flowerdale sand washing dpemp g hazell pty ltd and d... · 2013-05-24 · flowerdale quarry –...

Flowerdale Sand – Washing Facility Development Proposal and Environmental Management Plan

Prepared By: Barry Williams

Date: 5 April 2013

Issue Date Recipient Organisation

Draft 1 5 October 2012 Mr Michael Hazell Hazell Bros. P/L

Draft 2 19 October 2012 Mr Michael Hazell Hazell Bros. P/L

Draft 3 22 October 2012 Mr Derek Walter EPA

Final 29 November 2012 Mr Derek Walter EPA

Final 3 December 2012 Mr Derek Walter EPA

Final (revised contact) 27 March 2013 Mrs Jayne Newman Waratah/Wynyard Council

Final (operating hours) 5 April 2013 Mrs Jayne Newman Waratah/Wynyard Council

Flowerdale Quarry – Washing Facility 5 April 2013

Integrated Land Management and Planning | Executive Summary 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY R.G. Hazell Pty. Ltd. and D.R. Hazell Holdings Pty. Ltd (Applicant) are applying to introduce a sand washing facility to their Flowerdale Quarry operation. By operating a wash plant on site the need to cart raw product (including waste) to a washing facility at Calder will be negated.

There will be benefits for the Applicant in lower costs and more control of the quality of the product. There will be benefits to the local community in that the change will cause the Flowerdale Quarry to be permanently manned, most likely by a person living in the community.

The wash facility will recycle the wash water through a series of ponds that will extract the fine particles. The operation will be ‘closed loop’ in that there will be no discharge of process water to the receiving environment. The Applicant will ensure that in any event less than a 1 in 20 year storm runoff will be contained in site facilities giving time for fines to be settled out before the water is released.

A noise study commissioned for this application found that the wash plant will not cause excessive noise levels at the closest residences to the site. Controls introduced for the existing operation will continue mitigating the risk of environmental damage resulting from dust, Flora and fauna values will be protected by the protection of water quality in the receiving environment.


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Forward 3

FORWARD The Applicant engaged Integrated Land Management and Planning to assist in gaining approval to add a washing plant to their Flowerdale Operation in January 2012. Following a phone conversation, a set of plans showing an indicative layout of the proposed facility was forwarded to Waratah / Wynyard Council on the 1st of March 2012. Waratah / Wynyard Council (Council) considered the proposal and responded that they would require a Development Application (DA).

During this period the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) was advised that a change to the Flowerdale Operation was proposed. The EPA advised that they would be required to assess the proposal and a Notice of Intent was submitted to the EPA on the 12th of April 2012. The EPA notified the applicant that a 2B class of assessment had been determined on the 30th of April 2012. The Project Specific Guidelines for the Development Proposal and Environmental Management Plan (DPEMP) were received by the Applicant on the 22nd of May 2012.

A site familiarisation meeting was conducted on site on the 7th of June 2012, attending were Mr Derek Walter (EPA) Ms Jayne Newman (W/WC) and Mr Michael Hazell (Applicant). A draft copy of the DPEMP was forwarded to the EPA on the 22nd of October 2012 a copy of the draft document was forwarded by the EPA to the Council. The EPA provided comments on the draft document on the 7th of November 2012. The comments were used to further refine the DPEMP.

Once the EPA is satisfied with the final DPEMP, a DA will be submitted to the Council. The development is discretionary, so the Council will then advertise the DA for public consultation.

If no representations are received, the EPA will draft the environmental conditions that will be incorporated into any permit the Council may wish to issue. The DA, with the DPEMP and the EPA’s conditions will then inform the decision by Council as to whether a permit should be issued.

If representations are received, these will need to be considered by the EPA and if necessary further information in the form of a supplement to the DPEMP will be required. It will be necessary for the Council to prepare a report and submit this along with the DA, DPEMP, supplement to the DPEMP and the conditions issued by the EPA to a full Council meeting for a determination.



TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 2

Forward ................................................................................................................................................... 3

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 8

2 Proposal Description ..................................................................................................................... 10

2.1 Proposal Outline ................................................................................................................... 10

2.2 Site Plans ............................................................................................................................... 12

2.3 Off-site Infrastructure ........................................................................................................... 17

2.4 Technical and Management Alternatives ............................................................................. 17

3 The Existing Environment ............................................................................................................. 17

3.1 Planning Aspects ................................................................................................................... 17

3.2 Environmental Aspects ......................................................................................................... 18

3.3 Socio-economic Aspects ....................................................................................................... 19

3.4 Alternative Sites .................................................................................................................... 19

4 Potential Effects and Their Management ..................................................................................... 20

4.1 Air Emissions ......................................................................................................................... 20

4.1.1 Existing conditions ........................................................................................................ 20

4.1.2 Avoidance and mitigation measures ............................................................................. 20

4.1.3 Assessment of effects ................................................................................................... 21

4.2 Liquid Waste ......................................................................................................................... 22




4.3 Groundwater ......................................................................................................................... 28



4.4 Noise Emissions ..................................................................................................................... 30

4.4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS....................................................................................................... 30

4.4.2 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... 30

4.4.3 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES............................................................................ 30

4.4.4 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS................................................................................................... 32

4.5 Solid and Controlled Waste Management ............................................................................ 32

4.5.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS....................................................................................................... 32

4.5.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATING MEASURES ............................................................................ 32


4.6 Dangerous Goods .................................................................................................................. 33






4.7 Biodiversity and Nature Conservation Values ...................................................................... 34


4.7.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES............................................................................ 35


4.8 Marine and Coastal ............................................................................................................... 36

4.8.1 Current situation ........................................................................................................... 36



4.9 Greenhouse Gases and Ozone Depleting Substances .......................................................... 37



4.9.3 Future initiatives ........................................................................................................... 37

4.10 Heritage ................................................................................................................................. 37

4.11 Land Use and Development .................................................................................................. 37



4.12 Visual Effects ......................................................................................................................... 39



4.13 Socio-economic Issues .......................................................................................................... 39



4.14 Health and Safety Issues ....................................................................................................... 40




4.15 Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment ................................................................................... 40




4.16 Fire Risk ................................................................................................................................. 41




4.17 Infrastructure and Off-site Ancillary Facilities ...................................................................... 42





4.18 Environmental Management and Systems ........................................................................... 42




4.19 Cumulative and Interactive Effects ....................................................................................... 43




4.20 Traffic Impacts....................................................................................................................... 43




5 Monitoring and Review ................................................................................................................. 44

5.1 Air quality .............................................................................................................................. 44

5.2 Water quality ........................................................................................................................ 44

5.3 Weeds ................................................................................................................................... 45

6 Decommissioning and Rehabilitation ........................................................................................... 45

7 Commitments ............................................................................................................................... 47

8 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 48

9 References .................................................................................................................................... 49

10 Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 50

FIGURES

Figure 1: Schematic of screening and washing process ........................................................................ 12

Figure 2: Locality Plan (extract 1:25 000 Topo) .................................................................................... 13

Figure 3: Site Plan - Aerial Image dated Feb 2011 ................................................................................ 14

Figure 4: Site Plan detail ....................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 5: washer and settling ponds general arrangement .................................................................. 16

Figure 6: Water and product balance diagram ..................................................................................... 27



TABLES

Table 1: Applicant details ........................................................................................................................ 9

Table 2: Site operation details ................................................................................................................ 9

Table 3: Existing permit conditions ......................................................................................................... 9

Table 4: Site environmental conditions ................................................................................................ 18

Table 5: Sources and controls for atmospheric emissions ................................................................... 21

Table 6: Groundwater bore in proximity (MRT, 2012) ......................................................................... 28

Table 7: Factors affecting and calculated noise levels (from (Terts, 2012)) ......................................... 31

Table 8: observations of threatened fauna species within 5 km .......................................................... 35

Table 9: threatened fauna species, threats and controls ..................................................................... 35

Table 10: Response to standards for primary industries zone ............................................................. 38

PLATES

Plate 1: Southern sediment retention basin ......................................................................................... 22

Plate 2: Northern sediment retention basin ......................................................................................... 23

Plate 3: Cut-off and diversion drain ...................................................................................................... 23

Plate 4: An example discrete sediment retention pit ........................................................................... 24

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Hazell Bros Layout A

Appendix 1a Mechanical equipment specifications

Appendix 2a Overall Plan Rev. 02

Appendix 2b Site Plan Rev. 02

Appendix 2c Sed Ponds and Settlement Pits Rev 02

Appendix 3 Settling pond calculations

Appendix 4a Noise

Appendix 4b Super Reclaimer Noise Level

Appendix 5 Hazard Analysis


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Introduction 8

1 INTRODUCTION R.G. Hazell Pty. Ltd. and D.R. Hazell Holdings Pty. Ltd (Applicant) are the landowners, lessees and the operators of the Flowerdale Sand and Gravel Pit (Flowerdale Quarry). The operation is spread over two adjacent tiles and two mining leases. The leases are for category 3 (Construction Minerals) and the operation is administered under a permit issued by the Waratah / Wynyard Council. The Board of the Environment Protection Authority issued permit environmental conditions No. 7255 that forms Part B of the Council Permit.

The current and previous operators developed the quarry by ripping and pushing to win product. Stockpiles created were then dry screened and crushed where required to produce gravel and sand for concrete and other construction uses.

A series of trials on the sand to be sold for ‘ready-mix’ concrete found that it had to be washed to provide a consistent specification. The resultant washed sand product is highly regarded and in demand.

In order to wash the sand it must be carted to an established washing facility at Calder Gravel Pits. The Calder washing facility is located at a sand and gravel pit operating on mining lease 1M/2010. Although close ‘as the crow flies’, it is necessary to cart 12 kilometres to deliver the raw product to the washing facility (see Figure 1).

The Applicant seeks to establish a sand washing facility on their mining lease at Marshalls Road. Using their own washing facility, the Applicant will realise substantial savings, making their product more cost competitive in the market place, reduce traffic movements on Calder Road and have greater control over the quality of the final product.

As much as 15% of the mass of sand product carted out of the Flowerdale Quarry is fines that will be discarded and 8 kilometres of extra travelling is required to wash the product. Along with the cost to pick up the product and load it onto trucks and delays in delivery, extra handling adds to the greenhouse gas emission contribution of the total operation.

Hobart

Queenstown

Triabunna

Burnie Smithton

Launceston

100 0


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Introduction 9

TABLE 1: APPLICANT DETAILS

Applicant R.G. Hazell Pty. Ltd. D.R. Hazell Holdings Pty. Ltd.

ACN 009 586 378 009 491 089

ABN 26 009 491 089

Address 8B Lampton Avenue

Derwent Park TAS 7009

Postal Address c/- Hazell Bros. Group

PO Box 430

Moonah TAS 7009

Contact Mr Rob Paddison

Phone (03) 6277 7888

Mobile 0459 343 106

TABLE 2: SITE OPERATION DETAILS

Name Flowerdale Sand and Gravel Pit (Flowerdale Quarry)

Address Marshalls Road

Flowerdale TAS 7054

Stutterds Road

Flowerdale TAS 7054

Mining Lease 1810 P/M 1843 P/M

Certificate of Title 225283/1 225735/1

Environmental Permit Permit DA 209/2005-A including permit environmental conditions no. 7255

Subsequently amended by RMPAT decision dated 10 October 2006.

TABLE 3: EXISTING PERMIT CONDITIONS

Maximum Production 40,000 cubic metres / annum

Operating hours Week days Weekends

0800 to 1800 0900 to 1400 Saturdays

Maximum Volumes Product stockpiles Overburden stockpiles

4,000 cubic metres 10,000 cubic metres

Maximum area of un-rehabilitated land

1810 P/M – 1.25 hectares 1843 P/M – 1.5 hectares

Maximum speeds Onsite Marshalls Road

20 km/hr 40 km/hr

Maximum truck trips on Marshalls Road

32 trips / day


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Proposal Description 10

2 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION

2.1 PROPOSAL OUTLINE The current operation is run on a campaign style basis with a screening event occurring every few weeks. Each campaign requires that a mobile screening plant is mobilised to the site, established and operated to deplete the raw product stockpiles and produce stockpiles of various grades of processed product.

This proposal is to establish a sand washing facility within the confines of the existing disturbed area of the Flowerdale Quarry. The facility will consist of a new screener (Super Reclaimer with a triple deck screen) and wash plant (De-waterer). The new operation will require the wash / screening plant to operate two or three days per week. Various processed products will be diverted off into stockpiles by the triple deck screen and the -4mm fines passing the final screen will go to the De-waterer. The De-waterer will remove the extra fine silts and clays from the sand. This improvement to the operation has several advantages including:

• Elimination of product double handling with associated efficiencies in time, cost and greenhouse gas emissions.

• Better quality control of the washing process to ensure that the final product consistently meets the required specification.

• Eliminate the need to transport the waste component of the product. • The waste silt product is retained on the site to be used for blending with gravels or

sculpting landforms in rehabilitation works.

The sand washing equipment will be an “off the shelf” relocatable facility that will be transported as a semi-trailer or on a float. The area of the pit that is currently ‘worked-out’ but un-rehabilitated will be used to establish the facility. A foundation will be constructed that will secure the individual components. A series of settling ponds will be constructed alongside the facility that will take and treat the wash water produced.

The Applicant is in negotiation with a supplier to provide the following equipment to establish the facility:

• 1x Super Reclaimer 10x5 triple deck • 1x De-waterer SRD180 • 2x SM450W conveyors • 1x MS50 conveyor

If this application is successful the equipment installed at the site will be the above or equivalent equipment in terms of throughput, water usage and noise. The supplier proposed a layout for the equipment which appears in the drawing ‘Hazell Bros. Layout A’, in this document as Appendix 1. Technical specifications for the equipment above are included as Appendix 1a.

The process line is established around the Super Reclaimer. This machine has a diesel engine that is used to energise the other equipment including the wash plant by a hydraulic system. A diesel engine will drive a single pump that will recycle the water from the last of the settling ponds back to the screen box.



The equipment will be brought to site, setup and secured to a foundation. Make up water will be sourced from the existing impoundment adjacent to the gravel pit (see Figure 2). A small diesel pump of around 5 kW will be located at the discharge pipe end of the water supply impoundment. The pump will be used to top up the settling ponds. It will have a small fuel tank, such that a full tank will supply around 60 kL of make water.

In operation, the wash water will be recycled through the ponds and back into the plant. The operation will be ‘closed loop’ with inputs limited to some makeup water to replace losses and diesel to energise the system.

The installation of the washing facility will include the following activities:

• Excavate small footings pads to secure the equipment (excavator). • Pour concrete to foundations (Agi-truck) • Excavate the settling ponds, set aside clay materials and construct stockpiles to cue the

product (excavator). • Compact the subgrade on the floor and sides of the settling ponds (track roll, excavator). • Place site won and cured clay materials over compacted floor in layers to achieve an

impermeable base (excavator). • Bring equipment to the site establish and secure (floats or trucks to tow trailers). • Connect the second settling pond to the screen box via the recycle pump. Connect the water

supply to the second settling pond via the makeup water pump.

The construction activities are likely to take 6 weeks with a period of 3 weeks delay to allow time for the clay materials to cure.

The estimated resource capacity based on extrapolating the exposed floor under the balance of the mining leases is over 2.5 million cubic metres. This gives a potential mine life expectancy of 60 years.

If the resource is extinguished in the future or markets change, the wash equipment can be unbolted from the foundation and relocated to another site. In this case the foundations will be broken up and the settling ponds drained, collapsed and the site rehabilitated. More detail on de-commissioning and rehabilitation is provided in Section 6 later in this document.



FIGURE 1: SCHEMATIC OF SCREENING AND WASHING PROCESS

2.2 SITE PLANS

Push raw product to stockpile Feed super-reclaimer from stockpile

-4 mm sand

4 – 12 mm stockpile

12 – 20 mm stockpile

De-waterer

Triple deck screen

Super-reclaimer

Recycled water

Diesel to energise

Diesel to energise

Products to market

Wash water

Flowerdale Sand – Washing Facility 15 Nov 2012


Mining Lease 1810 P/M

Mining Lease 1843 P/M

Flowerdale Quarry

Off-site wash plant FIGURE 2: LOCALITY PLAN (EXTRACT 1:25 000 TOPO)

Flowerdale Sand – Washing Facility 15 Nov 2012


FIGURE 3: SITE PLAN - AERIAL IMAGE DATED FEB 2011

Washer / screener

66 Pages Rd

62 Pages Rd

160 Marshalls Rd

142 Marshalls Rd Owned by Operator

150 Stutterds Rd

64 Pages Rd

Water impoundment

1 4

4

2

2

4

4

4

2 Watercourse or stream class

Flowerdale Quarry – Washing Facility 15 Nov 2012


0 20 40 60 80 100

LENGTHS IN METRES

Dire

ctio

n of

min

ing

Settling pond

Gross particle trap

Existing relocatable site huts

Settling pond

Machinery

Product stockpiles

Roads, earthworks

Vegetation

Existing drainage

Product stockpiles

Quarry access road

Washed sand access

FIGURE 4: SITE PLAN DETAIL

Southern sediment retention pond

Northern sediment retention pond

Washer

Screener

Waste fines stockpiles

Discharge

Discharge

Emergency spillway

Raw product

Dedicated retention ponds

New drainage

Flowerdale Quarry – Washing Facility 15 Nov 2012


Existing site drains

Gross particle traps

Super reclaimer 10x5 triple deck

or equivalent

De-waterer SRD180 or equivalent

Gravel wearing surface

Section through settling ponds

-4mm Sand

Trimmed and compacted impervious substrate

4-12mm

12-20.5mm

FIGURE 5: WASHER AND SETTLING PONDS GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

Emergency spillway

Settling pond

Machinery

Product stockpiles

Roads, earthworks

Vegetation

Existing drainage

Compacted site-won clay

Waste fines stockpile

New drainage

Noise source

Makeup water pump 250m further on

On road trucks

Wheel loader

Water recycling pump

Water from stockpiles


Integrated Land Management and Planning | The Existing Environment 17

2.3 OFF-SITE INFRASTRUCTURE The operation will not be supported by any extra offsite infrastructure. The volume of material to be carted on Marshalls Road and subsequently on the Bass Highway will be unchanged. The need to cart materials on Calder Road will be eliminated. There is no plan to wash product from other sites immediately or in the future.

Initially the plant will be energised by diesel engines. There is an opportunity to carry overhead power to the site from the northern boundary. The feasibility of a permanent electrical supply will be investigated with Aurora and may require the installation of a transformer.

2.4 TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES The management alternative to this proposal is for the Applicant to continue to wash the product from the Flowerdale Quarry at Calder. To continue to cart the raw product to Calder will cost the Applicant in time, labour and fuel. These costs will only increase in years to come. At some point the cost of operating in an inefficient manner will cause the operation to be unviable and a source of high quality construction material will be lost to the market.

A technical alternative to the water washing facility would be to install an air operated sand classifier. These machines are more suited to situations where water is an impractical medium for classification such as in arid regions or extremely cold climates. An air classifier would have higher initial installation costs and higher operating noise levels.

3 THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

3.1 PLANNING ASPECTS The site is located within the Waratah-Wynyard municipal area and the existing operation and any further development is administered under the under the Waratah-Wynyard Planning Scheme 2000.

The land on which the quarry is situated and the surrounding land is zoned ‘Primary Industries’. Mineral extraction and processing is consistent with the intent of the Primary Industries Zone. The land is surrounded by productive agricultural land which is also consistent with the zone intent.

Council considers this application to be an ‘intensification’ of the existing use and therefore a development application is required. The existing operation is a level 2 activity and hence the Board of the Environment Protection Authority must consider the environmental impacts.

There is a new draft interim planning scheme under development for the Waratah-Wynyard Council. The new draft interim planning scheme and new zone maps are not available for public comment at this time. The quarry is pre-existing at the time the draft interim planning scheme is being developed and should be considered to have ‘existing use rights’ by the Planning Authority. The status of this proposal with respect to the new planning scheme will be dependent on whether a permit has been issued before the interim planning scheme has been declared.



3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS TABLE 4: SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

Climate data nearest weather station Wynyard Airport (091107)

Mean max. Temperature (0C) 16.9 Mean min. Temperature (0C) 7.0

Mean annual rainfall (mm) 1001.6

Wind data In the morning the predominant wind direction (> 30 %) and the strongest winds come from the west.

In the afternoon the strongest winds and dominant direction is still from the west but southwest, northwest and east winds feature.

Land capability

Class 5 and 6 - 60% of the land is unsuitable for cropping, 40% limited to occasional cropping or a restricted range of crops.

Aspect The existing quarry is located on a lower slope of a ridge running east from a hill with its crest on the mining lease boundary to the west. The crest of the hill is has a reduced level (RL) 125 metres using the Australian Height Datum (AHD) and the floor of the pit is at RL 50. An unnamed watercourse No. 472154 is on the northwest edge of the existing pit. Further north and west another water course (No. 472149) has been dammed to provide reliable water supply. These water courses are terminal tributaries to the Inglis River that runs through a valley to the east.

Vegetation The site is surrounded by a mixture of native forest and established plantations. TASVEG has the forest mapped as WOU Eucalyptus obliqua wet forest. There is an area of non-Eucalyptus forest mapped as NME Melaleuca ericifolia swamp forest to the north of the existing quarry. Melaleuca ericifolia swamp forest is listed as a threatened forest community.

Soil type Inglis Association (In) - Described as soils developed on Tertiary quartz gravel and sand on undulating to rolling (3-32%) land.

Aquatic environment

The Inglis River is located on the east boundary of the site. The current extraction area and proposed washing plant site drain to two existing sediment retention ponds. The north pond discharges via a class 4 and class 2 watercourse 670 metres to the Inglis River. The south pond discharges via a class 4 watercourse 350 metres to the Inglis River.

Downstream water users

No. Client Property No. Purpose

(ML) 8652 CHRISTOPHER GEORGE GRIFFIN & LINDA JOY GRIFFIN 7449556 IRRIGATION 38.5

9221 EWINGTON, S J 7367016 IRRIGATION 36

8651 GREGORY JOHN MCDONALD & RHONDA MCDONALD 7084630 IRRIGATION 40

2482 NEVILLE LAURENCE ATKINSON & HEATHER MAY ATKINSON 7892566 IRRIGATION 444

2482 NEVILLE LAURENCE ATKINSON & HEATHER MAY ATKINSON 7892566 IRRIGATION 36

2388 P M DUNN & S D SOUTHWELL 7086222 IRRIGATION 18

8456 WAYNE LINDSAY HANSEN & LINDA MAREE HANSEN 7564474 IRRIGATION 252



3.3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS The current census data for the region reveal that Waratah-Wynyard has above the National average unemployment statistics and that technicians and trade workers and machinery operators and drivers make up more than a quarter of those employed.

It can be seen that even a small development that can provide more consistent employment and help provide cost competitive construction materials can have a benefit to the community.

3.4 ALTERNATIVE SITES The existing extraction activities at the Flowerdale Quarry reveal a base level with a heavy clay matrix at around RL 50. If this base level is extrapolated through the land contained within the mining leases 1810P/M and 1843P/M the quarry has reserves of quartz gravel of around 2.7 million cubic metres. Trials found that to most effectively utilise this resource it is necessary to wash the sand.

The objective of this proposed change to the operation of the Flowerdale Quarry is to negate the need to cart the product to other sites for processing. Alternative sites have not been considered for this proposal.


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Potential Effects and Their Management 20

4 POTENTIAL EFFECTS AND THEIR MANAGEMENT

4.1 AIR EMISSIONS 4.1.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS Air emissions are likely from two sources; diesel engines will produce exhaust emissions and processing the extracted materials can give rise to dust emissions. The current operation utilises a wheel loader and occasionally a dozer to rip and push raw product. These mobile machines have diesel engines that produce exhaust emissions. During a screening campaign a mobile screener is transported to the site. The mobile screen is energised by a diesel engine. The actual equipment used at the site will vary depending on what is available from Hazell Bros Group at the time.

Dust can be liberated from traffic over dusty surfaces including the access road, from the dry screening operation as materials drop onto vibrating screens and from surface dust on stockpiles when liberated by the wind.

Air emissions can become a nuisance from either the quarry site or from traffic on Marshalls Road.

An activity is required to comply with the following legislation and policies with regard to air emissions:

• Environment Management and Pollution Control Act 1994: • Workplace Health and Safety Regulations 1998: • Quarry Code of Practice 1999: • Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality) 2004:

The criterion used for evaluation of this proposal will be the ‘Acceptable Standard’ included in the Quarry Code of Practice 1999 which states; “Dust should not normally be visible crossing the boundary of the premises”.

The site currently operates under the provisions of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP). The EMP provides constraints on the operation to limit the risk of dust emissions:

• The maximum product stockpile size is,4,000 cubic metres (m3 ). • The maximum overburden stockpile size is 10,000 m3. • The maximum area of un-rehabilitated land is 3 hectares (ha). • An onsite speed limit of 20 kilometres per hour (km/hr). • A self-imposed speed limit of 40 km/hr on Marshalls Road. • Trucks carrying dusty products will have tray covers applied.

4.1.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The Flowerdale Quarry is operational and uses a mobile screener as an integral part of the current operation. The quantity of product processed and carted off site will not be increased. Truck movements will not be increased, so there will not be any additional dust generated from traffic. The



existing screening operation will be replaced with a current model unit with a screen box and de-waterer attached to the discharge end.

The emissions from the diesel engines on site will be limited by routine maintenance to ensure that injectors are clean and in good condition and worn components are replaced before performance is affected.

Dust emanating from the super reclaimer, trafficked area or the stockpiles will be monitored and if necessary water sprays introduced to settle the dust.

Sources of dust from the proposed operations are as follows:

TABLE 5: SOURCES AND CONTROLS FOR ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS

Source Emission Control Diesel engines Exhaust fumes Current model machines

Routine maintenance

Product stockpiles Dust from surfaces Limitation on size All products will be wet Very fine particles removed

Drop points Dust from loading hoppers and trucks

Minimise drop point height

Super reclaimer Dust from hopper Raw product is moist

Traffic on site Dust from wheels Speed limited 20 km/hr onsite

Traffic on Marshalls Rd Dust from wheels Speed limited to 40 km/hr

4.1.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The addition of a wash plant to the end of the existing process stream is unlikely to cause an increase in dust emissions. The existing controls on operations are adequate to mitigate the risk of activities on the site generating nuisance dust emissions.

Item Description Responsible When

4.1.3.1 Dust suppression by water sprays or water cart on trafficked surfaces will be utilized if required

Operator As required



4.2 LIQUID WASTE 4.2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS

The active extraction, stockpiling and processing area is serviced by two substantial sediment retention basins (see Plate 1 and Plate 2). The production area and newly revegetated areas are separated by a substantial diversion drain (see Plate 3) that is directed to the two sediment retention basins.

All remaining disturbed areas are serviced by small dedicated sediment retention pits designed to retain sediment in runoff from small discrete areas of the workings, see plate 4. These dedicated sediment retention pits have small catchments, are located on roadways that are outside the catchment that drains to the two main sediment retention ponds and discharge into dense vegetation. The approximate locations are shown in Figure 4.

Liquid emission and water quality standards are included in:

• State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 • Water Management Act 1999 • Quarry Code of Practice 1999

The Quarry Code of Practice 1999 sets the following limits on acceptable emission standards for discharge into inland waters:

• Total Suspended Solids (or non-filterable residue) in runoff should not exceed 30 milligrams per litre (mg/L),

• unless a dilution factor of 50 times exists, in which case the limit is 60 mg/L.

PLATE 1: SOUTHERN SEDIMENT RETENTION BASIN



PLATE 2: NORTHERN SEDIMENT RETENTION BASIN

PLATE 3: CUT-OFF AND DIVERSION DRAIN



PLATE 4: AN EXAMPLE DISCRETE SEDIMENT RETENTION PIT

4.2.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES Sources of water contaminated with fine particles of sand, silt and clay include; rainfall run off from all areas of exposed soil and sand without vegetation cover; water applied to trafficked areas, stockpiles and drop points to control dust and the new washing process.

The new operation has the potential to transfer large quantities of water from the catchment in which the water supply dam is located into the extraction area. The wash plant will require water to wash the raw product. The fine silts and clays removed from the product will then be entrained in the wash water. If this were to be discharged, the capacity of the existing sediment retention ponds would be exceeded and water containing entrained particles would discharge into the natural aquatic environment. See the location of the two existing sediment retention ponds and discharge points in Figure 4.

The receiving aquatic environment consists of small natural streams with fauna species that are dependent on clear, well oxygenated water and gravelly / weedy bottom to survive.

The wash plant will recycle wash water such that there will not be a discharge of process water into the receiving aquatic environment. There will be a three stage process for removing fine particles from the wash water before it is returned to the wash plant.

1. Discharge from the plant will be deposited into a gross particle trap. The gross particle trap will be designed to be cleared using the site wheel loader. Large particles will be deposited here and the trap will be frequently cleared of sediment.

2. Discharge from the gross particle trap will be directed to the primary settling pond. This pond will be designed to be cleared using an excavator. The input end of the pit will be cleared as required to retain retention volume (see diagram on Figure 4).



3. The third stage will be a second settling pond that will allow longer retention times to settle out finer particles. This pond will be cleared infrequently. The discharge water will move slowly through the ponds, such that the operation of one day will not displace the entire system capacity.

Monitoring and maintaining process water settling pond system is described in Section 5.2.

The connection between the ponds will be via a weir constructed at the extremity of the ponds to prevent dirty water from short circuiting. Engineering drawings of the mechanical layout, and arrangement of the settling ponds are included as Appendix 2.

A third settling pond is shown on the engineering drawings. This will only be constructed if one of the two ponds must be taken out of service for an extended period and it is necessary to continue the operation of the wash plant. In this scenario the third pond will be constructed first and the connecting infrastructure connected before the other pond is cut out.

The floor of the quarry has an existing series of drains that direct rainfall runoff and any water added by water cart operations towards two existing sediment retention structures. The introduction of the washing plant is likely to cause water to be deposited around the plant and in stockpiles. This water will be directed to the settling ponds by a dedicated drain (see Figure 3 and 4). The balance of the site drainage will be contained within the existing site drainage system and directed to the existing sediment retention ponds.

The wash water treatment facility will be constructed in the floor of the quarry with adequate extra capacity to accommodate up to a 1 in 20 year reoccurrence rain event without an uncontrolled discharge.

The volumes of the sediment retention ponds, flow rates expected in the system and hence the settling times for the treatment facility are detailed in the calculations included below and in Appendix 3.

The volume of water required to run the washing plant depends on the volume of raw product to be washed and the properties of the raw product, such as clay and silt content. The plant has been sized to run at a maximum raw product throughput of 100 tonnes per hour. The flow rate required to wash 100 tonnes per hour can be as little as 114 kilolitres per hour (kL/hr) up to a maximum of 324 kL/hr. These figures are based on advice from the Calder washing plant and the equipment suppliers.

The calculations for the size of the settling ponds are based on the maximum production rate and the maximum wash water flow rate to present the worst case scenario. These calculations are included as Appendix 3.

Calculations show that the ponds sizes have sufficient surface area

Pond area required

= 40 m2

Pond area proposed

= 950 m2



A Process Flow Schematic is included to help explain the process by which products (brown arrows) and water (blue arrows) are circulated in the system. The quantities are expressed in units of tonnes per hour and kilolitres per hour for consistency. In some cases such clearing the gross particle trap the waste product will be removed intermittently rather at a constant rate.

It should be noted that the ultra-fine component of the sediment that is likely to settle in the second settling pond will have a negligible effect on the capacity of the pond and hence is not shown on the diagram.

From the Process Water Settling Ponds Calculations and the Process Flow Schematic on page 25:

Calculations show that the ponds have adequate capacity to retain a full days discharge.

Capacity to detain wash water 1 day

= 1620 m3

Proposed pond capacity

= 1940 - 45 = 1895 m3

Calculations show that after 19 hours any particles larger than 8 µm will have settled out.

Depth of water column clear after 19 hrs

= 2.7 m

Proposed pond depth

= 2.5 m

Note: There will be only process consequences of the system failing to provide adequate retention time. The water recycled into the wash unit will be dirty. No lack of design capacity can cause a discharge to the receiving environment.

The ponds must have surplus capacity to accommodate a 1 in 20 year reoccurrence rain event without an un-controlled discharge. The ponds are connected only to the area housing the plant and the stockpiles, all other areas are captured by site drainage systems. Only the rain water falling directly on these surfaces needs to be considered. The combined plant, stockpile and ponds have a combined area of 0.4 ha.

The ponds will have a total of 0.80 m free-board that can be used as extra capacity if required in a storm event. The extra water will be lost either due to evaporation or through losses in the system from water exported in the washed sand and products.

Calculations show that there will be adequate freeboard above the normal operating level of the ponds to fully contain a 1 in 20 year reoccurrence storm event.

Freeboard to retain 1 in 20 year event

= 0.57 m above normal working level

Proposed freeboard provided

= 0.8 m



The wash water pump, make up water pump and wash unit are diesel operated. The engines must be started to initiate flow. The main system will be energised at the beginning of each washing day and shut down at the end of the day.

The make-up water pump is will be a small self-contained motor and pump combination. These units are portable and have small fuel tank incorporated allowing up to 4 hour operation. An example is a QP209/L48E with a Yanmar diesel engine that has a 2 .5 L tank and consumes around 0.75 L/hr. This pump will deliver up to 700 L/min. Total volume of make-up water delivered for a tank of fuel is 168 kL or 0.17 m over the surface of the ponds. This is less than the 0.80 m freeboard that is already provided to contain a 1 in 20 year event.

If makeup water is required, the makeup water pump will be started and operated until the ponds have reached the desired level. If the pump is inadvertently left on it will simply run out of fuel.

A water balance diagram is included below:

FIGURE 6: WATER AND PRODUCT BALANCE DIAGRAM

First stage settling pond

100 t/hr

324 kL/hr

Screener 85 t/hr

5 kL/hr

15 t/hr 319 kL/hr

5 t/hr

5 t/hr

0.5 kL/hr

318 kL/hr

317 kL/hr

Wash Plant

Gross particle trap

Second stage settling ponds

10 t/hr

1 kL/hr 317 kL/hr

7 kL/hr

Product stockpiles

Blend with gravels

Site rehab. works

Make-up water

Pump

External storage



4.2.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The installation of the process water treatment facility will effectively remove around 4,000 m2 of the catchment area away from the existing runoff facilities. These facilities will still be better able to cope with the remaining duty. The process water treatment facility will have adequate extra capacity to retain a 1 in 20 year event. If a more extreme event occurs the ponds will discharge through the emergency spillway into the existing site drain and to the southern sediment retention basin.

The overall effect of the proposed installation of a washing plant and process water treatment facility will be to enhance the effectiveness of the existing runoff water treatment facilities. The process water treatment facility will not discharge in all but the most extreme conditions. Under these extreme conditions all the catchment will be discharging into the river systems and the contribution of the sand washing plant will be negligible.


4.2.3.1 The settling ponds will be constructed with capacity to ensure that there is no discharge more frequently than for a 1-in-20 year storm event.

Operator Prior to commissioning

4.3 GROUNDWATER Earthmoving activities have potential to release hydraulic pressure on water tables and perched aquifers leading to a reduction in pressure or flow in existing water bores. Alternatively in the absence of controls, the water introduced to the settling ponds could contaminate the groundwater with water high in TSS reducing the groundwater’s suitability for domestic use or watering stock.

4.3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The ongoing extractive operations at the Flowerdale Quarry have not approached the groundwater table. Mining operations will proceed on benches above the current pit floor. The local topography indicates that the clay matrix encountered in the pit floor is likely to extend horizontally under the resource.

A perched aquifer is not evident in the clay matrix base excavated to date and there is no evidence to suggest that a perched aquifer will be encountered in future extraction.

There are no groundwater monitoring bores located close to the operation. The nearest existing bores are listed below. Groundwater was encountered in these bores a depths ranging from 9.1 to 25.9 metres.

There are standards and prescriptions included in the legislation and policies below that refer to groundwater impacts:

• State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 • Water Management Act 1999 • Quarry Code of Practice 1999

TABLE 6: GROUNDWATER BORE IN PROXIMITY (MRT, 2012)



Site ID Feature Type

Locality X Coord. AMG66

Y Coord. AMG66

Depth (m)

Standing Water Level (SWL)

Depth Water Struck and Yield

622 Bore Moorleah 384600 5462500 19.8 not available 18.3 metres (Yield: Unknown)

623 Bore Moorleah 384300 5462400 16.8 7.6 metres (as at 29-DEC-79)

9.1 metres (Yield: .63 litres/sec)

4761 Bore Preolenna 386300 5463100 48.8 12.2 metres (as at 28-DEC-87)

25.9 metres (Yield: Unknown) and 35.1 metres (Yield: .51 litres/sec)

4766 Bore Flowerdale 386400 5463200 27.4 not available 21.3 metres (Yield: 1.51 litres/sec)

30402 Bore Calder 386020 5459154 45 0 not available 13 metres (Yield: 1.26 litres/sec)

4.3.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The excavation required to construct the settling ponds for the wash plant will be a maximum of 2.7 metres deep. The ponds will be lined with a low permeability clay layer and the underlying substrate is a clay matrix that has a low permeability. If there is an amount of seepage, clay fines in the wash water will quickly penetrate and seal the leak. It is highly unlikely that the water from the wash plant will escape to recharge groundwater.



4.4 NOISE EMISSIONS Mechanical noise emissions from quarries can become a nuisance to neighbouring properties if the emissions are above acceptable limits.

4.4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The Flowerdale Quarry has been operating continuously for a number of years. The Applicant has run the current operation for the last 5 years. The current operation uses a dozer and wheel loader to extract the product and push it into stockpiles A mobile screen is brought to site periodically to run a campaign of screening the raw product into various sized product stockpiles for sale or further processing. .

At times various pumps, trucks and utilities operate at the site. These sounds from these types of equipment will be consistent with the existing soundscape that is expected in a productive agricultural region.

This is not a hard rock operation; no blasting, rock drilling or rock breaking takes place at this site.

4.4.2 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS • Environment Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 • Environment Protection and Pollution Control (Miscellaneous Noise) Regulations

2004 • DPIWE Quarry Code of Practice 1999 • Environment Protection Policy (Noise) 2009

The Quarry Code of Practice 1999 quotes the following acceptable standard for limits on mechanical noise from a quarry operation:

With the exception of blasting where permitted, noise from activities in a quarry affecting residential premises, must not exceed 10 dB(A) above the normal ambient noise levels during daytime operations.

(DPIWE (A), 1999) 4.4.3 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES It is proposed that the following equipment will be utilised in the wash plant operation:

• Wheel loader – currently operates at the site. • On road trucks – currently operate at the site. • Makeup water supply pump – 5 kW diesel powered pump • Wash water recycling pump – 20 kW diesel powered pump. • Super reclaimer with Duetz F4L912 - 54 kW diesel engine.

The equipment will be located as per Figure 5.

The Applicant commissioned a mechanical noise study to use modelling techniques to predict the effect that the proposed new operation may have on neighbouring properties. The equipment that is utilised continuously and together while the wash plant is operating is considered. Other equipment that is only used periodically and in various combinations is not considered. This equipment already operates at the site at various times.



The report uses the information supplied by the new equipment manufacturer to calculate the predicted noise level at the nearest residences. These results are compared against the acceptable standard to determine whether any adverse impacts are likely.

The entire report is included in this document as Appendix 4.

4.4.3.1 Mechanical noise report An essential element of the mechanical noise assessment is actual measurements of ambient noise on site. These measurements allow a predicted value of mechanical noise to be calculated over the ambient noise values. Onsite readings of ambient noise were recorded during a field visit on the 13th of August 2012.

The results of the on-site measurements for ambient noise with the quarry not operating returned values of Leq = 35.5 dB(A) and background noise value of L90 = 28.2 dB(A). Where low background noise levels are encountered and value of 30 dB(A) is assumed.

This proposal introduces two new pieces of equipment. The Super –Reclaimer and the wash water recycling pump will operate continuously while the wash unit is in operation. The manufacturer provided measured noise levels for the Super - Reclaimer as displayed in the diagram included as Appendix B of the noise report. The stated noise level is 84 dB(A) measured 3 metres from the engine. The recycling pump will be selected based on information supplied by the Super-Reclaimer manufacturers on the worst case wash water supply requirements. For the duty required a centrifugal pump attached to a 20 kW diesel engine is oversized and hence very conservative.

The calculated predicted noise levels at the nearest neighbouring residences are reproduced from the report in the table below. TABLE 7: FACTORS AFFECTING AND CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS (FROM (TERTS, 2012)) Factors affecting noise levels

150 Stutters Rd 160 Marshall Rd 62 Pages Rd 66 Pages Rd

Depth of forest (m) 200 370 380 250

Effects (dB(A))

Geometric Spreading 35.6 37.6 35.2 38.6

Natural barrier -15.0 -7.8 -8.2 -8.0

Forest attenuation -13.0 -13.0 -13.0 -13.0

Predicted noise levels

Neutral weather 7.6 16.8 14.0 17.6

Adverse weather 14.4 23.8 21.0 24.6

The predicted noise levels at the residences neighbouring the quarry site are within the acceptable limits by a considerable margin.

(Terts, 2012)



The equipment purchased may vary from that stated but noise levels will be a selection criterion to ensure that operational noise levels will be equivalent.

4.4.4 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The new operation at the Flowerdale Quarry will introduce new equipment and a new program of operations. The noise study prepared for this application shows that the new operation will meet the acceptable standard as quoted in the Quarry Code of Practice even under adverse weather conditions.

The new operation will be more consistent than was previously the case. The machinery will operate routinely but for short periods, where as previously it would have operated intensively but infrequently. If the noise from the operation is perceptible it is likely to become more familiar and hence less intrusive.

4.5 SOLID AND CONTROLLED WASTE MANAGEMENT 4.5.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The Flowerdale Quarry will change from a campaign style operation to a semi-permanent operation. The existing infrastructure will continue to be utilised. There will be no permanent facilities installed. The site shed is a relocatable unit and the toilet will continue to be a ‘port-a–loo’ type unit.

Standards for the storage and disposal of general and controlled waste are included in:

• Environment Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 • Environment Management and Pollution Control (Waste Management) Regulations 2000 • Quarry Code of Practice 1999

The Quarry Code of Practice 1999 states that all waste must be removed from the site on a progressive basis and recycled wherever possible. 4.5.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATING MEASURES The screener and wash plant will be operated around 3 days per week. At the end of each operating cycle the Applicant will take the opportunity to recover and dispose of all waste. The hierarchy of waste control will be used to guide the waste management measures on site.

Hierarchy of waste control is displayed below:

1. Avoidance 2. Reuse 3. Recycling 4. Treatment 5. Disposal



Any materials or wastes temporarily stored onsite will be secured in containers with lids until disposal. No waste materials will be discarded on the site or buried under embankments or other earthworks.

Waste product won from the washing process will be disposed of as below:

• Materials will be recovered from the gross particle trap using the site wheel loader and then stockpiled to dry and finally blended with gravel products for market.

• Materials will be recovered from the settling ponds using an excavator and will be used for site contouring and rehabilitation works.

4.5.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS There will be days of activity at the quarry while gravel is screened and washed and stockpiles established followed by periods where only loading and carting will take place. All waste materials will be removed at the end of each cycle, ensuring that the site remains clear of rubbish. The new operation requires that the Applicant has a permanent presence onsite and hence will have better control to ensure that all systems are working effectively and no waste materials accumulate.

4.6 DANGEROUS GOODS Dangerous goods used on this site are confined to hydrocarbons used to energise and lubricate fixed and mobile plant. Without controls hydrocarbons can be easily transported by rainfall run off into the receiving aquatic environment. In ponds and streams the hydrocarbon spread over the water surface and will prevent the natural exchange of oxygen. The deoxygenated water is unsuitable to support most types of aquatic flora and fauna.

4.6.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing operation uses diesel engines to energise temporary fixed and mobile plant at the site. This will continue unchanged. Hydrocarbons can be considered dangerous to the environment and to workers.

Standards on the storage, handling and transport of dangerous goods are included in:

• Environment Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 • Dangerous Goods (General) Regulations 1998 • Quarry Code of Practice 1999 • Security-Sensitive Dangerous Substances Act 2005

4.6.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The mobile and fixed plant will be refuelled by a mobile refuelling unit. The threat to the receiving aquatic environment by accidental hydrocarbon spills will be mitigated by ensuring that a hydrocarbon spill kit is available when activities are underway and that workers are competent in using the kit. Additionally if a spill does occur, booms will be placed across the outlet of the affected sediment retention basin.

The operator will use modern and well maintained machinery that is unlikely to break down or habitually leak hydrocarbons.



There will be no permanent fuel storage facility associated with this proposal.

4.6.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS Hydrocarbons are the only goods that can be considered to be a threat and the combination of modern well maintained machinery and a backup of the hydrocarbon spill kit make the risk of environmental damage remote.


4.6.3.1 A hydrocarbon spill kit will be available when the plant is in operation and workers will be trained in its use


4.7 BIODIVERSITY AND NATURE CONSERVATION VALUES 4.7.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The Flowerdale Quarry occupies a site that has been the subject of a forestry operation guided by a forest practices plan (FPP) number NFB2317. The site survey undertaken to prepare the FPP found that there were no flora values present on the site that required special provisions.

The FPP and associated survey was completed in 2006 and provides a thorough assessment of the natural values that were present at the site before the harvesting operation and subsequent plantation establishment. The information from the FPP and information that is currently available through the Natural Values Atlas is used here.

The surveys undertaken to inform the FPP found that there were fauna values on the site that required special provisions. The special values were associated with the possible presence of threatened species as detailed below:



TABLE 8: OBSERVATIONS OF THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES WITHIN 5 KM

Species Common name Ss Ns Observers Date Obs type

Location (gda94)

Accipiter novaehollan

grey goshawk e Stephen Scott (2227)

07-Sep-2006 nest Point (387519,5459354) +/-

Alcedo azurea subsp. diemenensis

azure kingfisher or azure kingfisher (tasmanian)

e EN Dirk Tomsa (22351),Wulan

14-Feb-2009 sight Point (390612,5463100) +/- 100m.

Aquila audax wedge-tailed eagle pe PEN Robert Onfray

21-Jun-2002 sight Point

(382412,5457283) +/- Astacopsis gouldi giant freshwater crayfish v VU Todd Walsh

(5839) 29-Nov-2010 sight Point

(382968,5463928) +/- Dasyurus

maculatus

spotted-tailed quoll r VU S Thalmann (2239)

12-Nov-2010 sight Point (387894,5459758) +/-

Perameles gunnii eastern barred bandicoot VU Greg Hocking

14-Apr-1993 sight Point

(388377,5465624) +/- Prototroctes

maraena australian grayling v VU Unkn

own Unkn

16-Nov-1987 sight Point (389954,5463055) +/- 20m.

Sarcophilus harrisii tasmanian devil e EN Marelyn Watson

17-Jan-2011 sight Point

(390314,5457836) +/- (DPIPWE (C), 2011)

Requirements for identifying natural values and protecting biodiversity are included in:

• Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 • Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 • Quarry Code of Practice 1999 • Weed Management Act 1999

4.7.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The introduction of a washing plant can potentially impact on fauna species through an uncontrolled discharge of wash water into the receiving environment. Following is the list of recorded threatened species and the controls required to mitigate the risk of disturbance.

TABLE 9: THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES, THREATS AND CONTROLS Species Common name Threat Control

Accipiter novaehollan

grey goshawk Clearing vegetation removes foraging

and nesting habitat No clearing associated with this proposal.

Alcedo azurea subsp. diemenensis

azure kingfisher or azure kingfisher (tasmanian)

azure kingfisher is dependent on riparian vegetation and fresh water

Closed loop wash water system and hydrocarbon controls. No clearing riparian vegetation.

Aquila audax wedge-tailed eagle Clearing vegetation removes foraging and nesting habitat

No clearing associated with this proposal

Astacopsis gouldi giant freshwater crayfish Freshwater crayfish is dependent on fresh water with intact riparian vegetation

Closed loop wash water system and hydrocarbon controls. No clearing riparian vegetation.

Dasyurus maculatus subsp.

spotted-tailed quoll Clearing vegetation removes foraging and habitat for constructing dens.

No clearing associated with this proposal.

Perameles gunnii eastern barred bandicoot Clearing vegetation removes foraging and habitat for constructing nests.


Prototroctes maraena

australian grayling Australian grayling are dependent on fresh water

Closed loop wash water system and hydrocarbon controls.

Sarcophilus harrisii tasmanian devil Clearing vegetation removes foraging and habitat for constructing dens.




Section 4.2 of this document explains that the introduction of the washing plant will decrease the volume of rainwater runoff flowing to the existing sediment retention basins by removing the area of the settling ponds, the processing and stockpiling area from the catchment. The settling ponds are sized to accommodate the rain falling directly on the pond surface and the additional areas from up to a 1 in 20 year reoccurrence rain event. The extra water from rain events will displace some of the make-up water required to balance losses to evaporation and moisture content in the product delivered offsite.

The settling ponds, established to support the wash plant are sized to accommodate 120% of the water from one days washing campaign. As the wash unit is started the dirty water will commence displacing the clean water in the ponds. In most circumstances the campaign will be complete before all the water in the settling ponds is displaced. In this manner the process will be closed loop and will not require process water to be discharged to the receiving aquatic environment.

4.7.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The development proposed is unlikely to adversely affect any species listed as threatened under either State or Federal legislation. The risk of the development impacting on receiving aquatic environment is mitigated by the commitments recorded in Section 4.2.

4.8 MARINE AND COASTAL 4.8.1 CURRENT SITUATION The Flowerdale Quarry is around 5 kilometres away from the coast. The operation can have an effect on marine and coastal systems by causing a pollutant to enter the Inglis River, which drains to the sea.

4.8.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES There are a range of controls that protect the receiving aquatic environment from an uncontrolled discharge from the site, these include:

• Progressive rehabilitation of the worked out disturbed areas • Diversion drains to ensure that no uncontrolled discharge occurs • Sediment retention basins to ensure that any discharge into local waterways meets

acceptable standards for total suspended solids as described in Section 4.2.1.

4.8.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The above measures will protect the receiving waterways from harm and will in turn protect marine and coastal systems.



4.9 GREENHOUSE GASES AND OZONE DEPLETING SUBSTANCES 4.9.1 CURRENT SITUATION The Flowerdale Quarry operation uses a mobile screen plant and wheel loader plus trucks to deliver the product to Calder where a wash unit is required to clean the raw product. The clean product is then reloaded onto truck for delivery to market.

4.9.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The addition of a wash plant will introduce a more substantial diesel engine operating the triple deck screen and the de-waterer and an extra 20 kW diesel engine to drive the water pump. This extra fuel consumption will be more than compensated by fuel saving due to the reduced travel distance for fully laden trucks. The net effect will be an overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions to supply the same product to the market place.

4.9.3 FUTURE INITIATIVES There is potential to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions by converting the fixed plant to electrical power. This will require considerable investment to deliver three phase power to the site. The current turn over from the quarry does not justify the expense at present. Fuel costs and future incentives may make this alternative energy source viable in the future.

4.10 HERITAGE The entire area used to establish the fixed equipment and settling ponds has been exposed by prior excavation. The wash plant proposal will not change the existing mining plan and hence will not cause any additional clearing or potential to disturb sites or items with heritage significance.

4.11 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT 4.11.1 CURRENT SITUATION The development proposal is being considered under the Waratah-Wynyard Planning Scheme 2000 as an ‘intensification’ of the existing use. The existing use is ‘resource extraction and processing’ which is categorised as resource development.

The ‘Resource Development’ use class is defined as “Use of land for primary production which involves the use, … or extraction of natural resources and processing of primary produce. It includes but is not necessarily limited to; … extraction of rocks and minerals, ... It includes buildings and works directly associated with these uses.” (Waratah - Wynyard Council, 2011). The entire property and that of the neighbouring land is zoned ‘Primary Industries’.

The intent of the primary industries zone is “to protect and allow for the sustainable use of natural and non-natural resources on which agriculture aquaculture, forestry and mining depend…” (Waratah - Wynyard Council, 2011). The values described for the primary industries zone are associated with “mineral and quarry deposits” amongst other natural assets.

Resource development is a’ Primary Use Class’ in the primary industries zone. A primary use class is described as “use classes which contain uses that, generally, are in accordance with the values and intent of a zone.” (Waratah - Wynyard Council, 2011).



Standards for development within the primary industries zone are as follows: TABLE 10: RESPONSE TO STANDARDS FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES ZONE

Standards for use or development in the Primary Industries Zone

Response

Issue 1: - Subdivision The proposal does not include subdivision of land.

Issue 2: - Prime Agricultural Land The proposal will take place on land that is classified as capability class 5 + 6. Class 1 to 3 is considered prime agricultural land.

Issue 3: - Infrastructure Provision The proposal will not require any extra supporting infrastructure.

Issue 4: – Amenity of residences in surrounding zones

The closest residential zone boundary is 4.5 kilometres to the east of the proposal site boundary.

Issue 5: - Water Pollution Acceptable solution –

5.1. No discharge of pollutants to surface or groundwater is to occur.

Performance criteria 5.1 Where discharge of pollutants to surface or groundwater is to occur it must be demonstrated that; (c) effluent will not prejudice the achievement of water quality objectives for receiving waters provided for by the State Policy for Water Quality Management 1977. The controls described in Section 4.2 will ensure that the objectives of the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 for receiving waters will be met.

Issue 6: - Vegetation Protection There will be no additional clearing of vegetation associated with this proposal.

Issue 7: - Airport Protection The boundary of the proposal site is over 6 kilometres away from the Burnie Airport boundary

Issue 8: - Railway Alignment The proposal site is not located close to any existing or future railway corridor.

4.11.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The existing gravel quarry and the proposed change to include a sand washing operation complies with the intent of the ‘Land Use Zone’ of the Land and that of surrounding lands. It is a primary use class but it relies on one performance criteria (5.1 (c) to meet the standard for that zone. The proposal is therefore a ‘discretionary application’.



4.12 VISUAL EFFECTS 4.12.1 CURRENT SITUATION The Flowerdale Quarry is located at the end of Marshalls Road in a natural valley. The screening - washing plant will be located on the floor of the pit at around RL 50. The surrounding land to the south west and north rises to RL 80 and above. The land to the east is densely vegetated and no direct sight line exists.

4.12.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS There are no vantage points, not on the Applicant’s land, from which the operation can be sighted. As discussed in Section 4.1 it is highly unlikely that dust generated by the operation will be visible crossing the boundary. The proposal will not impact on visual amenity of surrounding lands.

4.13 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ISSUES 4.13.1 CURRENT SITUATION The existing operation occurs on a campaign style basis with the screening equipment transported to the site to operate over a period, develop some stockpiles and then relocate elsewhere. During a campaign there will be a number of operators engaged in the work. In the intervals between campaigns truck drivers attend the site and load themselves with a site wheel loader.

In the 2011 census 52.7% of the population in the Wynyard area reported they were in full time employment and 7.3% said they were unemployed. This is against an Australian average of 59.7% and 5.6% respectively. The workforce reported their occupation was 16.7% technicians and trade workers and 10.7% machinery operators and drivers. The national average for these occupations is 14.2% and 6.6% respectively (ABS, 2012).

4.13.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS It can be seen from the data that the Wynyard region is challenged in providing employment for its citizens when compared to the national average. Unemployment figures especially are disproportionately high. It can also be seen that occupations associated with extractive industries are particularly important in providing the existing employment opportunities.

The planned operation will proceed differently from existing. The equipment will be located at the site on a semi-permanent basis and will be operated for a number of days per week. It is likely that the site will be attended on a daily basis. The activity will warrant at least one and perhaps two employees engaged in its operation.

Strengthening an existing extractive operation so that it can compete with suppliers from outside the district and potentially supply product outside the district can only be a benefit to the local community and economy.

The wash plant at Calder is run currently by an owner operator and will continue to operate washing the Calder Gravel Pit sand product. Employment levels at this business will not be affected.



4.14 HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES 4.14.1 CURRENT SITUATION The existing operation is a push and stockpile operation augmented with screening campaigns to process the raw product into marketable commodities. Legislation that sets acceptable standards for health and safety on the site includes:

• Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 • Workplace health and safety (Mine Safety) Regulations 2011

Health and safety risks are consistent with most quarrying and earthmoving operations including operating heavy equipment, heavy lifting, fumes and dust. A risk is introduced by the style of operation in that when truck drivers are working between campaigns they are working alone and isolated.

4.14.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The proposal changes the style of operation and will most likely cause a person to be stationed at the site permanently. This means that truck drivers that may not be familiar with the site and equipment will not be alone when working and most probably will not load themselves.

A risk that will be introduced by the proposal will be the settling ponds. The ponds will be around 2.5 metres deep and will be substantial in area. Access around the ponds will be restricted but a risk exists that machinery or equipment can accidentally be driven into the ponds. To control this risk spoil from the ponds excavation will be used to construct a bund to delineate between the operations area and the ponds. Only when the ponds are being cleaned out will equipment be given access to the settling ponds area.

Access to the site is via a locked gate so the public do not have access when the plant is un-manned.

4.14.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The change to the operation will reduce the risk of dust causing health and safety issues but will introduce a new risk of exposure to the settling ponds. Delineation of the ponds will discourage access to the ponds for all but targeted pond clearing activities. This will mitigate the safety risk introduced by the live edges of the ponds.


4.14.3.1 The live edge of the ponds will be protected with a bund that will only be trafficked for pond cleaning exercises.


4.15 HAZARD ANALYSIS AND RISK ASSESSMENT 4.15.1 CURRENT SITUATION The Flowerdale Quarry has operated substantially unchanged for around 6 years. Hazards associated with the existing operation are addressed by existing controls brought into effect by the conditions imposed by the Waratah / Wynyard Council Permit.

New hazards or existing hazards exasperated by this proposal are reviewed in the Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment included as Appendix 5.



4.15.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES By a combination of existing controls and new measures introduced in this document the risk of all but two hazards can be reduced to low. The two hazards that remain in the moderate range are uncontrolled discharge into the receiving waterways and unacceptable noise impact on neighbours:

• The water from the wash plant and runoff from the process area will discharge into ponds that will have redundant capacity to accommodate accumulated silt between cleans and the rainfall from a 1 in 20 year event. The remaining catchment will drain into an arrangement of drains that will carry the runoff to existing sediment retention basins. The risk of the makeup water pump being left on is mitigated by fuel capacity only allowing a maximum of 60 kL supply. The ponds overflowing risk remains in the moderate range because of the major consequences should any controls fail. The introduction of the settling ponds will reduce the catchment reporting to the existing sediment retention basins.

• The mechanical noise effect has been modelled for this facility and the results show that there should not be an adverse impact on neighbouring properties. Noise of the forests intervening between the wash plant and the neighbours should reduce the likelihood of an impact. The risk remains in the moderate range because the operator takes the risk of causing disturbance to the neighbours very seriously.

4.15.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The overall impact of the wash plant should be a reduction in the risk of an uncontrolled discharge to the receiving aquatic environment. The mechanical noise study (Appendix 4) shows that this change to the existing operation should not cause a nuisance to the neighbours through unacceptable levels of noise.

4.16 FIRE RISK 4.16.1 CURRENT SITUATION The introduction of a wash plant will not increase the risk of fire emanating for the operation. The change to the operation will increase the site presence and hence increase the risk of a bush fire affecting the personnel at the site.

4.16.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES For occupational health and safety reasons and transport logistics the operator stationed at the gravel pit will be in direct phone contact with Hazell Bros Transport office in Burnie. If a bush fire threatens the facility the operator will be contacted and advised. The site has alternative access points either to Marshalls Road or Stutterds Road.

To reduce the risk of a fire emanating from the site hot works will not be performed outside on days of total fire ban. Hot works are defined as any activity that produces an ignition source including; flame cutting, welding, grinding, etc.

4.16.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS A combination of low fire risk activities and good access arrangements make it highly unlikely that the activity will cause a fire risk or be exposed to an unacceptable threat from bushfire.



4.17 INFRASTRUCTURE AND OFF-SITE ANCILLARY FACILITIES 4.17.1 CURRENT SITUATION The only offsite infrastructure that is required to support the existing operation is the local and regional road network. Substantial works on Marshalls Road were required as a condition imposed on the original council permit. Marshall’s Road now has adequate width, passing bays to accommodate the traffic from the quarry. Trucks travel from Marshalls Road onto Preolenna Road and then to the Bass Highway. The traffic load on these roads will not change as a result of this development.

4.17.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The introduction of the wash plant will have the effect of eliminating the need for fully laden trucks to travel up, and back down Calder Road to wash the product at an external facility.

4.18 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND SYSTEMS 4.18.1 CURRENT SITUATION The Board of the Environment Protection Authority issued permit environmental conditions No. 7255 that forms Part B of the Council Permit that regulates the Flowerdale Quarry. The permit environmental conditions are based on the commitments made in the environmental management plan (EMP) prepared by Pitt & Sherry to accompany the original development proposal.

The then operator was not issued with a permit to operate from Council until November 2007, this time based on an updated EMP prepared by Environmental Service and Design in August 2007. The 2007 EMP was reviewed and updated by Environmental Service and Design in March 2009. Rehabilitation efforts at the Flowerdale Quarry are guided using a dedicated rehabilitation plan (Milner, 2009).

The Applicant is a subsidiary of the Hazell Bros. Group Pty Ltd. Hazell Bros. Group’s Environmental Management System is certified by Davis Langdon Certification Services to AS/NZS ISO 14001:2004.

4.18.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES It is proposed that operations at the Flowerdale Quarry will continue largely unchanged but with the additional washing process included at the end of the process line. Mining, screening and carting activities will continue to be controlled using the existing conditions described in the existing operating permit and possibly new conditions imposed after the environmental assessment.

The addition of the water washing component will introduce new elements to the process stream that require controls detailed in this DPEMP.

4.18.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS A combination of the environmental permit conditions and the additional commitments included in this document, together with the rehabilitation plan described earlier mean that the operation has



adequate environmental management systems to ensure compliance with community expectations and statutory requirements.

4.19 CUMULATIVE AND INTERACTIVE EFFECTS 4.19.1 CURRENT SITUATION There are currently 16 separate mining leases targeting category 3 construction materials located in the catchment to the Inglis River. There is potential for an accumulative impact on the water quality condition of the Inglis River if the liquid waste emissions from these operations are not controlled.

4.19.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The controls detailed in Section 4.2 will be effective in ensuring that the wash plant will not discharge in less than a 1 in 20 year reoccurrence rain event. The area taken for the wash plant and settlement ponds will not report to the sediment retention basins under normal operating conditions. The catchment area that reports to the existing sediment retention basins will be reduced providing an extra factor of safety for these basins.

4.19.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The design parameters for the wash plant settling ponds will prevent discharges in all but extreme events. The net effect will be an extra factor of safety on the existing sediment retention ponds and hence a reduced risk of an uncontrolled discharge.

4.20 TRAFFIC IMPACTS 4.20.1 CURRENT SITUATION The maximum permitted production rate from the quarry is 40,000 cubic metres per annum. The existing Council permit has a condition that restricts the maximum number of trips on Marshall’s Road to 32 per day. Currently those trucks that are carrying sand for concrete will travel up the Calder Road to the Calder Gravel Pit and drop their load. They will pick up a load of washed sand and travel on to the market place.

4.20.2 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The introduction of the washing plant will make the trip to Calder and double handling un-necessary. The washed product will be loaded at Flowerdale and delivered directly to the market place. The traffic movements on Calder Road will be reduced. It is likely that the existing restrictions on Marshalls Road will remain in force so the traffic movements will remain unchanged.

4.20.3 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS There will be no change in the traffic movements emanating from the quarry with respect to residents on Marshalls Road or Preolenna Road. Calder Road will have truck movements reduced. Turning truck movements on the intersection between Calder Road and Bass Highway at Wynyard will also be reduced.


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Monitoring and Review 44

5 MONITORING AND REVIEW

5.1 AIR QUALITY The existing permit conditions imposed to control the risk of dust from the site or access road causing a nuisance to neighbours will be effective. The Operator will monitor the prevailing wind and ground conditions. If a potential exists for an uncontrolled emission it will be possible to use water from the wash plant pumping system to wet down trafficked surface and stockpiles.


5.1.1 The efficacy of the dust control measures will be monitored and stockpiles and surfaces wetted if necessary.

Operator At all times

5.2 WATER QUALITY Protection for the receiving aquatic environment relies on adequate capacity in the existing sediment retention basins to ensure that entrained particles have time to settle out before the water is discharged. A reduction in the capacity of the existing sediment retention basins can cause and uncontrolled discharge to the receiving aquatic environment.

The efficacy of the settling ponds is a function of the surface area and depth of the pool. The capacity of the system must be sized to ensure that the flow from the wash plant is detained long enough to enable the desired particle size to settle out. It is important that the capacity and the depth of the ponds are not reduced to less than the design parameters.

The settling ponds will be managed on a routine basis, with frequency of cleaning activities dependent on the position of the structure in the process line:

• The gross particle trap will capture large particles that fall rapidly out of suspension. It will be necessary to dig this trap out frequently (daily) to ensure that the desired capacity is retained.

• The first settling pond will capture finer particles most of which are likely to settle out in the input end of the pond. If the depth of the pond is reduced in the input end the process water will be propelled to the output end causing more particulate matter to enter the second pond. The interval between cleans will be dependent on operating times and the composition of the raw product. It will be necessary to monitor the silt level in this pond weekly. Once it is apparent that a beach is forming at the input end the accumulated silt will be removed.

• The subsequent pond will be collect finer particles and will have less frequent treatment up to one year intervals.

• The integrity of the settling ponds will be checked weekly. Signs of tension cracks or excessive seepage outside the ponds will prompt a structural inspection by a suitably qualified civil engineer.

A reduction in the capacity in the settling ponds will cause the recycled wash water to become increasingly dirty, reducing the quality of the final product.


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Decommissioning and Rehabilitation 45

The settling ponds and sediment retention basins must be monitored for their capacity regularly. In most cases the silt recovered can be blended with gravels to achieve a desired grading or used on site as a rehabilitation medium.


5.2.1 If monitoring shows that the capacity of the existing sediment retention basins is reduced to half the accumulated silt will be cleared

Operator When required

5.2.2 The settling ponds will be checked for structural integrity. If problems are revealed, a structural assessment will be initiated.

Operator Weekly

5.3 WEEDS As a normal part of the operation of the Flowerdale Quarry, the operator will monitor for new weed incursions. The response will be targeted to the species and the scale of the infestation;

• New and small outbreaks of herb type weeds will be treated either by hand pulling immediately or noting to be included in the spring spraying program.

• Woody weeds will be pulled when small or by cut and paint method during the spring weed management program.

At least annually, in late spring a weed management program will consist of a thorough site survey and targeted control program consisting of spray with proprietary herbicides or other control method as appropriate to the species and situation.


5.3.1 Weeds will be monitored throughout the year and a control program will occur late in spring each year


6 DECOMMISSIONING AND REHABILITATION This proposal includes the introduction of a wash plant to the existing operation at the Flowerdale Quarry. It is possible that market conditions may change and the wash plant will become no longer viable. In these circumstances it will be necessary to decommission the wash plant.

In this scenario the demobilisation process will be as follows:

• The mechanical equipment will be unfastened from the concrete foundation securing it and transported off-site.

• The concrete foundations will be broken up with a rock breaker and the spoil transported off-site for disposal at a concrete recycling facility or an inert landfill site.

• Pumps at the main water storage dam and the second settling pond will be packed up and transported off-site.

• The ponds will be allowed to settle for days until the majority of the silt suspended in the water column has settled out.


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Decommissioning and Rehabilitation 46

• The ponds will be very slowly drained of water by siphoning through small diameter hoses to restrict the flow. The ponds will be drained to the southern sediment retention pond making sure that intake and delivery end of the hose remains on the surface.

• The ponds will be cleared of sludge and clay liner with spoil stockpiled temporarily on the site for drying.

• The embankments that were constructed from the original excavation will be pulled up and this and the dry clay and silt blended before being used to fill the ponds. The product will be placed in layers and compacted to reconstitute a stable surface.

• The entire plant and pond area will be covered with a growing medium and the successful planting on the banks to the east will be continued over the surface.


6.1.1. If the wash plant is to be decommissioned the equipment site and ponds will be deconstructed to provide a stable surface for rehabilitation and revegetation.

Operator Upon de-commissioning


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Commitments 47

7 COMMITMENTS


4.1.3.1 Dust suppression by water sprays or water cart on trafficked surfaces will be utilized if required


4.2.3.1 The settling ponds will be constructed with capacity to ensure that there is no discharge more frequently than for a 1-in-20 year storm event.


4.6.3.1 A hydrocarbon spill kit will be available when the plant is in operation and workers will be trained in its use


4.7.3.1 There will be no discharge from the settling ponds into the receiving environment in all but a 1 in 20 year events.


4.14.3.1 The live edge of the ponds will be protected with a bund that will only be trafficked for pond cleaning exercises.


5.1.1 The efficacy of the dust control measures will be monitored and stockpiles and surfaces wetted if necessary


5.2.1 If monitoring shows that the capacity of the existing sediment retention basins is reduced to half the accumulated silt will be cleared


5.2.2 The settling ponds will be checked for structural integrity. If problems are revealed, a structural assessment will be initiated.

Operator Weekly

5.3.1 Weeds will be monitored throughout the year and a control program will occur late in spring each year


6.1.1. If the wash plant is to be decommissioned the equipment site and ponds will be deconstructed to provide a stable surface for rehabilitation and revegetation.

Operator Upon de-commissioning


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Conclusion 48

8 CONCLUSION The addition of a wash plant to the Flowerdale Quarry operation will have benefits for the Applicant (Operator) and the local community. The change will eliminate double handling and reduce the number of truck movements on Calder Road.

The Flowerdale Quarry will change from a periodic operation to one that will operate during normal hours with a permanent site presence. A permanent presence on site will be a boost for employment and will enable better monitoring of activities that occur on site.

This application shows that the changed operation, managed in accordance with the prescriptions included will not pose a threat to the environment nor to neighbours. The existing controls mitigating the risk of environmental impacts remain; including reduced vehicle speeds, constrained areas of disturbance, limited stockpile sizes and competent sediment retention infrastructure.

In addition to the existing controls the Operator has committed to constructing and maintaining water settling ponds, provide hydrocarbon capture facilities, undertake an annual weed monitoring and control program and to decommission and rehabilitate the site if the equipment is no longer required.

If this application is successful, in the future the Flowerdale Quarry will be permanently manned which will greatly increase the Operator’s capacity to respond to events that may occur onsite. The occupational safety of the drivers that attend the quarry will be enhanced and the risk to the environment brought about by unresolved infrastructure problems will diminish.


Integrated Land Management and Planning | References 49

9 REFERENCES

ABS. (2007, October 25). 2006 Census Quickstats: Wynyard (State Suburb). Retrieved June 26, 2012, from Australian Bureau of Statistics: http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ABSNavigation/prenav/ProductSearch?&areacode=SSC66396&producttype=QuickStats&action=401

DPIPWE. (2012). WSUD Engineering procedures for Stormwater Management in Tasmania. Hobart: DPIPWE.

DPIWE. (1999). Quarry Code of Practice. Hobart: Environment Protection, Planning and Analytical Services Division.

Milner, P. (2009). Rehabilitation Plan - Flowerdale Sand and Gravel Pit (Project 4109). Burnie: unpublished.

MRT. (2012, June 22). On-Line Data Web Map Viewer. Retrieved June 30, 2012, from Mineral Resources Tasmania: http://www.mrt.tas.gov.au/Viewer/Exposure/E3?REQUEST=Entry&PRJ=Blank&MODE=mrt&DELETE_DEFAULT=Y&SID=11741718&REQUEST=Entry

Terts, P. (2012). Flowerdale Gravel Pit Washing Plant - Noise Issues. Hobart: unpublished.

Waratah - Wynyard Council. (2011). Waratah - Wynyard Planning Scheme 2000. Wynyard: Waratah - Wynyard Council.


Integrated Land Management and Planning | Appendices 50

10 APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - Possible equipment layout plan

Appendix 1a - Possible equipment specifications

Appendix 2a - Overall Plan revision 02

Appendix 2b - Site Plan revision 02

Appendix 2c - Sediment Ponds and Settlement Pits revision 02

Appendix 3 - Settling Ponds calculations

Appendix 4a - Noise Issues Report

Appendix 4b - Possible equipment noise levels

Appendix 5 - Hazard Analysis

flowerdale sand washing dpemp g hazell pty ltd and d... · 2013-05-24 · flowerdale quarry –...

Documents