ASSESSMENT ON PROPONENT INFORMATION ......– the rail alignment design will be assessed to avoid...
Transcript of ASSESSMENT ON PROPONENT INFORMATION ......– the rail alignment design will be assessed to avoid...
BALLABALLAINFRASTRUCTURE–RAILANDCONVEYORPROJECT
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENT
Date:9December2014
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500
Proponentcontactdetails:
RUTILARESOURCESLTDContactPerson: AngelaJohnson–GroupExecutive‐WAEmail: [email protected]: www.rutila.com.auPhone: +61894835700Address: GroundFloorEast,34ColinStreet,WestPerth,WesternAustralia,6005Documentdevelopedby:
PRESTONCONSULTINGPTYLTDPhilScott(Director)Email: [email protected]: www.prestonconsulting.com.auPhone: +61892210011Fax: +61892214783StreetAddress: Level3,201AdelaideTerrace,EastPerth,WesternAustralia,6004PostalAddress: POBox3093,EastPerth,WesternAustralia,6892 DisclaimerThisReporthasbeenpreparedonbehalfofandfortheexclusiveuseofRutilaResourcesLtdandissubjecttoandissuedinaccordancewiththeagreementbetweenPrestonConsultingPtyLtdandRutilaResourcesLtd.PrestonConsultingPtyLtdacceptsnoliabilityorresponsibilitywhatsoeverfororinrespectofanyuseoforrelianceuponthisReportbyanythirdparty.Photoonfrontpagetitled“BallaBallaTrainPullingCopperOreinSacks–C1901‐1910”obtainedfromBattyeLibraryPerth
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |i
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
ForgeResourcesSwanPtyLtd(Forge)obtainedMinisterialapprovalforthedevelopmentoftheBallaBallaInfrastructurePort(BBIP)on21August2013(MinisterialStatement945(MS945)).Forgeisa100%ownedsubsidiaryofASXlistedRutilaResourcesLtd(Rutila).Rutilaisthejointventure (JV) partner with Todd Corporation Ltd in the Balla Balla JV, whereby Forge is theassignedManager.
TheBBIPislocatedonthePilbaracoastline,approximately100kilometres(km)eastofAnketellPoint and 120 km south‐west of Port Hedland in Western Australia (WA). The BBIP wasoriginally proposed to allow the export of ore from Rutila’s Balla Balla Infrastructure Mine(MS794),howeverrecentstudieshaveidentifiedthatthereisadditionalportcapacityavailablefor use by third parties. The Pilbara IronOre Project (PIOP) (MS 924) operated by FlindersMinesLtd(Flinders)willbetheBBIPfoundationcustomer.
Toallowthistooccur,anapproximate200kmcombinationofrailwayandoverlandconveyorwillbeconstructedtoconnecttheBBIPwiththePIOPinthecentralPilbararegion.ThisrailwayandconveyororetransportinfrastructureisreferredtoastheBallaBallaInfrastructure–Railand Conveyor Project (the Proposal), and combined with the BBIP, form the Balla BallaInfrastructureProject.
TableES1providesashortsummaryoftheProposalthatisthesubjectofthisdocument.
TableES1:SummaryoftheProposal
ProposalTitle BallaBallaInfrastructure–RailandConveyorProject
ProponentName ForgeResourcesSwanPtyLtd
ShortDescription TheProposalistoconstructandoperatearailwayline(approximately160kminlength)andconveyorline(approximately40kminlength)runningfromthePilbaraIronOreProject(operatedbyFlindersMinesLtd)northtotheBallaBallaInfrastructurePort.TheProposalincludessupportinginfrastructuresuchasstockyards,borrowpits,accessroads,communications,waterboresandpipelines,accommodationcamps,workshops,laydownareas,aballastquarry,aconveyorrailwaylineoverpassandgradeseparationcrossingoftheNorthWestCoastalHighway(NWCH).
Two ‘key’environmental factors, floraandvegetationand terrestrial fauna,were identifiedaspotentiallybeingsignificantlyimpactedbytheProposalintheabsenceofmitigation.Potentialenvironmental impacts,mitigationandoutcomes for these factorsarediscussed inTableES2andaredescribedinmoredetailinSection6.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |ii
TableES2:Assessmenttable–keyenvironmentalfactors
PreliminaryKeyEnvironmentalFactor/
EPAObjective
PotentiallySignificantImpact(withoutmitigation)
EnvironmentalAspect
ManagementActions(Mitigation) Regulation PredictedOutcomes(MeetsEPAObjective–Y/N)
FloraandVegetation–
Tomaintainrepresentation,diversity,viabilityandecologicalfunctionatthespecies,populationandcommunitylevel.
Context
Flora:
NoThreatenedFlora(TF)recordedwithintheStudyArea(‘StudyArea’forthisfactorisdefinedasthealignmentandareassurveyedbyEcoscapeanddescribedinEcoscape,2014a);
NinePriority(P)FlorarecordedwithintheStudyArea,includingthreeP1andoneP2taxa;
17additionalPriorityFlora(PF)havethepotentialtooccur(butwerenotrecorded);
NoDeclaredPestplantsundertheBiosecurityandAgricultureManagementAct2007recorded;and
16introducedplantspeciesrecorded.
Vegetation:
90.6%ofthevegetationintheStudyAreawasfoundtobeinExcellentcondition,with6.2%inVeryGoodcondition;
BeardVegetationAssociationsthatintersectwiththeStudyAreaallhavemorethan97.8%oftheirpre‐Europeanextentremaining;
NosheetflowdependentvegetationidentifiedwithintheStudyArea;
NoThreatenedEcologicalCommunities(TECs)identified;
OnePEC(P3‘HorseflatLandSystemoftheRoebournePlains’)locatedinthenorthernportionoftheStudyArea;
VegetationthatmayrepresenttheP1sub‐typeofthe‘FourplantassemblagesoftheWonaLandSystem’PECidentifiedbutnotyetconfirmedasaPEC;
GroundwaterDependentEcosystems(GDEs)occurwithintheStudyArea,generallyalongmaindrainagelines;and
AnumberofvegetationtypeshavingrestricteddistributionswereidentifiedbyEcoscape(2014)asbeinglocallysignificant.
RelevantDesignCommitments:
TheProposalAreaboundaryandBBIPrailloophavebeenrelocatedapproximately4.5kmtothesouth‐east,whichexcludeslargeportionsoftheP3PECfromthisassessment;and
Upto3,000haofgrounddisturbancewillberequiredduringoperations.Thebalancebetweenthevegetationdisturbedduringconstructionandtheoperationalfootprintwillberehabilitatedoncetheareasarenolongerrequired.
Impacts
DirectlossofmostlyVeryGoodtoExcellentconditionvegetation;
Grounddisturbance–clearingofnativevegetation;and
Earthmovingandconstructionactivities.
Implementthefollowingindustrybest‐practicecontrols:
ImplementProjectConstructionandOperationalEMPs;
Vegetationclearingwillbemanagedthroughinternalgrounddisturbanceprocedures;
BoundariesofareastobeclearedordisturbedwillbeidentifiedbyGPScoordinatesandmapsofboundarieswillbeprovidedtodozeroperator;
Undertakeprogressiveclearing;
Conductraisedbladedisturbancewherepracticableontrackstominimisevegetationremoval;
Developthedisturbancefootprinttotheminimumrequiredtoensuresafeandadequateconstructionandoperation;
Applywaterordustsuppressantstodisturbedareasandoretransfer/storageareastominimisedustgeneration;
Implementweedhygieneandmanagementmeasures/procedurestopreventspreadofweedsandtheintroductionofnewweedspeciesasaresultofconstructionandoperationoftherailwaylineandassociatedinfrastructure;and
Cleanvehiclespriortoenteringvegetatedareastopreventtheintroductionofnewweedspecies.
Implementthefollowingadditionalproposalspecificcontrols:
ConductadditionalfloraandvegetationsurveysofanyportionsoftheProposalAreathathavenotyetbeensurveyed.TheProposalAreaistheareathatformsthebasisforthisProposalandistheareawithinwhichtheProposalwillbeimplemented.TheProposalAreaisoutlinedinredinFigure1;
DevelopInfrastructurePlanandsubmittoOEPAforapprovalpriortothecommencementofconstruction.TheInfrastructurePlanistofinalisetherequireddisturbancetokeyenvironmentalfeatures,andwillincludetheresultsofthesurveysdiscussedabove;
Offsetclearingofupto3,000haofVeryGoodtoExcellentconditionvegetation,basedontheresultsoftheInfrastructurePlan;
IdentifythestatusandmaptheextentofthepotentialP1‐P3‘FourplantassemblagesoftheWonaLandSystem‘PECidentifiedintheProposalArea;
VegetationconfirmedtoformpartofaPECistobeconsideredakeyconstraint–therailalignmentdesignwillbeassessedtoavoidPECswherepracticable.Flexibleinfrastructure(camps,accessroads,borrowpitsetc.)willbelocatedoutsideofthePECboundarieswherepracticable;
LocallysignificantvegetationandknownPFlocationswillbeincludedinadesignconstraintsmaptobeusedduringdetailedprojectplanning.Theselocationswillbeavoidedifsuitablealternativeoptionsfortherailalignmentareavailable.Flexibleinfrastructure(camps,accessroads,borrowpitsetc.)willbesitedtoavoidorminimiseimpactstotheselocations;and
Appropriatebufferswillbeappliedaroundlocallysignificantvegetation,PECsandPFifnecessarybasedontheconstructionactivitiestobeundertaken(i.e.tominimiseindirectimpactsfromdust,floodingetc.).
MinisterialStatement(future);
EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999(EPBCAct),PartV(authorisedclearing)andEnvironmentalProtection(ClearingofNativeVegetation)Regulations2004–abletoaddressanyadditionalclearingoutsideofboundariesorlimitsauthorisedunderPartIVoftheEPAct;
WildlifeConservationAct1950(WA)(WCAct)andEPBCActcanaddressimpactstoprotectedfloraiffound;
WeedmanagementwillbeinaccordancewiththerequirementsoftheAgricultureandRelatedResourcesProtectionAct1976;and
FutureStateAgreementAct,MiningAct1978(MiningAct)andPortAuthorityapprovalstoensureProposalisdevelopedasperapproveddesign.
TheProposalwillresultinthedisturbanceofupto3,000haofnativevegetation,withapproximately1,200habeingrehabilitatedatthecompletionoftheconstructionperiod.AconservativeestimateisthatallofthevegetationtobedisturbediseitherinVeryGoodorExcellentcondition(96.8%ofthevegetationwithintheStudyAreafallswithineitherofthesecategories);
ThefinaldisturbanceextentwithineachbioregionwillbeconfirmedwiththesubmissionoftheInfrastructurePlanpriortoconstruction.Thisinformationwillbeusedtodetermineoffsetrequirements;
Theproposeddisturbanceisnotexpectedtoresultinasignificantdeclineintheextentofvegetationassociationsasallarealmostcompletelyintact(i.e.>97.8%remaining)andtheProposalislinearinnature(i.e.disturbanceisspreadacrossupto15associations);
NoTECsorTFspeciesareexpectedtobeimpacted;
PFhavebeenrecordedandsomeplantsorpopulationsmaynotbeabletobeavoided.Impactshoweverarenotexpectedtobesignificantgiventhat:
o Somespeciesthriveondisturbedareasandpopulationsmaythereforeincrease;and
o Mostspecieshaveawidedistributionorarelocallycommon.
OfnoteisthattheBBIPrailloophasbeenrelocatedapproximately4.5kmtothesouth‐east,whichhassignificantlyreducedimpactstoaP3PEC‘HorseflatLandSystemoftheRoebournePlains’.ThefinalProposalAreaboundaryhasbeenamendedtoreflectthischange.Upto324.5haofthisPECremainswithintheProposalArea,howeverthisequatestoonly2.3%oftheoverallPECpolygon(PECpolygon1878).AportionofthePECmaybedisturbedhoweveritnotisexpectedtobesignificantfromalocalorregionalperspective;
Upto6haofthevegetationthatmayrepresentaP1sub‐typeofthe‘FourplantassemblagesoftheWonaLandSystem’PECisexpectedtobeimpactedasitlieswithinaconfinedvalley.TheimplementationofmanagementactionswillminimisetheimpactstothispotentialPEChoweverupto19%ofthepolygon(Figure7)willbedisturbed.Thereareapproximately127,050haofthisPECwithinthePilbara,thereforetheProposalisnotexpectedtosignificantlyimpactthePEConaregionalscale;
NosheetflowdependentvegetationwillbeimpactedasnonewasfoundwithintheProposalArea;
Indirectimpactsarenotexpectedtobesignificant
Alterationorblockageofsurfacewaterflows
Incorporatesurfacewatermanagementanderosionprotectionintoprojectplanninganddesigntominimisedisruptiontowatercoursesandriparianvegetation;and
Implementmeasurestomanagesurfacewaterflowsalongthelengthoftherailalignmenttominimisedownstreameffects.
EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999(EPBCAct),PartV(authorisedclearing)andEnvironmentalProtection(ClearingofNativeVegetation)Regulations2004–abletoaddressdisturbancetovegetation
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |iii
PreliminaryKeyEnvironmentalFactor/
EPAObjective
PotentiallySignificantImpact(withoutmitigation)
EnvironmentalAspect
ManagementActions(Mitigation) Regulation PredictedOutcomes(MeetsEPAObjective–Y/N)
DirectlossofconfirmedorpotentialPECvegetation;
DirectlossofPFspecies;
Indirectimpactstovegetationhealththrougharangeofmechanismssuchasdust,floodingorerosion;
Transferofexistingweeds,introductionofnewweedspeciesduringconstructionandoperation;and
GroundwaterdrawdownaroundabstractionboresresultinginareductioninGDEhealth.
asaresultoffloodingorerosionoutsideofthelimitsauthorisedunderPartIVoftheEPAct;and
FutureStateAgreementAct,MiningAct1978(MiningAct)andPortAuthorityapprovalstoensurewatercoursecrossingsaredevelopedasperapproveddesign.
astheimplementationofindustry‐standardcontrolshassuitablymanagedtheseimpactsinsimilarprojectsacrossthePilbara;
AnyoccurrencesofnewweedspeciesorthespreadofexistingweedswillbecontainedwithintheProposalAreaandcontrolledthrougheradicationmeasures;and
TakingintoconsiderationthecarefulselectionofProposalAreaboundaries(toexcludekeyenvironmentalfeatures),proposedmanagementactionsandtheapplicationofoffsets,RutilaexpectsthattheProposalcanbeimplementedtomeettheEPAObjectiveforthisfactor.
Abstractionofgroundwater
GroundwaterabstractionborestobelocatedandoperatedsuchthatgroundwaterdrawdownisminimisedwithinareasofconfirmedGDEs.
26Dand5CLicencesundertheRIWIActcanensureimpactstoGDEsareminimised.
TerrestrialFauna‐Tomaintainrepresentation,diversity,viabilityandecologicalfunctionatthespecies,populationandassemblagelevel.
Context
Threebroadfaunahabitats;plainandplateau,slopesandriver,largecreekandassociatedvegetation;
FiveconservationsignificantfaunarecordedintheStudyArea(‘StudyArea’isdefinedasthealignmentandareassurveyedbyPhoenixanddescribedinPhoenix,2014a):
o NorthernQuoll(EN‐EPBCAct;S1‐WCAct);
o RainbowBee‐eater(Migratory–EPBCAct);
o LinedSoil‐creviceSkink(P4–DepartmentofParksandWildlife(DPaW));
o AustralianBustard(P4–DPaW);and
o WesternPebble‐moundMouse(P4–DPaW).
Afurther23conservationsignificantfaunaspeciesmaypotentiallyoccur;
Approximately640haofsuitableNorthernQuolldenningandshelterhabitatwasmappedasscattered‘patches’,spanningseverallandsystemsandisconsideredsignificanthabitat;
RestrictedhabitatforPilbaraOlivePython(VU–EPBCAct,S1–WCAct)andNorthernMarsupialMole(EN–EPBCAct,S1–WCAct)alsolocated;
3,612haofpotentialburrowingandforaginghabitatfortheBilby(VU–EPBCAct;S1–WCAct)andBrush‐tailedMulgara(P4–DPaW)wasrecordedinthenorthernportionoftheStudyArea;
WiththeexceptionoftheNorthernQuoll,PilbaraOlivePythonandNorthernMarsupialMolehabitat,conservationsignificantfaunahabitatisgenerallywellconnectedtosimilarhabitatoutsideoftheProposalArea;
TheRainbowBee‐eater,AustralianBustardandWesternPebble‐moundMousearecommonandwidespreadthroughoutthe
Grounddisturbance–clearingofpotentialfaunahabitat
Implementthefollowingmanagementactions:
ImplementmanagementactionsdetailedinFloraandVegetationsectionabove.Themajorityoftheseactionsalsomanageimpactstofaunahabitat;
ConductadditionaltargetedsignificantfaunahabitatsurveysofanyportionsoftheProposalAreathathavenotyetbeensurveyed(Figure8);
DevelopInfrastructurePlanandsubmittoOEPAforapprovalpriortothecommencementofconstruction.TheInfrastructurePlanistofinalisetherequireddisturbancetoconservationsignificantfaunahabitat,andwillincludetheresultsofthesurveysdiscussedabove;
NoNorthernMarsupialMolehabitatistobedisturbed;
NorthernQuollandPilbaraOlivePythondenning/shelterhabitatareasaretobeconsideredkeyconstraints–therailalignmentdesignwillbeassessedtoavoidtheseareasofhabitatwherepracticable.Flexibleinfrastructure(camps,accessroads,borrowpitsetc.)willnotbelocatedwithinthesehabitatareas;
Watercoursecrossingswillbeconstructedwithculvertsorbridgeswhichwillallowfaunatotraverseundertherailcorridor;
Bilby,Brush‐tailedMulgaraandSREhabitatwillbeincludedinadesignconstraintsmaptobeusedduringdetailedprojectplanning.Flexibleinfrastructure(camps,accessroads,borrowpitsetc.)willbesitedtoavoidorminimiseimpactswithinthesehabitatareas;
AppropriatebufferswillbeappliedaroundNorthernQuoll,PilbaraOlivePythonandNorthernMarsupialMoledenning/shelterhabitatifnecessarybasedontheconstructionactivitiestobeundertaken(i.e.tominimiseindirectimpactsfromdust,floodingetc.);
PrepareandimplementaNorthernQuollManagementPlanpriortoconstruction.ThemanagementplanwillincludeinformationfromtheInfrastructurePlanaboutfinalhabitatdisturbancerequirementsaswellasadditionalspecificdesignandmanagementcontrolsfortheNorthernQuollsuchas:
o Pre‐clearingsurveystodeterminethelocationofdens;
o ClearingcampaignsandsignificantdevelopmentswithinNorthernQuollcriticaldenning/shelterhabitatwillbescheduledtoavoidthebreedingseasonwherepossible;
o Considerationofadditionalfaunaculvertstomaintainhabitatconnectivity;
o Rehabilitationofhabitat;and
o ConductaprogramtomonitortheeffectsoftheProposalonNorthernQuoll.
MinisterialStatement(future);
EPBCActPartV(authorisedclearing)andEnvironmentalProtection(ClearingofNativeVegetation)Regulations2004–abletoaddressanyadditionalfaunahabitatdisturbanceoutsideofboundariesauthorisedunderPartIVoftheEPAct;
WCActandEPBCActcanaddressunauthorisedimpactstoprotectedfauna;and
FutureStateAgreementAct,MiningActandPortAuthorityapprovalstoensureProposalisdevelopedasperapproveddesign.
TheProposalwillresultinthedisturbanceofapproximately3,000haoffaunahabitat,ofwhichapproximately1,200hawillberehabilitatedatthecompletionoftheconstructionperiod.BroadfaunahabitatinthesurroundingarearemainsalmostcompletelyintactandthereforetheProposalisnotexpectedtohaveasignificanteffectontherepresentationofbroadfaunahabitatatalocalorregionallevel;
NorthernQuollareexpectedtobeabletotraversetherailembankment.ThemajorityoftheareasofNorthernQuolldenning/shelterhabitatwillbecompletelyavoided.OfnoteisthattheProposalAreahasbeenrevisedtonowexcludesiteQ5,whichhadthehighestrecordednumbersofNorthernQuoll.Aftertheimplementationofmanagementactionsupto5haoftheremaininghabitatwillberequiredtobedisturbedoutofatotalof640haidentifiedintheStudyArea.ThisequatestoadisturbanceofhabitatwithintheStudyAreaoflessthan1%.Allofthelandsystemscontainingsuitablehabitatarewellrepresentedinthesurroundingareas.Rutilaisconfidentthathabitatdisturbancehasbeenavoidedandminimisedasmuchaspossible.TheProposalisthereforenotexpectedtoresultinasignificantresidualimpacttothisspecies;
Aftertheimplementationofthemanagementactionsupto78haofPilbaraOlivePythonhabitatwillberequiredtobedisturbed,outofatotalof4,109haidentifiedwithintheStudyArea.OfnoteisthattheProposalAreahasbeenrevisedtonowexcludesiteQ5,whichhadasignificantportionofsuitablehabitatforthisspecies.ThemaximumdisturbanceofhabitatidentifiedwithintheStudyAreaequatestolessthan2%.SuitablehabitatexistsoutsideoftheProposalAreaandRutilaisconfidentthathabitatdisturbancehasbeenavoidedandminimisedasmuchaspossible.RutilathereforeexpectsthattheProposalwillnotresultinasignificantresidualimpactonthisspecies;
Thesanddunehabitats(shownindarkblueonFigure2andFigure3)areconsideredtobesuitabletosupporttheNorthernMarsupialMole,howeveritspresenceorabsencecannotbe
Vehicletraffic,noiseandhumaninteraction
Implementthefollowingcontrols:
Includefaunaegressmechanismsatallturkeysnestdams;
Providetrainingtoensurethatnativeorintroducedfaunaarenotfedbysite
FutureStateAgreementAct,MiningActandPortAuthorityapprovalstoensureProposalisconstructedinaccordancewith
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |iv
PreliminaryKeyEnvironmentalFactor/
EPAObjective
PotentiallySignificantImpact(withoutmitigation)
EnvironmentalAspect
ManagementActions(Mitigation) Regulation PredictedOutcomes(MeetsEPAObjective–Y/N)
Pilbarabioregionandtherecordsofthesespeciesfromthesurveysarenotconsideredtobesignificant;
13likelyorpotentialshort‐rangeendemic(SRE)taxaidentifiedasoccurringwithintheStudyArea;and
TwooftheseSREspeciesareonlyknownfromwithintheStudyArea.
RelevantDesignCommitments:
Upto3,000haofgeneralfaunahabitatdisturbancewillberequiredduringoperations.Thebalancebetweenthehabitatdisturbedduringconstructionandwhatisrequiredduringoperationswillberehabilitatedoncetheareasarenolongerrequired;
TheProposalAreaboundaryhasbeenrevisedtoexcludeNunyerryGorge,whichcontainssiteQ5,thesitethathadthehighestrecordednumbersofNorthernQuollduringthePhoenixsurvey;
DisturbanceofNorthernQuolldenning/shelterhabitatwillberestrictedtoamaximumof5ha;
NoNorthernMarsupialMolehabitatwillbedisturbed;and
DisturbanceofPilbaraOlivePythonshelterhabitatwillberestrictedtoamaximumof78ha.
Impacts
Generallossoffaunahabitat;
Lossofconservationsignificantfaunahabitat;
Declineinhabitatquality;
Vehiclestrikecausinginjuryordeath;and
Changeinbehaviourasaresultofnoise.
duringconstructionandoperationactivities
personnel;
Storefoodwastesinbinsthatarenoteasilyaccessibletofauna;
Uselownoiseequipmentwherepracticable;
Developborrowpitssuchthattheyarefree‐draining(wherepracticable–discussedfurtherinSection7)tominimisewaterpooling;
Controlintroducedfaunaaroundcampsandotherworkareas;
Internalreportingofallincidentsresultinginfaunainjuryordeath;and
Setandenforcevehiclespeedlimits.
controls. confirmed.Nevertheless,avoidance,minimisationandmitigationstrategieshavebeenappliedthishabitat,andtheProposalisabletocompletelyavoidthishabitat;
OtherconservationsignificantfaunahabitatiswidespreadandgenerallywellconnectedtosimilarhabitatoutsideoftheProposalArea.Thedisturbanceofanarrowcorridorandassociateditemsisnotexpectedtosignificantlyimpactthehabitatofthesespecies.
TheProposalwillnotaffecttheconservationstatusofanysignificantspecies;
TwoSREspeciesareonlyknownfromwithinthestudyarea,fromrockyhillandgullyhabitat.AvoidanceandmanagementstrategiesareproposedforSREhabitat,andthedevelopmentoflinearinfrastructureislikelytodissectaportionofSREhabitatratherthandisturbanentirepopulation.ItisalsolikelythatsuitablehabitatexistsoutsidetheProposalArea(Phoenix,2014a).TheProposalisthereforeunlikelytoresultinsignificantimpactstoanySREspecies;
Noiseimpactsarenotexpectedtobesignificantasconstructiondoesnotgenerallyoccurinasinglelocationforanextendedperiod.Railmovementsduringoperationsareinfrequent;and
TakingintoconsiderationthecarefulselectionofProposalAreaboundaries(toexcludekeyfaunahabitat)andproposedmanagementactions,RutilaexpectsthattheProposalcanbeimplementedtomeettheEPAObjectiveforthisfactor.
500000mE
500000mE
550000mE
550000mE
600000mE
600000mE
7700000mN7700000mN
7650000mN7650000mN
7600000mN7600000mN
LOCALITY
0 10km
Scale 1:750,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
WESTERNWESTERN
AUSTRALIAAUSTRALIA
KalgoorlieKalgoorliePerthPerth
Balla BallaBalla Balla
GeraldtonGeraldton
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine & Port
Proposal Area
Rail
Conveyor
TopographyConservation / National Park
DoT Port Boundary
Road / Track
Railway
Watercourse
KarrathaKarratha Port HedlandPort Hedland
MungaroonaMungaroonaRange NatureRange Nature
ReserveReserve
NorthNorth
WestWest
CoastalCoastal
HighwayHighway
ROEBOURNEROEBOURNE
Whim CreekWhim Creek
WICKHAMWICKHAM
TomTom
PricePrice
RailwayRailway
Roebourne
Roebourne
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
RoadRoad
Millstream Chichester National ParkMillstream Chichester National Park
RoadRoadWittenoom
Wittenoom
Nanut
arra
Nanut
arra
Karijini National ParkKarijini National Park
NWCH Crossing
SherlockSherlock
RiverRiver
Fortescue
Fortescue
FortescueFortescue
RiverRiver
RiverRiver
CaliwingaCaliwinga
Cree
kCr
eek
Weelumurra
Weelumurra
CreekCreek
HooleyHooley CreekCreek
Nuny
erry
Nuny
erry
Creek
Creek
Sher
lock
Sher
lock
Rive
rRi
ver
BallaBalla
RiverRiver
BallaBalla
BBI Port
BBI PortConveyor
BBI RailStockyard
PIOPPIOP
BBI MineBBI Mine
BBI PortStockyard
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |vi
FigureES2providesaconceptualillustrationofthesignificanceframeworkandhowitappliestothekeyenvironmentalfactorsthatmaybeimpactedbytheProposal.ItillustratesRutila’sviewof the levelofuncertaintyremainingafterall available informationhasbeenconsidered. It isexpected that the application of conditions (relating to offsets and the requirement for anInfrastructurePlan)willgreatlyreduceanyuncertaintyandensurethattheProposalcanmeettheEPA’sObjectives.
Please note that Figure ES2 is conceptual only and is not intended to imply precision inevaluatingthesignificanceofimpacts.
FigureES2:Conceptualillustrationoftheapplicationofthesignificanceframework
Flora&Vegetation TerrestrialFauna
Likelysignificanceofimpacts
KeyEnvironmentalFactors Outcome Condition
MaymeettheEPA'sObjectives
MeetstheEPA'sObjectives
UnlikelytomeettheEPA'sObjective
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |vii
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................I
LISTOFFIGURES..........................................................................................................................................VIII
LISTOFTABLES...........................................................................................................................................VIII
LISTOFAPPENDICES.................................................................................................................................VIII
1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................1
ProjectBackground...............................................................................................................................................1
PurposeofthisDocument...................................................................................................................................1
LevelofAssessmentCriteria‐CategoryAAPI...........................................................................................2
2 PROPONENTANDKEYPROPOSALCHARACTERISTICS......................................................3
ProponentDetails...................................................................................................................................................3
KeyProposalCharacteristics.............................................................................................................................3
3 GENERALDESCRIPTIONOFPROPOSAL...................................................................................8
ProposalFacilitiesandActivities....................................................................................................................8
Location,TenureandLandUse......................................................................................................................10
AlternativesConsidered.....................................................................................................................................11
ApprovalandDevelopmentTimeframes...................................................................................................12
4 STAKEHOLDERCONSULTATION.............................................................................................15
5 RELEVANTSTUDIES.....................................................................................................................17
6 ASSESSMENTOFPRELIMINARYKEYENVIRONMENTALFACTORS.............................19
DeterminationofKeyEnvironmentalFactors........................................................................................19
FloraandVegetation..........................................................................................................................................19
Context........................................................................................................................................................................19
PotentialSignificantImpactswithoutMitigation..................................................................................21
ProposedManagement(Mitigation)............................................................................................................25
Regulation.................................................................................................................................................................26
OutcomeandAssessmentagainstEPAObjective....................................................................................27
TerrestrialFauna..................................................................................................................................................29
Context........................................................................................................................................................................29
PotentialSignificantImpactswithoutMitigation..................................................................................32
ProposedManagement(Mitigation)............................................................................................................32
Regulation.................................................................................................................................................................33
OutcomeandAssessmentagainstEPAObjective....................................................................................34
7 OTHERENVIRONMENTALFACTORS......................................................................................37
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |viii
8 PRINCIPLESOFTHEEPACT......................................................................................................41
9 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................42
10 GLOSSARY.......................................................................................................................................43
11 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................45
12 APPENDICES...................................................................................................................................47
LISTOFFIGURES
FigureES1:LocationoftheProposalAreaandIndicativeInfrastructure…………………………….……vFigureES2:Conceptualillustrationoftheapplicationofthesignificanceframework……………….viFigure1:LocationoftheProposalAreaandIndicativeInfrastructure.......................................................5Figure 2: Conservation significant fauna records andhabitat in thenorthernhalf of the StudyArea(Source:Phoenix,2014a).....................................................................................................................................6Figure 3: Conservation significant fauna records andhabitat in thenorthernhalf of the StudyArea(Source:Phoenix,2014a).....................................................................................................................................7Figure4:TenureandlandusewithintheProposalArea...............................................................................13Figure5:AlternativerailalignmentoptionsconsideredfortheProposal.............................................14Figure6:PriorityEcologicalCommunitiesoftheNorthernPortionoftheRailCorridor................22Figure7:PriorityEcologicalCommunitiesoftheSouthernPortionoftheRailCorridor................23Figure8:StudyAreasandProposalAreaboundaries.....................................................................................24
LISTOFTABLES
TableES1:SummaryoftheProposal……………………............................................…………………………………iTableES2:Assessmenttable–keyenvironmentalfactors.......................................................................…...iiTable1:CriteriaforCategoryAAPIlevelofassessment..................................................................................2Table2:KeyCharacteristicsoftheProposal(CorrespondstoProposalAreaboundaryprovidedinFigure1)...........................................................................................................................................................................4Table3:SummarydescriptionofProposalelements........................................................................................8Table4:ApprovalsSchedule......................................................................................................................................12Table5:Relevantstakeholderconsultationrecords.......................................................................................15Table6:Summaryofenvironmentalsurveys....................................................................................................17Table7:Environmentalassessment–otherenvironmentalfactors.........................................................38Table8:EPActprinciples............................................................................................................................................41
LISTOFAPPENDICES
Appendix1:BiologicalReportsandSurveysAppendix2:ProposalAreaShapefilesAppendix3:SummaryofStakeholderConsultation
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |1
1 INTRODUCTION
PROJECTBACKGROUND
ForgeResourcesSwanPtyLtd(Forge)obtainedMinisterialapprovalforthedevelopmentoftheBallaBallaInfrastructurePort(BBIP)on21August2013(MinisterialStatement945(MS945)).Forgeisa100%ownedsubsidiaryofASXlistedRutilaResourcesLtd(Rutila).Rutilaisthejointventure (JV) partner with Todd Corporation Ltd in the Balla Balla JV, whereby Forge is theassignedManager.
TheBBIPislocatedonthePilbaracoastline,approximately100kilometre(km)eastofAnketellPoint and 120 km south‐west of Port Hedland in Western Australia (WA). The BBIP wasoriginally proposed to allow the export of ore from Rutila’s Balla Balla Infrastructure Mine(MS794) mine, however recent studies have identified that there is additional port capacityavailable for use by third parties. The Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP) (MS 924) operated byFlindersMinesLtd(Flinders)willbetheBBIPfoundationcustomer.
Toallowthistooccur,anapproximate200kmcombinationofrailwayandoverlandconveyorwillbeconstructedtoconnecttheBBIPwiththePIOPinthecentralPilbararegion.ThisrailwayandconveyororetransportinfrastructureisreferredtoastheBallaBallaInfrastructure–Railand Conveyor Project (the Proposal), and combined with the BBIP form the Balla BallaInfrastructureProject.
PURPOSEOFTHISDOCUMENT
The purpose of this Assessment on Proponent Information (API) document is to provide adetailed description of the Proposal and to enable assessment of the potential environmentalimpactsthatmayresult,shouldtheProposalbeimplemented.Thisdocumentalsooutlinesthekeyelements(characteristics)requiredfortheconstructionandoperationoftheProposal.Theassessmentwill be completed by theOffice of the Environmental ProtectionAuthority ofWA(OEPA)undertheprovisionsofPartIVoftheEnvironmentalProtectionAct1986(EPAct).
ThisdocumenthasbeensubmittedalongwithareferralunderSection38(1)oftheEPAct,ontheassumptionthatanAPIlevelofassessmentisappropriate(refertoSection1.3below).ThisassumptionisbasedonongoingdiscussionswiththeOEPAoverseveralmonths.
TheintentionisthatthisAPIdocumentcontainsalltheinformationthattheOEPAwouldrequireto assess the Proposal, and therefore the scoping process can be circumvented. Rutila hascommissioned studies based on input from the OEPA and therefore it is expected that thisprocessisappropriate.
This API document has been written in accordance with the EPA’s gazetted EnvironmentalImpactAssessment(EIA)PartIVdivisions1and2AdministrativeProcedures(EPA,2012a),andhasalsotakenintoaccounttheEnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline8:forEnvironmentalFactorsandObjectives(EPA2013c). RutilaalsoconsideredOEPAadviceabouttheguidancedocumentcurrentlybeingpreparedforreleasebytheOEPA.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |2
This API document focuses on the environmental factors that are deemed to be ‘key’ factors,thosewith thepotential tobe significantly impactedandcouldnotbeappropriatelymanagedunderotherexisting legislation. Potential impacts to thesekey factorsaredescribed indetailandassessedusingrelevantstudiesspecifictotheProposal. ‘Other’environmental factorsarediscussedbriefly,withafocusondemonstratingthattheycanbeappropriatelymanagedusingacombination of industry‐standard controls and other existing legislation. Therefore, this APIdocument describes the most relevant impacts and characteristics of the Proposal forassessment and provides all related biological reports and survey results as Appendices(Appendix1).
Rutila is also in the process of preparing a referral under the Environment Protection andBiodiversityConservationAct1999(Cth)(EPBCAct)whichistobesubmittedinparallelwiththisAPIdocument.RutilaintendsonkeepingtheapprovalprocessesseparateanddoesnotrequestabilateralassessmentforthisProposal.
LEVELOFASSESSMENTCRITERIA‐CATEGORYAAPI
In submitting thisdocument, the criteria foraCategoryA levelof assessmentwere reviewed.Table1identifiesthesecriteriaanddescribeshowtheProposalcomplieswitheachcriteria.
Table1:CriteriaforCategoryAAPIlevelofassessment
Criteria Comment
(a) The Proposal raises a limitednumber of key environmentalfactors that can readily bemanagedandforwhichthereisanestablished condition‐settingframework.
The Proponent, in consultationwith the OEPA, has considered the keyenvironmental factors. Flora and vegetation and terrestrial fauna areconsideredtobekeyenvironmentalfactorsfortheProposal.
There is an established condition setting framework for rail and linearinfrastructureproposalsinterrestrialenvironmentsinthePilbara.
(b) The Proposal is consistent withestablishedpolicies,guidelinesandstandards.
ThelocationandpurposeofthelanduponwhichtheProposalisbasedisconsistentwithestablishedGovernmentpolicyandlanduse.
Assessmentagainstpolicies,guidelinesandstandardsisprovidedinthisAPIdocumentandtheProposalisconsistentwiththese.
Information is provided where relevant in relation to guidelines andstandards.
(c) The Proponent can demonstratethat it has conducted appropriateand effective stakeholderconsultation, in particular withdecisionmakingauthorities.
Rutilahascompletedextensivestakeholderconsultation. AsummaryoftheconsultationisincludedinSection5.
(d) There is limited or local concernonly about the likely effect of theProposal, implemented, on theenvironment.
TheProposalisexpectedtoresultinlowlevelsoflocalconcern.PreviousconcernswiththeProposalfromPastoralists,NativeTitleclaimantsandmining tenure holders have led to numerous realignments of theProposalArea (refer to Section2.5) to ensure that theProposalwill beacceptable. The Proposal Area is the area that forms the basis for thisProposalandistheareawithinwhichtheProposalwillbeimplemented.TheProposalAreaisoutlinedinredinFigure1.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |3
2 PROPONENTANDKEYPROPOSALCHARACTERISTICS
PROPONENTDETAILS
Theproponent for this submission isForge. Forge is a 100%owned subsidiaryofASX listedRutila.RutilaistheJVpartnerwithToddCorporationLtdintheBallaBallaJV,wherebyForgeistheassignedManager.
TheProponentfortheProposalisdetailedbelow:
ForgeResourcesSwanPtyLtdABN:14149783068
Thekeycontactpersoninrelationtothisdocumentis:
RutilaResourcesPtyLtd
ContactPerson: AngelaJohnson–GroupExecutive‐WAEmail: [email protected]: www.rutila.com.auPhone: +61417910294Address: GroundFloorEast,34ColinStreet,WestPerth,6005
KEYPROPOSALCHARACTERISTICS
RutilahasconsideredEnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline1:DefiningtheKeyCharacteristicsofaProposal (EAG1) (EPA, 2012b) ‐ which focuses on how to define the key characteristics ofproposals for thepurposesof assessment and incorporation intoMinisterial Statements. Theobjective of EAG1 is to assist proponents to identify and provide the key characteristics thatcaptureallkeyfeaturesoftheproposalrelevanttoPartIVoftheEPAct.ThekeycharacteristicsfortheProposalaredescribedinTable2.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |4
Table2:KeyCharacteristicsoftheProposal(CorrespondstoProposalAreaboundaryprovidedinFigure1)
SummaryoftheProposal
ProposalTitle BallaBallaInfrastructure–Rail&ConveyorProject
ProponentName ForgeResourcesSwanPtyLtd
ShortDescription TheProposalistoconstructandoperatearailwayline(approximately160kminlength)andconveyorline(approximately40kminlength)runningfromthePilbaraIronOreProject(operatedbyFlinders)northtotheBallaBallaInfrastructure‐Port.TheProposalincludessupportinginfrastructuresuchasstockyards,borrowpits,accessroads,communications,waterboresandpipelines,accommodationcamps,workshops,laydownareas,aballastquarry,aconveyorrailwaylineoverpassandalevelcrossingoftheNorthWestCoastalHighway.
PhysicalElements
Element Location ProposedExtentAuthorised
Grounddisturbance
WithintheProposalAreashowninFigure1
Disturbanceofnomorethan3,000hectares(ha)withinthe50,089haProposalArea,withnomorethanapproximately1,800haremainingdisturbedduringoperations.Thedisturbanceareasnotrequiredforoperationsaretoberehabilitatedpost‐construction.
Allelements WithintheProposalAreashowninFigure1
Disturbanceofnomorethan5hawithinareasofdefinedNorthernQuolldenningandshelterhabitatasshowninFigure2andFigure3.
Disturbanceofnomorethan78hawithinareasofdefinedPilbaraOlivePythonshelterhabitatasshowninFigure2andFigure3.
NodisturbanceofNorthernMarsupialMolehabitatasshowninFigure2andFigure3.
500000mE
500000mE
550000mE
550000mE
600000mE
600000mE
7700000mN7700000mN
7650000mN7650000mN
7600000mN7600000mN
LOCALITY
0 10km
Scale 1:750,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
WESTERNWESTERN
AUSTRALIAAUSTRALIA
KalgoorlieKalgoorliePerthPerth
Balla BallaBalla Balla
GeraldtonGeraldton
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine & Port
Proposal Area
Rail
Conveyor
TopographyConservation / National Park
DoT Port Boundary
Road / Track
Railway
Watercourse
KarrathaKarratha Port HedlandPort Hedland
MungaroonaMungaroonaRange NatureRange Nature
ReserveReserve
NorthNorth
WestWest
CoastalCoastal
HighwayHighway
ROEBOURNEROEBOURNE
Whim CreekWhim Creek
WICKHAMWICKHAM
TomTom
PricePrice
RailwayRailway
Roebourne
Roebourne
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
RoadRoad
Millstream Chichester National ParkMillstream Chichester National Park
RoadRoadWittenoom
Wittenoom
Nanut
arra
Nanut
arra
Karijini National ParkKarijini National Park
NWCH Crossing
SherlockSherlock
RiverRiver
Fortescue
Fortescue
FortescueFortescue
RiverRiver
RiverRiver
CaliwingaCaliwinga
Cree
kCr
eek
Weelumurra
Weelumurra
CreekCreek
HooleyHooley CreekCreek
Nuny
erry
Nuny
erry
Creek
Creek
Sher
lock
Sher
lock
Rive
rRi
ver
BallaBalla
RiverRiver
BallaBalla
BBI Port
BBI PortConveyor
BBI RailStockyard
PIOPPIOP
BBI MineBBI Mine
BBI PortStockyard
560000mE
560000mE
7700000mN7700000mN
7680000mN7680000mN
7660000mN7660000mN
7640000mN7640000mN
600000mE
600000mE
NorthNorth
WestWest CoastalCoastal HighwayHighway
Whim CreekWhim Creek
Millstream Chichester National ParkMillstream Chichester National Park
BBI MineBBI Mine
0 4km
Scale 1:300,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
560000mE
560000mE
7700000mN7700000mN
7680000mN7680000mN
7660000mN7660000mN
7640000mN7640000mN
600000mE
600000mE
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine
Proposal Area
Conservation Significant Vertebrate SpeciesAustralian Bustard
Northern Quoll
Lined Soil-Crevice Skink
Rainbow Bee-eater
Western Pebble Mound Mouse
Conservation Significant Fauna HabitatGreater Bilby, Mulgara sp.
Greater Bilby, Mulgara sp. andNothern Marsupial Mole
Northern Quoll
Northern Quoll and Pilbara Olive Python
Pilbara Olive Python
TopographyConservation / National Park
Road / Track
Railway
7600000mN7600000mN
7580000mN7580000mN
560000mE
560000mE
580000mE
580000mE
7620000mN7620000mN
Nanut
arra
TomTom
PricePrice
Railway
Railway
Roebourne
RoebourneWittenoom
Wittenoom
RoadRoad
Millstream Chichester National ParkMillstream Chichester National Park
PIOPPIOP
0 4km
Scale 1:300,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
7600000mN7600000mN
7580000mN7580000mN
560000mE
560000mE
580000mE
580000mE
7620000mN7620000mN
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine
Proposal Area
Conservation Significant Vertebrate SpeciesAustralian Bustard
Northern Quoll
Lined Soil-Crevice Skink
Rainbow Bee-eater
Western Pebble Mound Mouse
Conservation Significant Fauna HabitatGreater Bilby, Mulgara sp.
Greater Bilby, Mulgara sp. andNothern Marsupial Mole
Northern Quoll
Northern Quoll and Pilbara Olive Python
Pilbara Olive Python
TopographyConservation / National Park
Road / Track
Railway
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |8
3 GENERALDESCRIPTIONOFPROPOSAL
PROPOSALFACILITIESANDACTIVITIES
Table3summarisestheelementsoftheProposalaswellasanykeycharacteristicsrelevanttoEIA.Upto3,000haofgrounddisturbancewithinthe50,089haProposalAreawillberequiredtoimplementtheProposal.Figure1showstheboundaryoftheProposalAreawithinwhichallgrounddisturbanceisexpectedtooccur.
TheProposaldoesnotincludeminingoperationsortheprocessingofironoreatRutila’sBallaBalla InfrastructureMineor theexportofore throughRutila’sBBIP,whichhavealreadybeenapprovedunderPartIVoftheEPAct(MinisterialStatements794and945respectively).
Table3:SummarydescriptionofProposalelements
ProposalElement Description
40km(estimated)overlandconveyorfromPIOPConveyorFeedChutetotheBallaBallaInfrastructureRailway(BBIR)Stockyard
ThebatterylimitforthesouthofthePIOPistheendoftheloadoutConveyorintotheconveyorFeedChute.FlinderswilldelivertheoretotheConveyorFeedChute,whichunloadsdirectlyontotheoverlandconveyor.
ThisconveyorconnectsthePIOPConveyorFeedChutetotheBBIRStockyard.Itwillbeapproximately40kminlengthandinstalledonanelevatedtrestlestructure.Communications,power,waterpipelinesandotherservicesareexpectedtobeeitherconnectedtothetrestlestructure,orburiedalongsideorunderneaththestructure.
Disturbanceestimatesarebasedonanaverage30mconstructiondisturbancewidth,whichincludestheconveyorconstructionarea,aswellasaccessroadsandtopsoilstockpiles.
Theaveragecorridorwidthwillbereducedtoapproximately18mforoperations,with12mbeingrehabilitatedonceitisnolongerrequired.
Allconveyorsareexpectedtobecompletelycovered,althoughthiswillbedependentonoperationalrequirements.
TheconveyorwillcrosstheRioTintoIronOre(RTIO)TomPricerailwaylineviaatrestleoverpassatthenorthernendoftheconveyorcorridor(Figure1).
RutilaisindiscussionswithRTIOaboutthedesignoftheoverpass,howeveritisexpectedthatanyissueswillbeminorincomparisonwiththealternativeoptionofarail‐over‐railoverpass.
BBIRStockyard TheBBIRstockyardislocatedimmediatelyeastoftheRTIOTomPricerailwaylineandadjacenttothesouthernloopoftheBBIR(Figure1).
Orefromthe40kmconveyorwillbestackedwithinthestockyardfromwhereitwillbereclaimedbyabucket‐wheelreclaimerandloadedontotrainsviaatrainloadingfacility.
Thestockpiles,reclaimer,internalconveyortransferpointsandtrainloadingfacilitywillbefittedwithwater(orapprovedequivalent)spraystocontroldust.Stormwaterrunofffromstockpileswillbecontrolledon‐siteusingretentionandsedimentationbasins.
BBIR‐160km(estimated)railwaylinefromBBIRStockyardtotheBBIPStockyard
TheBBIRwillextendapproximately160kmnorthfromtheConveyor/RailInterchangeStockyard(Figure1).Therailwaylinewillbestandardgaugeheavyhaulrailwaywithpassingloopsstrategicallylocatedalongthelinetomaximisesystemperformance.Amarshallingyardwillalsobeinstalled.
Therailwayconstructioncorridorwillincludetherailembankment,accessroads,topsoilstockpiles,communicationsandservices.Communicationsandotherserviceswillgenerallybeburiedalongsidetherailembankmentinaseparateservicescorridor(Figure1).
Therailwayconstructioncorridorwillrequireanaverageof80mdisturbancewidth.Theaverageoverallcorridorwidthwillbereducedtoapproximately50mforoperations,with30mbeingrehabilitatedonceitisnolongerrequired.
Therailembankmentwillbearmouredbyballastrocktominimiseerosionofthestructure.
Drainageculvertsorbridgeswillbeinstalledforminorandmajorwatercoursecrossingsrespectively.Aminimumtwomajorwatercoursecrossingswillberequired,tocrossFortescueandSherlockRiversand/oritstributaries.Figure1showsthelocationofthesewatercoursecrossings.Culvertswillbeinstalledacrosswatercourses,andtheywillbe
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |9
ProposalElement Description
appropriatelydesignedandinstalledsuchthattheycancopewithpotentialfloodeventsineachlocation.
Therailwaylinewillcrossseveralpublicroads,themostsignificantbeingtheNWCH,whichwillbearoadoverrailgradeseparationcrossing.ThesecrossingswillbeinstalledwithwarningsasrequiredbytheRailSafetyAct2010.
BBIPStockyard TheBBIPStockyardwillbelocatedadjacenttothenorthernrailloop,withaconveyoroverpassconnectingthestockyardwiththeBBIP(Figure1).Itwillholdsufficientcapacitytoloadcape‐sizevesselsandaccommodateathroughputof25milliontonnesperannum.OrewillbeunloadedfromthetrainsusingacarunloaderandtransportedviaoverlandconveyortotheBBIPstockyard.
Orewillbestackedwithinthestockyardfromwhereitwillbereclaimedbyabucket‐wheelreclaimerandtransferredontotheBBIPconveyorviaaloadoutbin.
Thestockpiles,bucket‐wheelreclaimer,internalconveyortransferpointsandtheloadoutbinwillbefittedwithwater(orapprovedequivalent)spraystocontroldust.Stormwaterrunofffromstockpileswillbecontrolledon‐siteusingretentionandsedimentationbasins.
TheBBIPStockyardhasbeenrelocatedfromitsoriginalposition(asapprovedunderMS945)tonowbefurthersetbackfromthecoastline.
AmarshallingyardandrollingstockmaintenancefacilityalsoformpartoftheBBIPStockyardarea,locatedsouthoftherailloop.
BBIPConveyor Ashort(approximately5km)conveyorwillconnecttheBBIPStockyardwiththeBBIPcauseway.TheorewillthenbeexportedviatheapprovedBBIPfacilities.
Theconveyorwillbeinstalledonatrestlestructure,andwillcrosstherailembankmentatthenorthernsideoftherailloop.Theconveyorconstructioncorridorincludestheconveyorconstructionarea,aswellasaccessroadsandtopsoilstockpiles.Communications,power,waterpipelinesandotherservicesareexpectedtobeeitherconnectedtothetrestlestructure,orburiedalongsideorunderneaththestructure.
Disturbanceestimatesarebasedonanaverage30mconstructiondisturbancewidth,whichincludestheconveyorconstructionarea,aswellasaccessroadsandtopsoilstockpiles.
Theaveragecorridorwidthwillbereducedtoapproximately18mforoperations,with12mbeingrehabilitatedonceitisnolongerrequired.
Allconveyorsareexpectedtobecompletelycovered.
Borrowpits Rutilawilltargetacutandfillbalanceasmuchaspossiblealongtheraillength,howeverthroughareasofflatterrain,borrowpitswillberequiredtoprovidesufficientmaterialfortherailembankment.BorrowpitswillbetargetsuitablematerialwithintheProposalArea,inlocationsthatminimisehauldistances.Thesizeofeachborrowpitwillvary,howeverthetypicaldepthwillbe2m.
Borrowpitswillgenerallybeslopedtobefree‐draining.Theremaybesomeareasofextremelyflatgroundwheretheborrowpitscannotreasonablybeslopedtobefree‐draining.Intheselocationstheborrowpitswillbebundedaroundtheirperimetertopreventsurfacewaterinflows,andevaporationandinfiltrationwillbeusedtominimisethetimethatstandingwaterremainsinthepit.
Severalborrowpitswillremainopenduringtheoperationalperiodtoprovidesupplementarymaterialformaintenancepurposedasrequired.Theremainingborrowpitswillberehabilitatedoncetheyarenolongerrequired.
Associatedinfrastructureandservices
ExternalAccessRoads‐referstoroadsthatarelocatedoutsideoftherailcorridor.Thesemayincluderoadsthatconnecttherailcorridorwithborrowpits,waterbores,publicroadsoraccommodationcamps.
Theseroadswillvaryinwidthdependingontheirpurpose,from6mforlightvehicleaccessroadsto20mformaterialhaulroads.
CommunicationTowersandReticulatedServices‐communicationscables(e.g.fibreoptic)andtowerswillbeinstalledalongthelengthoftherailandconveyorcorridors.Thesecableswillbeburiedwithintheservicessectionofthecorridororinstalledalongtheconveyortrestlestructure.
WaterSupplyandPipelines‐duringconstructionandoperations,waterwillbesourcedfromanumberofboreswithintheProposalArea.Thetotalexpectedwaterrequirementwillbe1.8GL/yrforconstruction,primarilyrequiredforembankmentconditioninganddustsuppression.Lowerwatervolumeswillberequiredduringoperation,formaintenancepurposes.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |10
ProposalElement Description
Sourcesofsuitablegroundwaterarecurrently beinginvestigated.Onceidentified,RutilawillobtaintheappropriatelicencesundertheRightsinWaterandIrrigationAct1914(RIWIAct).
Eachborewillbeoperatedtoensurethatonlythesustainableyieldforeachboreisabstracted.AbstractionplanningwillbedetailedinaGroundwaterOperatingStrategysubmittedtotheDepartmentofWater(DoW)aspartofthe5Capplicationprocess.
AccommodationCamps‐potentiallythreeaccommodationcampswillbeinstalledwithintheProposalAreaforconstructionpersonnel.Thesecampswillbeappropriatelysitedinproximitytokeyworkareasandpotablewatersupply.
WorkshopandLaydownAreas‐severalworkshopsandlaydownareaswillberequiredalongthelengthoftheProposalArea.Workshopswillvaryinsizeandpurposeandwillbeusedtoservicelightandconstructionvehicles,andotherequipment.Laydownareaswillbeusedforparkingandstorageareas.
Therewillbelightvehiclerefuellingfacilitiesatseveraloftheworkshopsorlaydownareas.On‐sitestorageoffuelwillberequiredfortheoperationofmobileplant,vehicles,generatorsandotherequipment.Somelimitedquantitiesofsolvents,paints,cleaningproductsandbondingagentswillalsoberequired.Allhydrocarbons,hazardousordangerousgoodswillbestoredandusedincompliancewithrelevantlegislationandstandards.
BallastQuarry‐maybedevelopedwithintheProposalAreaifasuitablesitecanbelocated.Thisballastquarrywillprovideballastarmourmaterialfortherailembankment.
IfasuitablesitecannotbefoundwithintheProposalAreathenmaterialmaybebroughttositefromanexternalsource(i.e.notpartofthisProposal).
PowerSupply‐generatorswillbeutilisedduringconstruction,locatedclosetoareasofpowerdemand(i.e.suchascampsorworkshops).Generatorswilleitherbeself‐bunded,orlocatedwithinabundedareatominimisespillrisks.
Landfill‐oneormoreputresciblelandfillsmaybedevelopedonsiteforthedisposalofconstructionandoperationswaste.Allhazardouswasteswillbedisposedofoff‐site.Theviabilityofrecyclingopportunitieswillbeconsidered.
NolandfillswillbelocatedwithintheMillstreamWaterReserve.
Alllandfillswillbesited,developedandoperatedinaccordancewithDepartmentofEnvironmentRegulation(DER)worksapprovalandlicenceconditions.
LOCATION,TENUREANDLANDUSE
TheProposalAreaislocatedinthePilbararegionofWAandisshowninFigure1.Allproposeddisturbance addressed in this API document is planned to be constructed entirelywithin theboundaryoftheProposalArea.
TheProposalAreawillbealignedwiththefollowingtenure(fromsouthtonorth):
Miscellaneous licenceL47/733extendingnorth from thePIOP to the southernendof the railcorridor;
ThefutureSpecialRailwayLicence(SRL)corridorwhichwilloverlaythemajorityoftherailwayportion of the Proposal. The SRL will run from the rail loop at the BBIR Stockyard to theboundaries of a newPilbara Ports Authority (PPA) lease in the north. Thewidth of the SRLwhen granted will be narrower than the Proposal Area as it will be refined based on moredetaileddesignworkcompletedinearly2015;and
A futurePilbaraPortsAuthority (PPA) lease thatwill include thenorthernportion of the railcorridor,aswellastheBBIPstockyardandBBIP.
ASection91(S91)licencehasbeenappliedforundertheLandAdministrationAct1997overthemajorityof theProposalAreaand is expected tobegrantedon12December2014. ThisS91
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |11
licence will allow geotechnical, water and other relevant investigations to occur prior toconstruction.
The Proposal Area passes through the City of Karratha and the Shire of Ashburton LocalGovernmentareas. TheProposalArea includesanareaofUnallocatedCrownLand(UCL)andthreepastoral leases–Sherlock,MallinaandCoolawanyah. Mining isasignificant landuse inthe surrounding area of the proposed BBIR and the Proposal Area traverses several areas ofMiningActtenure.
The Proposal Area passes between the Millstream Chichester National Park and MungarooRangeNatureReserve(avoidanceofthesereserveswasidentifiedearlyasakeyconstraintforthe Proposal), however it does pass through a Redbook area. This Redbook area (shown inFigure 4) lies immediatelywest and adjacent to theMillstream Chichester National Park andcoversanareaof73,585ha.
Figure4showsthetenureandlandusefeatures.
ALTERNATIVESCONSIDERED
A railway line is considered the best iron ore transport option as Rutila can cost‐effectivelyboost their transport efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by negating the use ofroadhaulage.
NumerousdifferentrailalignmentoptionsfromminetoportwereoriginallyconsideredfortheProposal (Figure 5). Key factors that Rutila considered during the assessment of alternativealignmentsfortheProposalincluded:
Cost; Engineeringconstraints; Developmenttimeframes; Locationinrelationtoorebodies(PIOPandotherareasofpotentialmineralisation); RegisteredandotherpotentialsignificantAboriginalHeritagesites; Complete avoidance of Millstream Chichester National Park and Mungaroona Range
NatureReserve; Existingpublicuseareas; Pastoralactivitiesandpastoralistrequests;and Potentialenvironmentalconstraints.
Several key changes that were made to the overall Proposal Area alignment have someenvironmentaloutcomesasdiscussedbelow:
1. AvoidanceofNunyerryGorge. NunyerryGorgewas found tohave a relatively largepopulation of Northern Quoll (refer to Appendix 1) that was unavoidable given thenarrowwidthofthegorge.TheareawasalsoidentifiedasasignificantethnographicsiteduringAboriginalHeritageinvestigations.TherealignmentoftheProposalAreaaroundthissectiongreatlyreducedthepotentialenvironmentalandHeritageimpacts;
2. Relocationofnorthernrailloop.TheoriginallocationofthenorthernrailloopwasattheverynorthernendoftheProposalArea.Therailloophasnowbeenrelocatedsouth‐west,andwilllinktotheBBIPviaashort(5km)conveyor.Thisrelocationbothshortens
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |12
theraillengthbyapproximately5kmandalsogreatlyreducestheimpacttoaPriorityEcologicalCommunity(discussedfurtherinSection4);and
3. Crossing of Sherlock River. The alignment now crosses the Sherlock River higherupstream, where the width of the watercourse and predicted flows are lower. Thisreduced the potential impacts to riparian vegetation and indirect impacts associatedwith watercourse crossings. This realignment also avoids the Roebuck Plains asrequested by the Pastoralist as well as the Croyden Outstation, which has Aboriginalsignificance.
The final Proposal Area alignment was considered to be the most feasible based onconsiderationoftheabovefactors.
APPROVALANDDEVELOPMENTTIMEFRAMES
Key approvalmilestone targets for assessment under Section 38 of the EP Act are shown inTable4.ThesetimeframesareconsistentwiththeEPA’sEnvironmentalAssessmentGuidelineNo.6: for Timelines for EIA of Proposals (EAG6) (EPA2010). The key development milestonetimeframes will be determined after a full Bankable Feasibility Study has been completed inmid‐2015.
Table4:ApprovalsSchedule
2014
Stage Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
RutilasubmitsReferralFormandAPIdocumentationOEPAsetlevelofassessmentasAPIOEPAassessAPIandRutilaprovideadditionalinformationifrequestedOEPApublishreportanddraftconditionsandsubmittoMinister
MinisterialStatementreleased
2015
CITY OFCITY OFKARRATHAKARRATHA
SHIRE OFSHIRE OFASHBURTONASHBURTON
TOWN OFTOWN OFPORT HEDLANDPORT HEDLAND
500000mE
500000mE
550000mE
550000mE
600000mE
600000mE
7700000mN7700000mN
7650000mN7650000mN
7600000mN7600000mN
MungaroonaMungaroonaRange NatureRange Nature
ReserveReserve
NorthNorth
WestWest
CoastalCoastal
HighwayHighway
ROEBOURNEROEBOURNE
Whim CreekWhim Creek
WICKHAMWICKHAM
TomTom
PricePrice
RailwayRailway
Roebourne
Roebourne
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
RoadRoad
Millstream Chichester National ParkMillstream Chichester National Park
RoadRoadWittenoom
Wittenoom
Nanut
arra
Nanut
arra
Karijini National ParkKarijini National Park
SherlockSherlockPastoral StationPastoral Station
MallinaMallinaPastoral StationPastoral Station
MallinaMallinaPastoral StationPastoral Station
CoolawanyahCoolawanyahPastoral StationPastoral Station
MillstreamMillstreamWater ReserveWater Reserve
UnallocatedUnallocatedCrown Land /Crown Land /
RedbookRedbookAreaArea
UnallocatedUnallocatedCrown LandCrown Land
PIOPPIOP
BBI MineBBI Mine
0 10km
Scale 1:750,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine & Port
Proposal Area
Pastoral StationSherlock
Mallina
Coolawanyah
TopographyShire Boundary
Conservation / National Park
DoT Port Boundary
Redbook Area
Millstream Water Reserve
Road / Track
Railway
500000mE
500000mE
550000mE
550000mE
600000mE
600000mE
7700000mN7700000mN
7650000mN7650000mN
7600000mN7600000mN
BBI Port
MungaroonaMungaroonaRange NatureRange Nature
ReserveReserve
NorthNorth
WestWest
CoastalCoastal
HighwayHighway
ROEBOURNEROEBOURNE
Whim CreekWhim Creek
WICKHAMWICKHAM
TomTom
PricePrice
RailwayRailway
Roebourne
Roebourne
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
RoadRoad
Millstream Chichester National ParkMillstream Chichester National Park
RoadRoadWittenoom
Wittenoom
Nanut
arra
Nanut
arra
Karijini National ParkKarijini National Park
PIOPPIOP
BBI MineBBI Mine
0 10km
Scale 1:750,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
BBI Port
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine & Port
Indicative Rail Alignment
Considered Rail Alignments
TopographyConservation / National Park
DoT Port Boundary
Road / Track
Railway
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |15
4 STAKEHOLDERCONSULTATION
Rutila has identified the key stakeholders for the Proposal and in addition to identifyingindividualstakeholders,Rutilahasalsobroughttogethermultiplestakeholderswherenecessarytoensurethereisalignmentbetweenkeydecisionmakingauthorities.
A date record summary of consultation efforts is maintained by Rutila and will be used tosupport the government approvals process by demonstrating that key stakeholder have beenidentified and will be added to when new stakeholders arise. This summary of stakeholderconsultationisprovidedinAppendix3.
Table 5 details the key stakeholders that Rutila has consulted with that are relevant to thisProposal.
Table5:Relevantstakeholderconsultationrecords
Stakeholder Date Topics/issuesraisedProponentresponse/outcome
OEPA Ongoingmonthlymeetings
Submission,formatandcontentoftheAPIdocument(thisdocument);
Presentationofoutcomesofbiologicalsurveys; Keyfactors; ReviewofdraftEIAsummarytable;and Projectupdates.
RutilawillcontinuetoinformOEPAofdesignchangesandthestatusofsurveysandapprovalsubmissions.
DER 21Nov2014 PresentationoftheProposal; Licensingofvariousinfrastructurethatform
partoftheProposalunderPartVoftheEPAct,including:o BBIPStockyardandconveyorconnection
toBBIP;o Wastewatertreatmentplants;o Landfill(s)(ifrequired);ando Mobilecrushingfacilities(ifrequired).
RutilawillobtainworksapprovalsandlicencesunderPartVoftheEPActpriortoconstructionandoperationrespectively.
DoW 14Oct2014 PresentationoftheProposal; Groundwaterabstractionalongtherail
alignment; Submissionof26DandBedandBanksPermit
applicationsforgroundwaterinvestigations;and
DoWinformedRutilathattheMillstreamaquifershouldbeconsideredtobecompletelyallocated.
Rutilawillsubmit5ClicenceapplicationsforallgroundwaterabstractionfortheProposal.
DepartmentoftheEnvironment(DoE)(Commonwealth)
24Sep2014 PresentationoftheProposal; Presentationofoutcomesofbiologicalsurveys; PresentationofpotentialimpactstoMattersof
NationalEnvironmentalSignificance(MNES); ExpectedsubmissiondatesforEPBCAct
referral;and Cost‐recovery.
RutilawillconsiderDoE’sadvicewhenpreparingtheEPBCReferral.
DPaW Oct‐Nov2014
InformationregardingtheProposalandpotentialimpactstoconservationsignificantspeciesprovidedviaphoneandemail;and
DPaWoriginallystatedthatameetingwouldnotbenecessaryasnomajorconcernswereraised,howeverrecentlyhaverequestedaprojectpresentation(tooccurinDecember
RutilawillcontinuetoliaisewithDPaWasrequired,howevernoconcernswereraised.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |16
Stakeholder Date Topics/issuesraisedProponentresponse/outcome
2014).
DepartmentofStateDevelopment
Ongoing DiscussionsandacceptanceoftheProposal. Proposalaccepted.
PPA Ongoing ProposedPortLandandlease/licenceboundaries;and
TransferfromDepartmentofTransportjurisdiction.
Developmentapplicationandlease/licenceapplicationsforthedevelopmentoftheProposalwillbesubmitted.
NgarlumaAboriginalCorporation
Ongoing Tenureboundaries&potentialdisturbanceimpactsdiscussed;
Employment,contractingandtrainingopportunitiesdiscussed;and
Heritagesurveyscompleted.
GeneralfavourablefeedbackofProposal,discussionongoing.
YindjibarndiAboriginalCorporation
Ongoing Tenureboundaries&potentialdisturbanceimpactsdiscussed;
Employment,contractingandtrainingopportunitiesdiscussed;and
Heritagesurveyscompleted.
Proposalwelcomed.
WunambalGaamberaAboriginalCorporation
Ongoing ProposaldiscussedincludingrelationshiptoPIOP. Proposalwelcomed.
CoolawanyahPastoralStation
Ongoing Tenureboundaries&potentialdisturbanceimpactsdiscussed;and
Earlyworksprogressing.
Proposalgenerallyaccepted,discussionsongoing.
SherlockPastoralStation
Ongoing Tenureboundaries&potentialdisturbanceimpactsdiscussed;and
Earlyworksprogressing.
Proposalaccepted.
MallinaPastoralStation
Ongoing Tenureboundaries&potentialdisturbanceimpactsdiscussed;and
Earlyworksprogressing.
Proposalwelcomed.
Flinders Ongoing PIOPexportrequirements; Timeframetargets; Infrastructureconnections; UseofFlinderscampforbiologicalsurveys;and Sharingofenvironmentalinformationand
resources.
RutilawillcontinuetoliaisewithFlindersthroughoutthelifeoftheProposal.
DepartmentofTransport
Ongoing–Lastconsultationwas19Nov2014
Transfermarinevesting;and Inputtomarine&raildesign/philosophy.
Proposalaccepted.
MainRoadsWesternAustralia
19Nov2014 ThedesignoftheNWCHcrossing. Proposalaccepted.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |17
5 RELEVANTSTUDIES
InpreparationoftheProposal,publicallyavailableinformationwasconsidered,howevermostof the Proposal Area had not been subject to biological surveys, with the only knowninformationrelatingtotheapprovedBBIPandBallaBallaInfrastructureMineatthenorthoftheProposalAreaandthePIOPatthesouthernextent.
Rutila planned and implemented a series of studies to confirm specific aspects of baselineenvironmentalinformationandlikelyimpactsassociatedwiththeProposal.EcoscapeAustraliaPtyLtd(Ecoscape)conductedthefloraandvegetationsurveysandPhoenixEnvironmentalPtyLtd(Phoenix)conductedtheterrestrialfaunasurveys.ThesestudiesarelistedanddescribedinTable6,andprovidedinAppendix1forreference.
Table6:Summaryofenvironmentalsurveys
Survey/investigationsname
StudyArea,typeandtiming
Studystandard/guidanceandlimitations
FloraandVegetation
RutilaResourcesRailwayCorridorFloraandVegetationAssessment.June2014.
DesktopassessmentandreconnaissancesurveyconductedinMay2014.
EPAGuidanceStatementNo.51 PositionStatementNo.3 ConsultationwithDPaWLimitations:None.
RutilaResourcesRailwayCorridorFloraandVegetationAssessment.November2014.
57,063haStudyArea;
SingleseasonLevel2survey;and
DesktopreviewandfieldsurveyinJul–Aug2014.
EPAGuidanceStatementNo.51 PositionStatementNo.3 ConsultationwithDPaWLimitations:
FieldsurveywasconductedoutsidetheoptimalperiodforPilbarabotanicalsurveysasoutlinedinGuidanceStatementNo.51.Thereweremoderateconstraintsinthisregardinsomeareasandsomevegetationtypesthathadasignificantannualorephemeralcomponent.
Allotherlimitationswereconsiderednegligible.
TerrestrialFauna
TerrestrialFaunaSurveysfortheRutilaResourcesRailwayCorridor.FinalReport.November2014.
27,064haStudyArea;
Level1terrestrialfaunasurveyandLevel2short‐rangeendemic(SRE)surveyconductedinJuneandJuly2014;and
Targetedvertebratefaunasurveyconducted26Aug–4Sep2014.
EPAGuidanceStatementNo.51 EPAGuidanceStatementNo.56 EPAGuidancefortheAssessmentofEnvironmentalFactors
No.20 PositionStatementNo.3 ConsultationwithDPaWLimitations:
Scopeandcompleteness–PilbaraOlivePythonsurveyspresenteddifficultywithoutthecapacityofthefieldteamtoundertakenightsurveys.
Proportionoffaunaidentified,recordedand/orcollected–ThescopedidnotincludesystematicLevel2trapping,thereforecomprehensiveassemblagedatawasnotcollected
Availabilityofadequatecontextualinformation–Paucityofcomparativedatainthearearegardingapproximate/typicalabundanceanddistributionofmanyspecies,includingthetargetspeciesinthetargetedfaunasurvey.
Addendumto:TerrestrialFaunaSurveysfortheRutilaResourcesRailwayCorridor.November2014.
Level1fieldsurveyconductedon20‐22October2014.
Studystandard/guidanceasabove.Limitations: Habitatmappingwasconductedmainlyatabroadscale,
basedoninformationcollectedduringflightsovertheStudyAreasandonlyground‐truthedatsurveysites.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |18
Rutilawillalsobeconductingdetailedassessmentspriortoconstructionsuchas:
Geotechnical investigations and test pits, including watercourse crossing locations.These investigations will provide information for bridge and culvert design,embankmentmaterialsandpotentialborrowpitlocations;
Groundwater source investigation drilling, pump‐testing and sustainable yieldassessmentsattargetlocationsalongthelengthoftheProposalArea;
Landfillsitinginvestigationsifwasteistobedisposedofonsite; Nutrient loading assessments for wastewater disposal (i.e. from sewage treatment
plants);and Flowrateandvolumeassessmentsatwatercoursecrossingstoinformculvertorbridge
design.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |19
6 ASSESSMENTOFPRELIMINARYKEYENVIRONMENTALFACTORS
DETERMINATIONOFKEYENVIRONMENTALFACTORS
This API document has taken into account advice about the recent guidance document beingpreparedforreleasebytheOEPA.Thissectionwillfocusontheenvironmentalfactorsthataredeemedtobe‘key’factors;thosewiththepotentialtobesignificantlyimpactedandcouldnotbeappropriatelymanagedunderotherexistinglegislation. Potential impactstothesekeyfactorsare described in detail and assessed using the information provided from relevant studiesspecifictotheProposal.‘Other’environmentalfactorsarediscussedbrieflyinSection7,withafocus on demonstrating that they can be appropriately managed using a combination ofindustry‐standardcontrolsandotherexistinglegislation.Insummary,thissectionwilldescribethemost relevant impactsandcharacteristicsof theProposal forassessmentandprovidesallrelatedbiologicalreportsandsurveyresultsasAppendices(Appendix1).
RutilaandPrestonConsultingPtyLtdconductedanassessmentofthepotentialenvironmentalimpactsoftheProposalanddeterminedthatfloraandvegetationandterrestrialfaunawerethetwo‘key’environmentalfactorsthatrequiredadetailedassessmentinthisAPIdocument.
The hydrological processes environmental factor was originally considered to be a ‘key’environmental factor due to the potential for the rail embankment to impact Sheetflowdependent vegetation, however none was identified in the flora and vegetation surveys.Remaining impacts to this factor (i.e. those associated with watercourse crossings) wereexpected to be able to be managed using industry‐standard design commitments and therequirementsoftheSRLandPPAapprovals.
FLORAANDVEGETATION
CONTEXT
PolicyContextThe Proposal Area passes between the Millstream Chichester National Park and MungarooRangeNatureReserve(avoidanceofthesereserveswasidentifiedearlyasakeyconstraintforthe Proposal), however it does pass through a Redbook area. This Redbook area (shown inFigure 4) lies immediatelywest and adjacent to theMillstream Chichester National Park andcoversanareaof73,585ha(Figure4).
RelevantBaselineInformationThefollowinginformationsummarisestherelevantfindingsofthefloraandvegetationsurveysundertakenbyEcoscape(2014). Thecompletereportshavebeenprovided inAppendix1 forreference.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |20
Flora:
NoplanttaxonrecordedintheStudyAreawaslistedasThreatenedundertheEPBCAct; Noplant taxon recorded in the survey isgazettedas aTFpursuant toSubsection2of
Section23FoftheWildlifeConservationAct1950(WA)(WCAct); NinePriorityFlora(PF)specieswerefound:
o P1 taxa Abutilon sp. Pritzelianum (S. van Leeuwen 5095), Helichrysumoligochaetum,Heliotropiummuticum;
o P2taxonPentalepistrichodesmoidessubsp.Hispida;o P3 taxa Indigofera sp. Bungaroo Creek (S. van Leeuwen 4301), Oldenlandia sp.
HamersleyStation(A.A.MitchellPRP1479),Sidasp.BarleeRange(S.vanLeeuwen1642);and
o P4taxaGoodenianuda,Rhynchosiabungarensis. 17otherPFhavethepotentialtooccurbutwerenotrecorded; Two taxawere found that have a significant range extension (Gyrostemontepperi and
Sidasp.RabbitFlat(B.J.Carter626)); Onepreviouslyundescribedspecieswasfound,knownasAcaciasp.thatwasattimesa
dominantcomponentofthemidstratum;and 16introducedspecieswerelocated,noneofwhichwereDeclaredPestplantsorlistedon
anyweedregister.
Vegetation:
90.6%ofthevegetation intheStudyAreawasfoundtobe inExcellentcondition,with6.2% in Very Good condition. Areas that were mapped in lesser condition had beenimpactedbycattlegrazingandweedinvasion(Ecoscape,2014);
None of the vegetation types recordedwithin the Study Area are considered likely torepresentaThreatenedEcologicalCommunity(TEC). ThenearestknownTECismorethan20kmfromtheStudyArea;
Onevegetation typewasconsidered to represent theP3 ‘HorseflatLandSystemof theRoebourne Plains’ PEC (shown on Figure 6) (vegetation type Ex1) and another fourvegetation types may represent other subtypes of this PEC (vegetation types Te(1),Tw(1),MattiskeFPg1andCc2AbEb);
One vegetation typemay represent (Shownon Figure 7) the P1 ‘Cracking clays of theChichesterandMungaroonaRange’subtypeofthe‘FourplantassemblagesoftheWonalandsystem’PEC(vegetationtypeSb);
GroundwaterDependantEcosystems(GDEs)occurwithintheStudyArea,predominantlyalongmajordrainagelines;
Threevegetationtypesmaybesignificantaccordingto theEPAGuidanceStatementNo.51. Terrestrial Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment inWesternAustraliaduetohavingsmallrepresentation/restricteddistribution(vegetationtypes(ElAs3Tm,FbGpEmandAmEe);
Twovegetationtypeshaveanassociationwithpoorlyrepresentedlandsystems(AmEeandAs3associatedwiththeGregorylandsystem);and
The characteristics of one vegetation type is similar to other vegetation that wasconsideredsignificantinothersurveysintheregion(vegetationtypesElEgTw).
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |21
Duetorecentdesignrefinements,therearesomeportionsoftheProposalAreathatdonotalignwiththeareaexaminedbyEcoscapeduringtheirlevel2survey(Figure8).Alloftheseportionsarewithintheboundariesofthedesktopsurveybuffer(Appendix1).
RelevantDesignConsiderationsOfnote is that theBBIP rail loophas been relocated approximately 4.5 km to the south‐east,which has significantly reduced impacts to the P3 ‘Horseflat Land System of the RoebournePlains’PEC(Figure6). RutilahasamendedtheoriginalProposalAreaboundarytoreflectthischange.
Upto1,800haofgrounddisturbancewillberequiredduringoperations.Thebalancebetweenthe vegetation disturbed during construction andwhat is required during operations will berehabilitatedoncetheareasarenolongerrequired.
POTENTIALSIGNIFICANTIMPACTSWITHOUTMITIGATION
Ground disturbance such as direct clearing, earthmoving activities and increased vehiculartraffic, predominantly during the construction of the Proposal may result in the followingimpacts:
Direct loss of primarily Very Good to Excellent condition native vegetationwithin theProposalArea(96.8%isexpectedtobe inVeryGoodtoExcellentcondition(Ecoscape,2014));
DirectlossofPFindividualsorpopulations; ClearingofvegetationwithinPECorpotentialPECvegetationtypes.324.5haoftheP3
‘HorseflatLandSystemoftheRoebournePlains’PECislocatedwithintheProposalArea(anotherfourvegetationtypesthatmayrepresentothersubtypesofthisPEC(equatestoan additional 140 ha) have been excluded from the Proposal Area by amending theboundaries).OnevegetationtypemayrepresenttheP1‘CrackingclaysoftheChichesterand Mungaroona Range’ subtype of the ‘Four plant assemblages of the Wona landsystem’PEC,whichcoversanareaof32ha(Figure7);
Directlossoflocallysignificantvegetation; Indirect impacts to vegetation health through a range of mechanisms such as dust,
floodingorerosion;and Transferofexistingweeds,ortheintroductionofnewweedspeciesduringconstruction
and/oroperation.
Therailembankmentwillcrossnumerousminorandmajorwatercoursesalongthelengthoftherailalignment.Withoutmitigationthesewatercoursecrossingsmaycausefloodinganderosion.Thismayresultinthedeclineinvegetationhealthwithinaffectedareas.
Theabstractionofgroundwaterwillberequiredatvariouslocationsalongthelengthoftherailalignment. Target groundwater abstraction zonesmay alignwith areas of GDEs andwithoutmitigation this abstraction may result in significant groundwater drawdown that couldpotentiallyresultinadeclineinvegetationhealthwithintheaffectedGDEs.
7685000mN7685000mN
7715000mN7715000mN
575000mE
575000mE
580000mE
580000mE
565000mE
565000mE
0 2km
Scale 1:125,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
585000mE
585000mE
7695000mN7695000mN
7700000mN7700000mN
7705000mN7705000mN
7710000mN7710000mN
NorthNorth
Highway
Highway
PIOPPIOP
CoastalCoastal
WICKHAMWICKHAM
ROEBOURNEROEBOURNE
MungaroonaMungaroonaRange NatureRange Nature
ReserveReserve
Millstream ChichesterMillstream ChichesterNational ParkNational Park
KarijiniKarijiniNational ParkNational Park
LOCALITY
TomTom
PricePrice
Railway
Railway
WestWest
RoebourneRoebourne
Road
Road
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
Whim CreekWhim Creek
7690000mN7690000mN
BBI Mine & PortBBI Mine & Port
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine & Port
Proposal Area
VegetationHorseflat Land System of theRoebourne Plains P3 PEC(DER Polygon 1878)
Potential Horseflat Land Systemof the Roebourne Plains P3 PEC(as mapped by Ecoscape)
Area Not Surveyed By Ecoscape
TopographyRoad / Track
North
Wes
t Coa
stal
Hig
hway
North
Wes
t Coa
stal
Hig
hway
BBI MineBBI Mine
BBI PortBBI Port
0 1km
590000mE
590000mE
585000mE
585000mE
580000mE
580000mE
7605000mN7605000mN
7600000mN7600000mN
7595000mN7595000mN
7590000mN7590000mN
NorthNorth
Highway
Highway
PIOPPIOP
CoastalCoastal
WICKHAMWICKHAM
ROEBOURNEROEBOURNEWhim CreekWhim Creek
MungaroonaMungaroonaRange NatureRange Nature
ReserveReserve
Millstream ChichesterMillstream ChichesterNational ParkNational Park
KarijiniKarijiniNational ParkNational Park
LOCALITY
TomTom
PricePrice
Railway
Railway
WestWest
RoebourneRoebourne
Road
Road
Scale 1:75,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Proposal Area
VegetationPotential Cracking Clays of the Chichesterand Mungaroona Range P1 PEC
TopographyRoad / Track
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
BBI Mine & PortBBI Mine & Port
Roebourne
Roebourne
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
RoadRoad
500000mE
500000mE
550000mE
550000mE
600000mE
600000mE
7700000mN7700000mN
7650000mN7650000mN
7600000mN7600000mN
7550000mN7550000mN
MungaroonaMungaroonaRange NatureRange Nature
ReserveReserve
NorthNorth
WestWest
CoastalCoastal
HighwayHighway
ROEBOURNEROEBOURNE
Whim CreekWhim Creek
WICKHAMWICKHAM
TomTom
PricePrice
RailwayRailway
Roebourne
Roebourne
Wittenoom
Wittenoom
RoadRoad
Millstream Chichester National ParkMillstream Chichester National Park
RoadRoadWittenoom
Wittenoom
Nanut
arra
Nanut
arra
Karijini National ParkKarijini National Park
PIOPPIOP
BBI MineBBI Mine
0 10km
Scale 1:750,000MGA94 (Zone 50)
LegendProposed Infrastructure Areas
Pilbara Iron Ore Project (PIOP)
BBI Mine & Port
Proposal Area
Surveys Completed Inside the Proposal AreaFlora & Fauna
Surveys Completed Outside the Proposal AreaFlora and Fauna
TopographyConservation / National Park
DoT Port Boundary
Road / Track
Railway
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |25
PROPOSEDMANAGEMENT(MITIGATION)
Rutila proposes to implement appropriate management measures to mitigate the potentialimpactsdescribed in Section6.2.2 above. Themanagementmeasureshavebeendivided intotwotypesofcontrols;industrybest‐practicecontrolsandadditionalProposal‐specificcontrols.Industrybest‐practicecontrolstobeimplementedarelistedbelow:
Developthedisturbancefootprinttotheminimumrequiredtoensuresafeandadequateconstructionandoperation;
ConstructionandOperationalEMPswillbedevelopedandimplemented; Internalgrounddisturbanceproceduresandagrounddisturbancepermit(GDP)system
will be developed prior to the commencement of ground disturbance. VegetationclearingwillonlyoccurifaccompaniedbyanapprovedGDP;
BoundariesofareastobeclearedordisturbedwillbeidentifiedbyGPScoordinatesandmapsofboundarieswillbeprovidedtothebulldozeroperator;
Clearingwillbeundertakeninaprogressivemanner,ascloseasreasonablypracticablepriortoconstruction;
Topsoilandvegetationwillbepushedtothesideofdisturbanceareasorcorridors foruseinrehabilitation;
Conductraisedbladedisturbancewherepracticableontemporarydisturbanceareas; Applywaterordustsuppressantstodisturbedareasandoretransfer/storageareasto
minimisedustgeneration; Incorporatesurfacewatermanagementanderosionprotectionintoprojectplanningand
designtominimisedisruptiontowatercoursesandriparianvegetation; Implement measures to manage surface water flows along the length of the rail
alignmenttominimisedownstreameffects; Locate and operate groundwater abstraction bores in accordance with DoW
requirementssuchthatgroundwaterdrawdownisminimisedwithinareasofconfirmedGDEs;
Implementweedhygieneandmanagementmeasures/procedures topreventspreadofweeds and the introduction of new weed species as a result of construction andoperation;and
Cleanvehiclespriortoenteringvegetatedareastopreventtheintroductionofnewweedspecies.
ThefollowingadditionalProposal‐specificmanagementmeasureswillbeemployedbyRutilatoavoid,minimiseand/ormitigatepotentialimpactstofloraandvegetation:
ConductadditionalfloraandvegetationsurveysofanyportionsoftheProposalAreathathavenot yet been surveyed. Figure 8 shows areas thatwerenot subject to a Level 2survey(howeverallareasliewithintheboundariesofthedesktopsurveybuffer).Rutilawill ensure that each area is surveyed to an appropriate level. A desktop survey isexpectedtobesuitableformostareasgiventhelackofTForTECs,howeverasitesurveytomaptheboundariesmayoccurifpotentialPECvegetationisidentified;
Develop Infrastructure Plan and submit to OEPA for approval prior to thecommencement of construction. This Proposal is being submitted prior to detaileddesign,thereforeflexibilityiscriticalatthisearlystage.TheInfrastructurePlanwillbe
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |26
completed following detailed design andwill finalise the required disturbance to keyenvironmentalfeatures,andwillincludetheresultsofthesurveysdiscussedabove;
An offset is to be provided for clearing of up to 3,000 ha of Very Good to Excellentconditionvegetation,basedontheresultsoftheInfrastructurePlan.TheInfrastructurePlan will provide accurate details of disturbance of Very Good or Excellent conditionvegetationwithineachlandsystem;
IdentifythestatusandmaptheextentofthepotentialP1‐P3‘FourplantassemblagesoftheWonaLandSystem’PECidentifiedintheProposalArea;
VegetationconfirmedtoformpartofaPECistobeconsideredakeyconstraint–therailalignment design will be assessed to avoid PECs where practicable. Flexibleinfrastructure(camps,accessroads,borrowpitsetc.)willbelocatedoutsideofthePECboundarieswherepracticable.TheInfrastructurePlanwillfinalisetheexpectedimpactpriortoconstructionanddemonstratehowtheaboveactionswereincorporatedintothedesign;
Locally significant vegetation and known PF locations will be included in a designconstraintsmap to be used during detailed project planning. These locationswill beavoided if suitable alternative options for the rail alignment are available. Flexibleinfrastructure(camps,accessroads,borrowpitsetc.)willbesitedtoavoidorminimiseimpacts to these locations. The Infrastructure Plan will finalise the expected impactpriortoconstructionanddemonstratehowtheaboveactionswereincorporatedintothedesign;
Appropriatebufferswillbeappliedaroundlocallysignificantvegetation,PECsandPFifnecessarybasedontheconstructionactivitiestobeundertaken(i.e.tominimiseindirectimpactsfromdust,floodingetc.);and
Groundwater abstraction bores to be located and operated such that groundwaterdrawdownisminimisedwithinareasofconfirmedGDEs.
Rutila will ensure that all staff, contractors and visitors are made aware of obligations andobjectivesregardingtheprotectionofnativevegetation.
REGULATION
TheMinisterialStatementreleasedasaresultofthisAPIprocessisexpectedtoregulateimpactsto flora and vegetation, either via limits in the key characteristic table or via conditions,includingthefollowing:
Limitofgrounddisturbanceduringconstructionperiod; Limit of ground disturbance during operations period, with a requirement for the
remaining balance (construction disturbance minus operations disturbance) to berehabilitated;
LimitondisturbancewithinconfirmedPECboundaries; ConfinementofactivitiestowithindefinedProposalArea; Condition requiring the submission and approval of an Infrastructure Plan prior to
construction;and Condition requiring offsets for the disturbance of Very Good to Excellent condition
vegetation.Conditionisexpectedtosetapriceperhectareforeachbioregion.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |27
The EPBCActwill regulate any potential impacts toMNES flora or vegetation resulting fromProposal implementation (however none have been found so far). Rutila is referring theProposal toDoE inparallel to thisAPI submission, however thiswill be for impacts toMNESfauna.
Part V of the EP Act and the Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Clearing) Regulations2004 can address any unauthorised clearing that may occur outside of the areas approvedthroughthePartIVEPActprocess.
Themanagementofweedswillbe inaccordancewith therequirementsof theAgricultureandRelatedResourcesProtectionAct1976.
SeveralapprovalsrelatetothedesignoftheProposal,andwillensureitcomplieswithrelevantstandards. TheseincludeafutureStateAgreementActproposalfortherailcorridor,aminingproposaltobesubmittedundertheMiningActfortheconveyor,andPortAuthorityapprovalsforworkswithinthePPAboundary(boundariesarestillinnegotiation,howeverthiswillcoverthenorthernportionofProposal).
OUTCOMEANDASSESSMENTAGAINSTEPAOBJECTIVE
PredictedOutcomes
The outcomes presented in this section have been determined using the best availableinformation. Given that theProposal is intended to allow some flexibility through thedesignphase, these outcomes have allowed for a level of conservatism where impacts cannot beaccuratelydefined.
After the application of management and mitigation measures have been considered, theProposalwillresultinthedisturbanceofupto3,000haofnativevegetation.Itisexpectedthat1,800haofthesedisturbedareaswillberequiredduringoperations.Theremainder(estimated1,200 ha) will be rehabilitated at the completion of the construction phase. Progressiverehabilitationmay occur if viable. A conservative estimate is that all of the vegetation to bedisturbediseitherinVeryGoodorExcellentcondition(96.8%ofthevegetationwithintheStudyAreafallswithineitherofthesecategories).
ThefinaldisturbanceextentwithineachbioregionwillbeconfirmedwiththesubmissionoftheInfrastructure Plan prior to construction. This information will be used to determine offsetrequirements. ThecostoftheoffsetcontributionperhectareforeachbioregionisexpectedtobesetbytheEPAaspartoftheministerialconditions.
The proposed disturbance is not expected to result in a significant decline in the extent ofvegetation associations as all are almost completely intact (i.e. >97.8% remaining) and theProposalislinearinnature(i.e.disturbanceisspreadacrossupto15associations).
TECsorTFspeciesarenotexpectedtobeimpactedbytheProposalasnonehavebeenrecordedwithinorincloseproximitytotheProposalArea.
The BBIP rail loop has been relocated approximately 4.5 km to the south‐east, which hassignificantlyreducedimpactstotheP3‘HorseflatLandSystemoftheRoebournePlains’PEC.Upto 324.5 ha of this PEC still lies within the Proposal (and may be disturbed), however thisequates to a disturbance of only 2.3% of the overall PEC polygon (PEC polygon 1878), in
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |28
addition to the 0.58% disturbance associated with the BBIP. A portion of the PEC may bedisturbedhoweveritisexpectedtobesignificantfromalocalorregionalperspective
Up to 6 ha of the vegetation thatmay represent the P1 ‘Cracking clays of the Chichester andMungaroonaRange’sub‐typeof the ‘Fourplantassemblagesof theWonaLandSystem’PEC isexpectedtobeimpactedasitlieswithinaconfinedvalley.TheimplementationofmanagementactionsidentifiedinSection4.3.1.4willminimisetheimpactstothispotentialPEC,howeverupto19%ofthepolygonwillbedisturbed.ThisPECextendsoverapproximately127,050haofthePilbara, therefore the Proposal is not expected to significantly impact the PEC on a regionalscale.
NoSFDVwillbeimpactedasnonewasfoundwithintheProposalArea.Environmentalculvertsarethereforenotexpectedtoberequired.
PFhavebeenrecordedwithin theProposalAreaanddespite the implementationof the listedmanagementmeasuressomeplantsorpopulationsmaynotbeabletobeavoided.ItmustalsobeassumedthattherewillbeotherPFplantsorpopulationswithintheProposalAreathathavenotyetbeenlocatedgiventhatitisnotpossibletolocateeveryplantoversuchalargearea.TheProposalishowevernotexpectedtosignificantlyimpactoraffecttheconservationstatusofanyPF species given that some species thrive on disturbed areas and populationsmay thereforeincrease andmost species have a wide distribution or are locally common (refer to Phoenix(2014)inAppendix1foradditionalinformationaboutPF).
TheProposal isunabletoavoidpassingthroughaRedbookArea(Figure4),asthealternativewould be to pass through theMillstreamChichesterNational Park or theMungaroonaRangeNatureReserve.ThelinearnatureoftheProposalhowevermeansthatimpactstothevalueofthisRedbookAreawillnotbesignificantlyaffected.
Indirect impacts are not expected to be significant as the implementation of best‐practiceindustrycontrolshassuitablymanagedtheseimpactsinsimilarprojectsacrossthePilbara.
AnyoccurrencesofnewweedspeciesorthespreadofexistingweedswillbecontainedwithintheProposalAreaandcontrolledthrougheradicationmeasures.
DegreeofUncertainty
Thereare someuncertainties associatedwith thepredictedoutcomes,howevernoneof theseareexpectedtobesignificant.Theseinclude:
Areas of the Proposal Area that lie outside Ecoscape’s Level 2 survey area (Figure 8).These areas were within the boundary of Ecoscape’s desktop survey however andnothingsignificantwasfoundinthoseareas.TheseareaswillbesubjectedtoaLevel2surveypriortoconstruction,withthefindingsbeingincludedintheInfrastructurePlan.Theproposedkeycharacteristicslimitsandconditionsareexpectedtoensurethatanyuncertainty does not result in changes to the predicted impacts. The degree ofuncertaintyforthepredictedoutcomesisthereforelow;and
The Level 2 survey occurring over a single season. It is expected that sufficientinformation was gathered during the single season Level 2 survey to allow anassessmentof impactstothisfactor. AsecondseasonmayleadtotheidentificationofadditionalPFspeciesor locationshowevergiventhelinearnatureoftheProposal,andthewide‐ranginghabitatofthemajorityofPF,itisunlikelythatthisinformationwouldalterthepredictedoutcome.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |29
AlignmentwithEPAObjective
Given that up to 3,000 ha of Very Good to Excellent condition vegetation is required to bedisturbedtoimplementtheProposal,theProposalwaspredictedtohavearesidualimpactforthisfactor.Takingintoconsiderationtheapplicationofoffsetshowever,RutilaexpectsthattheProposalcanbeimplementedtomeettheEPAobjectiveforthisfactor.
TERRESTRIALFAUNA
CONTEXT
PolicyContextAs discussed in Section 6.2.1, the Proposal Area passes between the Millstream ChichesterNationalParkandMungarooRangeNatureReserve(avoidanceofthesereserveswasidentifiedearlyasakeyconstraintfortheProposal),howeveritdoespassthroughaRedbookarea.ThisRedbook area (shown in Figure 4) lies immediately west and adjacent to the MillstreamChichesterNationalParkandcoversanareaof73,585ha(Figure4).
RelevantBaselineInformationThe following information summarises the major findings of the terrestrial fauna surveysundertakenbyPhoenix.Unlessotherwisestated,thefollowingtextshouldbeconsideredtobeadirectreferencetoPhoenix(2014a).
Eight broad fauna habitats were mapped by Phoenix within the Study Area. These faunahabitats,alongwiththeirextentofoccurrencewithintheStudyArea,aredetailedinAppendix1.Three fauna habitats were limited in extent; Woodland, Gully and Isolated Sand Dune, eachcoveringlessthan1%oftheStudyArea.
Atotalof128vertebratefaunaspecieswererecordedduringthefieldsurveys. Fivespeciesofconservation significance were recorded during the survey from direct sightings, secondaryevidence,echolocationrecordingsandcameratraps:
NorthernQuoll(Dasyurushallucatus)(Endangered–EPBC); RainbowBee‐eater(Meropsornatus)(Migratory–EPBC); LinedSoil‐creviceSkink(Notoscincusbutleri)(Priority4–DPaW); AustralianBustard(Ardeotisaustralis)(Priority4–DPaW);and WesternPebble‐moundMouse(Pseudomyschapmani)(Priority4–DPaW).
Northern Quoll was recorded from trapping, camera trapping, scats and bones. During thetargeted survey, 21 Northern Quoll individuals were recorded at three sites and based onpopulationestimates this reflects thenumberof animals in the trappingarea. Approximately640haofsuitabledenningandshelterhabitatforNorthernQuollwasmappedoverseverallandsystems as scattered ‘patches’ within the Study Area. The habitat is considered significanthabitatforthespecies.ThelandsystemscontainingsuitablehabitatarealsowellrepresentedintheStudyAreasurrounds.ItislikelythatNorthernQuolloccurmorebroadlyinsuitablehabitatintheseareas,includingwithintheChichesterandHamersleyRangeswhichextendwidelyeastandwestoftheStudyArea.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |30
TheRainbowBee‐eater(Meropsornatus)andLinedSoil‐creviceSkink(Notoscincusbutleri)weredirectlysightedwithintheStudyArea.TracksoftheAustralianBustard(Ardeotisaustralis)andan inactive mound of the Western Pebble‐mound Mouse (Pseudomys chapmani) were alsorecorded. The records of the Lined Soil‐crevice Skink from the survey represent an easterlyrange extension of approximately 40 km. The survey records fromwithin spinifex grasslandhabitatareconsistentwiththehabitattypeofthemajorityofpreviousrecordsforthespecies.This habitat iswell represented bothwithin the StudyArea andmore broadly outside of theStudyArea and itmayoccurmore commonly in thebroader region. TheRainbowBee‐eater,AustralianBustardandWesternPebble‐moundMousearecommonandwidespreadthroughoutthePilbarabioregionandtherecordsofthesespeciesfromthesurveysarenotconsideredtobesignificant.
BasedonhabitatspresentintheStudyArea,knowndistributionsandnearbyrecords,afurther23conservationsignificantspeciesmaypotentiallyoccurintheStudyArea(Phoenix,2014a):
Reptiles:
Gane'sBlindSnake(Aniliosganei)(Priority1–DPaW);and PilbaraOlivePython(Liasisolivaceusbarroni)(Vulnerable–EPBCAct),(Schedule1–WC
Act).
Birds:
FlockBronzewing(Phapshistrionica)(Priority4–DPaW); Fork‐tailedSwift(Apuspacificus)(Migratory–EPBCAct),(Schedule3–WCAct); EasternGreatEgret(Ardeamodesta)(Migratory–EPBCAct),(Schedule3–WCAct); GlossyIbis(Plegadisfalcinellus)(Migratory–EPBCAct),(Schedule3–WCAct); White‐belliedSea‐Eagle (Haliaeetusleucogaster) (Migratory–EPBCAct), (Schedule3–
WCAct); GreyFalcon(Falcohypoleucos)(Schedule1–WCAct),(Vulnerable–DPaW); PeregrineFalcon(Falcoperegrinus)(Schedule4–WCAct); BushStone‐curlew(Burhinusgrallarius)(Priority4–DPaW); CommonSandpiper(Actitishypoleucos)(Migratory–EPBCAct),(Schedule3–WCAct); CommonGreenshank(Tringanebularia)(Migratory–EPBCAct),(Schedule3–WCAct); WoodSandpiper(Tringaglareola)(Migratory–EPBCAct),(Schedule3–WCAct); Oriental Pratincole (Glareolamaldivarum) (Migratory – EPBC Act), (Schedule 3 – WC
Act);and StarFinch(Neochmiaruficaudasubclarescens)(Priority4–DPaW).
Mammals:
Brush‐tailedMulgara(Dasycercusblythi)(Priority4–DPaW); Long‐tailedDunnart(Sminthopsislongicaudata)(Priority4–DPaW); Bilby(Macrotislagotis)(Vulnerable–EPBCAct),(Schedule1–WCAct); NorthernMarsupialMole(Notoryctescaurinus)(Endangered–EPBC),(Schedule1–WC
Act),(Endangered–DPaWpriorityfaunalist); SpectacledHare‐wallaby(Lagorchestesconspicillatusleichardti)(Priority4–DPaW); Black‐flanked Rock‐wallaby (Petrogale lateralis lateralis) (Vulnerable – EPBC Act),
(Schedule1–WCAct),Vulnerable–DPaW);
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |31
GhostBat(Macrodermagigas)(Priority4–DPaW);and Short‐tailedMouse(Leggadinalakedownensis)(Priority4–DPaW).
NoevidenceofBilby,Mulgara,NorthernMarsupialMole,PilbaraOlivePythonoranynewLeristaspecies was recorded during the targeted fauna survey. Approximately 3,600 ha of habitatcharacterised by burrowing substrate and adequate vegetation structure suitable to supportBilby andMulgarawasmappedwithin the Study Area, although habitat qualitywas variablewithinthesemappedareas. LandsystemmappingindicatesthepotentialhabitatextendswellbeyondtheStudyArea,bothtotheeastandwest.
It is highly likely the Pilbara Olive Python occurs within the Study Area, particularly in the(approximately) 40 km section containing creekline habitat within the Rocklea land system.ThishabitatoccursinthecentralpartoftheProposalAreaandwasidentifiedasverysuitableforthespecies(Figure2andFigure3). Thehabitatis linedbyrockylandfeaturesanddottedwithpermanentpoolswhichare ideal forbasking, foraging and sheltering. TheRocklea landsystemextendswelloutsidetheStudyArea.Minorcreeklines,permanentwaterholesandrockyrefuges suitable for this species were evident in the Rocklea land system from aerialobservationsbeyondtheStudyAreaboundaries.
The sand dune habitats are considered suitable to support the Northern Marsupial Mole.Becauseofthelimitedinformationavailableonthespeciesdistributionandbiology,aswellassamplingdifficulties, itspresenceinthishabitatcannotbeconclusivelyruledoutbasedonthefieldsurveyresults.
Thirteen likely orpotential SRE invertebrateswere collected from the StudyArea comprisingthree arachnids, two centipedes, seven isopods andone snail. Elevenof thesewere collectedfrom the field survey and two specieswere identified in the desktop review inside the StudyArea,butwerenotcollectedinthepresentfieldsurvey.Withtheexceptionofslaters,allSREswereonlyrecordedashighertaxonomicranks(sp.indet.),morphologicalidentificationwasnotpossible.Twoslaters,Buddelundia‘92’andBuddelundia‘95’arecurrentlyonlyknownfromtheStudyArea,butarelikelytooccurmorewidelybasedontheirapparenthabitatpreferencesforrockyhillslopesandgullies,respectively.
RelevantDesignConsiderationsUp to 3,000 ha of general fauna habitat disturbancewill be required during operations. Thebalance between the habitat disturbed during construction and what is required duringoperationswillberehabilitatedoncetheareasarenolongerrequired.
TherailalignmenthasbeenrelocatedtonowavoidPhoenix’ssiteQ5(NunyerryGorge),whichhadthehighestnumbersofNorthernQuollduringthePhoenixsurvey(Figure2andFigure3).RutilahasamendedtheiroriginalProposalAreaboundarytoreflectthischange.
Rutilahaverevieweddisturbancerequirementsandcancommittothefollowingfromadesignperspective:
DisturbanceofNorthernQuolldenning/shelterhabitatwillberestrictedtoamaximumof5ha;
NoNorthernMarsupialMolehabitatwillbedisturbed;and DisturbanceofPilbaraOlivePythonshelterhabitatwillberestricted toamaximumof
78ha.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |32
POTENTIALSIGNIFICANTIMPACTSWITHOUTMITIGATION
Ground disturbance such as direct clearing, earthmoving activities and increased vehiculartraffic during the construction and operation of the Project (predominantly during theconstructionphaseofthisProposal)mayresultinthefollowingimpacts:
Directdisturbanceofupto3,000haofgeneralfaunahabitat; Direct disturbance of potential conservation significant fauna habitat, including
identifiedNorthernQuoll,Bilby,Mulgara,PilbaraOlivePythonandNorthernMarsupialMolehabitat;
Declineinhabitatqualityasaresultofindirectimpacts(suchasdustorpollution); Alterations in faunabehaviour(suchasbreedingand foragingetc.)asaresultofnoise
emissionsfromconstructionandoperationalactivities;and Possibility of terrestrial fauna injury or death as a result of vehicle strike due to
increasedvehiculartrafficwithintheProposalArea.
PROPOSEDMANAGEMENT(MITIGATION)
TheProposaldesignhas,andwillcontinueto,avoidandminimiseclearingofhighervaluefaunahabitat where practicable. The proposed rail alignment and locations of associatedinfrastructureweredevelopedtooptimiseoperationalcostswhilebeingsensitivetotheneedtoavoidorlimittheimpacttopotentialsignificantfaunavaluesduetoclearinganddisturbanceofhabitat.
Rutila proposes to implement appropriate management measures to mitigate the potentialimpactsdescribed in Section6.3.2 above. Themanagementmeasureshavebeendivided intotwotypesofcontrols;industrybest‐practicecontrolsandadditionalProposal‐specificcontrols.
The proposed industry best‐practice controls for ground disturbance (i.e. such asminimisingdisturbance, developing a GDP system, managing weeds etc.) listed in Section 6.2.3 will alsoapplytogeneralfaunahabitatdisturbanceandthereforehavenotbeenrepeatedinthissection.Additionalindustrybest‐practicemanagementmeasuresspecifictofaunawillinclude:
Watercourse crossings will be constructed with culverts or bridges which will allowfaunatotraverseundertherailorconveyorcorridor;
Faunaegressmechanismswillbeinstalledatallturkeysnestdams; Control introduced faunaaround campsandotherworkareas andprovide training to
ensurethatnativeorintroducedfaunaarenotfedbysitepersonnel; Storefoodwastesinbinsthatarenoteasilyaccessibletofauna; Uselownoiseequipmentwherepracticable; Developborrowpitssuchthattheyarefree‐drainingtoavoidwaterpooling; Reportinternallyallincidentsresultinginfaunainjuryordeath;and Setandenforcevehiclespeedlimits.
ThefollowingProposal‐specificmanagementmeasureswillalsobeemployedbyRutilatoavoid,minimiseand/ormitigatepotentialimpactstoterrestrialfauna:
Conduct additional targeted significant fauna habitat surveys of any portions of theProposalAreathathavenotyetbeensurveyed(Figure8);
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |33
Develop Infrastructure Plan and submit to OEPA for approval prior to thecommencement of construction. The Infrastructure Plan is to finalise the requireddisturbancetoconservationsignificantfaunahabitat,andwillincludetheresultsofthesurveysdiscussedabove;
Watercourse crossings will be constructed with culverts or bridges which will allowfaunatotraverseundertherailcorridor;
NorthernMarsupialMoledenning/shelterhabitatwillnotbedisturbed; NorthernQuollandPilbaraOlivePythondenning/shelterhabitatistobeconsideredkey
constraints– the rail alignmentdesignwillbeassessed toavoid theseareasofhabitatwhere practicable. Flexible infrastructure (camps, access roads, borrowpits etc.)willnotbelocatedwithinthesehabitatareas;
Bilby,Brush‐tailedMulgaraandSREhabitatwillbeincludedinadesignconstraintsmaptobeusedduringdetailedprojectplanning.Flexibleinfrastructure(camps,accessroads,borrowpitsetc.)willbesitedtoavoidorminimiseimpactswithinthesehabitatareas;
Appropriate buffers will be applied around Northern Quoll, Pilbara Olive Python andNorthern Marsupial Mole denning /shelter habitat if necessary based on theconstruction activities to be undertaken (i.e. to minimise indirect impacts from dust,floodingetc.);
Given the extent of suitable Northern Quoll habitat in the Proposal Area, a NorthernQuollManagementPlanwillbepreparedand implementedprior to construction. Themanagement plan will include information from the Infrastructure Plan about finalhabitatdisturbancerequirementsaswellasadditionalspecificdesignandmanagementcontrolsfortheNorthernQuollsuchas:
o Pre‐clearingsurveystodeterminethelocationofdens;o ClearingcampaignsandsignificantdevelopmentswithinNorthernQuollcritical
denning/shelterhabitatwillbescheduledtoavoidthebreedingseasonwherepossible;
o Considerationofadditionalfaunaculvertstomaintainhabitatconnectivity;o Rehabilitationofhabitat;ando ConductaprogramtomonitortheeffectsoftheProposalonNorthernQuoll.
IntheeventthatmonitoringsuggestssignificantadverseeffectsonlocalNorthernQuollpopulations as a result of the Proposed Action, a framework will be developed forfurtherinvestigations,managementandcontingencyactions.
REGULATION
TheMinisterialStatementreleasedasaresultofthisAPIprocessisexpectedtoregulateimpactsto flora and vegetation, either via limits in the key characteristic table or via conditions,includingthefollowing:
Limitofgrounddisturbanceduringconstructionperiod; Limit of ground disturbance during operations period, with a requirement for the
remaining balance (construction disturbance minus operations disturbance) to berehabilitated;
Limit on disturbance within Northern Quoll, Pilbara Olive Python and NorthernMarsupialMoledenning/shelterhabitatboundaries;
ConfinementofactivitiestowithindefinedProposalArea;and
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |34
Condition requiring the submission and approval of an Infrastructure Plan prior toconstruction.
The EPBC Act will regulate any potential impacts to MNES fauna resulting from Proposalimplementation.RutilaisreferringtheProposaltoDoEinparalleltothisAPIsubmission.TheWCActalsomanagesunauthorisedimpactstospecieslistedunderthatAct.
Part V of the EP Act and the Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Clearing) Regulations2004canaddressanyunauthorisedclearingoffaunahabitatthatmayoccuroutsideoftheareasapprovedthroughthePartIVEPActprocess.
SeveralapprovalsrelatetothedesignoftheProposal,andwillensureitcomplieswithrelevantstandards. TheseincludeafutureStateAgreementActproposalfortherailcorridor,aminingproposaltobesubmittedundertheMiningActfortheconveyor,andPortAuthorityapprovalsforworkswithinthePPAboundary(boundariesarestillinnegotiation,howeverthiswillcoverthenorthernportionoftheProposal).
OUTCOMEANDASSESSMENTAGAINSTEPAOBJECTIVE
PredictedOutcomes
The proposed railway corridor and locations of associated infrastructure were developed tooptimise operational costs and balance the need to avoid or limit the impact to potentialsignificantfaunavalues.
Other active management measures are also consistent with best practice and stewardshipprinciples.
After application of the described management and mitigation measures, the Proposal isexpectedtoresultinthefollowingoutcomesinrelationtoterrestrialfauna:
TheProposalwillresult inthedisturbanceofapproximately3,000haof faunahabitat,withapproximately1,800haremainingdisturbedduringtheoperationsperiod. Broadfaunahabitat in the surrounding area remains almost completely intact and thereforetheProposal isnotexpectedtohaveasignificanteffectontherepresentationofbroadfaunahabitatatalocalorregionallevel;
NorthernQuollareexpectedtobeabletotraversetherailembankment.ThemajorityoftheareasofNorthernQuolldenning/shelterhabitatwillbecompletelyavoided.Ofnoteis that the Proposal Area has been revised to now exclude Nunyerry Gorge (site Q5),whichhadthehighestrecordednumbersofNorthernQuoll.Aftertheimplementationofthe management actions approximately 5 ha of the remaining 640 ha of denning /shelter habitat will be required to be disturbed. The overall disturbance of habitatwithin the Study Area is therefore less than 1%. All of the land systems containingsuitable habitat are well represented in the surrounding areas, including within theChichesterandHamersleyRangeswhichextendwidelyeastandwestoftheStudyArea(Phoenix, 2014). Rutila is confident that habitat disturbance has been avoided andminimised asmuch as possible. TheProposal is thereforenot expected to result in asignificantresidualimpacttothisspecies;
PilbaraOlivePythonwasconsideredlikelytooccurinanapproximately40kmsectionofcreeklinehabitatwithintheProposalArea.Thiscreeklinehabitatextendswelloutsidethe Proposal Area. Minor creek lines, permanentwaterholes and rocky refugeswere
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |35
evident fromaerialobservationsbeyondtheProposalArea (Phoenix,2014). After theimplementationofthemanagementactionsupto78haofPilbaraOlivePythonhabitatwill be required tobedisturbed, out of a total of 4,109ha identifiedwithin the StudyArea.Asstatedabove,theProposalAreahasbeenrevisedtonowexcludesiteQ5,whichhada significantportionof suitablehabitat. Theoveralldisturbanceofhabitatwithinthe Study Area equates to approximately 1.9%. Rutila is confident that habitatdisturbancehasbeenavoidedandminimisedasmuchaspossible.This,combinedwiththeknowledgethatsuitablehabitatextendswellbeyondtheboundariesoftheProposalArea,resultsintheexpectationthattherewillnotbeasignificantresidualimpactonthisspecies;
Thesanddunehabitats(shownindarkblueonFigure2andFigure3)areconsideredtobe suitable to support the Northern Marsupial Mole, however due to limited speciesdistribution and biology information its presence or absence cannot be confirmed(Phoenix,2014).Rutilahastakenaconservativeapproachandassumedthatthisspeciesis present. Avoidance, minimisation andmitigation strategies have been applied thishabitat. After the implementation of the management actions, the two NorthernMarsupialMolehabitatareaswillbeentirelyavoided;
Otherconservationsignificantfaunahabitatiswidespreadandgenerallywellconnectedto similarhabitat outsideof theProposalArea. Thedisturbanceof anarrowcorridorandassociateditemsisnotexpectedtosignificantlyimpactthehabitatofthesespecies;
TheProposalwillnotaffecttheconservationstatusofanysignificantspecies; TwoSREspeciesareonlyknownfromwithinthestudyarea, fromrockyhillandgully
habitat. Avoidance andmanagement strategies are proposed for SRE habitat, and thedevelopmentof linear infrastructure is likely todissectaportionofSREhabitatratherthandisturbanentirepopulation.ItisalsolikelythatsuitablehabitatexistsoutsidetheProposal Area (Phoenix, 2014a). The Proposal is therefore unlikely to result insignificantimpactstoanySREspecies;and
Indirect impacts are not expected to be significant as construction does not generallyoccurinasinglelocationforanextendedperiod.Railmovementsduringoperationsareinfrequent.
DegreeofUncertainty
Thereare someuncertainties associatedwith thepredictedoutcomes,howevernoneof theseareexpectedtobesignificant.Theseinclude:
Areas of the Proposal Area that lie outside Phoenix’s targeted survey area (Figure 8).TheseareaswillbesubjectedtoaLevel2surveypriortoconstruction,withthefindingsbeing included in the InfrastructurePlan. Theproposedkeycharacteristics limitsandconditionsareexpectedtoensurethatanyuncertaintydoesnotresultinchangestothepredicted impacts. The degree of uncertainty for the predicted outcomes is thereforelow;and
AreasofNorthernQuollhabitatthatwasnotsurveyedduringthetargetedsurvey.ThesepotentialhabitatareaswereidentifiedbyRutilaasbeingcompletelyavoidableandthishasbeenconsideredincalculatingtheamountofhabitatthatisrequiredtobedisturbed.Therefore the uncertainty about the presence of Northern Quoll within these habitatareashasnoimpactonthepredictedoutcomeastheareaswouldbeavoidedanyway.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |36
AlignmentwithEPAObjective
Given thatminimal impacts toconservationsignificant faunahabitatsareexpectedduring theimplementation of the Proposal, the Proposal is not expected to have a significant residualimpact for this factor. Rutila expects that theProposal can be implemented tomeet the EPAobjectiveforthisfactor.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |37
7 OTHERENVIRONMENTALFACTORS
Rutilahasassessedthepotential impactsoftheProposalonthevariousenvironmentalfactorslisted in EnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline8: forEnvironmentalFactorsandObjectives (EPA2013c). ThisAPIdocument focuseson theenvironmental factors thataredeemed tobe ‘key’factors, those with the potential to be significantly impacted and could not be appropriatelymanagedunderotherexistinglegislation.PotentialimpactstothesekeyfactorsaredescribedindetailinSection6andassessedusingrelevantstudiesspecifictotheProposal.
The ‘other’ environmental factorshavebeen consideredbyRutila anddue to the low level ofimpact, application of industry standard controls and other regulatory mechanisms, thesefactorsarenotexpectedtoberequiredtobeassessedindetailbytheEPA.Table7providestherelevantEIAinformationfor‘other’environmentalfactorstoensuretheEPAhasahighdegreeofconfidencethatthepotentialimpactsarenotsignificantandaremanageableunderstandardindustry controls and other regulatory mechanisms. Rutila understands the importance ofcompliancewiththerelevantstatutesthatwillbeusedtomanagetheseenvironmentalfactors.
Toensure that theassessmentsareasconciseaspossible, the followingsectionsonlycontainthe baseline environmental information that was deemed to be relevant to each factor. Fordetailed information of broader existing environmental information (i.e. geology, climate andweather),pleaserefertothebiologicalsurveyreportsattachedinAppendix1.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |38
Table7:Environmentalassessment–otherenvironmentalfactors
FactorandEPAObjective
RelevantExistingEnvironment EnvironmentalAspectPotentially
SignificantImpact(withoutmitigation)
ManagementActions(Mitigation) RegulationPredictedOutcomes(Meets
EPAObjective–Y/N)
HydrologicalProcesses‐Tomaintainthehydrologicalregimesofgroundwaterandsurfacewatersothatexistingandpotentialuses,includingecosystemmaintenance,areprotected.
ThePilbaraischaracterisedbyseasonalwatercoursesinresponsetotheerraticnatureofrainfallintheregion;
ThenorthernportionoftheProposalAreaisassociatedwiththeSherlockRiver,crossingtheriverandcorrespondingwithitsfloodplainandtributaries;
NearthecentreoftheProposalAreathealignmentcrossestheFortescueRiver;
ThesouthernportionoftheProposalAreaisassociatedwithWeelumurraCreekanditstributariesthatflowintotheFortescueRiver;
GDEsidentifiedwithintheStudyArea; NoSheetflowdependantvegetationidentified
withintheStudyArea;and Nosignificantgroundwaterusersknowninthe
area.
Grounddisturbance–clearingofapproximately3,000haofnativevegetation;
DevelopmentoftheProposal,includingcreekandrivercrossings;
Abstractionofapproximately1.8GL/yrofgroundwaterforwatersupplyduringconstruction(reducesto0.3GL/yrduringoperations);and
Removalofriparianandin‐streamvegetation.
Alterationstosurfacewaterflows,causingflooding,sedimentation,,ponding,diversions,erosionand/orreductioninsurfacewateravailabilitydownstream;
Erosioncausedbyincreasedrun‐offandflowvelocityasaresultofreducedvegetationcover;
Reductioningroundwateravailability;and
GroundwaterdrawdownreducingthehealthofGDEs.
ThefollowingmanagementstrategieswillbeemployedbyRutilatoavoid,minimiseand/ormitigatepotentialimpactstohydrologicalprocesses:
Civilengineeringdesignswillincludeappropriatedrainagerequirements.Catchmentanalysiswillbecarriedoutinordertodetermineculvertandbridgedesignparameters;
Installengineeredculvertswherenaturaldrainagefeaturesareinterruptedbytherailembankment;
Borrowpitswillbemadetobeself‐drainingwherepracticable.Inextremelyflatareaswhereborrowpitscannotreasonablybemadetoself‐drainthepitswillbebundedtopreventsurfaceflowsfromenteringthepit.Watercollectingwithinthepitwillbeallowedtoinfiltrateorevaporate;
Wheretheriskoferosionisidentifiedinspecificareasduringconstruction,erosioncontrolstructuressuchassiltfences,diversionandcollectionbunds,sedimentdamsandholdingsumpswillbeinstalled.Suchstructureswillbetemporaryinnatureandwillbecompletelyremovedaspartofrehabilitationoftheconstructionarea;
Undertakeprogressiverehabilitationofdisturbedareasthatarenotrequiredforongoingoperations;and
Drillandabstractgroundwaterinaccordancewith26Dand5ClicencesadministeredbytheDoW.
MinisterialStatement(future) EPBCActPartV(authorised
clearing)andEnvironmentalProtection(ClearingofNativeVegetation)Regulations2004–abletoaddressanyadditionalclearingoutsideofboundariesauthorisedunderPartIVoftheEPAct;
26Dand5ClicencesundertheRIWIActwillmanagegroundwaterdrillingandabstraction;and
FutureStateAgreementAct,MiningActandPortAuthorityapprovalstoensuremajorwatercoursecrossingsaredevelopedasperapproveddesign.
Vegetationclearingwillbeprogressive,andareasnotrequiredforoperationswillberehabilitatedprogressivelyoratthecompletionoftheconstructionperiod.Thisminimisesthepotentialforsurfacewaterimpactssuchaserosionandflooding;
Best‐practicesurfacewatermanagementforrailprojectsisnowwellunderstoodandhasbeendemonstratedtobesuccessfulandwillbeadoptedfortheProposal;
GroundwaterimpactsareexpectedtobeminorandabletobemanagedbyDoWundertheRIWIAct;
Erosionandsedimentationimpactsduringconstructionareexpectedtobelocalisedandshort‐term;and
Thisfactorcanbemanagedusingindustrystandardmanagementcontrolsandexistinglegislation.ThiswillensurethattheProposalwilleffectivelymeettheEPAobjective.
Landforms‐Tomaintainthevariety,integrity,ecologicalfunctionsandenvironmentalvaluesoflandformsandsoils.
PilbaraBioregion; Chichester,FortescuePlains,Hamersleyand
Roebournesubregions;and 65geologicalunits.
Developmentofborrowpitsandballastquarry;and
Earthworkssuchascutandfillactivities.
Alterationofexistinglandforms;and
Soilerosionandsedimentationfromdisturbedareas.
Anetcutandfillbalancewillbetargetedduringengineeringdesign;
Implementationofsedimentanderosioncontrolmeasures(detailedabove);
Borrowpitdepthswillgenerallybelimitedto2m; Borrowpitswillbemadetobeself‐drainingwhere
practicable.Inextremelyflatareaswhereborrowpitscannotreasonablybemadetoself‐drainthepitswillbebundedtopreventsurfaceflowsfromenteringthepit.Watercollectingwithinthepitwillbeallowedtoinfiltrateorevaporate;
Borrowpitsthatarenotrequiredforoperationswillberehabilitated;and
Ifnotrequiredforoperations,theballastquarrywillbeclosedandrehabilitatedinaccordancewithcurrentMiningActguidance.
MinisterialStatement(future);and
FutureStateAgreementAct,MiningActandPortAuthorityapprovalstoensureProposalisdevelopedasperapproveddesign.
TheProposalfootprintisrestrictedlargelytovalleyfloorswithminimalneedforcuttingsortraversaloversignificantlandforms;
TheProposalwillnotresultinthecreationofsignificantlandformsoractivitiesthatwillaffecttheecologicalfunctionofsoils;and
TheProposalcanmeettheEPAobjective.
SubterraneanFauna‐Tomaintainrepresentation,diversity,viabilityandecologicalfunctionatthespecies,populationandassemblagelevel.
TheProposalisnotexpectedtohaveanimpactonsubterraneanfauna.Nosignificantexcavationsordewateringareproposedalongthelinearalignment.
TerrestrialEnvironmentalQuality‐Tomaintainthequality
ThemajorityoftheProposalArearemainsrelativelyundisturbed,howeverwithsomeevidenceofgrazing.NoareasofpotentialcontaminationarelocatedinproximitytotheProposalArea.
Generationofwaste‐including:
Generaldomesticwaste(e.g.paper,cardboards,some
Localisedcontaminationofsoil,groundwaterorsurfacewaterandsubsequentimpacts
WastewillbesegregatedandeitherremovedfromsiteviaanauthorisedwastecontractorordisposedofonsitetoalandfilllicensedunderPartVoftheEPAct;
HydrocarbonsandchemicalsbundedandstoredinaccordancewithDangerousGoodsSafety(StorageandHandlingforNon‐
DangerousGoodsSafetyAct2004(storageofhazardousmaterials);
DangerousGoodsSafety(StorageandHandlingforNon‐
TheProposaldoesnotinvolvetheproduction,storageorhandlingoflargequantitiesofmaterialsthatmaycausepollution.The
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |39
FactorandEPAObjective
RelevantExistingEnvironment EnvironmentalAspectPotentially
SignificantImpact(withoutmitigation)
ManagementActions(Mitigation) RegulationPredictedOutcomes(Meets
EPAObjective–Y/N)
oflandandsoilssothattheenvironmentalvalues,bothecologicalandsocial,areprotected.
plasticsandfoodscraps); Industrialwastes(e.g.
pallets,packaging,scrapmetals;andtyres);
Hazardouswastes(e.g.hydrocarbonsandcontaminatedmaterial);and
Hydrocarbonorchemicalspills.
onsurroundingecosystems;and
Creationofhazardsfornativefaunaandpersonnel
explosives)Regulations2007andAS1940:StorageandHandlingofFlammableandCombustibleLiquids;
Re‐fuellingbaysatbulkfuelstoragefacilitiesequippedwithconcreteapronsorsuitablelining(e.g.buriedheavydutyplastic);
Spillclean‐upmaterialreadilyavailableatworksitesandonmobileservicetrucksofvehicles,wherehydrocarbonsandchemicalsarestoredand/orused;and
Aspillresponseprocedurewillbedevelopedandimplementedpriortoconstruction.
explosives)Regulations2007; PartVEPAct(WorksApproval
andLicenceforlandfill); EnvironmentalProtection
(UnauthorisedDischarges)Regulations2004;and
GeneralprovisionsoftheEPAct.
potentialforimpactsonthisfactorarethereforerelativelylowandcanbeappropriatelymanagedviaexistinglegislation.TheProposalcanthereforemeettheEPAobjective.
InlandWatersEnvironmentalQuality‐Tomaintainthequalityofgroundwaterandsurfacewater,sedimentandbiotasothattheenvironmentalvalues,bothecologicalandsocial,areprotected.
ThenorthernportionoftherailalignmentisassociatedwiththeSherlockRiver,crossingtheriverandcorrespondingwithitsfloodplainandtributaries;
NearthecentreoftherailcorridorthealignmentcrossestheFortescueRiver;and
ThesouthernportionoftherailalignmentisassociatedwithWeelumurraCreekanditstributariesthatflowintotheFortescueRiver.
Generationofwaste(asdescribedinthefactorabove);
Hydrocarbonorchemicalspills;
Surfacewaterrunofffromclearedareas;and
Alterationofsurfacewaterflows.
Groundwaterorsurfacewatercontaminationviawasteorhydrocarbon/chemicalspills;and
Increasedturbidityduetoerosioncausedbyreducedvegetationcoveroralterationofsurfacewaterflowpaths.
Managewasteandhydrocarbon/chemicalspillsaspermanagementactionslistedinthefactorabove(TerrestrialEnvironmentalQuality);and
Managesurfacewaterflowsinaccordancewiththemanagementactionslistedinthefactor‘HydrologicalProcesses’.
DangerousGoodsSafetyAct2004(storageofhazardousmaterials);
DangerousGoodsSafety(StorageandHandlingforNon‐explosives)Regulations2007;
PartVEPAct(WorksApprovalandLicenceforlandfill);
EnvironmentalProtection(UnauthorisedDischarges)Regulations2004;and
GeneralprovisionsoftheEPAct.
TheProposaldoesnotinvolvetheproduction,storageorhandlingoflargequantitiesofmaterialsthatmaycausepollution.
SurfacewatermanagementhasbeendiscussedadequatelyundertheHydrologicalProcessesfactorandwasdeterminedthattheEPAObjectivecouldbemet.
Thepotentialforimpactsonthisfactorarethereforerelativelylowandcanbeappropriatelymanagedviaexistinglegislation.TheProposalcanthereforemeettheEPAobjective.
AirQuality‐Tomaintainairqualityfortheprotectionoftheenvironmentandhumanhealthandamenity.
TheProposalislocatedinaremoteareainwiththenearestsensitivereceptorsmorethan3.5kmawayaslistedbelow:o CoolawanyahHomestead(3.5kmtothe
southeastoftheProposalArea);o MountFloranceHomestead(6kmtothe
southeast);o SherlockHomestead(7kmtothewest);ando CroydonOutstation(10kmtothewest).
NosignificantsourcesofairpollutionareinproximitytotheProposal.
Dustliftfrombareground/clearedareas;
Constructionandoperationalactivitiessuchasthemechanicaldisturbanceofrockandsoilmaterialsbyplantoperation,blastinganduseofvehiclesondirtroads;and
Useofmachinery,gensetsandlightandheavyvehicles.
Increasedlevelsofairbornedust;and
Minorpointsourceairemissionsfromvehicleandgensetexhausts.
Theareaofexposedclearedsurfaceswillbekepttotheminimumrequiredforsafeandefficientconstruction;
Dustsuppressionwilloccurinareasthathavehighpotentialtogeneratedust,suchasareasthatreceiveheavytrafficandkeyconstructionareas;
Vehiclespeedswillberestricted; Theperformanceofdustsuppressionequipmentwillbe
monitoredbyregularsiteinspections;and Wherepracticableandcosteffectivedustsuppressantsmaybe
usedtoreducethevolumeofwaterrequiredtoeffectivelyminimisedustgeneration.
OccupationalSafetyRegulations1996;
GeneralprovisionsoftheEPAct;and
MiningAct(conveyortoPIOP)andPortAuthority(portboundaries)approvalstoincludemanagementofdust.
Thepotentialforimpactsonthisfactorarerelativelylow,withdustbeingthemainemission.NosensitivereceptorsareincloseproximitytotheProposalArea.TheProposalthereforecanmeettheEPAobjective.
Amenity‐Toensurethatimpactstoamenityarereducedaslowasreasonablypracticable.
TheProposalAreaisnotextensivelyusedbythepublicandisnotvisiblefrommaintouristroutesorsettlements;
TheProposalislocatedinaremoteareainwiththenearestsensitivereceptorsmorethan3.5kmaway;and
TherearenopublicfacilitiesinproximitytotheProposalArea.
Earthmovingactivities; Vehiclemovements; Generalconstructionand
operationactivities/traffic;and
Useofmachinery.
Directimpactssuchasnoiseandvibrationtosensitivereceptors;and
Publicaccesswillbelimitedinsomeoperationalareas.
Equipmentusedwillbemaintainedinaccordancewithmanufacturers’specificationsandrelevantstandards;
VehiclespeedswithintheProposalAreawillberestricted; Anynoiseorotheramenitycomplaintswillberaisedasan
incidentandinvestigated;and Internalcombustionenginesfittedwithasuitablemufflerin
serviceablecondition.
EnvironmentalProtection(Noise)Regulations1997;
StatePlanningPolicy5.4(noise);
GeneralprovisionsoftheEPAct;and
FutureStateAgreementActprocessexpectedtoconsideramenityimpactsonstakeholders.
Thepotentialforimpactsonthisfactorarerelativelylowgiventheremotelocation,andcanbeappropriatelymanagedviaexistinglegislationandnegotiationswithPastoralists.TheProposalthereforecanmeettheEPAobjective.
Heritage‐Toensurethathistoricalandculturalassociationsarenotadverselyaffected.
SeverallistedAboriginalHeritagesites(oftheirbuffers)occurwithintheProposalArea;
InitialAboriginalHeritagesurveysarecurrentlybeingundertakenfortheProposal;and
NoEuropeanHeritagesitesarelocatedwithintheProposalArea.
Generalgrounddisturbance. DisturbanceofAboriginalHeritagesites.
EthnographicandheritagesurveyswillbeundertakenpriortoanygrounddisturbancetoidentifysitesofAboriginalsignificance;
SignificantAboriginalsiteswillnotbedisturbedwithoutauthorisation;
AllaspectsoftheProposalwillbecarriedoutinaccordancewithEPAGuidanceStatementNo.41(EPA2004)throughtheimplementationofaCulturalHeritageManagementPlanandrelevantagreementswithnativetitleclaimantgroups,therebyavoidingimpacttoAboriginalsitesofsignificance;and
Grounddisturbancewillbesubjectedtoaninternalground
AboriginalHeritageAct1972; AboriginalandTorresStrait
IslanderHeritageProtectionAct1984;and
NativeTitleAct1993.
RutilaisawareoftheirresponsibilitiesundertheAboriginalHeritageAct1972,andiscurrentlyworkingwiththerelevantNativeTitlegroupstoensureimpactstoAboriginalHeritagesitesareminimised.Therailalignmenthasalreadybeenrelocatedinsomeareastoavoidsignificantsites.
Thepotentialforimpactsonthis
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |40
FactorandEPAObjective
RelevantExistingEnvironment EnvironmentalAspectPotentially
SignificantImpact(withoutmitigation)
ManagementActions(Mitigation) RegulationPredictedOutcomes(Meets
EPAObjective–Y/N)
disturbanceapprovalprocess. factorcanbeappropriatelymanagedviaexistinglegislation.TheProposalthereforecanmeettheEPAobjective.
HumanHealth‐Toensurethathumanhealthisnotadverselyaffected.
Norisktohumanhealthisanticipated.NoiseandvibrationiscoveredintheAmenitysectionabove.
Offsets‐Tocounterbalanceanysignificantresidualenvironmentalimpactsoruncertaintythroughtheapplicationofoffsets.
OnePEC(P3‘HorseflatLandSystemoftheRoebournePlains’)recordedinthenorthernportionoftheEcoscape(2014)StudyArea(Figure6);
VegetationthatmayrepresentoneofthefourcommunitytypesthatfortheP1‐P3‘FourplantassemblagesoftheWonaLandSystem‘PECwasrecordedtooccurwithintheEcoscape(2014)StudyArea(Figure7);
NoTECsorTFrecorded; ThreeP1,oneP2,fourP3andtwoP4PFspecies
found;and WiththeexceptionoftheNorthernQuoll,Pilbara
OlivePythonandNorthernMarsupialMolehabitat,faunahabitatisgenerallywellconnectedtosimilarhabitatoutsideoftheProposalArea.
Grounddisturbance–clearingofapproximately3,000haofnativevegetation;and
Earthmovingandconstruction/operationactivities.
DirectlossofmostlyVeryGoodtoExcellentconditionvegetation
DirectlossofconfirmedandpotentialPECvegetation
DirectlossofPFspecies
Directlossofconservationsignificantfaunahabitat
DevelopInfrastructurePlanandsubmittoOEPAforapprovalpriortothecommencementofconstruction.TheInfrastructurePlanistofinalisetherequireddisturbancetokeyenvironmentalfeatures,andwillincludetheresultsofthesurveysdiscussedabove;and
Offsetclearingofupto3,000haofVeryGoodtoExcellentconditionvegetation,basedontheresultsoftheInfrastructurePlan.
EPAct EPBCAct
OffsetsareproposedtocounterbalancethesignificantresidualenvironmentalimpactsoruncertaintyassociatedwiththeProposal.TheProposalwillthereforemeetthisEPAobjective.
RehabilitationandClosure‐Toensurethatpremisesareclosed,decommissionedandrehabilitatedinanecologicallysustainablemanner,consistentwithagreedoutcomesandlanduses,andwithoutunacceptableliabilitytotheState.
ThemajorityoftheProposalAreaiscurrentlyusedforpastoralactivities,withaportionremainingasUCL.
Ongoinguseof/responsibilityforinfrastructure;
Hydrocarbon/chemicalstorageareas;
Disturbedareas;and Inadequaterehabilitation
andclosureplanning.
Contamination; Alterationof
landformsimpactingsurfacewaterflow;
Increasederosionassociatedwithunstablelandforms;
Unsuitablereinstatementofvegetationorfaunahabitat;and
Thespreadofweeds,increaseddust.
Topsoilwillbestrippedandstoredonsiteforrehabilitation; Managementproceduresfortherecovery,storageand
utilisationoftopsoilwillbedevelopedandimplemented; Topsoilistobestoredfortheshortesttimeperiodpossibleto
maintainviabilityoftheseedbankandsoilfertility; Anyareasclearedforconstructionpurposesthatarenot
requiredduringoperations(borrowpits,accesstracksetc.)willberehabilitatedassoonaspracticableaftertheyarenolongerrequired;
RehabilitationProcedurewillbedevelopedfortheProjectinaccordancewithEPAGuidanceStatementNo.6RehabilitationofTerrestrialEcosystems(EPA2006),whichsetsoutthegeneralexpectationsaboutre‐establishingbiodiversityvalueswhereasiteistoberehabilitatedbacktonativevegetation;
ComplywiththerequirementsoftheContaminatedSitesAct2003ifcontaminationoccurs;
Soilstockpileswillbeinspectedregularlyforevidenceoferosionandweedsandremediatedaccordingly;and
ClosureandrehabilitationoftherailstructureitselfwillbesubjecttodiscussionswiththeWAStateGovernmentasrailwaylinesaregenerallyretainedasastateasset.
MinisterialStatement(future)toincluderequirementforrehabilitationofareasnotrequiredforoperations;
ContaminatedSitesAct2003willmanageanypotentialcontamination;and
FutureStateAgreementAct(rail),MiningActandPortAuthority(conveyor)approvalprocessesexpectedtoconsiderrehabilitationandclosure.
Anyareasclearedforconstructionpurposesthatarenotrequiredduringoperations(borrowpits,accesstracksetc.)willberehabilitated,eitherprogressivelyoratthecompletionofconstruction.ClosureandrehabilitationoftherailstructureitselfwillbesubjecttodiscussionswiththeWAStateGovernmentasrailwaylinesaregenerallyretainedasastateasset.Ifrequired,thefinalclosureoftheProposalisnotexpectedtobecomplicatedduetothelackofsignificantlandforms.
RehabilitationandclosureisthereforenotexpectedtobeasignificantissuefortheProposalandthereforetheProposalcanmeettheEPAobjective.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |41
8 PRINCIPLESOFTHEEPACT
TheEPActidentifiesaseriesofprinciplesforenvironmentalmanagement(Section4a,EPAct,asamended). Rutila has considered these principles in relation to the development andimplementationoftheProposal.Table8outlineshowtheprinciplesrelatetotheProposal.
Table8:EPActprinciples
Principle HowitwillbeaddressedbytheProposal
1. Precautionaryprinciple
Wheretherearethreatsofseriousirreversibledamage,lackoffullscientificcertaintyshouldnotbeusedasareasonforpostponingmeasurestopreventenvironmentaldegradation.
Intheapplicationoftheprecautionaryprinciple,decisionsshouldbeguidedby:
a. carefulevaluationtoavoid,wherepracticable,seriousorirreversibledamagetotheenvironment;and
b. anassessmentoftherisk‐weightedconsequencesofvariousoptions.
TheProposalhasutilisedexistingenvironmentaldataduringdesignandhassupplementeditwithaseriesofstudiesthatareidentifiedinSection4.1.Detaileddesignwillutilisespatialdatatoavoidandminimiseimpactsonidentifiedconstraints.
2. Intergenerationalequity
Thepresentgenerationshouldensurethatthehealth,diversityandproductivityoftheenvironmentismaintainedorenhancedforthebenefitoffuturegenerations.
TheProposalcanbedesignedandimplementedwithoutsignificantimpactsonthehealth,diversityandproductivityoftheenvironment.TheProposalwillenableeconomicandsocialbenefitstoflowfromironoreprojectsthathave“strandedore”andwouldotherwisehavenotransportsolution.
3. Conservationofbiologicaldiversityandecologicalintegrity
Conservationofbiologicaldiversityandecologicalintegrationshouldbeafundamentalconsideration
SurveyworkhasbeenusedtoconfirmtherangeandstatusofenvironmentalvalueswithintheProposalArea.TherecordedbaselinedatafromtheProposalAreaandsurroundsindicatethattherearenotlikelytobesignificantbiodiversityorecologicalintegrityimpactsatlocalorregionalscales.
4. Improvedvaluation,pricingandincentivemechanismsa. Environmentalfactorsshouldbeincludedinthe
valuationofassetsandservices.b. Thepolluterpaysprinciple–thosewhogenerate
pollutionandwasteshouldbearthecostofcontainment,avoidanceorabatement.
c. Theusersofgoodsandservicesshouldpaypricesbasedonthefulllifecyclecostsofprovidinggoodsandservices,includingtheuseofnaturalresourcesandassetsandtheultimatedisposalofanywaste.
d. Environmentalgoals,havingbeenestablished,shouldbepursuedinthemostcosteffectiveway,byestablishingincentivestructures,includingmarketmechanisms,whichbenefitand/orminimisecoststodeveloptheirownsolutionsandresponsestoenvironmentalproblems.
Railtransportofbulkmaterialhasbeenproventobemoreefficientandachievealowerenvironmentalimpactduringoperationthanroadtransport.
EnvironmentalconstraintavoidanceandmanagementcostshavebeenconsideredintheprojectcostingphasesandthiswillcontinuethroughtheBankableFeasibilityStudystage.
5. Wasteminimisation
Allreasonableandpracticablemeasuresshouldbetakentominimisethegenerationofwasteanditsdischargeintotheenvironment
Wastewillbeminimisedbyadoptingthehierarchyofwastecontrols;avoid,minimise,re‐use,recycleandsafedisposal.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |42
9 CONCLUSION
AvoidanceisakeystrategyforthemanagementofenvironmentalimpactsandRutilahasusedtheinformationgatheredbyEcoscapeandPhoenixin2014toincorporateconstraintmappingandavoidanceintotheiralignmentplanningatanearlystage.Thisplanning,combinedwiththeproposedwidthoftheProposalArea,willallowthemajorityofsignificantvegetationorhabitattobeavoidedcompletely.
Forthoseareasofsignificantvegetationorhabitatthatcannotbeavoided,disturbancewillbeable to be minimised through management measures such as relocation of flexibleinfrastructure,narrowingofconstructioncorridorsthroughsignificantvegetationorhabitatandgeneralbest‐practiceindustrycontrols.
Areasdisturbedduringconstruction thatarenotrequired foroperationswillberehabilitated.ThisisexpectedtobeasignificantareaforthisProposal(approximately1200ha)andwillresultinareductionintheresidualimpactoftheProposal.
Offsets are proposed to compensate for the residual environmental impact of the Proposal;specifically the loss of 3,000 ha of Very Good to Excellent condition vegetation. FinalarrangementswilloccurpendingthesubmissionofanInfrastructurePlanatthecompletionofdetaileddesign,andoffsetpaymentswilloccuronacostperhectarebasis.
Rutila has completed extensive stakeholder consultation that will continue to develop as theProposalproceedsintodetaileddesign,constructionandoperationalphases(refertoSection4).This stakeholder consultation has demonstrated that many environmental factors can bemanagedunderotherlegislation.
‘Key’and‘other’environmentalfactorshavebeenassessedagainstEPAObjectivesandrelevantguidelines. The Proposal has been prepared with design, layout and management controlsidentified to avoid, minimise or manage the potential environmental impacts. Given theconfiguration of the Proposal to avoid andminimise significant impacts and themanagementactions and controls to protect the environment, the Proposal is expected to meet the EPAObjectives.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |43
10 GLOSSARY
Term Meaning
AHAct AboriginalHeritageAct1972
API AssessmentonProponentInformation–thelevelofassessmentrelevanttothisProposal
BBIP BallaBallaInfrastructurePort
BBIR BallaBallaInfrastructureRailway
DAA DepartmentofAboriginalAffairs
DER DepartmentofEnvironmentRegulation
DisturbanceArea TheactualareaofdisturbancerequiredtoimplementtheProposal.TheDisturbanceAreawillbewithintheProposalAreaboundaries.
DMP DepartmentofMinesandPetroleum
DoE DepartmentoftheEnvironment(Commonwealth)
DoW DepartmentofWater
DPaW DepartmentofParksandWildlife
DSD DepartmentofStateDevelopment
EAG1 EnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline1:Definingthekeycharacteristicsofaproposal
EAG6 EnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline6:TimelinesforEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentofProposals
Ecoscape EcoscapeAustraliaPtyLtd
EIA EnvironmentalImpactAssessment
EMPs EnvironmentalManagementPlans
EPA EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority(WA)
EPAct EnvironmentalProtectionAct1986
EPBCAct EnvironmentalProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999(Commonwealth)
Flinders FlindersMinesLimited
Forge ForgeResourcesSwanPtyLtd
GDEs GroundwaterDependentEcosystems
GL Gigalitre
ha Hectares
km Kilometres
m Metres
MNES MattersofNationalEnvironmentalSignificance
MS945 MinisterialStatement945
NWCH NorthWestCoastalHighway
OEPA OfficeoftheEnvironmentalProtectionAuthorityofWesternAustralia
PEC PriorityEcologicalCommunities–plantcommunitieslistedasbeingpotentiallythreatenedundertheWildlifeConservationAct1950
PF PriorityFlora
Phoenix PhoenixEnvironmentalPtyLtd
PIOP PilbaraIronOreProject
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |44
Term Meaning
PPA PilbaraPortsAuthority
Proposal AsdefinedundertheEPAct‐aproject,plan,programme,policy,operation,undertakingordevelopmentorchangeinlanduse,oramendmentofanyoftheforegoing,butdoesnotincludescheme.
TheProposal TheProposalistoconstructandoperatearailwayline(approximately160kminlength)andconveyorline(approximately40kminlength)runningfromthePilbaraIronOreProject(operatedbyFlinders)northtotheBallaBallaPort.TheProposalincludessupportinginfrastructuresuchasstockyards,borrowpits,accessroads,communications,waterboresandpipelines,accommodationcamps,workshops,laydownareas,aballastquarry,aconveyorrailwaylineoverpassandgradeseparationcrossingoftheNorthWestCoastalHighway(NWCH).
ProposalArea TheProposalAreaistheareathatformsthebasisforthisProposalandistheareawithinwhichtheProposalwillbeimplemented.TheProposalAreaisoutlinedinredinFigure1.
RIWIAct RightsinWaterandIrrigationAct1914
Rutila RutilaResourcesLtd
RTIO RioTintoIronOre
S91 Section91oftheLandAdministrationAct1997
SRE Short‐rangeEndemic
SRL SpecialRailLicence
TEC ThreatenedEcologicalCommunities–plantcommunitieslistedasbeingthreatenedandlegallyprotectedundertheWildlifeConservationAct1950and/ortheEnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999
TF ThreatenedFlora
UCL UnallocatedCrownLand
WA WesternAustralia
WCAct WildlifeConservationAct1950(WA)
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |45
11 REFERENCES
BOM(2014),ClimatestatisticsforAustralianlocations.CommonwealthofAustralia,BureauofMeterology.Availableat:http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/.DepartmentofAgriculture(2003),EvaporationdataforWesternAustralia.DepartmentofAgriculture,SouthPerth,WA.ResourceManagementTechnicalReportNo.65.EnvironmentAustralia(2001),AdirectoryofimportantwetlandsinAustralia.3rdedition.EnvironmentAustralia,Canberra,ACT.EPA(2012a),EnvironmentalImpactAssessment(PartIVDivisions1and2)AdministrativeProcedures2012.WesternAustralianGovernmentGazette.Perth,Friday,7December2012.No.223.
EPA(2012b),EnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline1:DefiningtheKeyCharacteristicsofaProposal.EnvironmentalProtectionAct1986.EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority.WesternAustralia.May2012
EPA(2013a),EnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline10:ScopingaProposal.EnvironmentalProtectionAct1986.EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority.WesternAustralia.August2013.
EPA(2013b),EnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline6:forTimelinesforEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentofProposals.EnvironmentalProtectionAct1986.EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority.WesternAustralia.March2013.
EPA(2013c),EnvironmentalAssessmentGuideline8:forEnvironmentalFactorsandObjectives.EnvironmentalProtectionAct1986.EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority.WesternAustralia.June2013.
Ecoscape(2014).RutilaResourcesRailwayCorridorFloraandVegetationAssessment.November2014.
Leighton,K.A.(2004),Climate.In:vanVreeswyk,A.M.E.,Payne,A.L.,Leighton,K.A.&Hennig,P.(eds)TechnicalBulletin9.AninventoryandconditionsurveyofthePilbararegion,WesternAustralia.DepartmentofAgriculture,GovernmentofWesternAustralia,SouthPerth,WA,pp.19–38.McKenzie,N.L.&Bullen,R.D.(2009),Theecholocationcalls,habitatrelationships,foragingnichesandcommunitiesofPilbaramicrobats.RecordsoftheWesternAustralianMuseum,Supplement78:123–155.Phoenix(2014a),TerrestrialFaunaSurveysfortheRutilaResourcesRailwayCorridor.FinalReport.November2014.
Phoenix(2014b),Addendumto:TerrestrialFaunaSurveysfortheRutilaResourcesRailwayCorridor.Draftreport.November2014.
TraditionalOwners‐MillstreamParkCouncil,DEC&ConservationCommissionofWesternAustralia(2011),Millstream‐ChichesterNationalParkandMungaroonaRangeNatureReserveManagementPlan.TraditionalOwners‐MillstreamParkCouncil,DepartmentofEnvironment
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |46
andConservationandConservationCommissionofWesternAustralia,Millstream,PerthandCrawley,WA.VanVreeswyk,A.M.E.,Payne,A.L.,Leighton,K.A.&Hennig,P.(2004),AninventoryandconditionsurveyofthePilbararegion,WesternAustralia.DepartmentofAgriculture,GovernmentofAustralia,TechnicalBulletin92:1–424.
ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATIONDOCUMENTRutilaResourcesLtd
BBIRA‐RAL‐EN‐RPT‐2500 P a g e |47
12 APPENDICES
ThefollowingAppendicesareprovidedontheattachedCD:
Appendix1:BiologicalReportsandSurveysAppendix2:ProposalAreaShapefilesAppendix2:StakeholderConsultationSummary