causing serious or materialenvironmental harm if released to the environment and includes fuels, oils, waste and chemicals butexcludes sewage.

Person Responsible is any person who is or was responsible for the environmentally relevantactivity to which this document relates and includes the officers, employees, contractors, jointventure partners and agents of that person, and includes a body corporate.

Quarry Code Of Practice means the document of this title published by the Department ofPrimary Industries, Water and Environment and the Department of Infrastructure, Energy andResources in June 1999, and includes any subsequent versions of this document.

The Land means the land on which the activity to which this document relates may be carried out,and includes: buildings and other structures permanently fixed to the land, any part of the landcovered with water, and any water covering the land. The Land falls within the area defined by:

1 Certificate of Titles 124550/2 and 117789/1; and2 As further delineated in Attachments 1 and 2.

Washdown Guidelines means the document titled Weed and Disease Planning and HygieneGuidelines - Preventing the spread of weeds and diseases in Tasmania, by the Department ofPrimary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, dated March 2015, and any amendment to orsubstitution of this document.

PCE 9374 (r1) 4/15


3 June2016

Weed means a declared weed as defined in the Weed Management Act 1999.

PCE 9374 (r1) 5/15

DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY3 June 2016

Schedule 2: Conditions

Maximum Quantities

Q1 Regulatory limits1 The activity must not exceed the following limits (annual fees are derived from these

figures):1.1 15,000 cubic metres per year of product.

General

G1 Access to and awareness of conditions and associated documentsA copy of these conditions and any associated documents referred to in these conditions mustbe held in a location that is known to and accessible to the person responsible for the activity.The person responsible for the activity must ensure that all persons who are responsible forundertaking work on The Land, including contractors and sub-contractors, are familiar withthese conditions to the extent relevant to their work.

G2 Incident responseIf an incident causing or threatening environmental nuisance, serious environmental harm ormaterial environmental harm from pollution occurs in the course of the activity, then theperson responsible for the activity must immediately take all reasonable and practicable actionto minimise any adverse environmental effects from the incident.

G3 No changes without approval1 The following changes, if they may cause or increase the emission of a pollutant which

may cause material or serious environmental harm or environmental nuisance, mustonly take place in relation to the activity if such changes have been approved in writingby the EPA Board following its assessment of an application for a permit under theLand Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, or approved in writing by the Director:1.1 a change to a process used in the course of carrying out the activity; or1.2 the construction, installation, alteration or removal of any structure or equipment

used in the course of carrying out the activity; or1.3 a change in the quantity or characteristics of materials used in the course of

carrying out the activity.

G4 Change of responsibilityIf the person responsible for the activity ceases or intends to cease to be responsible for theactivity, he or she must notify the Director in writing of the full particulars of any personsucceeding him or her as the person responsible for the activity.

G5 Change of ownershipIf the owner of The Land upon which the activity is carried out changes or is to change, then,as soon as reasonably practicable but no later than 30 days after becoming aware of thechange or intended change in the ownership of The Land, the person responsible must notifythe Director in writing of the change or intended change of ownership.

G6 Notification prior to commencementThe Director must be notified in writing of the commencement of operations at least 14 daysbefore that occurs.

PCE 9374 (r1) 6/15


G7 Quarry Code of PracticeUnless otherwise required by these conditions or required in writing by the Director, theactivity (or activities) undertaken on The Land must comply with the Acceptable Standardsprovisions of the Quarry Code of Practice.

G8 Management Plans1 Unless otherwise approved in wiriting by the Director, a Construction Environmental

Management Plan, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Construction Water QualityMonitoring Program must be submitted to the Director for approval prior to thecommencement of extractive activities on the Land. This requirement will be deemed tobe satisfied only when the Director indicates in writing that the submitted documentsadequately addresses the requirements of this condition to his or her satisfaction.

2 The Construction Environmental Management Plan must include but not necessarily belimited to, management measures in relation to the following:2.1 Prevention of environmental impacts during construction;2.2 The process for determining wet weather non-work periods;2.3 The location(s) and method(s) of any stockpiles and how they will be managed to

ensure they do not contaminate waterways or create a source of dust emissions;2.4 The location, size, maintenance schedule and discharge points for any stormwater

management infrastructure such as perimeter drains and sediment settlementponds; and

2.5 Any other information in accordance with guidelines provided by the Director.3 The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must include, but not necessarily be limited to,

management measures in relation to the following:3.1 Prevention of impacts upon surface water and waterways;3.2 Erosion and sediment control, including measures necessary to meet the

requirements of conditions in this permit pertaining to erosion and sedimentcontrol;

3.3 Dust controls, including measures necessary to prevent environmental nuisance,material environmental harm and serious environmental harm.; and

3.4 Any other information in accordance with guidelines provided by the Director.4 The Construction Water Quality Monitoring Program must include detail of, but not

necessarily be limited to, the following:4.1 The monitoring program that will be implemented for monitoring potential water

quality impacts from the activity4.2 The frequency of sampling and the parameters that samples will be analysed for;4.3 Any triggers or limits that are to be put in place for determining when a potential

impact has occurred and the steps that will be taken if a trigger or limit isexceeded; and

4.4 Any other information in accordance with guidelines provided by the Director.5 Without limitation, the plans must include:

5.1 A table containing all of the major commitments made in the plans; and5.2 An implementation timetable for key aspects of the plans.

6 The person responsible must implement and act in accordance with the approved plans.7 In the event that the Director, by notice in writing to the person responsible, either

approves a minor variation to the approved plan(s) or approves a new plan insubstitution for the plan originally approved, the person responsible must implementand act in accordance with the varied plan or the new plan, as the case may be.

PCE 9374 (r1) 7/15


Atmospheric

A1 Control of dust emissionsDust emissions from The Land must be controlled to the extent necessary to preventenvironmental nuisance beyond the boundary of The Land.

Decommissioning And Rehabilitation

DC1 Notification of cessationWithin 30 days of becoming aware of any event or decision which is likely to give rise to thepermanent cessation of the activity, the person responsible for the activity must notify theDirector in writing of that event or decision. The notice must specify the date upon which theactivity is expected to cease or has ceased.

DC2 Temporary suspension of activity1 Within 30 days of becoming aware of any event or decision which is likely to give rise

to the temporary suspension of the activity, the person responsible for the activity mustnotify the Director in writing of that event or decision. The notice must specify the dateupon which the activity is expected to suspend or has suspended.

2 During temporary suspension of the activity:2.1 The Land must be managed and monitored by the person responsible for the

activity to ensure that emissions from The Land do not cause seriousenvironmental harm, material environmental harm or environmental nuisance; and

2.2 If required by the Director a Care and Maintenance Plan for the activity must besubmitted, by a date specified in writing by the Director, for approval. The personresponsible must implement the approved Care and Maintenance Plan, as may beamended from time to time with written approval of the Director.

3 Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Director, if the activity on The Land hassubstantially ceased for 2 years or more, rehabilitation of The Land must be carried outin accordance with the requirements of these conditions as if the activity haspermanently ceased.

DC3 Stockpiling of surface soil1 Prior to commencement of extractive activities on any portion of The Land, surface

soils must be removed in that portion of The Land to be disturbed by the conduct of theactivity and stockpiled for later use in rehabilitation of The Land. Topsoil must be keptseparate from other overburden and protected from erosion or other disturbance.

2 Any stockpiles associated with the activity must be located within the area of The Landas defined in Attachments 1 and 2.

DC4 Rehabilitation following cessation1 Following permanent cessation of the activity, and unless otherwise approved in writing

by the Director, The Land must be rehabilitated including:1.1 stabilisation of any land surfaces that may be subject to erosion;1.2 removal or mitigation of all environmental hazards or land contamination, that

might pose an on-going risk of causing environmental harm; and1.3 decommissioning of any equipment that has not been removed.

2 Where a Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan (DRP) has been approved by theDirector, decommissioning and rehabilitation must be carried out in accordance withthat plan, as may be amended from time to time with written approval of the Director.

PCE 9374 (r1) 8/15


DC5 Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan1 Within 3 months of the date of issue of this Notice, or by a date otherwise specified in

writing by the Director, a Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan (DRP) must besubmitted to the Director for approval. This requirement will be deemed to be satisfiedonly when the Director indicates in writing that the submitted document adequatelyaddresses the requirements of this condition to his or her satisfaction.1.1 The DRP must be prepared in accordance with guidelines issued by the Director.

If no guidelines have been issued by the Director the measures described in thisplan must include, but should not necessarily be limited to, the following:

1.1.1 A table containing all of the major commitments made in the plan;1.1.2 An implementation timetable for key aspects of the plan; and1.1.3 A reporting program to regularly advise the Director of the results of the

plan.1.2 The plan must be consistent with the Quarry Code of Practice 1999.1.3 The person responsible must implement and act in accordance with the approved

plan.1.4 In the event that the Director, by notice in writing to the person responsible, either

approves a minor variation to the approved plan or approves a new plan insubstitution for the plan originally approved, the person responsible mustimplement and act in accordance with the varied plan or the new plan, as the casemay be.

Effluent Disposal

E1 Perimeter drains1 Perimeter cut-off drains must be constructed at strategic locations on The Land to

prevent surface run-off from entering the area used or disturbed in carrying out theactivity. All reasonable measures must be implemented to ensure that sedimenttransported along these drains remains on The Land. Such measures may includeprovision of strategically located sediment fences, appropriately sized and maintainedsediment settling ponds, vegetated swales, detention basins and other measuresdesigned and operated in accordance with the principles of Water Sensitive UrbanDesign.

2 Drains must have sufficient capacity to contain run-off that could reasonably beexpected to arise during a 1 in 20 year rainfall event. Maintenance activities must beundertaken regularly to ensure that this capacity does not diminish.

E2 Design and maintenance of settling ponds1 Sediment settling ponds must be designed and maintained in accordance with the

following requirements:1.1 ponds must be designed to successfully mitigate reasonably foreseeable sediment

loss which would result from a 1 in 20 year storm event;1.2 discharge from ponds must occur via a stable spillway that is not subject to

erosion;1.3 all pond walls must be stable and treated with topsoil and vegetated or otherwise

treated in such a manner as to prevent erosion; and1.4 sediment settling ponds must be periodically cleaned out to ensure that the pond

design capacity is maintained. Sediment removed during this cleaning must besecurely deposited such that sediment will not be transported off The Land bysurface run-off.

PCE 9374 (r1) 9/15


3 June 2016

E3 Stormwater1 Polluted stormwater that will be discharged from The Land must be collected and

treated prior to discharge to the extent necessary to prevent serious or materialenvironmental harm, or environmental nuisance.

2 Notwithstanding the above, all stormwater that is discharged from The Land must notcarry pollutants such as sediment, oil and grease in quantities or concentrations that arelikely to degrade the visual quality of any receiving waters outside the Land.

3 All reasonable measures must be implemented to ensure that solids entrained instormwater are retained on The Land. Such measures may include appropriately sizedand maintained sediment settling ponds or detention basins.

Flora And Fauna

FF1 Washdown GuidelinesThe activity must be undertaken in accordance with the Weed and Disease Planning andHygiene Guidelines - Preventing the spread of weeds and diseases in Tasmania, by theDepartment of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, dated March 2015, or anysubsequent revision of that document. This includes, but is not limited to, the implementationof vehicle washdown procedures in accordance with the Washdown Guidelines for vehiclesand machinery entering and leaving the Land.

Hazardous Substances

H1 Spill kitsSpill kits appropriate for the types and volumes of materials handled on The Land must bekept in appropriate locations to assist with the containment of spilt environmentally hazardousmaterials.

H2 Storage and handling of hazardous materials1 Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Director, environmentally hazardous

materials held on The Land must be:1.1 located within impervious bunded areas, spill trays or other containment systems;

and1.2 managed to prevent unauthorised discharge, emission or deposition of pollutants:

1.2.1 to soils within the boundary of The Land in a manner that is likely to causeserious environmental harm;

1.2.2 to groundwater;1.2.3 to waterways; or1.2.4 beyond the boundary of The Land.

Noise Control

N1 Operating hours1 Unless otherwise approved by the Director, activities associated with the extraction of

rock, gravel, sand, clay or minerals, and the loading/haulage of product, must not beundertaken outside the hours of 0700 hours to 1900 hours on weekdays.

2 Notwithstanding the above paragraph, activities must not be carried out on publicholidays that are observed Statewide (Easter Tuesday excepted).

PCE 9374 (r1) 10/15


Operations

OP1 Weed managementThe Land must be kept substantially free of weeds to minimise the risk of weeds being spreadthrough the transport of products from The Land.

PCE 9374 (r1) 11/15


Schedule 3: Information

Legal Obligations

LO1 EMPCAThe activity must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the EnvironmentalManagement and Pollution Control Act 1994 and Regulations thereunder. The conditions ofthis document must not be construed as an exemption from any of those requirements.

LO2 Storage and handling of dangerous goods, explosives and dangerous substances1 The storage, handling and transport of dangerous goods, explosives and dangerous

substances must comply with the requirements of relevant State Acts and anyregulations thereunder, including:1.1 Work Health and Safety Act 2012 and subordinate regulations;1.2 Explosives Act 2012 and subordinate regulations; and1.3 Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Act 2010 and subordinate

regulations.

LO3 Aboriginal relics requirements1 The Aboriginal Relics Act 1975, provides legislative protection to Aboriginal heritage

sites in Tasmania regardless of site type, condition, size or land tenure. Section 14(1) ofthe Act states that; Except as otherwise provided in this Act, no person shall, otherwisethan in accordance with the terms of a permit granted by the Minister on therecommendation of the Director of National Parks and Wildlife:1.1 destroy, damage, deface, conceal or otherwise interfere with a relic;1.2 make a copy or replica of a carving or engraving that is a relic by rubbing, tracing,

casting or other means that involve direct contact with the carving or engraving;1.3 remove a relic from the place where it is found or abandoned;1.4 sell or offer or expose for sale, exchange, or otherwise dispose of a relic or any

other object that so nearly resembles a relic as to be likely to deceive or becapable of being mistaken for a relic;

1.5 take a relic, or permit a relic to be taken, out of this State; or1.6 cause an excavation to be made or any other work to be carried out on Crown land

for the purpose of searching for a relic.2 If a relic is suspected and/or identified during works then works must cease immediately

and the Tasmanian Aboriginal Land and Sea Council and the Aboriginal HeritageTasmania be contacted for advice before work can continue. In the event that damage toan Aboriginal heritage site is unavoidable a permit under section 14 of the AboriginalRelics Act 1975 must be applied for. The Minister may refuse an application for apermit, where the characteristics of the relics are considered to warrant theirpreservation.

3 Anyone finding an Aboriginal relic is required under section 10 of the Act to report thatfinding as soon as practicable to the Director of National Parks and Wildlife or anauthorized officer under the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975. It is sufficient to report thefinding of a relic to Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania to fulfil the requirements of section10 of the Act.

PCE 9374 (r1) 12/15


Other Information

OI1 Waste management hierarchy1 Wastes should be managed in accordance with the following hierarchy of waste

management:1.1 waste should be minimised, that is, the generation of waste must be reduced to the

maximum extent that is reasonable and practicable, having regard to best practiceenvironmental management;

1.2 waste should be re-used or recycled to the maximum extent that is practicable;and

1.3 waste that cannot be re-used or recycled must be disposed of at a waste depot siteor treatment facility that has been approved in writing by the relevant planningauthority or the Director to receive such waste, or otherwise in a manner approvedin writing by the Director.

OI2 Notification of incidents under section 32 of EMPCAWhere a person is required by section 32 of EMPCA to notify the Director of the release of apollutant, the Director can be notified by telephoning 1800 005 171 (a 24-hour emergencytelephone number).

OI3 CommitmentsThe person responsible for the activity has a general environmental duty to conduct theactivity in accordance with the commitments contained in Attachment [X].

PCE 9374 (r1) 13/15


Attachment 1: The Land


Attachment 2: The Land - Coordinates


synotts clay extractive pit · environmental assessment report tasmanian irrigation pty ltd –...

Documents