60289290 Rix's Creek EIS Master FINAL 26OCT2015

0.5mm/s

1mm/s

2mm/s

5mm/s

5mm

/s

2m

m/s

1m

m/s

0.5

mm

/s

Wright(3.4mm/s)

Wright(3.4mm/s)

Dunn(3.4mm/s)

Dunn(3.4mm/s)

Mine Rescue(0.51mm/s)

Mine Rescue(0.51mm/s)

Retreat(0.15mm/s)

Retreat(0.15mm/s)

Ernst(0.44mm/s)

Ernst(0.44mm/s)

Centroid ofBlasting (west)


Centroid ofBlasting (north)


Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Belm

ad

ar

Way

Belm

ad

ar

Way

Maison Dieu Road

Maison Dieu Road

Brid

gm

an

Ro

ad

Brid

gm

an

Ro

ad

Bri

dg

man

Ro

ad

Bri

dg

man

Ro

ad

HU

NT

ER

RIV

ER

HU

NT

ER

RIV

ER

Bla

ckwall C

reek

Bla

ckwall C

reek

HUNTER R

IVER

HUNTER R

IVER

McDougallsHill

McDougallsHill

SingletonHeights

SingletonHeights

CHPPRIX’S CREEK MINE

PIT 3 PIT 2

NORTH PIT

PIT 1

Tailingsemplacement

4

Tailingsemplacement

3

0 2km1

Project Area

Lease extension area

Railway

Watercourse

Assessment location

CL352 Boundary

Ground vibration contour

Road

KEY

GROUND VIBRATION CONTOUR ASSESSMENT

FIGURE 12-5

Rix’s Creek Continuation of Mining

Environmental Impact Statement

\Pro

jects

\60289290_R

ixC

reek_M

ine\4

.Tech w

ork

are

a\4

.7 G

raphic

s\F

IGU

RE

S\E

IS\6

0289290 F

12-5

Gro

und V

ibra

tion C

onto

urs

30 0

6 2

015

TO

115dBL

110dBL

105dBL

100dBL

100dBL

105dBL

110dBL

115dBL

Wright(112.1dBL)

Wright(112.1dBL)

Dunn(112.3dBL)

Dunn(112.3dBL)

Mine Rescue(102.6dBL)

Mine Rescue(102.6dBL)

Retreat(110dBL)Retreat

(110dBL)

Ernst(97.7dBL)

Ernst(97.7dBL)





Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Main

No

rtn

Rail L

ine

Belm

ad

ar

Way

Belm

ad

ar

Way

Maison Dieu Road

Maison Dieu Road

Brid

gm

an

Ro

ad

Brid

gm

an

Ro

ad

Bri

dg

man

Ro

ad

Bri

dg

man

Ro

ad

HU

NT

ER

RIV

ER

HU

NT

ER

RIV

ER

Bla

ckwall C

reek

Bla

ckwall C

reek

HUNTER R

IVER

HUNTER R

IVER

McDougallsHill

McDougallsHill

SingletonHeights

SingletonHeights

CHPPRIX’S CREEK MINE

PIT 3 PIT 2

NORTH PIT

PIT 1

Tailingsemplacement

4

Tailingsemplacement

3

0 2km1

Project Area

Lease extension area

Railway

Watercourse

Assessment location

CL352 Boundary

Airblast vibration contour

Road

KEY

AIRBLAST CONTOUR ASSESSMENT

FIGURE 12-6

Rix’s Creek Continuation of Mining

Environmental Impact Statement

\Pro

jects

\60289290_R

ixC

reek_M

ine\4

.Tech w

ork

are

a\4

.7 G

raphic

s\F

IGU

RE

S\E

IS\6

0289290 F

12-6

Airbla

st

Vib

ration C

onto

urs

30 0

6 2

015

TO

AECOM Rix's Creek Mine - Continuation of Mining Project Environmental Impact Statement – Rix's Creek Mine - Continuation of Mining Project

Revision C – 26-Oct-2015 Prepared for – Bloomfield Collieries Pty Limited – ABN: 76000106972

156

Flyrock

The predicted flyrock trajectory paths are shown in Figure 12-7 and Figure 12-8 for blast holes that have been drilled vertically, or 10 degrees off vertical respectively. These figures show the expected maximum throw (distance rock may be blown from the blast location). Safety Factor distances of two and four times the maximum throw distance are also shown.

Figure 12-7 Flyrock Trajectory Paths, 10° Blast Holes

Figure 12-8 Flyrock Trajectory Paths, Vertical Blast Holes

As the maximum extent of the trajectory is up to 200m, Flyrock would be contained within the Mine boundary. Flyrock can be readily controlled by appropriate blast design and loading practice. If the recommended exclusion zones are observed, flyrock would not present a danger to personnel within the mine lease or outside the extraction area.



157

Potential Impacts to other Infrastructure, Mines or Livestock

Infrastructure

Externally owned/managed infrastructure that could be considered as being possibly impacted by blasting includes:

- New England Highway:

Pavement and culverts;

Bridge over Rix’s Creek;

Haul road bridge over the New England Highway;

Cut and cover tunnel under the New England Highway; and

A second proposed cut and cover tunnel.

- Buried Fibre Optic Cable beside the New England Highway;

- Main North Rail Line;

- 66Kv Ausgrid power line from Maison Dieu Industrial Estate traversing Rix’s Creek Lane (concrete and timber poles) to the Rix’s Creek Mine infrastructure;

- A Dam certified by the Dam Safety Committed in the Integra Mine (Possum Skin Dam); and

- Other uncertified dams on the Rix’s Creek and Integra Mine sites.

Asset owner are generally aware of mining activities and design their infrastructure accordingly. The owner/managers of the fibre optic cable are aware of the Project having been involved with design and installation of the cut and cover tunnels and the consultation process’s prior for the installation of the fibre optic cables.

The Main North Rail Line is located over 1.3km from the nearest blasting in the West Pit This affords sufficient separation that observance of the appropriate procedures and protocols of the ARTC for blasting closer than 600m is not necessary.

The Ausgrid Power line is located about 500m from the Northern Pit where the nearest blasting activities would take place. Ausgrid routinely applies a limit of 100mm/s on their poles for blasting. Blasting would be carried out with sufficient separation, and compliance with the Ausgrid Power limit can be readily achieved by environmental blast design.

The nearest dam’s Certified by the Dam Safety Committee is the Possum Skin Dam and Tailings Dams located in the Integra Mine site over 4.0km from the Projects blasting areas. At these offset distances ground vibration would be well within the Dam Safety Committee vibration limit (Terrock, 2015).

There are no specified vibration limits on the other dams not regulated by the Dam Safety Committee. The inspection regimes for theses dams would be expected to ascertain any change of condition.

Mines

The nearest mine to the continuation area is the Integra Mine which has been placed in Care and Maintenance by Integra. The main infrastructure of the Integra Mine is over 3km from the nearest continuation area blasting and the predicted peak ground vibration levels are less than 0.3mm/s, which is at human threshold perception levels with no potential structural issues.

Blasting in the continuation area is a progression of blasting that has been conducted over many years and will impose no additional impacts on the Camberwell mine.

Livestock

Blasting in the continuation areas is expected to have a negligible impact on livestock, as livestock rapidly become acclimatised to blasting.

Mining into the future would involve a continuation of blasting in an area where blasting has occurred at the Mine and the two adjoining mines over many years. The only possible impact of blasting would be on livestock brought into the area from a non-mining area. Livestock management by the Mine over many years indicates that livestock become accustomed to blasting once cattle perceive they are not threatened.



158

12.5.3 Cumulative Impacts

Noise sources in proximity to the Mine with the potential to contribute to cumulative noise impacts include:

- Integra Coal Operations mine;

- Mount Thorley Warkworth Mine;

- Hunter Valley Operations mine;

- Ravensworth Surface Operations mine;

- Ashton mine; and

- Mount Owen mine.

The Mount Thorley Warkworth, Hunter Valley Operations, Ravensworth Surface Operations, Ashton and Mount Owen mines are located at some distance from the Mine and the NSR are located between the Mine and these other mines. Therefore, when noise is enhanced from one, it would be attenuated from the other. Integra Coal Operations does however have the potential to contribute to a cumulative noise impact with the Mine.

Four relevant NAG were assessed for cumulative noise impacts with Integra Coal Operations using the Year 2017 modified night (night 2) scenario and results from the Environmental Noise Assessment previously conducted for the Integra Coal Operations which includes a worst case noise scenario.

These results were modelled for neutral and adverse meteorological conditions. The predictions are based on the use of the Integra Coal Operations rail loading facility as it is likely that cumulative noise levels would be less if the Rix’s Creek Mine rail loading facility was operational. Assessment of potential cumulative noise impacts for noise sensitive receivers in the relevant NAG A, B, M and N, concluded that a minor exceedance of 1 dB is predicted at noise sensitive receiver 177. Modelling indicates that noise from the Integra Coal Operations rail loading facility is the main contributor to predicted levels in that case. Regardless a 1dB exceedance is negligible as it is not perceptible to the human ear.

12.6 Mitigation Measures

Noise

Construction

As part of the cut and cover tunnel CEMP, noise management measures would be included consistent with the requirements of the Interim construction Noise Guidelines (ICNG) (DECC, 2009). Notably construction work would be limited to standard construction hours as per Section 2.2 of the ICNG where practical.

Operation

The Mine would operate under an updated version of its existing Noise Management Plan. The key goal of noise management would be to maintain Project noise impacts below intrusive noise criteria proposed to be conditioned for the project, being:

- LAeq,15minute 42 dB for NAG A, B and C, applicable to all time periods; and

- LAeq,15minute 40 dB for NAG D to O inclusive, applicable to all time periods.

The Noise Management Plan would incorporate key noise management strategies which have been developed by Global Acoustics as detailed in Appendix M in order to provide the mine with ‘industry best practice’ noise management and mitigation. Key elements that would be incorporated include:

- The already developed and implemented predictive noise model, updated daily. This includes meteorological data from the Hunter Valley Meteorological Sounding Group Joint Venture and meteorological forecasts for the Mine used to develop half hourly predictions of noise enhancement conditions. This data is currently used in the following manner:

Noise model predictions are used at the daily production meetings to plan evening and night time operations;

Modifications to operating configurations are planned to minimise potential off-site noise impacts if elevated noise levels are predicted;



159

Trained site personnel undertake attended noise monitoring during the night period, with priority given to receptor areas for which elevated noise predictions were provided (if any);

If noise levels exceeding a trigger level criterion are measured, operations at the site are modified to reduce noise emission. Modifications include operating at lower levels within the pit, in areas that provide a high degree of topographical shielding, and/or, progressively shutting down equipment, starting with plant operating in the most exposed areas. A trigger of 2 dB below the criteria level is used to initiate modification and/or machine shutdown;

Follow-up attended monitoring is undertaken to determine the effectiveness of modifications implemented; and

Measurements and actions are documented for reporting to relevant stakeholders.

- Independent attended monitoring would be undertaken by noise consultants in addition to the Mine internal attended noise monitoring program to fulfil the Mine’s EPL requirements.

The Mine has been operating within this management system since August 2014. The continued implementation of this proactive approach to managing noise would be followed to refine and calibrate the predictive noise model on an ongoing basis.

In addition to the predictive modelling and attended monitoring to proactively identify and respond to potential noise exceedances, the Noise Management Plan would also detail key mitigation strategies and the timing of their implementation, including:

- The establishment of appropriate overburden emplacement levels/heights to allow shielded emplacement to occur deeper in the pit during adverse meteorological conditions;

- Haul route alignments within the pit designed to maximise the available topographical shielding provided by the pit shell;

- For the maximum production rate scenario (2023), development of two high elevation emplacement areas , to the north and south of the pit, separated by approximately 1300 metres. This allows full flexibility of mitigated overburden dumping locations independent of the prevailing wind direction;

- Attenuation of new blast hole drills;

- Development of the Mine fleet replacement forecast program to plan the phase in of attenuated plant in accordance with the timeframes modelled in the Environmental Noise Assessment. This commenced in 2014 with the introduction of the noise attenuated Liebherr 9800 excavator and was added to in early 2015 by a noise attenuated CAT 793F rear dump truck;

- Establishment of a 4.5 metre high earth bund to reduce noise emission to the south of the coal haul route;

- Maintenance of the earth barrier to the east side of the ROM pad (already constructed);

- Installation of a barrier at the ROM dump hopper;

- Installation of noise attenuation sheeting on the south and east facades of the CHPP; and

- Details of how night operating configurations would be implemented during or prior to times of meteorological enhancement of noise (temperature inversions).

Vibration and Blasting

In order to manage the potential impact of blasting over the life of the Project, the existing Explosive Management Plan and associated Blasting Checklist would be reviewed and updated as appropriate and would incorporate the following measures:

- Inclusion of the established methodology for calculating blast limits for blasting in close proximity to the Rix’s Creek Coke Ovens;

- Monitoring requirements for compliance with ground vibration limits at the Rix’s Creek Coke Ovens. The established methodology for calculating Rix’s Creek Coke Oven impacts from blasting would be revised if Coke Oven ground vibration criteria is exceeded at the Rix’s Creek Coke Ovens ;

- Checks to manage the potential impact of blasting on the stability of the New England Highway including details of changes to blasting practice and other appropriate measures which may need to be applied;



160

- Controls for the design of blasting and loading practises to be implemented to minimise Flyrock generation consistent with existing operations;

- Installation of traffic control to exclude traffic on the New England Highway when blasting approaches closer than 500m to the Highway in accordance with the existing Explosives Management Plan prepared in consultation with RMS; and

- Use of continuous vibrations recording instruments when monitoring blasting events to provide closer scrutiny of the actual airblast measurements and more accurate reporting.

The Explosives Management Plan would also include measures for the management of blast generated dust and fumes. Further discussion in relation to air quality management is provided in Section 11.0.

12.7 Summary

The noise impact Assessment concluded that exceedance of the Project Specific Noise Level is likely if mining during continued operations is not modified, during adverse meteorological conditions. The greatest impact is predicted for the year 2017 stage, which is quite similar to the existing operation. Noise levels are predicted to reduce significantly over the following stages of Mine development as the Mine acquires a higher proportion of attenuated equipment, and continues to develop a pit shell form that allows for haulage of waste material to topographically shielded areas deeper in the pit during adverse meteorological conditions.

Having regard to potential exceedances of the Project Specific Noise Level, the Mine has undertaken a thorough review of all reasonable and feasible measures to limit noise production and therefore potential impacts. With the range of reasonable and feasibly noise mitigation measures in place, The Bloomfield Group has demonstrated it can meet the recommended noise criteria.

In addition to implementing a range of measures aimed at minimising overall noise generation from the Mine, The Bloomfield Group is committed to continued use of predictive modelling as part of its noise management planning to identify where potential noise exceedances may occur and reconfigure operations to minimise impacts.

Blasting and associated impacts were assessed as having minor potential to impact sensitive receivers and as mining progresses towards the north-west over the duration of the Project, impacts are predicted to decrease.

The Bloomfield Group is committed to investing in the measures needed to mitigate and manage noise and associated impacts that may result from the Project. It is considered that with the progression of mining activities moving in a north-westerly direction, and away from Singleton over the life of the Project, impacts would decrease over time.



161

This page has been left blank intentionally.



162

13.0 Biodiversity This section provides an assessment of the potential impacts of the Project on biodiversity and is supported by the Ecology Report for the Continuation of Rix’s Creek Mine, Singleton LGA (Eastcoast Flora Survey, 2014) provided in Appendix I.

The assessment of biodiversity impacts addresses the DGRs as detailed in Table 13-1.

Table 13-1 Director-Generals Requirements for the Assessment of Biodiversity

Biodiversity DGRs

Biodiversity – including: - measures taken to avoid, reduce or mitigate impacts on biodiversity; - identification of existing vegetation within disturbance areas, and the ecological values of this habitat; - accurate estimates of proposed vegetation clearing; - a detailed assessment of potential impacts of the development on any:

terrestrial or aquatic threatened species or populations and their habitats, endangered ecological communities and groundwater dependent ecosystems; and

remnant vegetation, habitat corridors, and existing biodiversity offset areas. - a comprehensive offset strategy for the development including a justification of how the strategy would

maintain or improve the biodiversity values of the region in the medium to long term. The obligation for a comprehensive biodiversity offset strategy may be met by contributing to the Upper Hunter Offsets Fund to be established under the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment Framework. If this is proposed the EIS must include: - an assessment of impacts on NSW threatened species under the Threatened Species Conservation Act

1995 (TSC Act) and matters of national environmental significance under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 2000 (EPBC Act), and

- use of the Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology (BCAM) and be consistent with the draft Biodiversity Plan for the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment.

13.1 Introduction

The Ecological Impact Assessment investigates the potential impact of the Project on flora and fauna, including threatened species, populations and ecological communities protected under the TSC Act 1995 and EPBC Act 1999.

13.1.1 Assessment Scenarios

The assessment of impacts on ecology was undertaken within the framework of two potential impact assessment scenarios to address the Draft Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment which may come into force following preparation of this EIS. The two assessment scenarios are described as:

- Scenario 1, the relevant NSW legislation has been addressed through ‘seven-part tests’(Section 5A of the EP&A Act 1979, Section 94 of the TSC Act 1995 and Section 220Z of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act)) to assess potential impacts on threatened ecological communities and fauna known or expected to exist within the Project area; and

- Scenario 2, the Project Area has been assessed under the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment bio-certification process being coordinated by the NSW OEH.

The Mine is a signatory to the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment and with approval of the Rix’s Creek continuation project, offsets for the Project would be provided in accordance with the Upper Hunter Biodiversity Plan, including contributing money to the Upper Hunter Offset Fund using the appropriate OEH calculators.

Scenario 2 is the preferred option for assessment. However, in the event that bio-certification has not been established prior to determination of this Project, then Scenario 1 would be implemented. The Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment is discussed below.

The flora and fauna assessment was undertaken within a 211.4 ha Project Area comprising approximately 33 ha (15.6%) within previously approved mining areas. As part of ecological assessments undertaken for the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment, land within the wider Singleton LGA has been surveyed and mapped, and this data has been referred to in the Ecological Impact Assessment.



163

13.1.2 Upper Hunter Coal Mining - Strategic Assessment of a Biodiversity Plan

The OEH is embarking on a regional biodiversity impact assessment process, the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment, to streamline the assessment and potential offsetting requirements of proposed development in the Hunter Valley, with a specific focus on the coal mining industry. One of the aims of the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment is to provide an approach to biodiversity impact management and offsetting that maintains or improves the biodiversity values of the region in the medium to long term. A key component of the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment is the identification of red flag impacts, which are impacts to already highly impacted or vulnerable species, populations and communities requiring higher offsetting requirements or the need to avoid impacts altogether.

Biodiversity values of proposed mine sites included in the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment are assessed using the Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology (OEH 2011) under section 126S of the TSC Act (OEH 2011). For the purposes of the TSC Act, biodiversity values include (but are not limited to) threatened species, threatened populations and threatened ecological communities, and their habitats.

An area, totalling 211.4 ha, within the Mining Lease ML 1432 and the proposed MLA 487 applications area have been assessed as part of the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment. Flora and fauna surveys, and mapping of vegetation communities and other biodiversity values have been completed following Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology.

13.2 Methodology

13.2.1 Background Information Review

A desktop review of databases, surrounding developments and previous studies relevant to the Project area was undertaken to identify key ecological attributes and possible ecological constraints to the Project. Key sources of information reviewed for the Project included:

- Biocertification Credit Calculator (OEH, 2014);

- BioNet Database (OEH, 2014);

- Hunter Remnant Vegetation Project (Peake, 2006);

- Hunter, Central and Lower North Coast Vegetation Classification and Mapping Project Volume 2: Vegetation Community Profiles (Sommerville, 2010);

- Greater Hunter Native Vegetation Mapping. Geodatabase Guide (Sivertsen, 2010);

- Upper Hunter Strategic Assessments: Rix’s Creek Mine, Singleton LGA (NSW DPI, 2012); and

- Developing landscape frameworks for regional conservation planning; an approach integrating fauna spatial distributions and ecological principals (Scotts and Drielsma, 2003).

All database searches were undertaken during June 2014.

13.2.2 Vegetation Surveys

The Ecological Impact Assessment has been undertaken within the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment framework using the Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology (NSW DECCW 2011). Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology requires assessments to separate a Project area into vegetation ‘zones’, based on vegetation type (community), vegetation condition, and the collection of key condition data within nominated transects (refer Section 2.4.1 of Appendix I).

Vegetation mapping of the Project area used aerial photographic interpretation and Rapid Data Points which summarise information about flora recorded at specific points in the field, to delineate vegetation zones. In all, seven vegetation zones were created and mapped in the Project area. Using the vegetation zone map, vegetation sampling was undertaken along 50 x 20m transects with 20 x 20m quadrants at one end of each transect, selected randomly within vegetation zones as outlined by NSW DECCW (2011).

Within the quadrants native and exotic plant species were recorded to provide data on species richness and abundance. Along each transect, attributes were also recorded such as, percentage cover estimates of canopy; mid storey, grass and exotic species; number of trees with hollows; proportion of canopy regeneration; and total length of fallen logs.



164

13.2.3 Threatened Flora Survey

Flora surveys were undertaken in May, August and September 2013 by field botanists with a thorough knowledge and experience in the detection of all potential species. With the exception of terrestrial orchids, separate targeted surveys are not required for those threatened flora species potentially present within the Project area. These can be detected with ease during standard field survey activities by experienced botanists.

13.2.4 Threatened Fauna Survey

Under Scenario 1, a search of the Biocertification Credit Calculator returned sixteen threatened fauna species as being potentially present. Ten fauna species required targeted survey within the Project area under the Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology. Of the ten fauna species identified, only three were targeted during survey as the remaining species were discounted as there is not suitable habitat for these species within the Project area. The three surveyed species include the:

- Brush-tailed Phascogale;

- Green-thighed Frog; and

- Squirrel Glider (refer Section 13.5.3).

Under Scenario 2, a search of the Biocertification Credit Calculator returned thirteen threatened fauna species as being potentially present. Only the Brush-tailed Phascogale and the Green-thighed Frog required targeted survey. No suitable habitat was identified for the remaining species in the Project area.

The targeted surveys under both scenarios incorporated various detection methods including:

- Trapping of land and tree based species using cage and Elliott traps;

- Stag watch observations of suitable mature trees with hollows or habitat trees at dusk;

- Spotlight searches;

- The use of infra-red motion detection digital cameras; and

- Nocturnal searches for presence or potential presence of amphibians.

13.3 Existing Environment

13.3.1 Vegetation Communities

Vegetation within the Project area is highly fragmented as a result of past clearing associated with grazing activities. The vast majority of the land is Derived Native Grassland with widely scattered trees which play a limited role in providing vegetation to enable wildlife dispersal. On advice from OEH, Derived Native Grasslands were deemed to be ‘low condition’. Given the agricultural history of the Project area and the relatively consistent composition of the ground layer vegetation, stratification into vegetation zones was heavily guided by remnant canopy species. Dominant canopy species were used to stratify into seven vegetation zones. Table 13-2 provides Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) equivalents for all defined vegetation zones within the Draft Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment and Project area.

Table 13-2 Equivalency Between Vegetation Zones and Threatened Ecological Communities

NSW Plant Community Type NSW Threatened Ecological Community

Commonwealth Threatened Ecological Community

1598 Forest Red Gum grassy open forest on floodplains of the Lower Hunter

Hunter Lowlands Redgum Forest

-

1602 Spotted Gum; Narrow-leaved Ironbark shrub; grass open forest of the central and Lower Hunter

Central Hunter Ironbark-Spotted Gum-Grey Box Forest [absent from Project area]

-

1605 Narrow-leaved Ironbark; Native Olive shrubby open forest of the central and upper Hunter

- Central Hunter Valley Eucalypt Forest and Woodland CEEC

1692 Bull Oak grassy woodland of the central Hunter Valley

- Central Hunter Valley Eucalypt Forest and Woodland CEEC



165

NSW Plant Community Type NSW Threatened Ecological Community

Commonwealth Threatened Ecological Community

1731 Swamp Oak; Weeping Grass grassy riparian forest of the Hunter Valley

- -

1748 Grey Box grassy open forest of the Central and Lower Hunter Valley

Central Hunter Grey Box-Ironbark Woodland

Central Hunter Valley Eucalypt Forest and Woodland CEEC

1605 Derived Native Grasslands: Narrow-leaved Ironbark; Native Olive shrubby open forest of the central and upper Hunter

- -

Under NSW legislation three of the seven vegetation zones within the Draft Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment area and the Project area are considered TEC’s under the Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology comprising 1.42 ha of the 211.4 ha (0.7%) Project area. Two TECs were identified within the Project area namely:

- Hunter Lowlands Redgum Forest: 0.8 ha

- Central Hunter Grey Box-Ironbark Woodland: 0.62 ha

Figure 13-1 shows the distribution of TEC within the Project area.

60289290 Rix's Creek EIS Master FINAL 26OCT2015

Documents

Transcript of 60289290 Rix's Creek EIS Master FINAL 26OCT2015