Environmental Assessment 2010- Volume 1 pt 1

Transcription

Camden Gas
Project Northern
Expansion
Environmental
Assessment
October 2010
VOLUME 1
MAIN REPORT
Prepared for AGL Energy Limited
101 Miller Street | Sydney | New South Wales | 2060
www.agl.com.au
Prepared by AECOM
Level 8, 17 York Street | Sydney | New South Wales | 2000 | T +61 2 8023 9333 | F +61 2 8023 9399
www.aecom.com
Environmental Assessment
Northern Expansion of the Camden Gas Project
AECOM
Certification Page
Submission of Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared under the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Section 75F
EA prepared by
Name
Alexandra Frolich
Erin Saunders
Qualifications
Bachelor of Science (Marine
Science)
Bachelor of Environmental Science
Environmental Scientist
Associate Director
Diploma of Urban and Regional
Planning
AECOM
Address
Level 8, 17 York Street
Sydney NSW 2000
in respect of
Project application
MP 09_0048
Applicant name
AGL Gas Production (Camden) Pty
Limited
Applicant address
Level 22, 101 Miller St
North Sydney, NSW 2060
Land to be developed
lot no., DP/MPS, vol/fol etc
Proposed project
The proposed project is to be carried out on the land shown in
Figure 3 of this EA. The proposed project involves the development of
land for the purpose of the drilling and operation of petroleum wells
and subsurface drilling of lateral well paths, the development of
associated infrastructure and tie-in connection to existing well fields of
the Camden Gas Project.
An Environmental Assessment (EA) is attached
Certification
I certify that I have prepared the contents of this Environmental Assessment
and to the best of my knowledge it is true in all material particulars and does
not, by its presentation or omission of information, materially mislead.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Signature
Signature
Name: Alexandra Frolich
Name: Erin Saunders
Date: 26 October, 2010
Date: 26 October, 2010
“This page has been left blank intentionally”
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
AECOM
AECOM
Contents
Glossary of Terms .........................................................................................................................................................xv Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................................... xix Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 The Camden Gas Project ......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2.1 The Proponent ......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2.2 Petroleum Exploration Licence and Petroleum Production Leases ....................... 1-1 1.2.3 Overview of the CGP............................................................................................... 1-1 1.2.4 Overview of the Northern Expansion ...................................................................... 1-4 1.3 Context of the Project ............................................................................................................... 1-5 1.4 Approvals Process .................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.5 1.4.1 Major Development ................................................................................................. 1-5 1.4.2 Environmental Assessment Scoping Report .......................................................... 1-6 1.4.3 Environmental Assessment Requirements ............................................................. 1-6 1.4.4 Planning Focus Meeting .......................................................................................... 1-6 1.4.5 Stakeholder Consultation ........................................................................................ 1-6 1.4.6 EA Exhibition ........................................................................................................... 1-7 Purpose of this Report .............................................................................................................. 1-7 1.5.1 1.6 2.0 3.0 Assessment Approach ............................................................................................ 1-7 Structure of this Report............................................................................................................. 1-8 Site Description and Context ..................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Location .................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Legal Description and Ownership ............................................................................................ 2-2 2.3 Context ...................................................................................................................................... 2-4 2.3.1 Land Use ................................................................................................................. 2-4 2.3.2 Infrastructure ........................................................................................................... 2-4 2.3.3 Natural Environment................................................................................................ 2-5 Project Need and Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 3.2 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Need for the Project .................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.1 Natural Gas ............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.2 Coal Seam Methane................................................................................................ 3-2 3.1.3 CSM and the CGP ................................................................................................... 3-3 Alternatives Considered ........................................................................................................... 3-3 3.2.1 Alternative Energy Sources for NSW ...................................................................... 3-3 3.2.2 Alternative CSM Resource ...................................................................................... 3-4 i
3.2.3 3.3 4.0 Alternative Siting of Wells and Infrastructure .......................................................... 3-4 “Do Nothing” Option .................................................................................................................. 3-5 Project Description ..................................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Overview of Proposed Activities ............................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Planning and Design of Northern Expansion ........................................................................... 4-2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.0 AECOM
4.2.1 Locational Principles ............................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.2 Site Design Process ................................................................................................ 4-3 4.2.3 Camden North Gas Plant ........................................................................................ 4-4 4.2.4 Preferred Location of Infrastructure ........................................................................ 4-4 Well Surface Locations ............................................................................................................. 4-5 4.3.1 Siting and Development .......................................................................................... 4-5 4.3.2 Construction ............................................................................................................ 4-5 4.3.3 Production, Operation and Post Development Activities ...................................... 4-10 4.3.4 Closure and Rehabilitation .................................................................................... 4-11 Gas Gathering System and Associated Infrastructure ........................................................... 4-12 4.4.1 Construction .......................................................................................................... 4-12 4.4.2 Production ............................................................................................................. 4-13 4.4.3 Post Development Operational Activities .............................................................. 4-13 4.4.4 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ........................................................................... 4-13 General ................................................................................................................................... 4-13 4.5.1 Construction and Operation Hours ....................................................................... 4-13 4.5.2 Services and Amenities ......................................................................................... 4-13 4.5.3 Other Infrastructure ............................................................................................... 4-13 4.5.4 Project Implementation.......................................................................................... 4-14 4.5.5 Environmental Licensing ....................................................................................... 4-14 4.5.6 Environmental Management Plans ....................................................................... 4-14 4.5.7 Environmental Management Improvements and Response ................................ 4-15 Statutory Planning ...................................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 5.2 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Commonwealth Matters............................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1.1 Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
(EPBC) Act 1999 ..................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.2 Referral .................................................................................................................... 5-1 State Matters ............................................................................................................................ 5-2 5.2.1 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) ................................... 5-2 5.2.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW) ....................... 5-4 5.2.3 Environmental Planning Instruments ...................................................................... 5-4 5.2.4 Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991 (NSW) ................................................................... 5-5 5.2.5 Pipelines Act 1967 (NSW) ....................................................................................... 5-6 5.2.6 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) .................................. 5-6 ii
5.3 6.0 5.2.7 Heritage Act 1977 (NSW) ........................................................................................ 5-6 5.2.8 Water Management Act 2000 (NSW) ..................................................................... 5-7 5.2.9 State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005 .......................... 5-7 5.2.10 State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production &
Extractive Industries) 2007 ...................................................................................... 5-8 5.2.11 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 .................................. 5-11 5.2.12 State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres)
2006 ....................................................................................................................... 5-11 5.2.13 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19 – Bushland in Urban
Areas ..................................................................................................................... 5-12 5.2.14 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 33 - Hazardous and Offensive
Development ......................................................................................................... 5-13 5.2.15 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 – Koala Habitat Protection ............. 5-14 5.2.16 Metropolitan Strategy and Sub Regional Strategy ............................................... 5-14 5.2.17 Draft Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan ................................................................ 5-15 Local Matters .......................................................................................................................... 5-16 5.3.1 Characterisation of the Development.................................................................... 5-16 5.3.2 Zoning and Permissibility of the Development...................................................... 5-18 Consultation ............................................................................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 New South Wales Formal Procedures ..................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Consultation with Stakeholders and Other Relevant Authorities ............................................. 6-3 6.3 Community Consultation .......................................................................................................... 6-9 6.3.1 6.4 7.0 Objectives and Approach ........................................................................................ 6-9 Landowner Consultation ......................................................................................................... 6-11 6.4.1 Sydney Catchment Authority................................................................................. 6-11 6.4.2 Roads and Traffic Authority................................................................................... 6-12 6.5 CGP Community Consultative Committee ............................................................................. 6-12 6.6 Local Government .................................................................................................................. 6-12 Issues Prioritisation .................................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.1 7.2 8.0 AECOM
Issues Identification .................................................................................................................. 7-1 7.1.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 7-1 7.1.2 The Issues ............................................................................................................... 7-1 Prioritisation of Issues .............................................................................................................. 7-1 7.2.1 Approach ................................................................................................................. 7-1 7.2.2 Assessment ............................................................................................................. 7-2 Land Use .................................................................................................................................................... 8-1 8.1 8.2 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Existing Environment ................................................................................................................ 8-1 8.1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................. 8-1 8.1.2 Existing and Surrounding Land Use ....................................................................... 8-1 Future Land Use ....................................................................................................................... 8-3 iii
8.3 9.0 8.2.1 Sydney Metropolitan Strategy ................................................................................. 8-3 8.2.2 South West Growth Centre ..................................................................................... 8-3 8.2.3 Council Development Areas.................................................................................... 8-5 8.2.4 Summary ................................................................................................................. 8-5 Potential Impacts ...................................................................................................................... 8-6 8.3.1 Construction ............................................................................................................ 8-6 8.3.2 Production ............................................................................................................... 8-8 8.3.3 Post Development ................................................................................................... 8-9 8.3.4 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ............................................................................. 8-9 8.4 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 8-10 8.5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 8-10 Surface Water ............................................................................................................................................ 9-1 9.1 9.2 9.3 Existing Environment ................................................................................................................ 9-1 9.1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................. 9-1 9.1.2 Catchments ............................................................................................................. 9-1 9.1.3 The Upper Canal Water Supply System ................................................................. 9-2 9.1.4 Flood Prone Areas .................................................................................................. 9-2 Potential Impacts ...................................................................................................................... 9-2 9.2.1 Flooding ................................................................................................................... 9-3 9.2.2 Upper Canal Water Supply ..................................................................................... 9-4 9.2.3 Downstream Impacts............................................................................................... 9-4 Environmental Safeguards ....................................................................................................... 9-4 9.3.1 9.4 10.0 AECOM
The Upper Canal ..................................................................................................... 9-5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 9-6 Hazard and Risk ...................................................................................................................................... 10-7 10.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 10-7 10.2 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 10-7 10.2.1 Study Scope .......................................................................................................... 10-7 10.2.2 Risk Analysis ......................................................................................................... 10-7 10.2.3 Approach to Assessment ...................................................................................... 10-8 10.3 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 10-8 10.4 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 10-9 10.5 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10.4.1 Occurrence/Causes of Hazards ............................................................................ 10-9 10.4.2 Potentially Hazardous Materials............................................................................ 10-9 10.4.3 CSM leaks ............................................................................................................. 10-9 10.4.4 Failures ................................................................................................................ 10-10 10.4.5 Location Specific Hazards ................................................................................... 10-10 Quantitative Risk Analysis .................................................................................................... 10-10 iv
10.6 10.7 11.0 Environmental Safeguards ................................................................................................... 10-11 10.6.1 Well Surface Locations........................................................................................ 10-11 10.6.2 Gas Gathering System ........................................................................................ 10-12 10.6.3 General ................................................................................................................ 10-12 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 10-12 Ecology .................................................................................................................................................... 11-1 11.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 11-1 11.2 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 11-1 11.3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 11-1 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.3.1 Desktop Review..................................................................................................... 11-1 11.3.2 Field Surveys ......................................................................................................... 11-2 Results .................................................................................................................................... 11-2 11.4.1 Flora....................................................................................................................... 11-3 11.4.2 Fauna................................................................................................................... 11-10 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................................. 11-17 11.5.1 Flora..................................................................................................................... 11-17 11.5.2 Fauna................................................................................................................... 11-18 11.5.3 EPBC Act Significant Impact Criteria .................................................................. 11-18 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................. 11-19 11.6.1 Well Surface Locations........................................................................................ 11-21 11.6.2 Gas Gathering System ........................................................................................ 11-21 Environmental Safeguards ................................................................................................... 11-22 11.7.1 11.8 12.0 AECOM
Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 11-22 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 11-24 Groundwater ............................................................................................................................................ 12-1 12.1 12.2 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 12-1 12.1.1 Geology and Geomorphology ............................................................................... 12-1 12.1.2 Aquifer Systems .................................................................................................... 12-3 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 12-4 12.2.1 Increased Aquifer Permeability and Flow Rate..................................................... 12-4 12.2.2 Dewatering of the Coal Measures Aquifers .......................................................... 12-5 12.2.3 Reduction in Groundwater Quality ........................................................................ 12-5 12.3 Salinity Risk ............................................................................................................................ 12-6 12.4 Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems ................................................................................... 12-6 12.5 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 12-7 12.6 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12.5.1 Well Construction .................................................................................................. 12-7 12.5.2 Produced Water Containment ............................................................................... 12-7 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 12-7 v
13.0 Noise ........................................................................................................................................................ 13-1 13.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 13-1 13.2 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 13-1 13.3 13.4 14.0 AECOM
13.2.1 Sensitive Receivers ............................................................................................... 13-1 13.2.2 Local Meteorological Conditions ........................................................................... 13-1 13.2.3 Ambient Noise Environment.................................................................................. 13-2 Assessment ............................................................................................................................ 13-2 13.3.1 Assessment Criteria .............................................................................................. 13-2 13.3.2 Noise...................................................................................................................... 13-5 13.3.3 Vibration ................................................................................................................ 13-6 13.3.4 Modelling Parameters ........................................................................................... 13-6 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 13-7 13.4.1 Noise...................................................................................................................... 13-7 13.4.2 Vibration ................................................................................................................ 13-8 13.5 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 13-9 13.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 13-10 Air Quality................................................................................................................................................. 14-1 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 14-1 14.1.1 Project Area ........................................................................................................... 14-1 14.1.2 Meteorology ........................................................................................................... 14-1 14.1.3 Regional Air Quality............................................................................................... 14-2 Methodology and Assessment ............................................................................................... 14-3 14.2.1 Emissions .............................................................................................................. 14-3 14.2.2 Assessment Criteria .............................................................................................. 14-3 14.2.3 Meteorology ........................................................................................................... 14-3 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 14-4 14.3.1 Construction .......................................................................................................... 14-4 14.3.2 Production ............................................................................................................. 14-4 14.3.3 Post Development ................................................................................................. 14-5 14.3.4 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ........................................................................... 14-5 14.3.5 Other Regional Sources of Air Pollutants ............................................................. 14-5 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 14-6 14.4.1 Construction .......................................................................................................... 14-6 14.4.2 Production ............................................................................................................. 14-6 14.4.3 Post Development ................................................................................................. 14-6 14.4.4 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ........................................................................... 14-6 14.4.5 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................................................... 14-6 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 14-7 vi
14.6 14.7 15.0 Greenhouse Gas Assessment ............................................................................................... 14-7 14.6.1 Overview ................................................................................................................ 14-7 14.6.2 Potential Emissions of the Northern Expansion ................................................... 14-8 14.6.3 Environmental Safeguards .................................................................................... 14-9 14.6.4 Summary ............................................................................................................. 14-10 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 14-10 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage ..................................................................................................................... 15-1 15.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 15-1 15.2 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 15-1 15.3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 15-1 15.4 15.3.1 Cultural Consultation ............................................................................................. 15-1 15.3.2 Background and Database Review....................................................................... 15-2 15.3.3 Archaeological Survey........................................................................................... 15-2 Results .................................................................................................................................... 15-3 15.4.1 16.0 17.0 AECOM
Assessment of Archaeological Sensitivity ............................................................ 15-5 15.5 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 15-7 15.6 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 15-8 15.7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 15-15 European Heritage ................................................................................................................................... 16-1 16.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 16-1 16.2 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 16-1 16.3 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 16-3 16.3.1 Upper Canal .......................................................................................................... 16-4 16.3.2 Molles Main ........................................................................................................... 16-4 16.3.3 Gledswood ............................................................................................................. 16-4 16.3.4 Varroville ................................................................................................................ 16-5 16.4 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 16-5 16.5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 16-7 Visual........................................................................................................................................................ 17-9 17.1 17.2 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 17-9 17.1.1 Project Area ........................................................................................................... 17-9 17.1.2 Sensitive Receivers ............................................................................................... 17-9 Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 17-10 17.2.1 Visibility Assessment ........................................................................................... 17-10 17.2.2 Visual Absorption Capacity ................................................................................. 17-10 17.3 Results .................................................................................................................................. 17-11 17.4 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................. 17-12 17.4.1 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Construction ........................................................................................................ 17-13 vii
18.0 17.4.2 Production and Post-development ...................................................................... 17-13 17.4.3 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ......................................................................... 17-13 17.5 Environmental Safeguards ................................................................................................... 17-13 17.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 17-14 Geology and Soils .................................................................................................................................... 18-1 18.1 18.2 18.3 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 18-1 18.1.1 Geology ................................................................................................................. 18-1 18.1.2 Soil Landscapes .................................................................................................... 18-1 18.1.3 Acid Sulphate Soils ............................................................................................... 18-2 18.1.4 Saline Soils ............................................................................................................ 18-3 18.1.5 Contaminated Soils ............................................................................................... 18-3 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 18-3 18.2.1 Construction .......................................................................................................... 18-3 18.2.2 Production ............................................................................................................. 18-4 18.2.3 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ........................................................................... 18-4 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 18-5 18.3.1 18.4 19.0 AECOM
Construction .......................................................................................................... 18-5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 18-6 Traffic and Transportation ........................................................................................................................ 19-1 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 19-1 19.1.1 Road Network ........................................................................................................ 19-1 19.1.2 Current Road Use and Capacity ........................................................................... 19-2 19.1.3 Other Transportation Routes................................................................................. 19-6 Future Development ............................................................................................................... 19-6 19.2.1 South West Rail Link ............................................................................................. 19-6 19.2.2 Development Areas ............................................................................................... 19-7 19.2.3 Road Upgrades ..................................................................................................... 19-7 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 19-8 19.3.1 Construction .......................................................................................................... 19-9 19.3.2 Production ........................................................................................................... 19-10 19.3.3 Post Development ............................................................................................... 19-10 19.3.4 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ......................................................................... 19-10 19.3.5 Summary of Potential Impacts on Camden Valley Way ..................................... 19-11 Environmental Safeguards ................................................................................................... 19-11 19.4.1 Construction ........................................................................................................ 19-11 19.4.2 Production ........................................................................................................... 19-12 19.4.3 Post development ................................................................................................ 19-12 19.4.4 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ......................................................................... 19-12 viii
19.5 20.0 20.2 20.3 22.0 23.0 24.0 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 19-12 Social and Economic ............................................................................................................................... 20-1 20.1 21.0 AECOM
Community Profile .................................................................................................................. 20-1 20.1.1 Camden LGA ......................................................................................................... 20-1 20.1.2 Campbelltown LGA ............................................................................................... 20-2 20.1.3 Population Growth in the South West ................................................................... 20-2 Economic Profile ..................................................................................................................... 20-3 20.2.1 Existing Environment............................................................................................. 20-3 20.2.2 The Gas Industry ................................................................................................... 20-5 20.2.3 The CGP ................................................................................................................ 20-6 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 20-6 20.3.1 Social ..................................................................................................................... 20-6 20.3.2 Economic ............................................................................................................... 20-7 20.4 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 20-8 20.5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 20-8 Rehabilitation ........................................................................................................................................... 21-1 21.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 21-1 21.2 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................. 21-1 21.3 Rehabilitation Works ............................................................................................................... 21-1 21.3.1 Initial Rehabilitation ............................................................................................... 21-1 21.3.2 Closure and Final Rehabilitation ........................................................................... 21-2 21.3.3 Completion Criteria................................................................................................ 21-3 21.4 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 21-3 21.5 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 21-3 21.6 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 21-4 Waste ....................................................................................................................................................... 22-1 22.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 22-1 22.2 Potential Impacts .................................................................................................................... 22-1 22.3 Environmental Safeguards ..................................................................................................... 22-4 22.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 22-4 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................................................. 23-1 23.1 Cumulative Impact of the Project ........................................................................................... 23-1 23.2 Cumulative Impact with Other Projects .................................................................................. 23-1 23.3 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 23-2 Environmental Management and Commitments ..................................................................................... 24-1 24.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 24-1 24.2 Environmental Objectives ....................................................................................................... 24-2 24.3 Statement of Commitments .................................................................................................. 24-16 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ix
25.0 26.0 24.4 Training and Induction .......................................................................................................... 24-19 24.5 Inspection, Monitoring and Auditing ..................................................................................... 24-20 24.6 Outline of Environmental Reporting ..................................................................................... 24-20 24.7 Outline of Environmental Auditing ........................................................................................ 24-21 24.8 Emergency Response Plan .................................................................................................. 24-21 Residual Risk ........................................................................................................................................... 25-1 25.1 Approach................................................................................................................................. 25-1 25.2 Analysis................................................................................................................................... 25-2 Project Justification .................................................................................................................................. 26-1 26.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 26-1 26.2 Justification ............................................................................................................................. 26-1 26.3 27.0 28.0 AECOM
26.2.1 Biophysical ............................................................................................................ 26-1 26.2.2 Economic ............................................................................................................... 26-2 26.2.3 Socio-cultural ......................................................................................................... 26-2 Ecological Sustainability ......................................................................................................... 26-3 26.3.1 The Precautionary Principle .................................................................................. 26-3 26.3.2 Inter-Generational Equity ...................................................................................... 26-4 26.3.3 Biological Diversity and Ecological Integrity ......................................................... 26-4 26.3.4 Improved Valuation and Pricing of Environmental Resources ............................. 26-4 26.3.5 Decision Making Process ...................................................................................... 26-4 26.4 Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect ............................................................................... 26-5 26.5 Consequences of Not Proceeding ......................................................................................... 26-6 26.6 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 26-6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 27-1 27.1 The Project.............................................................................................................................. 27-1 27.2 Justification for the Project ..................................................................................................... 27-1 27.3 Sustainability of the Project .................................................................................................... 27-1 27.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 27-1 References ............................................................................................................................................... 28-1 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
x
AECOM
List of Tables
Body Report
Table 1-1: Development of the Camden Gas Project................................................................................................. 1-2 Table 1-2: Outline of Report Structure ........................................................................................................................ 1-8 Table 2-1: Summary of Affected Land – Northern Expansion.................................................................................... 2-2 Table 3-1: Natural gas production in Australia (PJ) .................................................................................................... 3-1 Table 4-1: Breakdown of Task by Activity................................................................................................................... 4-2 Table 4-2: Locational Principles for the Northern Expansion ..................................................................................... 4-3 Table 4-3: Summary of Drilling Technology Options .................................................................................................. 4-7 Table 5-1: Statutory Requirements for EA (S.5 of the EP&A Act).............................................................................. 5-2 Table 5-2: Statutory Requirements for EA (S.5A of the EP&A Act) ........................................................................... 5-3 Table 5-3: SEPP 2007 Matters for Consideration ...................................................................................................... 5-9 Table 5-4: Matters for consideration ......................................................................................................................... 5-12 Table 5-5: Relevant Local Environmental Planning Instruments ............................................................................. 5-16 Table 5-6: Zoning and Permissibility of Northern Expansion Works ........................................................................ 5-20 Table 7-1: Issues Prioritisation Matrix ......................................................................................................................... 7-2 Table 7-2: Prioritisation Analysis................................................................................................................................. 7-2 Table 7-3: Revised prioritisation of environmental Issues .......................................................................................... 7-6 Table 8-1: Growth areas and projected population within the Project Area ............................................................... 8-6 Table 9-1: Potential Impacts on Surface Water Processes and Surface Water Quality ............................................ 9-3 Table 10-1: General Causes/Hazards ...................................................................................................................... 10-9 Table 10-2: CSM Well Overpressure Control Mechanisms ................................................................................... 10-11 Table 10-3: Leak and Fire Protection ..................................................................................................................... 10-11 Table 11-1: Flora/Vegetation Summary of well surface locations within the Project Area ...................................... 11-4 Table 11-2: Flora/Vegetation Summary of gas gathering lines within the Project Area .......................................... 11-7 Table 11-3: Summary of fauna habitat potential of well surface locations within the Project Area ....................... 11-11 Table 11-4: Summary of Fauna Habitat Potential of gas gathering lines within the Project Area ......................... 11-14 Table 11-5: Endangered Ecological Communities in the study area ..................................................................... 11-18 Table 11-6: Potential ecological impacts ................................................................................................................ 11-19 Table 11-7: Flora and Fauna Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 11-22 Table 12-1: Stratigraphy of the Project Area: Camden ............................................................................................ 12-2 Table 13-1: Summary of Existing Ambient Noise Levels (dBA) ............................................................................... 13-2 Table 13-2: Construction Noise Goals ...................................................................................................................... 13-3 Table 13-3: Operational Project Specific Noise Criteria ........................................................................................... 13-4 Table 13-4: Sleep Disturbance Criteria..................................................................................................................... 13-5 Table 13-5: Guideline Values for vibration velocity for evaluating short-term vibration on structures ..................... 13-5 Table 13-6: Operational Noise Criteria for each Well Location ................................................................................ 13-8 Table 13-7: Recommended Site Vibration Control Criteria ...................................................................................... 13-9 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xi
AECOM
Table 14-1: Climate statistics for Camden Airport .................................................................................................... 14-1 Table 14-2: DECCW air quality monitoring data collected at Macarthur (2007) ...................................................... 14-2 Table 14-3: Air quality assessment criteria ............................................................................................................... 14-3 Table 14-4: Greenhouse gas emission sources included in the assessment .......................................................... 14-8 Table 14-5: Estimated annual greenhouse gas emissions ...................................................................................... 14-8 Table 14-6: Greenhouse Emission Mitigation Measures.......................................................................................... 14-9 Table 15-1: Aboriginal archaeological sites located within the proposed areas of development ............................ 15-3 Table 15-2: Areas of Archaeological Sensitivity ....................................................................................................... 15-5 Table 15-3: Mitigation measures.............................................................................................................................. 15-9 Table 16-1: Summary of known heritage items within the Project Area .................................................................. 16-1 Table 16-2: Summary of Potential Impacts .............................................................................................................. 16-3 Table 16-3: Mitigation measures for European heritage sites within the Study Area. ............................................. 16-5 Table 17-1: Well sites visible from sensitive receivers ........................................................................................... 17-11 Table 17-2: Montages ............................................................................................................................................. 17-11 Table 18-1: Soil Landscapes within the Project Area ............................................................................................... 18-2 Table 19-1: Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) .................................................................................................... 19-2 Table 19-2: Level of Service for roadways relevant to the Northern Expansion ...................................................... 19-3 Table 19-3: Road hierarchy classification ................................................................................................................. 19-4 Table 19-4: Roadway Classification ......................................................................................................................... 19-4 Table 19-5: Peak intersection performance summary.............................................................................................. 19-5 Table 20-1: Social summary for Camden LGA (2006 Census) ................................................................................ 20-1 Table 20-2: Social summary for Campbelltown LGA (2006 Census) ...................................................................... 20-2 Table 20-3: Population and Growth Change of LGAs within the Project Area (ABS, 2009) ................................... 20-2 Table 20-4: Population Projections of SLAs* within the Project Area 2001-2031 ................................................... 20-3 Table 20-5: Employment data for Project Area LGAs from 2006 ABS census ........................................................ 20-3 Table 20-6: Personal Income data for Project Area LGAs from 2006 ABS census ................................................. 20-4 Table 20-7: Employment distribution (%) based on ABS 2006 census ................................................................... 20-4 Table 22-1: Classification of Potential Wastes Generated from the Project during Construction ........................... 22-2 Table 22-2: Classification of Potential Wastes Generated from the Project during Operation and
Decommissioning ...................................................................................................................................................... 22-3 Table 24-1: Northern Expansion Environmental Objectives and Goals ................................................................... 24-2 Table 24-2: Summary of Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................... 24-5 Table 24-3: Statement of Commitments – CGP Northern Expansion Area ........................................................... 24-16 Table 25-1: Residual Risk Matrix .............................................................................................................................. 25-2 Table 25-2: Risk Profile ............................................................................................................................................. 25-2 S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xii
AECOM
List of Plates
Plates Section
Plate 1: Typical Open Wellhead Design
Plate 2: Typical Closed Wellhead Design
List of Figures
Figures Section
Figure F1: Existing Well Fields - Camden Gas Project Figure F2: Camden Gas Project within PEL 2 and PPL Boundaries Figure F3: Northern Expansion Area Overview Figure F4: Upper Project Area Figure F5: Central Project Area Figure F6: Lower Project Area Figure F7: Well Surface Locations - RA09 and RA03 Figure F8: Well Surface Locations - VV11 and VV07 Figure F9: Well Surface Locations - CU02, CU20 and CU22 Figure F10: Well Surface Locations - CU06 CU10, CU14, CU26 AND CU29 Figure F11: Land Use Context Figure F12: Well Surface Location Indicative Layout Figure F13: Indicative 6 Multiwell Layout Figure F14: Indicative 6 Multiwell Elevation Figure F15: Typical Well Surface Location Enclosure Equipment Figure F16: Proposed Project Area and Surface Water Features Figure F17: Well Surface Locations - Upper Project Area, Ecological Constraints Figure F18: Well Surface Locations - Central Project Area, Ecological Constraints Figure F19: Well Surface Locations - Lower Project Area, Ecological Constraints Figure F20: Construction Noise Contours - Upper Project Area Figure F21: Construction Noise Contours - Central Project Area Figure F22: Construction Noise Contours - Lower Project Area Figure F23: Operational Noise Contours - Upper Project Area Figure F24: Operational Noise Contours - Central Project Area Figure F25: Operational Noise Contours - Lower Project Area Figure F26: Well Surface Locations - Upper Project Area, Cultural Heritage Constraints Figure F27: Well Surface Locations - Central Project Area, Cultural Heritage Constraints Figure F28: Well Surface Locations - Lower Project Area, Cultural Heritage Constrains Figure F29: Overview of European Heritage Within The Project Area Figure F30: Visual Catchment Plan Figure F31: Visibility Assessment - Upper Project Area S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xiii
AECOM
Figure F32: Visibility Assessment - Central Project Area Figure F33: Visibility Assessment - Lower Project Area Figure F34: Well Surface Location CU02 Photomontage Figure F35: Well Surface Location CU06 Photomontage Figure F36: Well Surface Location CU10 Photomontage Figure F37: Well Surface Location CU14 Photomontage Figure F38: Well Surface Location CU20 Photomontage Figure F39: Well Surface Location CU22 Photomontage Figure F40: Well Surface Location CU26 Photomontage Figure F41: Well Surface Location CU29 Photomontage Figure F42: Well Surface Location RA03 Photomontage Figure F43: Well Surface Location RA09 Photomontage Figure F44: Well Surface Location VV07 Photomontage Figure F45: Well Surface Location VV11 Photomontage Figure F46: AADT Traffic Count Stations Figure F47: Indicative St Andrews Road Intersection Upgrade Figure F48: Camden Valley Way and St Andrews Road Intersection Analysis List of Appendices
Appendix A Environmental Assessment Requirements
Appendix B Letter Requesting Exemption from the Need For A Concept Plan
Appendix C Letter Requesting Declaration of Major Project
Appendix D Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
Appendix E Flora and Fauna Assessment
Appendix F Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
Appendix G Air Quality Impact Assessment
Appendix H Greenhouse Gas Assessment
Appendix I Aboriginal Archaeological Assessment
Appendix J Historic Cultural Heritage Assessment
Appendix K Stage 2 CGP Subsidence Report
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xiv
AECOM
Glossary of Terms
Term
Definition
Acid Sulphate Soils
Soils containing pyrite which produces sulphuric acid when exposed to
oxygen
Alluvial
Comprising of sediment deposited by a river or other flowing water body
Aquifer
Geological formation, group of formations, or part of a formation capable
of transmitting and yielding significant quantities of water
Archaeological site
A place in which material evidence of past activity is preserved
Australian Height Datum
The standard reference level used to express the relative elevation of
standard features. A height given in metres AHD is essentially the height
above sea level.
Annual Average Daily Traffic
The volume of traffic in both directions over a 24 hour period, averaged
over one year
B-Double
Heavy vehicle combination consisting of a prime mover towing 2 semitrailers
Biodiversity
The encompassment of biological variety at genetic, species and
ecosystem scales
Bore
A cylindrical hole drilled to access groundwater
Botanical Gardens
An institution holding documented collections of living plants for the
purposes of scientific research, conservation, display and education
Buffer
A zone of user-specified distance around a point, line or area
Catchment
The area in which water collects to form the supply of a river stream or
drainage area
Coal
A fossil fuel formed through the compaction of organic matter over time
Coal Seam Methane
A natural gas formed as a by-product during the coalification process
whereby organic matter is turned into coal. Compared with conventional
natural gas, coal seam methane contains very little heavier hydrocarbons
such as propane or butane.
Conservation
The management of natural resources in a way that ensures their
continuing availability to both present and future generations.
Development Area
Areas of land intended to facilitate the growth of population within Sydney
through the provision of new residential, commercial and industrial zoning
in accordance with the Growth Centres SEPP and the Metropolitan
Strategy.
Ecological integrity
The quality of an ecosystem in which the natural ecological processes are
sustained, with genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity assured for the
future
Ecologically Sustainable
Development
Using, conserving and enhancing resources so that ecological processes,
on which life depends, are maintained and the total quality of life, now
and in the future can be increased.
Emissions
Release of substances into the atmosphere
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xv
AECOM
Term
Definition
Environmental Management System
The control, training and monitoring measures to be implemented during
the design, construction and operation phase of a project in order to
avoid, minimise or ameliorate potentially adverse impacts (being socioeconomic, cultural, physical, biological) identified during environmental
assessments.
Fracture Stimulation
Refers to a treatment performed to restore or enhance the productivity of
a well.
Geographic Information Systems
(GIS)
Digital systems for the capture, storage, retrieval, analysis, and display of
spatial data in reference to the earth
Greenhouse emissions
The release of greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane,
CFCs) into the atmosphere
Groundwater
Surface water contained within the saturated zone
Hazard
A source or situation of potential threat or danger
Heritage
The culture, property, and characteristics of past times
Hydrogeology
The study of the interrelationships of geologic materials and processes
with water
Mitigation
Reduce the severity
Natural Gas
A hydrocarbon gas that is usually obtained from underground sources,
often in association with petroleum and coal deposits.
Pollutants
Waste material that contaminates air, soil, or water
Project
The Northern Expansion of the Camden Gas Project (CGP)
Project Area
Combined subsurface and surface Project Areas.
RAMSAR
An intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for national
action and international cooperation for conservation of wetlands and
their resources
Rehabilitation
The return and recovery of previously disturbed land to a stable land
surface capable of useful purposes.
Resource
A new or reserve supply that can be drawn upon when needed.
Riparian vegetation
Vegetation occurring alongside streams and rivers
Supply Pipeline
A high pressure pipeline that connects to the main distribution network for
sale to the gas market
Solid waste
Any non-hazardous, solid, degradable waste. Includes putrescible waste,
garden waste, uncontaminated biosolids and clinical and related waste
where sterilised to a standard acceptable to the Department of Health
Subsurface Project Area
The Subsurface Project Area defined by Figure 3 of this EA and the area
within which proposed subsurface drilling of lateral wells would occur. No
surface infrastructure would be located within this area.
Surface Project Area
The Surface Project Area defined by Figure 3 of this EA and the area to
which all proposed surface infrastructure would be located.
Surface water
All water bodies above the land
Telemetry
Automatic transmission and measurement of data from remote sources
by wire or radio or other means
Threatened species
Animals and plants that are in danger of extinction or may now be
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xvi
Term
AECOM
Definition
considered extinct, but have been seen in the wild in the last 50 years.
Tributaries
Streams or rivers which contribute flow into a larger river or water body
Turbidity
Suspended particles in a volume of water
Well Completion
Is a generic term used to describe the downhole and surface equipment
required to enable safe and efficient production from a gas well.
Well Surface Location
An area that may incorporate up to 6 co-located wells at one site or
compound.
Wetlands
Areas that are saturated by surface or groundwater with vegetation
adapted for life under those soil conditions, e.g. swamps, marshes, and
estuaries.
Workover
Well maintenance work performed during the producing life of a well
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xvii
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xviii
AECOM
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym
Explanation
AADT
Average annual daily traffic
ABARE
Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics
ABS
Australian Bureau of Statistics
AECOM
AECOM Australia Pty Ltd
AGL
AGL Gas Production (Camden) Pty Limited
AHD
Australian Height Datum
AQIA
Air Quality Impact Assessment
ASS
Acid Sulphate Soils
BASIX
Building Sustainability Index
CBD
Central Business District
CCC
Camden Consultative Committee
CCX
Chicago Climate Exchange
CEEC
Critically Endangered Ecological Community
CFCs
Chloro-fluorocarbons
CGP
Camden Gas Project
CGP Network
Existing well fields of the CGP, including existing well surface locations, gas
gathering lines and associated gas treatment plants
CLMP
Contaminated Land Management Plan
CO2
Carbon Dioxide
CPRS
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme
CPW
Cumberland Plain Woodland
CSM
Coal Seam Methane
DA
Development Application
DECCW
Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water
DEWHA
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts
DII
Department of Industry and Investment
Distribution Network
Gas distribution network owned by Jemena Gas Networks (NSW) Ltd
DoP
Department of Planning
DPI
Department of Primary Industries
DWE
Department of Water and Energy
EA
EARs
Environmental Assessment Requirements
EASR
Environmental Assessment Scoping Report
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xix
Acronym
Explanation
ECBG
El Caballo Blanco and Gledswood
EEC
Endangered Ecological Community
EMS
EP&A Act
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979
EP&A Regulation
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000
EPA
Environment Protection Agency
EPBC Act
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999
EPI
Environmental Planning Instrument
ESD
Ecologically Sustainable Development
FEED
Front End Engineering Design
GIS
Geographic Information Systems
Growth Centres SEPP
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006
ha
Hectares
Heritage Act
Heritage Act, 1977
HIPAP
Hazardous Industry Planning Advisory Paper
IGAE
Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment
km
Kilometres
kL
Kilolitres
LEP
Local Environmental Plan
LGA
Local Government Area
LNG
Liquefied Natural Gas
LOS
Level of Service
LRMSP
Landscape and Rehabilitation Management Sub Plan
Metropolitan Strategy
NSW Government Sydney Metropolitan Strategy
Model Provisions
NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Model Provisions, 1980
MSEC
Mine Subsidence Engineering Consultants
NOx
Nitrous Oxide
NEM
National Electricity Market
NSW
New South Wales
NES
National Environmental Significance
NPI
Australian National Pollutant Inventory
O3
Ozone
PASS
Potential Acid Sulphate Soils
PEA
Preliminary Environmental Assessment
PEL
Petroleum Exploration Lease
PFM
Planning Focus Meeting
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
AECOM
xx
AECOM
Acronym
Explanation
PHA
Preliminary Hazard Analysis
Pipelines Act
Pipelines Act, 1967
PJ
Petajoules
PM10
Particulate matter less than 10µm
PO Act
Petroleum (Onshore) Act, 1991
POEO Act
Protection of the Environment Operations Act, 1997
PPL
Petroleum Production Lease
PPM
parts per million
PSV
Flow relief pressure safety valve
RA
Risk Assessment
RBTP
Ray Beddoe Treatment Plant
REP
Regional Environmental Plan
RNE
Register of the National Estate
RPGP
Rosalind Park Gas Plant
RTA
Roads and Traffic Authority
SCA
Sydney Catchment Authority
SCADA
Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition
SDV
Wellhead shutdown valve
SEPP
State Environmental Planning Policy
SEPP 14
State Environmental Planning Policy 14 - Coastal Wetlands
SEPP 19
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas
SEPP 2005
State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005
SEPP 2007
State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining. Petroleum Production and Extractive
Industries) 2007
SEPP 33
State Environmental Planning Policy 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development
SEPP 44
State Environmental Planning Policy 44 - Koala Habitat Protection
SHR
State Heritage Register
SIS
Surface to In-Seam
SLA
Statistical Local Areas
SOC
State Owned Corporation
SWGC
South West Growth Centre
SWMSP
Soil and Water Management Sub Plan
SWRL
South West Rail Link
TDS
Total Dissolved Solids
TEG
Tri-ethylene Glycol
TMSP
Traffic Management Sub Plan
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
xxi
Acronym
Explanation
TSC Act
Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995
Upper Canal
Sydney Upper Canal Water Supply
VAC
Visual Absorption Capacity
VOC
Volatile Organic Compound
Waste Strategy
NSW Waste Avoidance and Recovery Strategy, 2007
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
AECOM
xxii
AECOM
Executive Summary
Introduction
AECOM Australia Pty Limited (AECOM) has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) on behalf of AGL Gas
Production (Camden) Pty Limited (AGL) to assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Northern
Expansion of the Camden Gas Project (CGP) (Northern Expansion). The CGP is a major coal seam methane
(CSM) project involving the extraction of gas from the Illawarra Coal Measures, within the Southern Coalfields of
the Sydney Basin, New South Wales (NSW). The Northern Expansion would involve the development of
additional gas wells and associated infrastructure in an area within the Camden and Campbelltown Local
Government Areas (LGAs).
The Northern Expansion has been declared by the Minister for Planning as a ‘Major Development’ under the
provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and State Environmental
Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005 (SEPP 2005), and is therefore subject to the provisions of Part 3A of
the EP&A Act.
Project Approval is being sought for the works comprising the Northern Expansion being:
•
The construction and operation of gas wells at up to 12 well surface locations containing up to 6 well heads
each;
•
The construction and operation of associated gas gathering and water lines, including interconnection with
the existing gas fields which form part of the CGP (CGP Network), along with central water storage points
where required;
•
The construction of access roads and ancillary infrastructure, including storage yard(s), where required; and
•
Subsurface drilling of lateral well paths within the boundaries of the Subsurface Project Area.
Some lands within the Project Area are earmarked for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development as part of the NSW Government’s Sydney Metropolitan Strategy (Metropolitan Strategy). Land use
has been identified as a key issue for the Northern Expansion and is discussed further in Chapter 8 of this EA.
This EA has been prepared by AECOM on behalf of the Proponent as part of a Project Application for gas wells
and associated infrastructure within the Project Area. It has been prepared in accordance with Part 3A of the
EP&A Act and the Environmental Assessment Requirements (EARs) issued for the Project by the DirectorGeneral of the Department of Planning (DoP).
Site Description and Context
The Project Area for the Northern Expansion has been separated into two distinct areas known as the Subsurface
Project Area (within which project works are limited to subsurface drilling of lateral wells only) and the Surface
Project Area where proposed surface infrastructure would be located.
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are situated within the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs, on generally
rural land within the suburbs of Currans Hill, Varroville, Raby and Denham Court. The total Project Area covers
14,380 ha of land within this area.
The Subsurface Project Area is aligned with the boundary of PPL 5 and part of PEL 2 as shown on Figure 2. The
Subsurface Project Area spans some 10,500 ha of land generally south of Liverpool LGA, west of Minto, and
north of Menangle Park as shown on Figure 3.
The Surface Project Area spans some 3,900 ha of land east of Camden Valley Way and extending from Narellan
Road in the south to Denham Court Road in the north. The Surface Project Area also includes part of the Mount
Annan Botanical Gardens to the south east as shown on Figure 3.
Several golf courses, sporting complexes and recreational reserves are scattered throughout the Subsurface and
Surface Project Area. The Smeaton Grange Industrial Park is also located within the Subsurface Project Area.
Land use within the Subsurface and Surface Project Area is largely rural and used for agricultural purposes such
as grazing, with some rural-residential properties scattered throughout the area. Residential development
throughout the Subsurface Project Area generally comprise of single and double storey detached dwellings.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES1
AECOM
The Northern Expansion incorporates certain land identified in the Metropolitan Strategy. The Turner Road and
East Leppington Development Areas have been identified for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development as part of the South West Growth Centre (SWGC), and are located within the Surface Project Area.
Three further Development Areas identified by the Metropolitan Strategy are located within the Subsurface Project
Area, being Leppington, Catherine Fields and Catherine Fields North. Camden Council has also defined two
further development areas known as the El Caballo Blanco and Gledswood (ECBG) and Camden Lakeside
Development Areas, which are within the Surface Project Area.
Land use within and surrounding the Northern Expansion comprises established residential and rural-residential
areas such as Catherine Field to the west, Raby, Eschol Park, Eagle Vale and Claymore to the east, Currans Hill
and Mount Annan to the south and Leppington to the north. Other land uses include the Smeaton Grange
industrial area and the neighbouring Oran Park Development Area, one of the largest development precincts
identified within the SWGC.
The Surface Project Area is dissected by the Sydney Upper Canal Water Supply (Upper Canal) which generally
runs north-south and forms part of the Upper Nepean Water Supply System. The Upper Canal is owned by the
Sydney Catchment Authority (SCA) and is a heritage item listed on the State Heritage Register (SHR).
The Eastern Gas Pipeline and Distribution Network also dissect the Subsurface and Surface Project Area and are
essential for the sale and delivery of natural gas. Gas gathering lines installed as part of the Northern Expansion
would connect directly into the existing infrastructure of the CGP, which connects to the Distribution Network.
Several water mains and transmission lines also run through the Subsurface and Surface Project Area.
Project Needs and Alternatives
Natural gas has the advantage that it burns cleaner than other fossil fuels, such as oil and coal, and produces
fewer greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy released. Over the last 20 years, conventional gas resources
have increased fourfold. According to statistics provided by Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource
Economics (ABARE), natural gas is Australia’s fastest growing fuel in the country, having the highest average
annual growth rate in consumption from 2001 to 2007, and the highest growth rate for 2007-2008. In order to
meet the growing demand and consumption of energy, production rates of natural gas must also continue to
increase.
Production of CSM has increased significantly in recent years and is only produced in Queensland and NSW.
CSM currently only contributes 7% of total natural gas supplies in Australia. However, it is forecast that by 2020
CSM will account for about 40% of eastern Australia’s gas demand. The large demand for CSM is generated due
to the benefits of CSM over conventional natural gas and the estimated volume of reserves compared to
conventional natural gas.
CSM projects have commercial and environmental advantages over conventional natural gas. CSM is found
closer to the surface and under lower pressure, making it easier to access and reduce environmental/geological
disturbance. CSM usually has higher concentration of methane, lower levels of impurities and is closer to sales
markets resulting in lower environmental and financial costs. With specific planning and best suited technology,
the Proponent would be able to further develop CSM gas fields with minimal environmental footprint.
Natural gas is a cleaner and more economically viable fuel than coal and other fossil fuels. The importance of
securing an indigenous, cost-effective energy supply, with lower greenhouse emissions is considered vital to the
social and economic growth of the Project Area and the State. A competitively priced gas supply from the CGP
and Northern Expansion would reduce local reliance on more greenhouse gas intensive fuels such as black coal.
Alternatives to the Project include consideration of alternative energy types, alternative locations with access to
CSM resources, alternative siting for wells and gas gathering system connections and the “do nothing” approach.
A consideration of these alternatives is provided in Chapter 3 of this EA.
Options for the siting of wells, the location of the gas gathering system, and supporting infrastructure in the
Northern Expansion have taken into consideration existing land uses and development, future urban use of these
areas, as well as technical, environmental and site-specific constraints. A site design process has been utilised in
conjunction with a flexible assessment approach in order to consider siting of well surface locations and design
and placement of associated infrastructure and to allow flexibility in the design of the Project such that it can
better integrate and adapt to changing land use and development.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES2
AECOM
If the Northern Expansion does not proceed, the opportunity to develop a convenient and competitive natural gas
supply within the Sydney Basin, a major state significant resource in an already constrained NSW gas market,
would be lost, and there would be no flow of resulting economic and social benefits to the NSW community.
Project Description
The Project Application relates to the Project Area identified in Figure 3 which includes the Surface Project Area
and the Subsurface Project Area within the boundaries of the existing PPL5 and a proposed PPL, and seeks
approval for the following:
•
Twelve well surface locations containing up to 6 well heads each;
•
Associated gas gathering and water lines, including interconnection with the existing CGP network, along
with central water storage points where required;
•
Access roads and ancillary infrastructure, including storage yard(s), where required; and
•
Subsurface drilling of lateral well paths within the boundaries of the Subsurface Project Area (see Figure 2).
The Project activities can be generally divided into the following:
•
Construction: The activities required to physically undertake the drilling of wells and subsurface lateral well
paths, gas gathering and water lines, and construction of access roads and supporting infrastructure;
•
Production: Production and delivery of gas from well surface locations to the existing CGP network via gas
gathering lines, including commissioning and maintenance activities;
•
Post Development: Operational activities which may be needed to maintain production efficiency. It is
anticipated that these activities may include the upgrade of gas gathering lines, re-fracture stimulation and
re-drilling (if required); and
•
Closure and Final Rehabilitation: Decommissioning of the Northern Expansion in accordance with statutory
requirements and industry best practice.
•
New PPL: This would be sought via the relevant process following the issue of Project Approval. Further
details are provided in Chapter 5 of the EA.
Statutory Planning
Commonwealth Legislation
The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) requires the
approval of the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts for actions that may
have a significant impact on matters of National Environmental Significance (NES). Approval from the
Commonwealth is in addition to approvals under NSW legislation.
The proposed Northern Expansion would not have a significant impact on matters of NES. A referral to the
Minister for the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts is not required.
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
The proposed Northern Expansion has been declared by the Minister as a ‘major development’ under the
provisions of the EP&A Act and SEPP 2005, and is therefore subject to the provisions of Part 3A of the EP&A Act
with the Minister being the approval authority (see Appendix C).
Environmental Planning Instruments
A range of Environmental Planning Instruments (EPIs), created under the EP&A Act, provide further detailed
guidance and regulation for development at a State, regional and local level.
In accordance with Clauses 75J of the EP&A Act, in deciding whether or not to approve the carrying out of a
Project, the Minister may (but is not required to) take into account the provisions of the EPIs that would not apply
if the Project were approved. However, the zoning of the subject land under these EPIs cannot be ignored. A
range of EPIs have been considered in relation to the Northern Expansion , including:
•
SEPP 2005;
•
State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007;
•
State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007;
•
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES3
•
•
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Industries;
•
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 – Koala Habitat Protection;
•
Camden Local Environment Plans 45, 46, 47, 48, 74, 117 and 121;
•
Camden Local Environment Plan (Camden Lakeside) 2009;
•
Draft Camden Local Environment Plan 151 (El Caballo Blanco and Gledswood);
•
Draft Camden Local Environment Plan 2009);
•
Campbelltown (Urban Area) Local Environment Plan 2002;
•
Campbelltown Local Environment Plan District 8 (Central Hills Lands);
•
Campbelltown Interim Development Order 15; and
•
Campbelltown Interim Development Order 28.
AECOM
A discussion of the application of these instruments to the Project and the permissibility of the Project is provided
in Chapter 5 of the EA. The Project is generally characterised as a ‘public utility undertaking’ and permissibility is
established through relevant LEPs, Model Provisions, SEPP 2007 or the Infrastructure SEPP for both the Surface
and Subsurface Project Area.
Licensing
Part 6 of the NSW Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991 (PO Act) provides for consideration to be given to the protection
of the environment before a petroleum title is granted. The majority of the proposed development within the
Project Area would be carried out under the existing PPL 5. Activities proposed to take place outside of PPL 5
would require a new PPL. An application would be made for a new PPL in conjunction with the application for
Project Approval under Part 3A of the EP&A Act.
Clause 11 of the NSW Pipelines Act 1967 (Pipelines Act) provides that a pipeline (other than those identified as
exempt) cannot be constructed or operated without a licence. Construction and operation of the proposed gas
gathering lines within the Project Area would not require a licence under Part 3 of the Pipelines Act.
Two Environmental Protection Licences (EPLs) are held by the proponent issued under the Protection of the
Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act) in relation to the CGP. The licences relate to the , including those
related to the Rosalind Park Gas Plant (RPGP) and the Ray Beddoe Treatment Plant ( RBTP). The proposed
works would require a new EPL or amendment of the existing EPL’s to include the new wells, gas gathering
system and associated infrastructure should the proposal be approved.
AGL currently hold a water license under the Water Act 1912 for the allocation of 30 ML per year. This allocation
would be sufficient for the Northern Expansion and as such, this licence would be transferred to a licence under
the Water Management Act 2000 (Water Act) when the Water Sharing Plan for the Greater Metropolitan Region
Groundwater Sources 2010 is gazetted.
Other Statutory Considerations
Other statutory considerations for the Project are outlined in Chapter 5 of the EA. They include the NSW
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and NSW Heritage Act 1977.
Consultation
In preparing this EA, the Director-General’s EARs have been addressed as required by Clause 75F of the EP&A
Act. The key matters raised by the Director-General for consideration in the EA are outlined in Table 6-1 of
the EA.
The Proponent has undertaken consultation with key local and State Government agencies as specified in the
EARs during the preliminary design phase and preparation of this EA. The purpose of this consultation has been
to provide an overview of the Project and to seek input to the preparation of the EA. Table 6-3 in the EA describes
the consultation undertaken as part of the EA for statutory and agency stakeholders.
As part of preliminary Project planning, AGL also undertook a program of community consultation targeting local
landowners and stakeholders through a program of meetings and workshops. Details of this consultation are
provided in Section 6.3 to 6.5 of this EA.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES4
AECOM
Issue Prioritisation
The environmental issues associated with the Northern Expansion identified through the EASR, consultation with
the community, State and local government agencies, and the Director-General’s EARs include:
•
land use (compatibility with future land use);
•
noise and vibration;
•
air quality impacts;
•
water management;
•
visual impact;
•
ecology (flora and fauna);
•
heritage;
•
hazard and risk;
•
transport and traffic;
•
geology and soils; and
•
social and economic impacts.
An issues prioritisation matrix was used to identify priorities. Each issue was given a ranking between one and
three for the severity of effects and the perceived consequences of those effects if left unmanaged. These two
numbers were added together to provide a numerical ranking for the issue that was used to categorise each issue
into high, medium or low priority.
Since the distribution of the EASR for the Project, AGL decided to make some omissions from the Project
Application. In light of this decision, the prioritisation of issues has changed to reflect the amended scope of the
environmental assessment. The table below identifies the prioritisation of environmental issues, and therefore the
focus of assessment for the proposed Project.
Low
Medium
Air Quality
Groundwater impacts
Geology and Soils
Surface Water (runoff into water
supply)
Ecology
Socio-Economic
Visual Impacts
Traffic and Transportation
Indigenous Heritage
High
Noise and Vibration Hazard and
Risk
Geology and Soils (Geotechnical
impacts)
Cultural Heritage
Land Use (compatibility with future
land use).
Land Use
Residential development has occurred mostly within the Subsurface Project Area and along the eastern and
western edges of the Surface Project Area in suburbs such as Raby, Claymore and Eschol Park in the east and
Catherine Field in the west. The newer residential suburbs of Currans Hills and Mount Annan adjoin the southern
extent of the Project Areas. Some rural and agricultural land is located to the west of the Subsurface Project Area
near Kirkham and Harrington Park, industrial land to the north east near Ingleburn, and Defence land to the far
south east extent of the Subsurface Project Area
The existing and future land use context of the Northern Expansion has been discussed in Chapter 8 with respect
to future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development proposed within the Project Areas as part of
the South West Growth Centre. Three Development Areas lie within the Subsurface Project Area, being
Leppington, Catherine Fields and Catherine Fields North, and two Development Areas lie within the Surface
Project Area, being the East Leppington and Turner Road Development Areas, as well as two Council proposed
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES5
AECOM
Development Areas. The design phase of the Northern Expansion has taken into account the future staging of
these Development Areas in order to avoid land use conflicts.
The environmental envelope approach enables the location of infrastructure as part of the Project to be flexible,
and can adapt to future land use. Given this approach and the proposed environmental safeguards for the Project,
potential impacts on land use are considered acceptable and manageable.
Previous stages of the CGP demonstrate the ability of the proposed infrastructure to co-exist within a variety of
environments with minimal impact and it is anticipated that the Northern Expansion would integrate effectively with
both existing and future planned land uses in the area.
Surface Water
The existing surface water environment within the Surface Project Area has been characterised, including
catchments and existing watercourses, flood prone areas and the Upper Canal Water Supply system.
The surface water assessment was limited to the Surface Project Area given that potential impacts upon surface
water are related to the construction and operation of surface infrastructure, which would be limited to the Surface
Project Area.
Potential impacts on the Surface Project Area are associated with the reduction of quality of surface water as a
result of the release of saline drilling, frac and formation waters into the surrounding environment, and the
potential contamination of existing watercourses, including the Upper Canal.
Mitigation measures include a Soil and Water Management Sub Plans (SWMSP), an Emergency Response Plan,
and a Flood Management Plan (where necessary) as contained in the existing EMS to the CGP. Specific
measures have also been identified to protect water quality in the Upper Canal.
It is not anticipated that the Project would have a significant impact on surface water quality and surface water
drainage provided that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented.
Hazard and Risk
A Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) was prepared in respect of the proposed Project in accordance with the
DoP document, Applying SEPP 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines. Although
the development does not fall under the definition of potentially hazardous industry under SEPP 33, a PHA has
been prepared in order to ensure that any risks in relation to the Project are addressed as part of the EA process.
The assessment was undertaken as per the NSW DoP Guidelines for Hazard Analysis No 6 and Risk Criteria for
Land Use Planning No 4. The main hazard identified with respect to the Project is associated with the production
and handling of CSM, including CSM leaks and machinery and infrastructure failure. Identified hazards were
considered in the Quantitative Risk Analysis.
The risk assessment has taken into account individual risk of fatality, risk of injury and propagation, and societal
risk. The assessment has concluded that risks associated with the Project are acceptable provided the identified
environmental safeguards are implemented.
Ecology
A flora and fauna assessment was undertaken in respect of the Project components in order to identify threatened
species within the environmental envelopes of proposed works. The assessment included field investigations
which were undertaken in May, June, August and September 2009 within the boundaries of the Surface Project
Area only. The field investigations focussed on the proposed well surface locations, gathering lines and access
road locations.
It is anticipated that the ecological impacts related to the project components would be minimal as final well
surface locations would be selected to avoid areas of significant vegetation. Further details of the flora and fauna
assessments undertaken and the mitigation measures proposed are provided in Chapter 11 of the EA.
Groundwater
The existing groundwater regime has been identified. Potential impacts to the groundwater regime include
increased permeability and depressurisation within the coal measures aquifer following fracing and groundwater
extraction. However, given the deep aquifer is not used for any beneficial use in the vicinity of the Subsurface or
Surface Project Areas, there is no measurable impact.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES6
AECOM
Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems (GDE’s) have not been identified within the Project Area. The Draft Water
Sharing Plan for the Greater Metropolitan Region groundwater sources (NOW, 2010) does not identify any high
priority GDE’s in the immediate vicinity of the Project Area, with O’Hares Creek located approximately 5 km east
of the Project Area being the closest GDE identified to the Project Area.
Based on the distance between the Project Area and the closest identified GDE, the low level of connection
between the surface and bedrock aquifers in the Sydney Central Basin (NOW, 2010), the depth from which
groundwater would be extracted, the saline nature of the groundwater to be extracted, and the construction
requirements of the production wells (Section 4.3.2), impacts to GDE’s in the vicinity of the Project Area are not
anticipated.
Dewatering of bedrock aquifers overlying the coal measures during gas production, well installation, fracing or
methane extraction is considered unlikely due to the nature of the overlying geology, the construction
methodology of the production wells, the confined extent of the fracing and the depth at which methane would be
extracted.
The construction and operation of the CSM facility and production wells is not expected to result in adverse
impacts to the groundwater regime.
Air Quality
An Air Quality Impact Assessment (AQIA) was undertaken as part of the EA. The AQIA was prepared in
accordance with DECCW guidelines, comparing emissions against assessment criteria using the DECCW
Approved Methods (DEC, 2005).
The AQIA was limited to the Surface Project Area given that potential impacts in relation to air quality are
associated with surface infrastructure and are therefore limited to the Surface Project Area.
Given the results of the qualitative AQIA and the performance of the existing stages of the CGP, the operation of
the associated wells as part of the Northern Expansion are not expected to adversely impact the air quality of the
local area or the region.
In addition to the AQIA, a Greenhouse Gas Assessment was also undertaken for the Project. As part of this
assessment, scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions were calculated. Total direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting
from operation of the Project were estimated to be approximately 1,221 t CO2-e per year. This represents
approximately 0.00075% of the total greenhouse gas emissions from NSW in 2007 (162.7 Mt CO2-e) and
0.0002% of the total GHG emissions from Australia (597.2 Mt CO2-e).
Mitigation measures for potential impacts on air quality and GHG emissions have been built into the design of the
Project and generally include measures such as controlled venting, water sprays, regular maintenance of vehicles
and equipment, traffic management and monitoring activities.
Noise
The potential noise and vibration impacts of the construction and operational components of the Project were
assessed as part of the EA. The noise assessment identified the key potential noise sources related to both the
construction and operational phases of the Project. There were no potential noise sources identified in relation to
subsurface drilling activities within the Subsurface Project Area.
It was determined that operational noise emission levels from the 12 proposed well locations are predicted to
meet the relevant Project specific noise goals at all existing residential dwellings.
It is anticipated that with recommended noise mitigation measures in place for each well site that operations
would not be unduly restricted as a result of noise emission levels and that the relevant construction noise goals
can be achieved at all residential and other noise-sensitive locations.
There may be exceedances of the construction noise criteria during the excavation and earth-moving activities
associated with road construction or installation of the gas gathering system or where well fracing is required. It is
understood that these activities would only be conducted during the daytime period and would be relatively short
in duration.
Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
An assessment of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage issues associated with the Surface Project Area was undertaken
with respect to the Project. As potential for the existence of Aboriginal artefacts is generally dependent on
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES7
AECOM
archaeological sensitivity and generally limited to within the “A” soil horizon at the surface, and proposed
subsurface drilling activities is highly unlikely to have an impact at this depth, no field survey was conducted within
the Subsurface Project Area. Potential for impacts upon Aboriginal heritage as a result of subsurface drilling
activities is considered to be negligible.
It was indicated that the potential for impacts to heritage items would be generally minimal due to the existing
disturbed nature of land within the Surface Project Area, and the identified mitigation measures (some of which
have already been incorporated into the design of the Project). Potential impacts would be minimised through the
implementation of the existing Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Sub-Plan (ACHMSP) in addition to other
general environmental safeguards and management options identified in this EA for heritage sites and artefacts.
Given the implementation of environmental safeguards and management measures identified, the impacts
associated with Aboriginal heritage are not expected to be significant.
European Heritage
An assessment of European heritage was undertaken as part of this EA. The assessment considered the broad
scale historical heritage issues of the region and the results of specific investigation through a field survey of the
proposed works. The field survey was limited to the Surface Project Area as potential impacts within the
Subsurface Project Area were considered negligible due to the distance of activities from the surface and the
subsequent low probability of impact upon heritage items.
The Surface Project Area is a cultural landscape resulting from European settlement in the earliest days of the
colony. A number of listed items on Commonwealth and non-statutory registers have been identified as occurring
within the Surface Project Area.
Potential impacts on historical heritage have been identified and given appropriate recommendations and
mitigation measures are implemented, impacts are considered unlikely or minimal. Mitigation measures have
already been incorporated into the design of the Project through the environmental envelope approach. The
European Heritage Management Sub Plan (EHMSP) of the existing EMS would also be updated to reflect the
Northern Expansion.
Visual
A visibility assessment was undertaken in consideration of a number of factors including extent of visibility,
viewing distance and number of viewers. Visual receptors within and surrounding the Surface Project Area have
been identified, and Visual Absorption Capacity (VAC) of the operating infrastructure has been considered.
The visibility assessment considers all phases of the Project from construction to closure and final rehabilitation.
Given the landscaping and initial rehabilitation works that are completed at the end of the construction phase,
visual impacts are reduced in subsequent phases. Therefore visual impacts are most significant during the
construction phase and largely limited to the Surface Project Area.
As subsurface drilling activities would not be visible at the surface, visual impacts would be negligible.
The visual assessment concludes that the visual impacts of the Project are minimal provided the recommended
mitigation measures are implemented.
Geology and Soils
The underlying geology of the Subsurface and Surface Project Area is comprised of the Illawarra Coal Measures
and varies between approximately 700 and 1000 m depth. The coal measures have an approximate thickness of
350 m within the Project Area, with the main coal seams targeted by the Northern Expansion being the Bulli and
Balgownie seams which occur at the top of the Illawarra Coal Measures at a depth of some 700 m.
A review of the Soil Conservation Service maps was undertaken to determine the distribution of soil landscapes
within the Surface Project Area. Based on the Wollongong – Port Hacking Soil Landscape Series Map Sheet
9029-9129 and the Penrith Soil Landscape Series Sheet 9030, five soil groups were identified as applying to the
study area; Blacktown, Luddenham, Picton, Berkshire Park, and South Creek. Potential acid sulphate soils, saline
soils and contaminated soils were also investigated.
The soils and geology of the Subsurface and Surface Project Area are well known due to the existing CGP
operations. The potential for impacts resulting from the Northern Expansion include the disturbance of soil and
minor alterations to landform due to trenching, drilling and excavation for the construction of the CNGP and supply
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES8
AECOM
pipeline, well surface locations, gas and water gathering systems, and access roads. However, these impacts are
expected to be minor and are anticipated to have a negligible effect on the area. Erosion and sedimentation
controls would be implemented to minimise potential impacts to the locality with disturbed areas rehabilitated as
soon as practical after works.
The potential for subsidence to occur at the surface has been assessed in Appendix K and is considered to be
negligible unless:
•
Large voids are created in the strata by the mining or extractive activity, leading to subsequent collapse,
consolidation and subsidence of the overlying strata.
•
Large voids are created in the strata by the mining or extractive activity, leading to subsequent failure of
remnant pillars and subsidence of the overlying strata.
•
Unconsolidated beds of strata are present, which can subsequently be consolidated by the weight of the
overburden, following the removal of interstitial fluids.
The proposed extraction of gas would not create large voids in the strata, nor leave remnant pillars. The strata
within the coal measures are not unconsolidated and in fact are hard and well consolidated rocks. The conditions
for significant subsidence to occur are not therefore present and it is concluded that the potential for subsidence
to occur as gas is extracted is considered to be negligible.
Traffic and Transport
The existing road network of the Project has been identified. Transportation routes such as B-double route, bus
routes and railway lines have also been considered. Future development of transport routes including new rail
links, new service roads and upgrades of existing roads have also been identified.
The most current RTA Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data for the Sydney Region (2005) has been used to
provide estimates of road use, capacity and level of service (LOS) for the roadways within and surrounding the
Surface Project Area where the majority of vehicle movements associated with the Project would occur. The
majority of recording locations have experienced traffic volume increases since 1999, likely as a result of
population and industry growth in the area. The LOS varies between Level E and Level A.
The proposed works is likely to result in a minor increase in traffic volumes for short periods of time, namely
during construction. Given the generally minor and temporary nature of these impacts, the proposed development
is considered to be acceptable in terms of traffic and transport. Mitigation practices have been identified and
include such measures as updating the existing Traffic Management Sub Plan (TMSP).
Social and Economic
Social and economic profiles were assessed and it was concluded that the Project is anticipated to provide social
and economic benefits for the local area and greater region through continued employment, revenue and ongoing
supply of a valuable indigenous resource in a constrained gas market to a growing population.
The Project is likely to have a positive impact on regional and State economies due to the provision of an
indigenous gas supply, while the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs also may experience positive impacts
associated with demand for local goods and services during both the construction and operation phases of the
Project.
The social impacts of the Project are largely related to amenity and can be adequately managed through the
implementation of appropriate mitigation measures as described in Chapter 20 of this EA.
The social impacts of the Project are considered to be acceptable, particularly when considered in the context of
the significant economic benefits of the Project to the local area and the State.
Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation activities would be limited to the Surface Project Area as subsurface drilling activities would not
result in impacts or disturbance at the surface. Rehabilitation activities would occur in two discrete phases;
namely initial rehabilitation following construction and the closure and final rehabilitation. Both the initial
rehabilitation of surplus construction areas and the closure and final rehabilitation would result in the land being
returned to a condition consistent with the previous existing land use of the site or better.
While minor and temporary impacts may occur during rehabilitation activities, the development and
implementation of appropriate environmental management measures and the implementation of the Landscape
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES9
AECOM
and Rehabilitation Management Sub Plan (LRMSP) prepared in respect of the previous stages of the CGP would
ensure the minimisation of impacts associated with rehabilitation activities. Considering the transient and
temporary nature of the proposed activities and the identified mitigation measures, there is considered to be no
significant net residual impact associated with the rehabilitation phase of the Project.
Waste
The potential for the generation of waste during all phases of the proposed Northern Expansion has been
identified and would be limited to the Surface Project Area as subsurface drilling activities would not result in the
generation of waste at the surface of the Subsurface Project Area. Waste generated requiring offsite disposal is
not expected to be substantial, as much of the waste including excess topsoil, mulched vegetation and produced
water would be reused for various activities associated with operation in accordance with the principles of the
NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy 2007 (Waste Strategy).
The implementation of environmental safeguards would minimise impacts associated with the generation and
management of waste resulting from the Project, therefore residual impacts are considered to be temporary and
manageable.
Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative impacts of the proposal have been considered with respect to impacts associated with the
proposed development, as well as with impacts associated with other projects in the region. It is concluded that
due to the temporary nature of the proposed activities there would be no significant net residual impacts
associated with the proposed development’s interaction with other known projects in the area. The potential
impacts for each of the environmental factors were also considered to be minimal provided the prescribed
mitigation measures and safeguards are implemented.
Environmental Management and Commitments
A set of environmental objectives, management measures and a statement of commitments is provided. The
existing and approved EMS would be updated accordingly and implemented for specific works related to the
Northern Expansion.
Project Justification
The Director-General’s EARs issued for this Project require justification for the Project to be provided, having
regard to biophysical, economic and social considerations together with the principles of Ecologically Sustainable
Development (ESD). The environmental impact assessment of the Project undertaken in this EA, has addressed
the relevant biophysical, economic and social considerations. It concluded that the Project is justified taking into
consideration its compatibility with existing and future land uses as well as in accordance with the principles of
ESD and the objectives of the EP&A Act. Consideration of the Project against a wide range of criteria
demonstrates that the Project is environmentally sustainable and justified, and is not expected to result in
significant environmental impacts provided the current regime of environmental management for the CGP is
maintained and recommended additional safeguards and mitigation measures are implemented.
Residual Risk
The Residual Environmental Risk Analysis for the proposed Project is based on a process adapted from
Australian Standard AS 4360:2004 Risk Management. The process is qualitative and is based on a Residual Risk
Matrix.
Residual Environmental Risk is assessed on the basis of the significance of environmental effects of the Project
and the ability to confidently manage those effects to minimise harm to the environment.
The residual risk analysis undertaken for the Project indicates that the proposal presents an overall low to medium
risk in relation to each of the identified environmental issues, provided that the recommended mitigation,
management and monitoring measures are implemented.
Conclusion
Project Approval is sought for the Northern Expansion of the CGP, which involves the construction and operation
of gas wells and associated infrastructure such as gas gathering lines and access roads and subsurface drilling of
lateral well paths. The Project satisfies the requirements of a Major Development under SEPP 2005 and has
therefore been deemed by the Minister to be a project to which Part 3A of the EP&A Act applies.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES10
AECOM
The primary purpose of the Project is to increase gas production from the CGP to meet projected future demand
which is expected to increase significantly. The Project would also provide for an indigenous gas supply for the
NSW market, reducing the need for transportation of gas from interstate to meet demand and encouraging the
use of a cleaner energy source than that provided by coal.
This EA has assessed the potential impacts of the Project and concludes that the works would not result in
significant adverse impacts to the environment. The existing environmental management measures of the EMS
are considered to be adequate for the Project, and further mitigation measures would be implemented where
required as recommended by this EA.
The Project stands to provide significant public benefit in terms of the provision of a vital source of energy to meet
projected future demand as well as allowing for the future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development of the area. Undertaking the Project in the manner proposed is justified taking into consideration
potential biophysical, economic and socio-cultural impacts and the principles of ESD.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES11
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
ES12
1.0
Introduction
1.1
Background
AECOM
The Camden Gas Project (CGP) is a major coal seam methane (CSM) project involving the extraction of gas from
the Illawarra Coal Measures, within the Southern Coalfields of the Sydney Basin, New South Wales (NSW).
The current CGP operations consist of 130 existing CSM wells, access roads, a high pressure supply pipeline,
underground gas gathering lines and the Rosalind Park Gas Plant (RPGP), forming Stages 1 and 2 of the CGP
(see Figure 1). These stages of the CGP operate under a number of project approvals and development
consents as summarised in Table 1-1.
AECOM Australia Pty Limited (AECOM) has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) on behalf of AGL Gas
Production (Camden) Pty Limited (AGL) to assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Northern
Expansion to the CGP. The Northern Expansion would involve the development of additional gas wells and
associated field infrastructure in an area within the Camden and Campbelltown Local Government Areas (LGAs).
The Project Area for the Northern Expansion has been separated into two distinct components known as the
Subsurface Project Area (within which project works are limited to subsurface drilling activities only) and the
Surface Project Area (where proposed surface infrastructure would be located). The land subject to the Northern
Expansion is located within the northern part of PEL 2 and includes PPL 5 as shown in Figure 2.
Project Approval is being sought for works within the Surface Project Area including the construction and
operation of gas wells at up to 12 well surface locations, gas gathering lines, water lines with central water storage
tanks where feasible, access roads and also subsurface drilling of lateral well paths within the boundaries of the
Subsurface Project Area. AECOM has prepared this EA in accordance with the provisions of Part 3A of the NSW
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), the NSW Environmental Planning and
Assessment Regulation 2000 (EP&A Regulation) and the Director-General’s Environmental Assessment
Requirements (EARs) which were issued in March 2010 by the NSW Department of Planning (DoP). The EARs
are presented in Appendix A.
1.2
The Camden Gas Project
1.2.1
The Proponent
The Proponent for the Project is AGL, a wholly owned subsidiary of AGL Energy Limited.
AGL believes that CSM provides a safe and superior alternative energy supply for the NSW market that is clean,
efficient and environmentally friendly when compared to other fossil fuel energy options. As the operator of the
CGP, AGL is responsible for the delivery of the Project in accordance with all regulatory requirements, AGL’s
approved CGP Environmental Management System (EMS) and industry best practice.
1.2.2
Petroleum Exploration Licence and Petroleum Production Leases
The CGP is located on land subject to PEL 2 issued by the former NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI),
now known as the Department of Industry and Investment (DII) under the NSW Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991
(PO Act). This licence allows AGL, as the licence holder, exclusive rights to undertake petroleum exploration
activities on land to which the licence applies (extending from Newcastle to Wollongong, as shown in Figure 2).
Within the area of PEL 2, AGL holds five PPLs, known as PPL1, PPL2, PPL4, PPL5 and PPL6. These leases
provide the Proponent with exclusive rights to undertake activities related to the production, gathering and sale of
petroleum gas.
1.2.3
Overview of the CGP
The CGP is located approximately 60 kilometres (km) south west of Sydney and operates with the key objective
of extracting and delivering an indigenous gas supply for the NSW market.
Stage 1 of the CGP was approved in 2002, and initially comprised 22 gas wells, the Ray Beddoe Treatment Plant
(RBTP), and an in-field compression and gas gathering system in the Cawdor area. Stage 1 entered into gas
production pursuant to PPL1 and PPL2.
Stage 2 of the CGP was originally approved in 2004 and initially comprised 43 wells, the Rosalind Park Gas Plant
(RPGP) and gas gathering lines within the Menangle and Menangle Park areas. Stage 2 entered into production
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-1
AECOM
pursuant to PPL4 in October 2004. In September 2008, an additional 16 wells were approved within the CGP
Stage 2 area at Spring Farm and Menangle Park. Some of these well surface locations have already been
constructed and are producing gas, with the remainder of the well surface locations scheduled for completion of
construction and commencement of production in 2010.
The Northern Expansion would add up to 12 new well surface locations to the CGP (with up to six well heads
each) and is proposed to enter into production pursuant to PPL5 and an additional PPL by early 2011.
An overview of the development history of the CGP is shown in Figure 1 and detailed in Table 1-1 below.
Table 1-1: Development of the Camden Gas Project
Name / No.
Description
Date of Issue
DA 15-1-2002i
Approval granted:
Jul 2002
Field – RBTP, Apap,
Joe Stanley,
Johndilo, Loganbrae,
Lipscombe, Mahon
- The continued operation of the existing 20 production wells;
- Operation of 5 additional wells not yet completed and/or drilled;
- Operation of the existing and proposed gas gathering system;
- Operation of the existing gas plant (RBTP).
MOD 53-4-2006
Modification granted for construction, drilling and operation of a
directional well (LB11) from LB09.
May 2006
DoP letter of
approval 9 Feb 2007
Re-drilling Management Plan for the AP01 and MH01 wells.
Feb 2007
MOD 24-3-2007
Modification granted for the construction, drilling and operation of two
Surface to In-Seam (SIS) wells (AP02/AP03) at AP01.
Jul 2007
MOD 3
Modification granted for the Kay Park and Loganbrae Gas Gathering
Line twinning modification Project.
Aug 2008
DA 246-8-2002i
Approval granted for the connection of three existing wells (KP01,
KP02, and KP03) to the RBTP, and the continued production and sale
of methane gas from the three wells.
Sep 2002
MOD 25-3-2007
SIS wells (KP05 and KP06) at KP01.
Jul 2007
MOD 2
Modification granted for the Kay Park and Loganbrae Gas Gathering
Line twinning modification Project.
Aug 2008
DA 282-6-2003-i
Approval granted for:
Jun 2004
Fields – RBTP,
Rosalind Park,
Wandinong, EMAI
(EM01-20, 38-40),
Glenlee (GL05, 0710, 14-17)
- Construction and drilling of 20 wells on the EMAI site;
Field – Kay Park
- Operation and production of gas from the existing (drilled) 23 wells
and 20 wells to be constructed (a total of 43 wells);
- Construction and operation of the gas gathering system;
- Construction and operation of the gas treatment plant (RPGP),
associated workshop and office facilities; and
- Production of up to 14.5 petajoules per annum from the gas treatment
plant.
MOD 72-7-2004
Modification granted for the consent to include land omitted from the
development consent, a requirement for an EMP for works in the
Campbelltown City Council road reserve, and to allow works to
commence prior to the granting of a production lease.
Aug 2004
MOD 5-1-2005
Modification granted for amendment to EMAI Access Road (18-112004 Map Ref M240329) and Gathering System (18-11-2004 Map Ref
M240328).
Feb 2005
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-2
AECOM
Name / No.
Description
Date of Issue
MOD 42-3-2005
Modification Application 42-3-2005 and the letter from Sydney Gas
Operations Pty Ltd to the Department dated 14 March 2005, and the
accompanying attachments.
Jun 2005
MOD 52-4-2006
Modification granted for the construction, drilling and operation of one
directional well (GL16) from GL07 and two directional wells (GL14 and
GL15) from GL10.
May 2006
MOD 119-10-2006
directional well (GL16) from GL07 and one directional well (GL15) and
one SIS well (GL14) from GL10.
Oct 2006
MOD 124-10-2006
directional well (GL16) from GL07 and two SIS wells (GL14 and GL15)
from GL10.
Nov 2006
MOD 11-2-2007
Modification granted for the relocation of the RPGP access road.
May 2007
MOD 26-3-2007
SIS well (EM38) at EM20 and upgrading (twinning) of the gas gathering
line between MP14-GL10, GL10-GL05, GL05-GL07 and RP03-RP08.
Jul 2007
MOD 9
Modification granted for construction, drilling and operation of two SIS
wells (EM39) at EM02 and (GL17) at GL05 and the upgrading
(twinning) of the gas gathering line from EM39 to the junction of the gas
gathering line and road to the EM03 well, and connection of the new
wells to the existing gas gathering system
Apr 2008
DA 183-8-2004-i
Approval granted for the following Development:
Dec 2004
Fields – Mount
Taurus and
Menangle Park
(MP13-17, MP30)
- Connection of 15 existing coal seam methane wells to the RPGP from
the Mount Taurus and Menangle Park properties, for the production of
methane gas; and
MOD 27-3-2007
SIS well (MP30) at MP13 and upgrading (twinning) of the gas gathering
line between MP13 and MP14.
Jul 2007
DA 9-1-2005
Approval granted for the following development:
May 2005
Field – Glenlee
- Construction and drilling of well GL11;
(incl. EM21/2, GL02,
04, 06, 11-13)
- Construction of a gas gathering system between four wells at Glenlee
and two wells at EMAI;
- Construction of a dam at the MT1 gas well site.
- Connection of six coal seam methane wells to the previously
approved Camden Gas Project – Gas Treatment Plant, for the
production of methane gas.
MOD 51-4-2006
Modification issued for the construction, drilling and operation of a
directional well from each of GL02 (GL12) and GL11 (GL13).
May 2006
MOD 28-3-2007
Modification granted for the upgrading (twinning) of the gas gathering
line between GL02 and GL05.
Jul 2007
DA 75-4-2005
Approval granted for the following development:
Oct 2005
Field – Sugarloaf
- Construction and drilling of seven wells;
- Construction of a gas gathering system and access roads;
- Connection of the wells to the Camden Gas Project – Gas Treatment
Plant; and
- Production of methane gas.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-3
AECOM
Name / No.
Description
Date of Issue
MOD 29-3-2007
SIS wells (SL08 and SL09) at SL03.
Jul 2007
DA 171-7-2005
Approval granted for:
Mar 2006
Field El Bethel
- Construction and drilling of ten wells (EB01 – EB10);
NB. Not commenced
- Construction of a gas and water gathering system and access roads;
- Connection of the wells to the RPGP; and
- Production of methane gas.
PA 06_0137
Approval granted for the construction and drilling of wells RB03-RB12
and gas gathering lines.
Dec 2006
Approval granted for the construction and drilling of wells EM23-36 and
gas gathering lines.
Dec 2006
PA 06_0138 MOD 1
Modification granted for an additional well (EM37).
Jul 2007
PA 06_0291
Approval granted for the drilling and operation of four well surface
locations in Spring Farm and 12 well surface locations in Menangle
Park, with no more than six wells at each well surface location.
Approval also granted for associated gas gathering lines, access and
for the production and sale of gas.
Sep 2008
Spring Farm and
Menangle Park
Glenlee Modification
Modification for the re-routing of damaged gas gathering line at Glenlee
Sep 2009
Field Razorback
PA 06_0138
Field EMAI (EM2337)
DA 282-6-2003i
1.2.4
Overview of the Northern Expansion
The Northern Expansion involves:
•
The construction and operation of gas wells (including subsurface drilling of well paths that would move
laterally in-seam utilising drilling techniques identified in Table 4-3) at up to 12 well surface locations
containing up to six well heads each;
•
The construction and operation of associated gas gathering and water lines, including interconnection with
existing gas fields of the CGP (CGP network), along with central water storage points where required; and
•
The construction of access roads and ancillary infrastructure, including storage yard(s), where required.
These surface infrastructure elements would be situated within the Surface Project Area and are shown on Figure
3. Development within the Subsurface Project Area (shown on Figure 2) would involve subsurface drilling
activities only. For the purposes of this assessment, the Surface Project Area has been separated into three subareas known as the Upper, Central and Lower Surface Project Areas as shown in Figures 4, 5 and 6 respectively.
The Northern Expansion is located on largely rural land within the suburbs of Currans Hill, Varroville, Raby,
Denham Court, Blairmount and Mt Annan. The suburbs of Catherine Field, Eagle Vale, Claymore, and Leppington
are in close proximity to the Project Area. The Surface Project Area is generally bound by the South Line rail track
and Narellan Road to the south, Camden Valley Way to the west, the M5 generally to the east and Denham Court
Road to the north. The Surface Project Area also includes a southern tie-in (within the Mt Annan Botanical
Gardens) to the existing CGP network (See Figure 3, 4, 5 and 6).
The Subsurface Project Area is bound by land generally south of Liverpool LGA, west of Minto, and north of
Menangle Park as shown on Figure 3. The Subsurface Project Area broadly comprises the suburbs listed above
(within the Surface Project Area) as well as the suburbs of Ingleburn, Macquarie Links, St Andrews, Mount Annan
and Harrington Park.
Some lands within the Northern Expansion are earmarked for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development as part of the NSW Government’s Sydney Metropolitan Strategy (Metropolitan Strategy). The
relationship of the proposed infrastructure and future land uses planned as part of this Strategy was a key
consideration in the design and planning of the Northern Expansion. Similar gas infrastructure currently exists
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-4
AECOM
within urban areas with minimal residual impact. Potential land use conflicts and impacts related to the Northern
Expansion are discussed in further detail in Chapter 8 of this EA.
A more detailed description of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas is provided in Chapter 2 of this EA.
Further detail of land affected by the project in the vicinity of the 12 well surface locations is shown on Figures 7,
8, 9 and 10.
1.3
Context of the Project
On 13 June 2003, the Minister for Planning declared the CGP to be a State Significant development. On 1 August
2005, planning reforms were introduced to the EP&A Act, including (of particular relevance to this Project) the
introduction of Part 3A which provides the assessment framework for major projects, previously classified as State
Significant development, and other projects declared by the Minister for Planning.
The Minister for Planning, on 10 October 2005, advised that a Concept Plan must be submitted for the remainder
of the development of the CGP prior to (or concurrently with) seeking Project Approval for any part of the
development, pursuant to Part 3A of the EP&A Act.
On 17 December 2008, AGL submitted a letter to the DoP requesting the Ministerial Direction requiring a Concept
Plan be removed. The letter is provided in Appendix B. In response to the Proponent’s request and in
consideration of the factors detailed in Appendix B, the Minister for Planning exempted the CGP from the need
for Concept Plan Approval.
1.4
Approvals Process
The EP&A Act and the EP&A Regulation provide a framework for environmental planning in NSW. Prior to any
decision to proceed with a project that may have an impact on the environment, a detailed assessment of the
likely impacts of the project must be undertaken. The Northern Expansion has been declared by the Minister for
Planning as a ‘Major Development’ under the provisions of the EP&A Act and State Environmental Planning
Policy (Major Development) 2005 (SEPP 2005), and is therefore subject to the provisions of Part 3A of the EP&A
Act (see Appendix C for Letter requesting Declaration of the Project as a Major Project).
1.4.1
Major Development
The Northern Expansion involves the recovery of CSM which requires the drilling and operation of petroleum
wells, associated gas gathering lines and ancillary works. The Project falls within the definition of a ‘Major
Development’ under Group 6 of Schedule 1 of SEPP 2005.
Group 6 of Schedule 1 to SEPP 2005 identifies classes of development which are defined as ‘Major Development’
and includes projects related to petroleum (oil, gas and coal seam methane), being:
‘Development for the purpose of drilling and operation of petroleum wells (including associated
pipelines) that:
(a)
Is in the local government areas of Camden, Wollondilly, Campbelltown City,
Wollongong City, Wingecarribee, Gosford City, Wyong, Lake Macquarie City,
Newcastle City, Maitland City, Cessnock City, Singleton, Hawkesbury, Port
Stephens, Upper Hunter or Muswellbrook, but only if the principle resource sought is
coal seam methane.
The Northern Expansion of the CGP involves the recovery of CSM through the drilling and operation of gas wells
and construction of associated gas gathering lines and ancillary works within the Camden and Campbelltown
LGAs. The Project therefore falls under Group 6 of Schedule 1 of SEPP 2005 and is eligible for assessment under
Part 3A of the EP&A Act.
The Proponent is therefore seeking Project Approval pursuant to Part 3A of the EP&A Act for works within the
Surface Project Area including the construction and operation of gas wells at 12 well surface locations,
construction of associated access roads and gas gathering lines which will be tied-in to the existing CGP network.
Project Approval is also sought for subsurface drilling activities within the Subsurface Project Area. This EA has
been prepared in support of a major Project Application for these works.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-5
1.4.2
AECOM
Environmental Assessment Scoping Report
The Environmental Assessment Scoping Report (EASR) formed the Preliminary Environmental Assessment
(PEA) for the proposed works, as required under Part 3A of the EP&A Act, and provided the Minister for Planning
with an outline of the environmental interactions of the Northern Expansion Project with the surrounding area. This
allowed the key environmental issues of significance and the level of environmental assessment required for the
EA to be established.
The EASR identified the following environmental issues as having a medium to high priority:
•
Land Use – potential for incompatibility of land use with new land uses proposed within the Project Area.
Potential land use impacts and mitigation measures are discussed further in Chapter 8 of this EA.
•
Water – potential impacts related to dewatering and disruption of groundwater aquifers due to drilling and
hydrofracturing activities, and potential impacts to surface water related largely to construction activities.
These impacts and associated mitigation measures are discussed further in Chapter 9 and Chapter 12 of
this EA.
•
Hazard and Risk – potential exposure of surrounding land uses, as well as employees, to risks and hazards
during construction and operations. These impacts and related mitigation measures are discussed further in
Chapter 10 of this EA.
•
Ecology – potential impacts upon threatened species as a result of construction activities. Further impacts,
as well as mitigation measures, are discussed further in Chapter 11 of this EA.
•
Noise and Vibration – potential impacts including temporary noise nuisance to local residents during
construction of well surface locations and gas gathering lines. These impacts and recommended mitigation
measures, considering both existing and proposed future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development, are discussed further in Chapter 13 of this EA.
•
Air Quality – potential impacts related to air quality in the area within and immediately surrounding the
Surface Project Area. These potential impacts and proposed mitigation measures are discussed further in
•
Aboriginal Cultural and European Heritage – potential impacts on Indigenous and Non-Indigenous heritage
(Upper Canal Water Supply System). These impacts, as well as mitigation measures, are discussed further
in Chapter 15 and Chapter 16 of this EA.
•
Visual – potential visual impacts of the Northern Expansion. These impacts and recommended mitigation
measures are discussed in Chapter 17.
•
Geology and Soils – potential geotechnical impacts as a result of drilling and fracing operations are
explored. These impacts, as well as mitigation measures, are detailed further in Chapter 18 of this EA.
Additional environmental issues were identified in the EASR, however, the potential impacts associated with these
were expected to be minimal or low priority. Each of these issues were subject to assessment as part of the EA
and appropriate mitigation measures and environmental safeguards are identified in the Statement of
Commitments (Chapter 24) which aim to ensure potential impacts are minimised and managed.
1.4.3
Environmental Assessment Requirements
Section 75F of the EP&A Act requires an EA to be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the DirectorGeneral of the DoP. A request for these requirements was made in February 2009.
The Director-General’s EARs were issued in March 2010, a copy of which is enclosed as Appendix A to this EA.
1.4.4
Planning Focus Meeting
Having regard to the history of the CGP, the DoP in this instance advised that a formal Planning Focus Meeting
(PFM) was not required. However, DoP, on behalf of the Director-General, sought the views of relevant statutory
authorities on issues to be included in the EARs, by referring a copy of the Preliminary Project Application and
EASR. This process provided the opportunity for key statutory authorities to establish the requirements for the
form and content of the EA. These requirements are outlined and addressed in Chapter 6 of this EA.
1.4.5
Stakeholder Consultation
During the preparation of this EA, key stakeholders were identified. These stakeholders included local community
groups as well as key government agencies. Throughout the preparation of the EA, these stakeholders have been
kept informed of the progress of the Project and issues raised by these stakeholders have been addressed as
part of the EA. Further details on stakeholder consultation are provided in Chapter 6.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-6
1.4.6
AECOM
EA Exhibition
The EP&A Act requires that the EA be placed on exhibition for public review for a minimum period of 30 days.
1.5
Purpose of this Report
This EA has been prepared by AECOM on behalf of the Proponent as part of a Project Application for proposed
gas wells and associated infrastructure within the Surface Project Area, and subsurface drilling within the
Subsurface Project Area. These works form part of the broader CGP.
In accordance with Part 3A of the EP&A Act, the Director-General’s EARs for the Project were issued in March
2010. This EA has been prepared pursuant to those requirements and addresses the matters listed by the
Director-General.
The purpose of this EA is to:
•
Explain the nature of the works and activities comprising the Northern Expansion (including construction,
production, post development and closure and final rehabilitation activities);
•
Assess the potential environmental impacts of these works and activities on the physical, social and
economic environment (having regard to both existing and future land use); and
•
Identify measures to be implemented during the construction and operation phases of the Northern
Expansion which would mitigate or manage potential impacts.
The outcomes and recommendations contained within this EA would be incorporated into the existing EMS for the
CGP. This would ensure a consistent level of environmental management and monitoring across the CGP.
1.5.1
Assessment Approach
The assessment of the Northern Expansion has utilised the following approach:
•
an “envelope” approach to impact assessment, meaning that a wider area or “envelope” is assessed to allow
the final infrastructure sites to move within the assessed footprint, subject to the recommended
environmental management measures and consultation with the landowner; and
•
a worst case or precautionary approach to the impact assessment such that that the highest impact activities
are assessed even when these activities are not the most likely, so that the full variety of possible activities
at each site are within the assessed parameters and the assessment is conservative.
Given the size of the Project and the lead time involved in identifying suitable locations for new wells and
supporting infrastructure, this assessment approach has been adopted to identify and assess possible/indicative
locations for the proposed infrastructure. The worst case assessment is also intended to establish maximum
specifications for the various phases for defined activities proposed within the ‘envelope’ to allow flexibility to
incorporate landowner requirements, environmental issues and future urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development.
The assessment approach was established for the approved Spring Farm and Menangle Park Project (as part of
Stage 2 of the CGP) to enable flexibility to accommodate landowner preferences and future land uses. This EA
has utilised the same “environmental envelope” approach in determining well surface locations and associated
gas gathering lines and infrastructure..
The “environmental envelope” approach to impact assessment requires a defined assessment area within which
the highest impact activities are assessed even when these activities are not most likely to occur. For the purpose
of this EA, a 200m radius for a well surface location and 25 metres either side of gas gathering lines and access
roads has been employed. A 200m radius allows for the avoidance of potential environmental and social
constraints within the identified ‘envelope’. The transient nature of the projects means that once the life of the
wells has expired, infrastructure would be removed and the land returned to its pre-existing condition, or better,
and therefore does not result in long-term sterilisation of land.
Utilising the abovementioned approach in this EA means that, subject to environmental constraints and landowner
consultation, proposed infrastructure could be located at any point within the assessed ‘envelope’ with confidence
that environmental impacts would remain within acceptable limits.
The existing environment of the Surface Project Area is variable in topography and vegetation as can be seen in
Figures 4, 5 and 6 and described in Chapter 2. By adopting the locational principles described in Section 4.2.1
and implementing an ‘environmental envelope’ approach to the assessment of the Project, agencies and the
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-7
AECOM
community can have confidence that the works would occur with minimal impact and in compliance with relevant
conditions and criteria.
The EA adopts the following approach to the assessment of the Northern Expansion:
•
Identifying the most appropriate location for well construction compounds within each “environmental
envelope”;
•
Utilising existing information, including Geographical Information System (GIS) data to identify environmental
constraints;
•
Developing guiding principles for the location of wells and associated infrastructure;
•
Undertaking an environmental assessment based on a description of the activities proposed and, where
relevant, assessment of surface disturbance based on a defined envelope;
•
Developing an initial Site Layout Plan (see Section 4.2.2) in consultation with landowners; and
•
Identifying appropriate management measures to be implemented for each activity based on locational
scenarios developed from the field surveys and locational principles.
The proposed Northern Expansion has been designed and planned with a degree of flexibility in order to
accommodate future development in the affected and surrounding areas, including both residential and other
forms of development. Well surface locations, gas gathering lines and access roads have been chosen in
consultation with landowners. Detailed environmental assessment of the envelopes has been undertaken to
determine the potential impact of locating defined infrastructure at any location within the envelope boundary.
Well design and construction methods have also allowed for a single change in levels as may be required in
relation to future development of roads and re-levelling associated with urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development in the Northern Expansion Project Area. As a result, suitable locations for the well surface
locations, gas gathering lines and supporting infrastructure have been identified through the EA process based
initially on geology, resource availability, engineering constraints, environmental constraints and land issues.
Some of the key issues include threatened habitat, main roads, residential areas (current and known future) and
heritage values. The preferred locations of the well surface locations and gas gathering network resulting from this
exercise is discussed in Chapter 4.
The assessment of the proposed works has been undertaken in recognition that potential impacts would be
predominately limited to the construction and operation of surface infrastructure and associated works within the
Surface Project Area. Potential impacts of subsurface works within the Subsurface Project Area would be
negligible due to the nature of the activities and the distance from the surface. There is expected to be no
measurable impact at the surface as a result of the proposed subsurface drilling activities. This is demonstrated
through observations of previous stages of the CGP which have involved similar works. No evidence of
subsidence impacts arising from subsurface drilling in the area has been noted and the potential for subsidence
as a result of the proposed Project activities is considered to be minimal (refer to Section 18.2)..
1.6
Structure of this Report
To inform the community, relevant government agencies and local councils of the level of environmental
assessment required, the EA has been structured to provide information on broad areas as outlined in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2: Outline of Report Structure
Section
Issues Addressed
Chapter 1
Introduction
Provides a background to the Project, including
information about the location, licenses, existing and
proposed well surface locations and infrastructure.
Information is also provided about the Proponent as
well as the purpose and structure of the EA.
Chapter 2
A detailed description of the subject site and the area
surrounding the Project is given.
Chapter 3
Project Need and Alternatives
Identifies the need for the Project and discusses
alternatives considered as well as the consequences of
not proceeding.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-8
AECOM
Section
Issues Addressed
Chapter 4
Provides an overview of and description of the
proposed activities and locations of the works
comprising the Project.
Project Description
Chapter 5
Statutory Planning
Describes the legislative context of the Project,
including the approvals required.
Chapter 6
Consultation
Discussion of formal consultation with agencies, as well
as the community, stakeholders, and relevant
authorities.
Chapter 7
Provides a summary of the prioritisation process
undertaken to identify the key environmental issues for
assessment.
Issues Prioritisation
Chapters 8 - 22
Environmental Impact Assessment
Discusses the existing environment, assessment
methods, potential impacts and measures to mitigate or
manage identified environmental issues. These
chapters:
•
Land Use
•
Surface Water
•
•
Include field and desktop studies;
Hazard and Risk
•
•
Discuss environmental implications;
Ecology
•
•
Groundwater
Consider cumulative impacts on the existing
environment;
•
Noise and Vibration
•
Outline possible residual effects; and
•
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas
•
•
Cultural Heritage
Identify environmental safeguards and mitigation
measures
•
European Heritage
•
Visual Amenity
•
Geology and Soils
•
Traffic and Transport
•
Social and Economic
•
Rehabilitation
•
Waste
Chapter 23
Cumulative Impacts
Chapter 24
Chapter 25
Residual Risk Analysis
Provides an assessment of the cumulative impacts
associated with the Project, considering other major
developments in the vicinity.
Provides a summary of environmental safeguards,
requirements and management responsibilities in
relation to the construction, operation and closure of
the works associated with the Project.
Provides an analysis of the residual environmental risk
based on the proposed Project and the ability to
implement safeguards to minimise harm to the
environment.
Chapter 26
Provides the justification for the Project based on
biophysical, economic and socio-cultural environmental
components as well as ecological sustainability
principles.
Chapter 27
Conclusion
Summarises the findings of the environmental
assessment.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-9
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
1-10
2.0
AECOM
This Chapter provides a description of the site and its regional and local context including:
•
The location of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas;
•
A description of the physical characteristics of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas;
•
An outline of existing land use within and surrounding the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas; and
•
A legal description of the land impacted by the Northern Expansion and its ownership.
Given the scale of the Surface Project Area, to provide a more accurate account of the characteristics of the area
and the location of the Project components within it, the Surface Project Area has been broken into three
segments – the Upper Surface Project Area, Central Surface Project Area and Lower Surface Project Area as
shown in Figures 4, 5 and 6.
2.1
Location
The proposed Northern Expansion is situated some 60km south-west of Sydney in the Camden and
Campbelltown LGAs. The Project Area is shown on Figure 2.
The Project Area for the Northern Expansion has been separated into two distinct components known as the
Subsurface Project Area (within which project works are limited to subsurface drilling activities only) and the
Surface Project Area (where proposed surface infrastructure would be located).
The Subsurface Project Area is aligned with the boundary of PPL 5 and part of PEL 2 as shown on Figure 2. The
Subsurface Project Area is situated within the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs, on generally rural and
residential land in the suburbs of Macquarie Links, Ingleburn, Raby, St Andrews, Mount Annan, Harrington Park
and Catherine Fields.
The Surface Project Area is defined as shown on Figure 1 and in more detail on Figure 3. The Surface Project
Area is situated on generally rural land within the suburbs of Currans Hill, Varroville, Raby, Blairmount, Mount
Annan and Denham Court. The Surface Project Area encompasses some 3,900 ha of land situated east of
Camden Valley Way and extending from the Main Southern Railway Line (South Line) to Mount Annan Botanic
Gardens and then to Denham Court Road in the north (See Figure 3, 4, 5 and 6). The Subsurface and Surface
Project Areas incorporate certain land identified in the Metropolitan Strategy. The Metropolitan Strategy seeks to
provide development areas to accommodate the population growth of Sydney and increase employment and
business and infrastructure development opportunities in rapidly growing subregions and strategic centres. The
Metropolitan Strategy also aims to facilitate the development efficient transport corridors for these subregions.
Sydney’s south west has been included in the Metropolitan Strategy as a major subregion and is one of two
officially released growth centres, the South West Growth Centre (SWGC). The SWGC identifies precincts of
future development, or ‘Development Areas’, five of which lie within the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas.
Three Development Areas lie within the Subsurface Project Area, being Leppington, Catherine Fields and
Catherine Fields North, and two lie within the Surface Project Area, being the East Leppington and Turner Road
Development Areas.
Camden Council has also earmarked two further Development Areas, being Camden Lakeside and the El Caballo
Blanco and Gledswood (ECBG) Development Area, both located within the Surface Project Area. These
Development Areas are not official precincts of the SWGC but rather an initiative of the Camden Council in
response to the Metropolitan Strategy.
Whilst there are a total of four Development Areas (identified by NSW government and Camden Council) located
within the nominated boundary of the Surface Project Area, the impacts of the proposed infrastructure on these
areas would be minimal, with only four well surface locations, CU02, CU06, CU20 and CU22 located within these
precincts. The relationship of the Northern Expansion with future planned land use and the potential impacts in
this regard are discussed in further detail in Section 2.3.1 and Chapter 8 of this EA.
The existing gas fields within the CGP (CGP network) are located to the south of the proposed Northern
Expansion (see Figure 1).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
2-1
2.2
AECOM
Legal Description and Ownership
The table below summarises the land directly impacted by the Northern Expansion surface infrastructure works,
including ownership details, legal description and the details of the infrastructure proposed.
Table 2-1: Summary of Affected Land – Northern Expansion
Owner
Royal Botanic
Gardens & Domain
Trust
Lot & DP
Well Surface Location & Supporting Infrastructure details
PT LOT 1001
DP734435
Access, gathering lines and tie-in connection to CGP
LOT 3 DP7189669
PT LOT 1002
PT LOT 1001
DP734435 LOT 3
DP7189669 PT
LOT 1002
Marist Brothers
91/1137298 –
93/1137298
CU14, CU10 & CU06, access, gathering lines, and connection
into the main spine within the Upper Canal gas gathering spine
lines.
Dart West E P Pty Ltd
90/1137298
Ingleburn Mushroom
Farms Pty Ltd
3251/835245
CU29, access and gathering lines for interconnection to CU26
and the Upper Canal gas gathering spine lines.
Faldison Pty Limited
20/1126152
CU26, access and gathering lines for interconnection to CU29
and the Upper Canal gas gathering spine lines.
SH Camden Valley
Pty Ltd
100-103/1153216
Samuel Vincent
Galluzzo
1/SP36786
CU02, access and gathering lines.
Lots 1/4 SP 36786
Frank Galluzzo and
Maria Galluzzo as
Joint Tenants
Vincenzo Pisciuneri
and Elizabeth
Pisciuneri as Joint
Tenants
The Owners - Strata
Plan No. 36786
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
CU20, access, gathering lines, and connection into the main
spine within the Upper Canal corridor.
2/SP36786
3/SP36786
4/SP36786
CP/SP36786
2-2
AECOM
Owner
Lot & DP
Well Surface Location & Supporting Infrastructure details
Rok Friscic
Teresa Friscic
Jozo Bernatovic
Eva Bernatovic as
tenants in common in
equal shares
3/260703
CU22, access, gathering lines, and connection into the main
spine within the Upper Canal corridor.
Serbian Orthodox
Diocese Aged Care &
Education Property
Fund
Auto-Consol 711465
VV07, access and gathering lines.
D&AI Pty Ltd
2/650698
Access road
Domeinico Capitani
and Josephine Grace
Carmel Capitani as
Joint Tenants
2/208217
RA03, access and gathering lines.
Sydney Water Corp
Lot 1 /1086624
Access and connection of gathering lines from VV07 through to
the main spine within the Upper Canal corridor.
Sydney Catchment
Authority
Lot 2 /1086624
VV11, access, main spine gathering line within the Upper Canal
corridor..
1/616147
Access and main spine gathering line within the Upper Canal
corridor.
2/616147
corridor.
2/619850
corridor.
1/623825
corridor.
1/623825
corridor.
Owned by Wolin
Investments Pty Ltd &
Landco (NSW) Pty
Ltd as Tenants in
Common
12/1041381
corridor.
Khengs Pty Ltd
23/585290
RA09, access and gathering lines
RTA
Crn Blaxland Rd &
Camden Valley
Way,
Campbelltown.
Access, gathering line and possible under-bore of Blaxland Rd.
Narellan Rd,
Campbelltown
Access, gathering line and under-bore of the Narellan Road /
South Western Freeway.
Denham Court Rd,
Denham Court.
Access, gathering line from the Upper Canal corridor, along
Denham Court Road through to RA09.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
2-3
2.3
Context
2.3.1
Land Use
AECOM
As previously mentioned, the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are located within the Camden and
Campbelltown LGAs. Six well surface locations and associated infrastructure (gathering lines and access roads)
are situated within the Camden LGA, and the remaining six well surface locations and associated infrastructure
are located within the Campbelltown LGA. No surface infrastructure would be located within the Subsurface
Project Area.
Within the Camden LGA, land directly affected by the Northern Expansion spans several different zones including
rural, residential, environmental protection in recognition of its scenic value, and other special use zones. Land
directly impacted within the Campbelltown LGA is similarly zoned for environmental protection. Chapter 5 of the
EA discusses land use zoning in further detail, including an examination of the permissibility of the Project.
Land within the Subsurface Project Area is largely residential (varying from rural-residential to residential housing)
with some agricultural and rural properties scattered throughout western portion. The Smeaton Grange Industrial
Park is also located within the Subsurface Project Area in addition to several golf courses and sporting
complexes.
Land within the Surface Project Area is largely rural and used for agricultural purposes such as grazing, with
some rural-residential properties scattered throughout the area. Three golf courses - Camden Lakeside Country
Club, Camden Valley Golf Resort and Macarthur Grange Golf Club, also lie within the Surface Project Area
(Figure 5) along with a sports complex forming part of the Marist Brothers College (Figure 6). The Mount Annan
Botanic Gardens, a local tourist attraction, is also located in the far south of the Surface Project Area. In addition,
several commercial, open space, special uses and environmental protection areas are located throughout the
Surface Project Area.
Large areas of land in the west of the Surface Project Area are earmarked for future urban (residential,
commercial and industrial) development as part of the Metropolitan Strategy and Camden Council’s Residential
Strategy (see Chapter 8). These areas are shown on Figure 11 and are known as the East Leppington, Camden
Lakeside, El Caballo Blanco-Gledswood (ECBG) and Turner Road Development Areas. Similarly, Leppington,
Catherine Fields and Catherine Fields North are within the western portion of the Subsurface Project Area (Figure
11). As a result of the future development of these areas, the Northern Expansion Project Area is likely to
experience considerable change in surrounding land use and associated characteristics such as visual amenity
and ambient noise over the life of the Northern Expansion.
The potential impacts of the Northern Expansion upon future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development, particularly within the Turner Road and ECBG Development Areas, are discussed in detail in
Chapter 8 of this EA. The proposed gas well infrastructure is not expected to result in the sterilisation of
significant areas of land. Previous stages of the CGP have demonstrated that infrastructure such as that proposed
by the Northern Expansion can co-exist with other land uses within urban areas with minimal residual impact.
Land use surrounding the Surface Project Area (and within the Subsurface Project Area) comprises established
residential and rural-residential areas such as Catherine Field to the west, Raby, Eagle Vale and Claymore to the
east, Currans Hill and Mount Annan to the south and Leppington to the north. Other land uses surrounding the
Subsurface Project Area include the Oran Park Development Area, one of the largest precincts within the SWGC,
and the Holsworthy Defence Base.
2.3.2
Infrastructure
The Surface Project Area is dissected by the Sydney Upper Canal Water Supply (Upper Canal) which runs
generally north-south and forms part of the Upper Nepean Water Supply System. The Upper Canal is owned by
the Sydney Catchment Authority (SCA) and is a heritage item listed on the State Heritage Register (SHR).
There are two high pressure gas pipelines dissecting the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas, the Eastern Gas
Pipeline and the Distribution Network. These are essential for the sale and delivery of natural gas in the region.
The Northern Expansion would connect back into the existing CGP network for delivery into the Distribution
Network. Several water mains and transmission lines also run through the Project Areas.
The major road network of the surrounding area is described further in Chapter 19 and includes the M5, Camden
Valley Way, Northern Road, Bringelly Road, Campbelltown Road and Narellan Road.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
2-4
AECOM
Major roads running within or directly adjoining the Surface Project Area include Camden Valley Way, Narellan
Road, Denham Court Road and the M5. St Andrews Road and other minor roads run through the Surface Project
Area servicing rural/residential properties. A major future road planned within the Surface Project Area is the
future Badgally Road from Camden Valley Way to Campbelltown via St Gregory’s. This is aimed to alleviate a
proportion of traffic currently travelling along Narellan Road on the route to Campbelltown. A significant upgrade
of the Camden Valley Way has commenced and works are ongoing.
The South Line railway is provided by CityRail and lies within parts of the Subsurface Project Area to the south
east and east. As part of the Metropolitan Strategy, it is planned to extend services from this rail corridor up into
Leppington as the new estates of the SWGC are developed.
2.3.3
Natural Environment
The Subsurface Project Area consists of a predominately residential and rural landscape with large pockets of
open and cleared land to the west of the Project Areas. To the far southeast of the Subsurface Project Area are
several linked densely vegetated reserves that buffer the Georges River.
The Surface Project Area is also primarily a rural landscape with predominantly open or cleared land with some
scattered stands of Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) as well as pockets of dense vegetation, which are
primarily found in the Upper Project Area (Figure 4). The Mount Annan Botanical Gardens in the lower Surface
Project Area exhibits a variety of Australian native flora and environmental conservation values. The topography is
predominately slightly undulating with gentle rolling hills and ridgelines, with only a few steep slopes evident.
The Surface Project Area is traversed by the Upper Canal with several watercourses and small dams spread
across the area. Most of the drainage systems throughout the wider Subsurface Project Area are ephemeral
creek systems, flowing only after sufficient rainfall. The dams were built for farming and are part of the drainage
and water collection system, harvesting the water for grazing.
The Surface and Subsurface Project Areas are located within the Nepean River and Georges River Sub
Catchment. The main catchment of the Surface Project Area is the South Creek tributary system which drains into
the Nepean River (Hawkesbury/Nepean Catchment), with some waterways draining into the Georges River
Catchment via the Bow Bowing/Bunbury Currans Creek tributary system.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
2-5
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
2-6
3.0
AECOM
Project Need and Alternatives
This chapter provides a discussion of the need for the expansion of the CGP and an overview of the various
alternatives considered. These alternatives include consideration of alternative locations of well sites, alternative
pipeline routes, alternative drilling techniques and the “do nothing option”.
3.1
Need for the Project
Conventional natural gas supplies are sourced from sandstone reservoirs, using traditional development
techniques that have been universally employed by the oil and gas industry for many decades. Contrary to this,
there is a growing utilisation of CSM resources of which the majority are located in the black coal deposits of NSW
and Queensland, situated close to city gas markets.
3.1.1
Natural Gas
Demand and Consumption
Natural gas has the advantage that it burns cleaner than other fossil fuels, such as oil and coal, and produces
fewer greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy released. For an equivalent amount of heat, burning natural
gas produces about 45 per cent less carbon dioxide than burning black coal (AER, 2007).
Over the last 20 years, identified conventional gas resources have increased threefold. According to statistics
provided by Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE), natural gas is Australia’s fastest
growing fuel in the country, having the highest average annual growth rate in consumption from 2001 to 2007, and
the highest growth rate for 2007-2008 of 5%. Natural gas is currently the third most consumed fuel in Australia,
and constituted 22% of energy consumed in Australia in 2007-2008. Comparatively, coal consumption
experienced a 0.9% growth for the same period, however, was still the greatest consumed fuel accounting for
39.7% of total energy consumed. NSW accounts for the largest consumption of all energy produced in Australia.
In order to meet the growing demand and consumption of energy, production rates of natural gas must continue to
increase. Natural gas production experienced a consistent growth in total production since 2001..A decline in
growth rate in 2007-2008 can be attributed to the decline in liquid natural gas (LNG) production over the period.
The five year average for annual growth of natural gas production and consumption is currently around 4.9% and
is higher than any other fuel. Trends in natural gas production (measured in PJ) in Australia are outlined in Table
3-1. It is expected that overall natural gas production and consumption would maintain a positive growth rate into
the future.
Table 3-1: Natural gas production in Australia (PJ)
200102
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
Conventional
21
26
25
28
26
22
20
16
CSM
16
26
33
37
57
81
122
143
Conventional
259
253
301
301
288
298
340
294
CSM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Conventional
242
220
164
159
153
145
132
124
CSM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Queensland
Victoria
South Australia
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
3-1
2001-02
AECOM
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
200809
Western Australia
Conventional
770
837
853
1020
1074
1129
1009
1095
CSM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Northern Territory
Conventional
19
18
17
19
20
22
33
33
CSM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
New South Wales
Conventional
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
CSM
8
8
8
8
10
10
5
5
Total
Combined
Production
1335
1389
1402
1572
1629
1708
1661
1710
%
Conventional
of Total
Australia
Production
98.2
97.5
97.1
97.1
95.9
94.7
92.4
91.3
% CSM of
Total Australia
Production
1.8
2.5
2.9
2.9
4.1
5.3
7.6
8.7
Total Australia
Source: Energy in Australia 2009, ABARE (2009)
Most of NSW gas supply is provided by the Cooper Basin in South Australia via the Moomba to Sydney pipeline
and the Distribution Network which runs up the New South Wales east coast and through the CGP from the
landfall of the Bass Strait fields at Longford (Victoria). Currently, natural gas is supplied to approximately 3.75
million homes and over 75,000 commercial and industrial enterprises in Australia (ABARE).
The Commonwealth Government are proposing the introduction of a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS)
which is expected to increase the cost of coal relative to gas, and subsequently lead to a greater demand for
natural gas supplies. The increasing availability of natural gas combined with such National and State policy
initiatives designed to encourage the use of lower greenhouse gas intensive fuels, are projected to drive the
economy of the gas market and the subsequent increase in consumption.
A 2.6% per year increase until 2030 is expected for natural gas consumption, whereas black coal is only projected
to have a 0.9% per year increase for the same period (ABARE).
3.1.2
Coal Seam Methane
Demand and Consumption
Production of CSM has increased significantly in recent years with its share of total Australian gas production
increasing from 2.5% in 2002-03 to 8.7% in 2008-09. CSM is only produced in Queensland and New South Wales
(Table 3-1), accounting for around 90% and 100% of total gas production, respectively. Production of CSM is
expected to continue to grow with two projects planned in Queensland and another four in New South Wales
(ABARE, 2010).
In 2007-08, the majority of CSM in Australia was produced from the Bowen-Surat Basin in Queensland
(approximately 95%) with the remainder being produced from the Sydney Basin in NSW (ABARE, 2009). CSM
currently only contributes to 9% of total natural gas supplies in Australia. However, it is forecast that CSM gas
production will reach over 300 PJ per year nationally, and it is expected that by 2020 CSM will account for about
40% of all of eastern Australia’s gas demand.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
3-2
AECOM
ABARE projects the total primary demand in Australia for natural gas will reach 1982 PJ by 2029-30, of which
CSM is expected to be a large contributor (40-50%).
The large demand for CSM is generated due to the benefits of CSM over conventional natural gas, and the
estimated volume of reserves compared to natural gas.
Advantages over conventional Natural Gas
The major coal producing basins of NSW are attractive targets for CSM as they have substantial thicknesses of
net clean coal at depths that are suitable (250 m to 1000 m) for the extraction of methane. These coals have
acceptable permeabilities, good lateral continuity, appropriate maturity, and are gas-saturated. It is estimated that
the amount of methane contained within the coal seams of eastern Australia is several times greater than the
current reserves for conventional natural gas, with an approximate energy content of 19,000 PJ (DPI, 2005).
CSM projects have commercial and environmental advantages over conventional natural gas. CSM is found
closer to the surface and under lower pressure, making it easier to access and reduce environmental/geological
disturbance. CSM usually has higher concentration of methane, lower levels of impurities and is closer to sales
markets resulting in less environmental and financial costs of several hundreds of kilometres of gathering lines.
With specific planning and best suited technology, the Proponent would be able to further develop CSM gas fields
with minimal environmental footprints.
3.1.3
CSM and the CGP
The Proponent has identified a significant gas resource in the Sydney Basin (the CGP) which, contrary to a
conventional gas resource, is held within coal seams instead of porous sedimentary rocks. AGL has previously
demonstrated that this resource can be successfully developed and has applied technology and techniques
adopted from the overseas market to the CGP in order to meet increasing energy needs. CSM currently provides
almost 90% of Queensland’s gas requirements and according to ABARE, a similar trend is expected for NSW in
the future.
The viability of CSM production in the Camden area has been reinforced by a number of factors:
•
The user market for gas producers is immediately adjacent to the gas source, thus reducing the
consumption of resources in the construction of pipelines to transport the gas.
•
Appropriate strategic planning, design and operation of the Project would ensure that its life-cycle would be
appropriately integrated with the other existing and future land uses in the area.
•
Natural gas is a cleaner and more economically viable fuel than coal and other fossil fuels. The importance
of securing an indigenous, cost-effective energy supply, with lower greenhouse emissions is considered vital
to the social and economic growth of the local area and the State. A competitively priced gas supply from the
CGP would reduce reliance on more greenhouse gas intensive fuels such as black coal.
The development of new gas supplies to the ever increasing Sydney and NSW market is important to secure
supply. The Northern Expansion would provide the next step both in ensuring that supply to the Sydney market is
maintained in the future and in helping to protect the environment.
The expansion of the CGP would also assist in the achievement of several NSW and regional energy objectives
and initiatives which are formulated to provide safe, efficient and secure energy supplies into the future.
The Eastern Pipeline and the Distribution Network run through the CGP, consequently, the Proponent is well
placed to assist in bringing additional gas to the market from the Northern Expansion.
3.2
Alternatives Considered
Alternatives to the Project include consideration of alternative energy types, alternative locations with access to
CSM resources, alternative siting for wells and gas gathering system connections and the “do nothing” approach.
Each of these is discussed below.
3.2.1
Alternative Energy Sources for NSW
There are two main proven conventional gas sources available as gas supplies, the Gippsland Basin in Victoria
and the Cooper Basin in South Australia. These sources currently supply the majority of gas to NSW.
Gas from the Gippsland Basin (offshore gas fields off the coast of Victoria from Lakes Entrance to Sale) is
supplied into the NSW market via the Distribution Network at a number of delivery points (e.g. Horsley Park,
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
3-3
AECOM
Wollongong, Nowra etc). Gas from the Cooper Basin in South Australia is supplied into the NSW market via the
Moomba-Sydney Pipeline at a number of delivery points (e.g. Wilton, Orange, Wagga Wagga etc).
In regard to alternative energy sources, the Northern Expansion project has been specifically designed to develop
and exploit an existing indigenous gas source. CSM is considered to be a superior option for bringing a cleaner
and more energy efficient fuel source to the market.
3.2.2
Alternative CSM Resource
It is considered that there is no alternative to the location of CSM resources as it is produced and available only in
a few locations. This allows the resource to be recovered and used rather than sterilised over time. There are two
main coal producing basins within NSW which could be targeted for methane production.
These are the Sydney Gunnedah-Bowen Basin, and the Clarence-Moreton Basin. However, the production of
CSM within these basins is dependent upon a number of factors including coal depth, and thickness, appropriate
land uses, permeability of the coal seams, and appropriate maturity and gas saturation. While exploration has
been carried out in a number of areas throughout these basins, the Proponent’s CGP is one of the few CSM
ventures in NSW that have been successfully progressed to the development phase.
The CGP is located within the Sydney market, close to the State’s energy intensive users. This reduces the
transportation costs compared with more remote projects. In addition, the existence of readily available
infrastructure including a gas plant and trunk gas mains ensures the efficient and sustainable use of resources
through the effective use of existing infrastructure. Other infrastructure essential to the Project such as roads,
powerlines, and nearby service businesses, already exist in the area, in contrast with consideration of similar
projects in more remote regions.
The ongoing benefits of the CGP, including the Northern Expansion, with its close proximity to the Sydney market
would contribute to the establishment of an indigenous supply of a cleaner energy source. Given the current
success of the CGP within the southwest area of Sydney, continued operation and expansion of the CGP is
considered to bring social, economic and environmental benefits to NSW.
3.2.3
Alternative Siting of Wells and Infrastructure
Constraints and potential land use compatibility issues have been identified in certain locations within and
surrounding the Surface Project Area. A site design process has been utilised in conjunction with other
assessment techniques in order to consider siting of well surface locations and design and placement of
associated infrastructure.
Options for the siting of wells, the location of the gas gathering system, and supporting infrastructure in the
Northern Expansion have taken into consideration existing land uses and development, as well as future urban
use of these areas. Technical, environmental and site-specific constraints considered in the siting of project
components included:
•
technical criteria including geology;
•
environmentally sensitive areas;
•
proximity to existing residences and future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development;
•
bushland corridors;
•
sediment and erosion hazards;
•
visual and acoustic amenity;
•
flora and fauna constraints;
•
archaeology and heritage constraints;
•
operational requirements including safety and access;
•
drilling technologies and techniques; and
•
the use of service corridors such as the Upper Canal to minimise the Project’s environmental footprint.
Consultation with landholders during the early Project design phase ensured that well surface locations and other
infrastructure were sited to accommodate the primary existing land use. This has resulted in the relocation,
removal or redesign of well surface locations before the Project was assessed and submitted for planning
approval. Approximately 20 well surface locations were proposed in the EASR prepared for the Project, however
following the site selection process certain well surface locations were relocated or removed from the Project. The
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
3-4
AECOM
12 well surface locations assessed in this EA therefore represent those which meet the preliminary site selection
criteria.
The use of Surface to In-seam (SIS) technology allows AGL to access gas reserves up to 2,500 m from the well
surface location. This not only minimises the environmental disturbance, but avoids conflict with existing and
future land uses as the well surface location would not impede activities on that land.
Co-location of wells and consultation with landowners has enabled AGL to utilise an “environmental envelope”
assessment approach. The “environmental envelope” assessment approach used in this EA (see Chapter 4)
allows the well surface locations to move within a 200 m radius of each well surface location and 25 m either side
of gas gathering lines and access roads mean that there is flexibility and an ability to deal with future issues as
they arise. This is a proven approach used successfully elsewhere in the CGP.
The siting of infrastructure also takes into account areas that are inappropriate for production due to land use or
environmental conflicts and constraints. Careful planning enables the location of wells such that they would not
impede strategic State and Council plans for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development.
Other existing constraints such as threatened flora and fauna are also able to be avoided.
3.3
“Do Nothing” Option
If the Northern Expansion does not proceed, the “do nothing” option would result in a lost opportunity to develop a
convenient and competitive natural gas supply within the Sydney Basin, sterilising a major state significant
resource in an already constrained NSW gas market, and there would be no flow of resulting economic and social
benefits to the NSW community. The likely future shortfall in the gas supply to the growing NSW market may in
turn lead to an increase in the use of less efficient alternative fossil fuel sources that would increase greenhouse
gas emissions, negating current and future efforts of the State and national greenhouse gas reduction schemes.
The “do nothing” option would also be a lost opportunity to contribute positively to Government initiatives such as
the development of coal seam methane resources, the National Greenhouse Strategy, petroleum exploration in
NSW, and the deregulation of energy markets in Australia. The “do nothing” option is therefore not considered to
be appropriate in this instance.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
3-5
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
3-6
4.0
AECOM
Project Description
The Proponent is seeking Project Approval for activities to develop CSM resources within the Subsurface and
Surface Project Areas, as part of the broader CGP. This chapter provides details of the activities proposed within
the Project Area, including both the construction and operation phases of the Northern Expansion. The activities
described in this chapter include the extraction of CSM from proposed well site locations, the construction and
operation of an associated gas gathering system which would be linked to the existing CGP network.
4.1
Overview of Proposed Activities
The Proponent is seeking Project Approval for works comprising the Northern Expansion of the CGP. The primary
objective of the Northern Expansion is to continue gas production from the Illawarra Coal Measures to supply the
NSW energy market.
The Project includes activities for the development of new well fields, installation of gas gathering lines and
access roads and a tie-in connection to the existing CGP network. The Project also includes post development
and closure activities.
The Project Application relates to the areas identified in Figure 3 as the Subsurface Project Area and the Surface
Project Area, and seeks approval for the following:
•
Twelve well surface locations containing up to 6 well heads each;
•
Associated gas gathering lines, including interconnection with the existing CGP network, along with central
water storage points where required;
•
Access roads and ancillary infrastructure, including storage yard(s), where required; and
•
Subsurface drilling of lateral in-seam well paths within the bounds of the Subsurface Project Area (shown on
Figure 2).
The Project activities can be generally divided into the following:
•
Construction: The activities required to physically develop wells and subsurface lateral well paths, gas
gathering lines, access roads and supporting infrastructure;
•
•
anticipated that these activities may include the upgrade of gas gathering lines, re-fracture stimulation (if
required) and re-drilling (if required);
•
Closure and Final Rehabilitation: Decommissioning of the Northern Expansion in accordance with statutory
requirements and industry best practice; and
•
New PPL: These would be sought via the relevant process following the issue of Project Approval.
Table 4-1 provides a breakdown of the Northern Expansion tasks by activity.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-1
AECOM
Table 4-1: Breakdown of Task by Activity
Construction
Production
Post Development
Closure and Final
Rehabilitation
•
Construction of drill
pads, and
environmental
controls.
•
•
•
•
Construction and
drilling of wells.
Upgrade/ installation
of access roads, gas
gathering and water
lines along existing
routes.
•
Re-fracing and redrilling of wells (where
required).
Decommissioning
wells, plugging
and abandoning
wells at the
conclusion of
production.
•
Removal of well
head assemblies
and rehabilitation
of sites.
•
Final rehabilitation
of the well surface
locations, gas
gathering lines
and access roads.
•
Construction of
water transfer and
collection pipelines
and gas gathering
systems.
•
Construction of
gathering lines to
tie-in with existing
CGP network.
•
Fracing (where
required).
•
Well completion
activities including
the installation of
well head and
surface equipment
to enable the
production of water
and gas.
•
Connection of the
wells to the gas
gathering lines.
•
Subsurface drilling
of lateral well paths.
•
Initial rehabilitation
of area used during
construction and
drilling activities.
4.2
•
•
Commissioning of
wells, typically
including initial work
over, dewatering and
production testing
activities to bring wells
into production.
Operation of the wells
in accordance with
relevant PPLs.
Maintenance of wells
(work over), access
roads and gas
gathering lines.
•
Internal and
independent
monitoring of
environmental, safety
controls and
performance against
statutory
requirements.
Planning and Design of Northern Expansion
The assessment approach taken in relation to earlier stages of the CGP has been adapted and developed to
create a logical system for the preliminary design, planning and development of the Northern Expansion as
discussed in the following sections.
4.2.1
Locational Principles
Prior to the commencement of the environmental impact assessment, locational principles were used for the
Northern Expansion to inform the selection of proposed locations for infrastructure in order to minimise potential
impacts.
These locational principles have been established over time in partnership with local councils, landowners and
NSW government agencies, in order to maximise flexibility in relation to the placement of the gas infrastructure so
that it may ultimately co-exist with the primary existing and future land use with minimal residual impact. These
principles show how the initial site selection process works, prior to the EA process being carried out. The final
location of well sites and associated infrastructure is then determined by a range of other considerations including
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-2
AECOM
landowner preferences, field considerations and environmental constraints. These locational principles are then
applied throughout the life of the Project where additional infrastructure or activities are required.
The DoP’s Locational Guidelines for Development in the Vicinity of Operational Coal Seam Methane Wells (2004)
(Locational Guidelines) was used as a base for the development of the locational principles. These principles
were then expanded to reflect the CGP specifically, drawing upon the experience gained throughout the
development of the CGP and the recommendations of the range of environmental studies undertaken. The
locational principles applied in respect of the preliminary planning for the Northern Expansion are set out below in
Table 4-2.
Table 4-2: Locational Principles for the Northern Expansion
Infrastructure Type
Locational Principles
New well surface
locations
The location of new well surface locations within the Surface Project Area would be
selected generally in line with the following principles wherever possible:
Supporting Infrastructure,
including gas gathering
lines (and connection to
the existing CGP network)
and access roads
4.2.2
•
Well surface locations would be located in existing disturbed or degraded
areas, to minimise new land disturbance;
•
Well surface locations would be chosen in consideration of the potential
environmental issues, including proximity to nearest receivers, items of
heritage significance, significant flora and fauna and would take account of
local topography, land use and other appropriate issues;
•
The potential environmental issues would be considered and built into the
Project at the preliminary planning phase so that potential issues are
diminished in the inherent Project design.
The location of supporting infrastructure within the Surface Project Area would be
selected generally in line with the following:
•
The routes of the gas gathering lines would be selected to utilise previously or
currently disturbed land areas where possible;
•
The routes of the gas gathering lines would also follow existing sealed and
unsealed tracks, fence lines, creeks and drainage lines where possible and
appropriate;
•
The routes of the gas gathering lines would co-locate with other utility corridors
or watercourse or drainage crossings where possible;
•
Access roads to new well surface locations would be required, and existing
roads or tracks would be used and upgraded (if necessary) in the first instance
where possible. Where new access roads are required, existing disturbed
areas would be utilised wherever possible;
•
Upgrade of the existing gas gathering and water system to increase capacity
would be carried out along established gas gathering routes, if required;
•
Re-fracture stimulation or re-drilling of wells would occur at existing well head
locations within the Surface Project Area, if required. The feasibility of refracture stimulation or re-drilling would be subject to environmental
considerations at the time.
Site Design Process
The site design process was based on the locational principles and guidelines outlined in Table 4-2 as well as
results from specialist environmental studies undertaken as part of the EA.
Prior to the start of construction at a well surface location, a Site Layout Plan (SLP) would typically be prepared in
consultation with the landowner and the DoP.
The SLP is designed to provide more detailed information, by establishing the footprint of each well surface
location, along with the appropriate environmental controls (such as noise mitigation and erosion controls) in
accordance with the CGP EMS. It would include the initial rehabilitation of surplus construction footprint following
completion of the construction phase.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-3
AECOM
The locational principles outlined above, along with those set out in the DoP’s Locational Guidelines, as well as
the mitigation measures outlined in this EA would be applied to the SLP. Consultation with the landowner would
typically occur to coordinate the activities with the primary existing land use throughout the operations on the land,
especially during the construction phase.
Prior to commissioning, a Landscape and Rehabilitation Management Plan (LRMP) for the life of the well surface
location through to decommissioning (anticipated to be approximately 15 years) would usually be prepared and
implemented in consultation with the landowner. The LRMP would ensure that appropriate rehabilitation and
screening measures are implemented. The rehabilitation of the well surface locations and associated
infrastructure would be in accordance with the relevant principles of the Australian Natural Heritage Charter,
where appropriate.
A Landscape and Rehabilitation Management Sub Plan exists for the CGP (LRMSP) which establishes the
requirements, management measures and monitoring for the CGP, including the proposed Northern Expansion.
The site specific LRMPs would typically build on the measures outlined in the LRMSP and would form part of the
overarching EMS for the CGP.
The SLP and LRMP establish a framework for the development of each well surface location, providing site
specific detail drawn from landowner consultation and the environmental constraints of each site. This approach
would ensure that site specific environmental requirements are met, and impacts are maintained within
acceptable levels.
4.2.3
Camden North Gas Plant
AGL had originally proposed a gas plant, known as the Camden North Gas Plant (CNGP) to be incorporated into
the Northern Expansion and an EASR was submitted and EARs issued. However, AGL has decided not to include
the CNGP as part of this project and it has been omitted from the Project Application and therefore this EA. The
Northern Expansion would involve the construction of gas gathering lines to tie-in to the existing CGP network.
Production of gas from the Northern Expansion would flow through the existing CGP network to the RPGP for
processing. RPGP currently has approval for the processing of gas to a capacity of 14.5 PJ/annum. The
accompanying EIS for the RPGP assessed the potential impacts of the plant operating at this capacity in relation
to relevant environmental issues such as air quality and noise and recommended mitigation measures where
appropriate. The RPGP has sufficient operational capacity to accommodate the additional gas generated by the
Northern Expansion under the existing approval.
4.2.4
Preferred Location of Infrastructure
As a result of the planning, constraints analysis and the “environmental envelope” approach described in
Section 1.6 of this EA, the preferred location for the proposed infrastructure is summarised below.
•
Well surface locations - The preferred sites for the 12 well surface locations have been spread across the
Surface Project Area, with more wells being located on the eastern side of the Upper Canal Water Supply.
Figure 3 shows the proposed well surface locations, with further detail provided on Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10.
•
Gas gathering lines - Gas gathering lines are spread throughout the Surface Project Area connecting each
well surface location to a main spine line. This main spine is located along drainage lines in the Upper Canal
access corridor (see Figure 3, and Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10 for further detail).
•
Tie-in to existing CGP network - The Northern Expansion gas gathering system would be tied-in with the
existing gas gathering network for the existing CGP. It is proposed that the main spine line continue along
the Upper Canal to Narellan Rd, cross underneath Narellan Rd using an approved under-bore technique,
and continue south along the eastern boundary of the Mount Annan Botanical Gardens. The proposed route
runs adjacent to an existing Integral Energy easement, linking up with the gathering line at the southern
boundary of the Botanical Gardens, which links the surface locations MP03 and MP05 (see Figure 6).
•
Access roads - Access roads are spread strategically throughout the Surface Project Area in line with the
locational principles to provide access to well surface locations and gathering lines for maintenance
purposes (see Figure 3, and Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10 for further detail).
No surface infrastructure would be located within the Subsurface Project Area.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-4
4.3
Well Surface Locations
4.3.1
Siting and Development
AECOM
The proposed site for each of the 12 well surface locations is shown in Figure 3 (see Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10 for
further detail). The locations have been determined following extensive geological exploration and analysis in
conjunction with considerations previously described in Chapter 4.2 of the EA. The final well surface locations
may be adjusted within the assessment envelope during detailed design, based on consideration of the
environmental and social constraints including land use (existing and future), topography, subsurface geology,
flora and fauna, archaeological constraints, noise and visual impacts.
A number of well surface locations were moved or alternative sites considered in the design phase following
consultation with landholders and identification of certain environmental constraints. For example, well surface
locations RA09, VV11, CU06 CU29 and CU14 were relocated during the EA process due to landowner
preferences.
The 12 well surface locations, each containing up to six well heads would be drilled into the Illawarra Coal
Measures approximately 700 m below the surface. The development of the well surface locations consists of the
following steps which are detailed further in the following sections:
•
Construction: The activities required to physically develop wells, including access roads and supporting
infrastructure;
•
•
anticipated these activities may include re-fracture stimulation and re-drilling (if required); and
•
Closure and Final Rehabilitation: decommissioning of the well surface locations in accordance with statutory
requirements and industry best practice.
4.3.2
Construction
Preparation and Construction of Well Surface Locations
Site preparation and construction works would be carried out generally in accordance with the following
sequence:
•
Install silt fences and other environmental controls as required;
•
Installation of approved road opening to property where necessary;
•
Upgrade or installation of access roads where required;
•
Removal of topsoil over access ways and store for initial rehabilitation;
•
Truck in hard surface (typically shale) for access road base and drill pad where required;
•
Install drain culverts, cattle grids, fencing, gates, bed level crossing and other works as necessary;
•
Installation of water storage tanks or pits where required;
•
Earthworks as required on a site-specific basis;
•
Construct drilling compound (up to 10,000m ) and fence the perimeter as required by the existing EMS, and
other requirements;
•
Strip topsoil and stockpile, then cut and fill as required for a level drill pad area;
•
Dig and line drill pit(s) with polyethylene non-permeable liner (typically up to 25 x 25 m and 2-3 m deep). The
drill pit(s) are provided to retain and recycle drilling debris and associated water for the drilling process;
•
Create a cut-back, flat operating area where wells are constructed on slopes. This construction generally
includes an up-slope diversion drain around the site to manage surface flow. The profile is returned (as near
as possible) to the original profile during rehabilitation; and
•
Rehabilitation of the surplus construction area when construction complete.
2
Access Roads
Access to the well surface locations would be provided along existing public roads and private tracks within the
relevant property boundary. Earthworks may be required to construct or upgrade access roads to new well
surface locations to enable the drilling rig and support equipment to access the sites. Where practicable, existing
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-5
AECOM
road and track access would be utilised to minimise construction activity and environmental disturbance.
Construction of access roads would be in accordance with the existing AGL EMS for the CGP, which includes a
Soil and Water Management Sub Plan.
Proposed access roads are depicted in Figure 3 with further detail provided on Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10. Private
roads and tracks used during operations would be returned to their original state, or to a condition agreed by the
landholder.
As the future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development proceeds within the locality and new
roads are provided, requirements for, and location of access roads may vary. The Proponent would work with this
to adapt to the evolving nature of road development and access provision in the locality.
Well Surface Infrastructure
Each well typically contains the following equipment:
•
Well head;
•
Well head shutdown valve control;
•
Carbon steel gas piping connecting the gas gathering system including:
-
Well head isolation ‘master’ valve;
-
Well head shutdown valve (SDV) configured to close on high pressure and high liquid levels in the
separator and onsite tank;
-
Well head 2-phase separator to remove free water from the gas;
-
Flow relief pressure safety valve (PSV) designed for full well gas flow; and
-
Gas flow meter for measuring well head gas rates.
•
On site tank(s) to collect separated water from the production separator. Some locations may allow water to
be transferred to a centralised water storage collection point via water gathering lines.
•
Water lines include the connection between separator and onsite tank; and
•
Telemetry instrumentation which would transmit well production data and information.
In addition, the following equipment may be installed on well head(s) to address well productivity issues:
•
Generators;
•
Various pumping configurations; and
•
Injection facilities.
Figure 12 illustrates a conceptual layout of the construction well footprint.
The well surface infrastructure consists of the wellhead, variable choke, water/gas separator and flow measuring
instrumentation. This instrumentation has telemetry which transmits the critical well information to a remote
location which would control wells within the Surface Project Area remotely. The wells would also have numerous
alarms and automatic shutdown functions based on a ‘Cause and Effect’ design to ensure the safety and control
of wells.
Once the well has been drilled and completed, the fenced drilling compound (up to 10,000 m² in area) is reduced
to approximately 45 x 45 m area and the surplus area is rehabilitated (as shown in Figure 12). The well surface
infrastructure is typically enclosed in a final area approximately 20 x 20 m (for up to six co-located well heads) –
known as the production compound. The production compound is defined as the restricted area surrounding the
final wellheads following completion of construction and drilling activities.
Production compounds are generally designed to have a small footprint and low visual impact, providing sound
insulation (where required) and security from vandalism. Production compounds would be similar in appearance
to electrical substations that are on located on nature strips throughout many Sydney suburbs. Screening of the
production compound would be provided where appropriate as outlined in Chapter 21. Vegetation would be
sourced from the local area and would include drought tolerant species endemic to the local area. The initial
rehabilitation of the footprint would involve seeding with vegetation consistent with the existing environment of
each location if required.
The typical wellhead configuration for six SIS wellheads (worst case scenario in terms of production compound
area) is illustrated in Figure 13, with indicative elevations shown in Figure 14.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-6
AECOM
Within the production compound, wellheads may be open or enclosed (see Plates 1 and 2). Enclosed wellheads,
such as that illustrated in Plate 2, have the wellhead and instrumentation contained within secure purpose built
facilities surrounded by man-proof fencing and would be used where appropriate on a site by site basis dependent
upon the need for acoustic attenuation. Figure 15 shows plans and equipment for a typical enclosed wellhead.
Open wellheads (where the wellhead and instrumentation is not contained within a solid enclosure, but access
remains restricted by man-proof fencing) are typically used in rural and industrial landscapes. A typical open
wellhead design is shown in Plate 1.
Well design and construction methods would allow for a single change in levels if required by future surrounding
land use and development.
Drilling Activities and Techniques
A variety of technologies are available for the drilling of wells. In establishing the most appropriate drilling
technique for each well surface location, geotechnical issues must firstly be considered, followed by a range of
environmental issues and constraints.
Table 4-3 provides a summary of the current technologies available for the drilling of wells.
Table 4-3: Summary of Drilling Technology Options
Drilling Option
Characteristics/Requirements
•
The well is drilled vertically from the surface and gradually builds angle to
intersect the seam near parallel with the seam dip angle.
•
Once the coal seam is intersected, the upper portion of the well bore is
cased, cemented and a smaller hole is subsequently drilled through the
casing and horizontally into the seam for approximately 2,500 m.
•
This technique allows a significant reduction in the number of surface
locations along with the ability to access previously stranded gas reserves
more than 2,500 m away from the well surface location.
•
The technique requires continuous drilling and therefore operations must be
conducted 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Under-balanced Drilling
•
(the pressure of overlying
strata is greater than the
pressure of the drilling fluid).
These were previously the standard wells in the CGP and currently
represent approximately 80% of drilled wells within the CGP area.
•
Equipment required includes a drilling rig equipped with air compressors and
booster packages that provide the energy for the percussion air hammer to
drive the drill bit and for fluid circulation.
•
Drilling action employed uses a percussion air hammer, button bit and drill
collars to provide the impacts to break up formations.
•
A drill pit or pits are also required to capture the drill cuttings and produced
water and for re-circulation.
Over-balanced Drilling
•
(the pressure of the drilling
fluid is greater than the
pressure of overlying strata).
Allows drilling of wells where land access constraints or environmental
features limit the use of drill pits.
•
Equipment includes a drilling rig and equipment required to focus on drill
fluid circulation and solid control systems with operating capacity of 1,800 L
per minute.
•
The drilling relies on applied weight on bit and rotation to penetrate
formations.
•
Weight is provided by running drill collars (heavy joints of pipe) behind the bit
with rotation and torque provided by the rig’s top drive or a downhole motor.
Surface to In Seam (SIS) or
Horizontal Drilling
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-7
AECOM
Drilling Option
Characteristics/Requirements
Directional Drilling
•
Major advantage of directional drilling is that bottom hole locations can be
located approximately 400 m away from the surface location (depending on
the vertical depth of the seam). Therefore, wells can be drilled into areas that
are constrained for vertical well construction.
•
Multiple wells can be drilled from a single location and gas reserves that are
potentially sterilised by surface developments can be accessed from outside
of the developed areas.
•
Similar surface equipment is required to that used for overbalanced drilling,
however directional equipment and a steerable mud motor are added to the
downhole equipment to allow control of drilling angle and direction.
(drilling at varied angles).
Consideration has been given to the range of impacts anticipated from the proposed drilling technologies, with the
assessment of environmental impacts focussing on the surface area disturbed during the construction and
operational phases of the development, based on a worst case footprint.
Specialist studies have been undertaken on a worst case scenario, assessing the drilling technology which is
considered to carry the greatest potential impacts in respect of the specific environment issue being assessed.
Well Stimulation and Completion
There are a number of technologies available for well stimulation to encourage gas to flow, however those of
relevance to the Project are namely under-reaming and fracture stimulation.
Fracture Stimulation
If required, once drilling has been completed, fracture stimulation (known as ‘frac’ or ‘fracing’) can be used to
increase the surface area of a coal seam in the wellbore. Fracture stimulation involves the injection of a slurry of
sand and water at high pressure which in turn stimulates the reservoir by providing a highly conductive flow path
for gas and water that extends away from the wellbore and into the seam. The frac sand is locked in place by the
pressure of the coal formation and the injected water and formation water is allowed to flow back out. As a result
of the water production, the reservoir pressure is reduced at which time gas then begins to desorb from the coal
and produce to the wellbore. The well then requires a work over to clean the wellbore and to install the wellhead
equipment.
Under-reaming
Under-reaming involves enlarging a wellbore past its original drilled size. Wells are drilled conventionally with
casing installed to just above the coal seams of interest. An under-reaming tool is run in hole on conventional
drillpipe and hinged cutting arms are opened through rotation. Current tools are able to under-ream a 178 mm
cased hole out to a maximum of 2,000 mm. This stimulation technique is best suited to high permeability coals
where the reservoir connectivity to the wellbore is high prior to under-reaming and is aimed at maximising the
well’s contact area with the gas reservoir.
Subsurface Drilling
Subsurface drilling activities relate to all wells whether vertical, directional or SIS. For directional and SIS wells,
the continued penetration of the underlying geology can be defined as subsurface drilling where the drilling
deviates from a central point on the surface and continues along a subsurface path some distance from its origin.
These drilling techniques minimise the surface impact of the Project and allow access to areas laterally remote
from the drilling origin, which would normally not be possible due to surface constraints. This EA has considered a
distance of up to 2,500 m of subsurface drilling from the well surface origin in its assessment, at a depth of some
700 m below ground level.
Drill and Frac Water Management
Drilling and fracture stimulation water is delivered from previous drilling and fracture stimulation campaigns, from
licensed stand-pipes or from other approved sources in the local area. The delivered volume required for fracture
stimulation of a well is in the order of 250 to 500 kilolitres (kL) depending on the frac design and geological
parameters. The constructed drill pit has a capacity of some 750 kL to allow free space for rainfall events. Drill
pits are constructed with an upslope diversion drain around the site to divert rainwater surface runoff around the
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-8
AECOM
pit. This ensures that only direct rainfall enters the pit. All pits would be lined and designed with adequate
capacity to accommodate the water associated with construction and natural rainfall events.
Following fracture stimulation, the waters are removed from the coal seam and either reused in future drilling and
fracture stimulation campaigns or are transported to licensed disposal facilities if the waters are of poor quality.
Disposal at licensed facilities is in accordance with Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water
(DECCW) guidelines.
For over-balanced, directional and SIS wells, water and drilling mud is used in the construction of the well. The
volume of water required for the drilling process varies depending on the type of drilling. The largest predicted
volume of water is required for the SIS option, for drilling and removal of cuttings during drilling. Anticipated
volumes are approximately 200 kL. Drilling mud and water is pumped from the well following construction and
stored in tanks or drill pits prior to reuse or disposal on site where appropriate or at a licensed facility.
Dewatering pumps and associated equipment are used in approximately 15% of wells to remove the injected
fracture stimulation water and the formation water, which reduces reservoir pressure and allows gas desorption of
the coal seam methane wells.
The produced water from the wells during the dewatering and early production phases would be collected at
storage points located at well surface locations that are easily accessible. These storage points would consist of
either the lined drill pits utilised during drilling and fracture stimulation or underground or aboveground storage
tanks. A centralised water collection point would also be considered, where feasible. The waters would then be
transported to future drilling/fracture stimulation operations or removed to licensed treatment facilities.
Each well would be different and subject to varying geological parameters. Evidence to date from existing vertical
wells within the CGP suggests that approximately one third of the volume of formation water would be produced
over the first one to two weeks following fracture stimulation, the second third would be produced over the
subsequent one to two months and the final third would be produced over the subsequent three to six months.
While a drill pit is in operation, the water level in the pit would be checked on a daily basis. The water level is
managed so as not to exceed approximately 80% of the pit holding capacity, providing a 20% freeboard. As the
pit water levels approach the 80% holding capacity, arrangements would be made for water to be removed from
the pit and disposed of offsite. This ensures that in the event of an unpredicted rain event, direct rainfall would not
cause the pit to overflow.
Over 90% of existing wells in the CGP are referred to as free flowing. This means that the reservoir pressure
within the coal seam combined with a velocity string installed in the well, produce the frac and formation water
without the assistance of a downhole pump. Should the Surface Project Area include wells which are not free
flowing, dewatering pumps and associated equipment would be installed in the well and wells pumped to remove
water until steady state gas production is achieved.
Drill Cuttings Management
Drill cuttings are collected and stored in the drill pit. The drill cuttings normally contain sandstone and coal so
there is very little sulphidic mineralisation to cause acid rock drainage. Once the drilling and fracture stimulation
operations are completed and the drill pit is dewatered and desiccated, there are several options to deal with the
drill cuttings.
Burial
Where pressurised air is used for the drilling process, drill cuttings would be buried at a depth of some two metres
and covered with excavated soils and rehabilitated. This is below the root zone of crops or proposed revegetation
species so as not to impact upon the viability of these plantings.
Water Storage and Burial
Where mud drilling is undertaken and bentonite is present, mud fluid and drill cuttings would be stored in tanks at
the wellhead. The mixture would be separated and fluid would be transferred to a licensed treatment/disposal
facility with remaining solids buried within the construction compound as described above.
Materials unsuited to onsite disposal would be disposed of offsite at an appropriate licensed facility in accordance
with DECCW guidelines (currently the Jacks Gully Waste Disposal Facility).
Coal Fines Capture
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-9
AECOM
The third option for the management of drill cuttings is to capture coal fines by diverting these solids from the drill
pits to a storage point next to the pit where excess water can drain into the pit. This option is used in the case of
SIS drilling which produces a larger amount of coal material than other drilling types due to the length of the well
drilled in coal. In this case the coal fines are stored and transported from the site and are recycled (currently at
the Glenlee Coal Washery).
Environmental controls
A range of environmental controls and management measures would be employed at well surface locations
during the construction phase. These are detailed in the AGL EMS and a variety of environmental management
sub-plans which sit within this broader document. The existing EMS would be applied to the Northern Expansion
Surface Project Area, along with additional conditions forming part of any approval issued in respect of the
Subsurface Project Area.
Of particular importance during the construction phase of the Northern Expansion is the management of soils.
Generally, during the construction period disturbed soils would be temporarily stockpiled with appropriate erosion
controls and then used in the initial rehabilitation of the well surface location. The stockpile area would be
determined in consultation with the landowner and in consideration of environmental factors.
Soil and water management controls to be implemented at each well surface location are further detailed in
4.3.3
Production, Operation and Post Development Activities
Production Testing
Commissioning a well into production typically includes initial work over, dewatering and production testing.
Production testing of the CSM resource would be undertaken for all new wells, involving the following program of
works:
•
Production testing of the well to ascertain the quantities of gas that will flow from the well; and
•
Daily checks of gas flow rates are carried out at each well surface location.
•
Gas extracted from wells during production testing would be collected and directed to the existing gas plant
for treatment and processing - gas from wells within the Surface Project Area would be directed through the
gathering system to the existing CGP network for processing. Once treated, the gas would subsequently be
directed into the Distribution Network.
Production and Metering of Gas
During the production phase, gas is transported via low pressure pipeline to the existing CGP network for
processing. Operator involvement at the well surface location is minimised by the installation of various
automated and remotely operated functions.
Telemetry is connected to all wells so the production data can be accessed and reviewed remotely. The wells
have numerous alarms and automatic shutdown functions which are based on a ‘Cause and Effect’ design. Any
well can be shut-in or opened remotely from a control room once the wellhead communication equipment has
been installed.
Operational activities at each well surface location during production typically include:
•
Routine daily/weekly inspections;
•
Formation water disposal; and
•
Well work over maintenance.
Maintenance/ Work over
During the production or operational phase, the wells require an occasional ‘work over’ to maintain the efficiency
of gas production. The work over typically involves a truck or trailer mounted rig to run or remove pipe for clearing
the well bore of fill (typically frac sand) or obstructions. Work over activities generally require a team of up to ten
personnel and would typically vary between one day and one week based on experience to date in other gas
fields of the CGP. Based on normal or typical operations it is estimated that a work over would be required for
each well as follows:
•
Twice in the first year;
•
Once in the third and fifth years; and
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-10
•
AECOM
Once every five years thereafter.
A small number of the existing wells do not fit with the maintenance regime outlined above and this can be the
result of production issues, ongoing mechanical problems or blockages. The maintenance of these wells would be
specified by the AGL Environment Officer based on the type of production issue.
Post Development Activities
Post development operational activities would be undertaken where required only. The activities related to well
surface locations during this phase are limited to re-fracing and re-drilling of wells (if necessary). These activities
would generally be conducted in the same way as outlined in the sections above in accordance with the EMS and
relevant management plan to be produced on a case by case basis.
Re-fracing of wells may be required after a period of operation, and would involve the same process as the initial
fracing of the wells. It is noted that re-fracing of the wells would only be undertaken where a production or
operational issue is identified. There may be instances where existing wells need to be redrilled for a variety of
operational, geological, or production reasons. As a result re-fracing and re-drilling are therefore unlikely to be
undertaken at all wells.
In-field compression
In-field compression occurs in the vicinity of well heads or along gas gathering lines to increase capacity and
production.
During the production phase of existing well surface locations, the initial high gas pressure at the well heads
would decrease over time. As a result, pressure drops for gas flow from the well head across the gas gathering
system and results in a reduction in the overall production rate delivered to the existing CGP network. In order to
maintain gas production, the Proponent may need to boost the pressure in the gathering system by in-field
compression. Generally, it is anticipated that wells in the southern part of the Project Area would be able to flow
through to the CGP network without the need for in-field compression.. The need for in-field compression may not
arise for some two to five years from project commencement (noting that the project may commence at any time
within five years of the grant of Project Approval), when production reaches a rate of some 20-30 TJ/day. As infield compression would not be immediately required for the production of gas from the project and the optimal
location for in-field compression has not yet been determined, approval for this activity is not sought at this stage.
In-field compression infrastructure may be located within the Northern Expansion Project Area, or within other
stages of the CGP, dependent upon locational criteria and environmental constraints. If and when required, the
installation of in-field compression would be subject to a separate assessment and approvals process which may
comprise (subject to consultation and agreement with the DoP):
If located within the Northern Expansion Project Area:
-
Modification of the Northern Expansion Project Approval under Section 75W; or
-
Separate Project Application under Part 3A.
If located elsewhere within the CGP:
4.3.4
-
Modification of relevant Concept Plan Approval, Project Approval or Development Consent;
-
Separate Project Application under Part 3A.
Closure and Rehabilitation
On completion of operations, impacted areas would be cleaned up and rehabilitated to return the land to preexisting use and condition or better in accordance with the EMS. This work would involve:
•
sealing/ plugging and abandonment of wells in accordance with relevant guidelines;
•
removing plant and equipment from wellheads and removal of fenced compounds;
•
filling in excavation; and
•
rehabilitation, contouring, and regressing/revegetation.
These activities would be undertaken in consultation with the landowner. Further detail on rehabilitation practices
is provided in Chapter 21 of this EA.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-11
4.4
Gas Gathering System and Associated Infrastructure
4.4.1
Construction
AECOM
The gas gathering system route, as depicted in Figure 3, would be designed, constructed and operated in
accordance with appropriate Australian Standards and industry best practice. The gas gathering system would be
buried to a minimum depth of 750 mm (as per Australian Standard AS4645.3-2008) and up to 1,200 mm in some
areas, including unsealed and sealed road crossings, and creek and drainage line crossings. Further detailed
engineering and design would be required for crossing other infrastructure, including the Upper Canal and existing
high pressure interstate gas pipelines. Following consultation with the landowner, the gas gathering system route
would seek to utilise existing crossings where possible.
An ancillary water transfer system would be typically co-located in the trenches for the gas gathering system and
installed simultaneously.
The route of the gas gathering system for the Project Area would be selected to utilise previously or currently
disturbed land areas wherever possible. Proposed new gas gathering lines are shown in Figure 3, with further
detail provided in Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10. These lines would connect the individual well surface locations to a
main spine line proposed to be located in an existing easement alongside the Upper Canal. The main spine line
would connect with the existing CGP network to deliver gas for processing at the existing RPGP. The majority of
the main spine line utilises the eastern side of the Upper Canal in order to minimise impacts through the use of
the existing service easement as no major clearing would be required..
AGL would require access along the Upper Canal predominately during the construction period. Once operational,
inspections would be required according to a designated schedule (or where infrequently required for
maintenance works). Ongoing consultation with the SCA would be undertaken to ensure AGL is aware of SCA’s
schedule and maintenance regime along the Upper Canal. Similarly, a schedule of AGL’s works would be
provided to the SCA.
Gas produced within the Northern Expansion would flow through the existing CGP network for treatment at
RPGP.
The construction of the gas gathering lines would typically involve the following works:
•
Survey of pipeline route;
•
Clear and grade pipeline route including stripping of topsoil (where required);
•
Stringing of pipe;
•
Welding of pipe;
•
Trenching and under-boring where necessary;
•
Lowering-in of pipe strings (including trench preparation and padding);
•
Installation of tracer lines (for pipe tracing) as polyethylene (PE) pipe is non conductive;
•
Installation of gas marker tape above PE gas pipe;
•
Backfilling and compaction of trench;
•
Pressure testing of pipeline;
•
Rehabilitation of ground along pipeline route;
•
Installation of gas line signposts to mark and identify pipeline location; and
•
Register gas gathering line on ‘Dial before you dig’.
The gas gathering lines would typically be buried in sections of approximately 100 m in length at any one time.
This would ensure minimal disturbance and reduce impacts on soil erosion and potential run on effects as a result
of unanticipated rainfall events or other variables.
Low water traps would be installed in low areas of the gathering system to allow removal of water that may collect
and would be emptied as required. All work would be conducted in accordance with the AGL EMS.
Access required for the construction of the gas gathering system would be along existing public roads and private
tracks within the relevant property boundary.
The construction of gas gathering lines would be undertaken once all approvals have been obtained, and to a
specification that complies with all relevant Australian Standards.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-12
4.4.2
AECOM
Production
During the production phase, gas is transported via gas gathering lines to the existing CGP network. Water traps
fitted at low points in the gathering system allow free water to be removed and would be periodically emptied as
required.
4.4.3
Post Development Operational Activities
The activities related to gas gathering lines during this phase are the upgrade or ‘twinning’ of gas gathering lines
and upgrade of access roads along existing routes where required to increase the capacity of the system or for
operational reasons. These activities would generally be conducted in the same way as the initial construction in
accordance with the EMS and relevant management sub plan to be produced on a case by case basis, where
necessary.
The gas gathering route would be inspected annually by a specialist third party Gas Detection inspection service
that performs a leakage survey of the below ground pipelines. The survey is conducted at 10 parts per million
(PPM) sensitivity for gases and the 10 PPM sensitivity reflects the measurement capability of the equipment used
to check for leaks. This initiative does not arise from an Australian Standard or any requirement, but represents
AGL best practice adopted from the practices used by high pressure gas pipelines to inspect for gas leaks once a
year.
4.4.4
Closure and Final Rehabilitation
The preferred method of rehabilitation for the gas gathering system would be to purge with air or water in order to
remove remaining gas, seal and then leave in situ to prevent further disturbance. This method would be subject to
consultation with the land owner and would typically be approached on a property by property basis. Should
removal of the gas gathering system be required, the excavated trench would be backfilled and rehabilitated,
including contouring and revegetation.
4.5
General
4.5.1
Construction and Operation Hours
With the exception of the initial drilling of wells, work hours during the construction phase of the Northern
Expansion would be 7.00am to 6.00pm, Monday to Friday and 8.00am to 1.00pm Saturday with no work on
Sunday or Public Holidays unless inaudible at the nearest receiver or authorised for safety reasons.
Drilling of wells would require 24 hour drilling activities, seven days a week. However, the locations of wells have
been carefully selected with regard to the distance to adjoining residences and other sensitive receivers to ensure
the impact associated with drilling activities is minimised.
4.5.2
Services and Amenities
Temporary portable toilets and amenities would be provided on site for use by construction workers during the
drilling of wells and the construction of the gas gathering system.
Electricity would be provided by portable generating units or through connection with the existing electricity
network, depending on each site and its surroundings. Non potable water required for construction and other
activities would be provided where available.
Appropriate accommodation for staff would be provided during the staged drilling program as part of construction
and initial production works. It is envisaged that a camp would be set up to accommodate 20 people, a kitchen
and dining room, laundry and first aid facilities, storage area and fuel and water tanks. The camp would require an
approximate level area of 75 x 30 m and appropriate site access.
The location of the camp would be determined prior to construction and would utilise the environmental envelope
approach and the DoP’s Locational Guidelines in addition to negotiations with local landowners. The camp would
be central to all the proposed well surface locations.
4.5.3
Other Infrastructure
The proposed works would incorporate Project design measures to avoid or improve other infrastructure in the
area, including:
•
Power lines;
•
Water pipelines;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-13
AECOM
•
Access road improvements (works would be within existing profiles);
•
The underboring of existing infrastructure (if required), such as the Upper Canal and Narellan Road,
associated with construction of the gas gathering systems would conform to the standards of the appropriate
authority; and
•
Eastern Gas Pipeline and the Distribution Network.
4.5.4
Project Implementation
Drilling and associated field construction is planned to start in Feb 2010 with construction taking approximately 9
months. This indicative timeframe is subject to relevant approvals and licences.
The first component of work would be the construction of the main spine line to be tied-in to the existing well fields
of the existing CGP. Once the fields are connected, the drilling of wells are likely to be staged over a two to five
year period depending on rig availability and the field development strategy.
The approximate life of the wells is likely to be 15 years, subject to productivity of each individual well surface
location.
Maintenance of well surface locations after final rehabilitation and closure would be in consultation with the DoP,
DII and the landowner.
4.5.5
Environmental Licensing
The Proponent holds two EPLs issued under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act)
in relation to the CGP, including those related to the RPGP and the RBTP. If approved by the Minister for
Planning, the proposed works would require a new EPL or amendment of the existing EPL’s to include the new
wells, gas gathering system and associated infrastructure.
The Proponent also holds a water license under the Water Act 1912 for the allocation of 30 ML per year. This
allocation would be sufficient for the Northern Expansion and as such, this licence would be transferred to a
licence under the Water Management Act 2000 (Water Act) when the Water Sharing Plan for the Greater
Metropolitan Region Groundwater Sources 2010 is gazetted.
4.5.6
Environmental Management Plans
In the past separate environmental management plans were prepared to address specific requirements under the
various approvals of the CGP. It was decided to consolidate these activities or site specific management plans
into one EMS (and sub plans) to facilitate uniform implementation of environmental management across the CGP.
The AGL EMS has previously been approved by the DPI (now DII) and is publically available as part of AGL’s
compliance with the requirements of various approvals and licences (available online at
www.agl.com.auwww.agl.com.au/camdengasproject).
The objective of the existing EMS is to describe the overall environmental management framework for the CGP,
setting out management requirements, measures of management implementation and the monitoring methods
used to ensure compliance and improve operations. The EMS is applicable to all CGP activities.
The EMS identifies existing petroleum titles, development consents, EPLs and relevant legislation. The EMS
describes activities, contains specific environmental management plans (sub plans) for key aspects of operations,
and sets out the processes for implementation, monitoring and review. Detailed site specific information is
provided in site specific plans which are referenced in the Sub Plans as applicable.
Current sub plans and other environmental management documentation provided under the EMS include:
•
Noise Management Sub Plan;
•
Flora and Fauna Management Sub Plan;
•
Soil and Water Management Sub Plan;
•
Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Sub Plan;
•
European Heritage Management Sub Plan;
•
Rehabilitation and Landscape Management Sub Plan;
•
Air Quality Management Sub Plan;
•
Waste Management Sub Plan;
•
Traffic Management Sub Plan;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-14
•
Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Materials Sub Plan;
•
Emergency Response Plan;
•
Site Layout Plans and Site Rehabilitation Plans; and
•
Compliance Register.
AECOM
Management measures which would be implemented during the site preparation, construction, operational and
the closure and rehabilitation phases of the proposed Northern Expansion, would be incorporated into the existing
EMS (and relevant sub plans) to include specific details and mitigation relevant to well surface locations and
infrastructure.
The EMS and the sub plans along with the Compliance Register, monitoring and reporting, and the Independent
Audit form part of the overall EMS for the CGP. These all would be updated as appropriate, based upon the
findings of this EA in relation to the Surface Project Area, and the Subsurface Project Area if applicable.
4.5.7
Environmental Management Improvements and Response
The AGL EMS and EMS sub plans provide a process for continuous improvement of the environmental
management of the Northern Expansion, through ongoing monitoring and regulatory management procedures.
Maintenance undertaken throughout the Project also contributes to monitoring activities and the continuation of
the working management operation provided by the EMS.
The CGP provides a telephone hotline for the reporting of complaints or emergencies. Complaints received by the
hotline are recorded and immediately addressed.
Further information on environmental management and monitoring in regards to the specific operations and
components of the Northern Expansion is provided in the Statement of Commitments in Chapter 24 of this EA.
Adoption of these safeguard measures underlines the commitment of AGL and its contractors to environmental
management during all phases of the Northern Expansion Project.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-15
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
4-16
5.0
AECOM
Statutory Planning
This chapter outlines the statutory framework within which the Northern Expansion lies, including the key
approvals and licenses required for the Project, as well as environmental planning instruments which apply to the
Project and how they relate to the various Project components and activities.
5.1
Commonwealth Matters
5.1.1
Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 came into effect in July 2000 and
requires the approval of the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts for actions
that may have a significant impact on matters of National Environmental Significance (NES). Approval from the
Commonwealth is in addition to any approvals under NSW legislation.
The requirement for approval under the EPBC Act is triggered by a proposed action which has the potential to
have a significant impact on a matter of NES or by a project which has the potential to have a significant impact
on the environment of Commonwealth land or which involves the Commonwealth. The EPBC Act lists eight
matters of NES which must be addressed when assessing the impact of a project.
A search of the DEWHA protected matters database was undertaken in August 2010, based on a 10km buffer
around the Project Area. The following is a summary of potential impacts of the proposed Northern Expansion on
matters of NES.
•
World Heritage properties: There are no world heritage properties proximate to the Northern Expansion, or
that would potentially be affected by the Project.
•
National Heritage Places: There are no Commonwealth Heritage Places identified within the search area,
however a total of 77 places listed on the Register of the National Estate (RNE) were identified within the
search area which are protected by the provisions of the EPBC Act. The locational principles for the siting of
the well surface locations and associated infrastructure aim to minimise potential impacts on matters
identified by the RNE.
•
Wetlands of National Importance: The search identified the proposed Project would be located within the
same catchment as a Ramsar site, Towra Point Nature Reserve, which is located approximately 16 km
south of the Sydney CBD. However, given the nature of the Project, the history of previous works for the
CGP and the distance of the site from the Towra Point Nature Reserve, it is not anticipated that there would
be a significant impact on the Ramsar Wetland.
•
Commonwealth-listed Threatened species: 3 threatened ecological communities and 41 Commonwealth
listed threatened species (18 fauna and 23 flora) were identified within the search area and therefore,
potential exists for the Northern Expansion Project to impact on threatened species listed under
Commonwealth legislation. The location of well surface locations and associated infrastructure has been
selected having regard to minimising impacts upon threatened species. The impacts of the Project in this
regard and proposed mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Chapter 11.
•
Commonwealth-listed Migratory Species: 14 migratory species were identified within the search area.
The ecological assessment undertaken as part of the EA concludes that there would be no significant impact
upon Commonwealth migratory species (see Chapter 11).
•
Nuclear Action: The proposed Project will not involve a nuclear action as defined under the EPBC Act.
•
Commonwealth Marine Area: There are no Commonwealth Marine Areas proximate to the Northern
Expansion, or that would potentially be affected by the Project.
•
Commonwealth Land: 7 Commonwealth Land sites were identified within the search area. The proposed
Northern Expansion is not on Commonwealth land, nor is Commonwealth land likely to be significantly
affected by the Project.
5.1.2
Referral
Based upon assessment of the Project against matters of NES, it is considered that the Project would not have a
significant impact on matters of NES. While the Project Area contains areas of Cumberland Plain Woodland, a
critically endangered ecological community (CEEC), no removal of Cumberland Plain Woodland is required as
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-1
AECOM
part of the Project. A referral to the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts
under the EPBC Act is therefore not required.
5.2
State Matters
5.2.1
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)
The EP&A Act and the EP&A Regulation provide a framework for environmental planning in NSW and include
provisions to ensure that projects which have the potential to impact the environment are subject to detailed
assessment, and provide opportunity for public involvement.
The Project falls within the definition of major project under Group 2, Clause 6 of Schedule 1 of SEPP 2005 and
has been deemed a project to which Part 3A of the EP&A Act applies. The Minister for Planning is the
determining authority for the project under section 75J of the EP&A Act. The Director-General has prepared EARs
which are included as Appendix A of this EA.
Under section 5 and 5A of the EP&A Act, the assessment must consider the potential significance of effects on
threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats as discussed in Table 5-1 and Table
5-2 below.
Table 5-1: Statutory Requirements for EA (S.5 of the EP&A Act)
Considerations under s.5A of the EP&A Act
Comment
The objects of this Act are:
(a) to encourage:
(i) the proper management, development and
conservation of natural and artificial resources,
including agricultural land, natural areas, forests,
minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the
purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare
of the community and a better environment,
This Project would provide benefits to the State of NSW
in the form of an indigenous natural gas energy supply.
Direct impacts to the natural environment will be
minimised or avoided. Chapter 20 discusses the
potential social and economic effects during
construction and operation with a response on how
potential effects may be managed.
(ii) the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and
economic use and development of land,
The Project has been designed and planned in
consideration of both existing and future planned land
use in order to ensure that the proposed infrastructure
can co-exist with other forms of development and adapt
to future changing land use without sterilising land for
further development and without future land use
sterilising an important natural resource. The Project is
therefore considered to promote the orderly and
economic use of land.
(iii) the protection, provision and co-ordination of
communication and utility services,
This Project represents the support of provision of utility
services and has been designed to avoid impacts on
existing service assets through the use of Locational
Guidelines and the environmental envelope approach
for the location of Northern Expansion infrastructure.
(iv) the provision of land for public purposes,
Not applicable.
(v) the provision and co-ordination of community
services and facilities, and
Chapter 20 assesses in detail local community services,
infrastructure and amenities and the potential effects
upon them.
(vi) the protection of the environment, including the
protection and conservation of native animals and
plants, including threatened species, populations and
ecological communities, and their habitats, and
This EA includes a detailed flora and fauna assessment
(Chapter 11) specifically with a view to avoiding,
minimising or managing potential impacts to the natural
environment.
(vii) ecologically sustainable development, and
Chapter 26 of this EA discusses the principles of ESD
in detail with respect to this Project, which has been
planned to operate in accordance of these principles.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-2
AECOM
Comment
(viii) the provision and maintenance of affordable
housing, and
Not applicable.
(b) to promote the sharing of the responsibility for
environmental planning between the different levels of
government in the State, and
Not applicable.
(c) to provide increased opportunity for public
involvement and participation in environmental
planning and assessment.
Consultation has been undertaken as part of this Project
and this will continue throughout the Project process
(see Chapter 6). The EA will be placed on exhibition to
provide the public with the opportunity to comment.
Table 5-2: Statutory Requirements for EA (S.5A of the EP&A Act)
Comment
(a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the
action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on
the life cycle of the species such that a viable local
population of the species is likely to be placed at risk
of extinction
This is discussed in detail in Chapter 11 of this EA.
(b) In the case of an endangered population, whether
the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect
on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the
endangered population such that a viable local
population of the species is likely to be placed at risk
of extinction
This is discussed in detail in Chapter 11 of this EA.
(c) In the case of an endangered ecological
community or critically endangered ecological
community, whether the action proposed:
The Project Area contains areas of Cumberland Plain
Woodland – an EEC. No removal of Cumberland Plain
Woodland is required as part of the Project. The
potential impacts of the Project on threatened species
are discussed in detail in Chapter 11 which concludes
that, with the provision of proposed mitigation measures,
the impact upon threatened species would not be
significant.
•
is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent
of the ecological community such that its local
occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction, or
•
is likely to substantially and adversely modify the
composition of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at
risk of extinction
(d) In relation to the habitat of a threatened species,
population or ecological community
•
the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed
or modified as a result of the action proposed,
and
•
whether an area of habitat is likely to become
fragmented or isolated from other areas of
habitat as a result of the proposed action, and
•
the importance of the habitat to be removed,
modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term
survival of the species, population or ecological
community in the locality
Whether the action proposed is likely to have an
adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or
indirectly),
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
The Project Area contains areas of Cumberland Plain
Woodland – an EEC. No removal of Cumberland Plain
Woodland is required as part of the Project. The
potential impacts of the Project on threatened species
are discussed in detail in Chapter 11 which concludes
that, with the provision of proposed mitigation measures,
the impact upon threatened species would not be
significant.
The ecological assessment undertaken in respect of the
Project concludes that the Project would not have an
adverse effect on critical habitat. Refer to Chapter 11
for further detail.
5-3
AECOM
Comment
Whether the action proposed is consistent with the
objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat
abatement plan
A Draft Recovery Plan exists for the Cumberland Plain.
This Draft plan was prepared by the DECCW and was
placed on public exhibition for a period of six weeks
from November 2009.
The Draft Plan identifies ‘priority conservation lands’ and
sets out actions to be taken to ensure the long term
viability of the threatened biodiversity of the Cumberland
Plain. The plan applies to land within the Camden and
Campbelltown LGAs.
The relevant actions contained within this plan are
discussed in Section 5.5.9 of this EA and the Project is
considered to be generally consistent with the actions
identified in the Draft Plan.
Whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a
key threatening process or is likely to result in the
operation of, or increase the impact of, a key
threatening process
5.2.2
Land clearing is identified as a key threatening process.
The Project would require the clearing of some exotic
and introduced pasture and vegetation within the
Surface Project Area which is not considered
threatening, however the implementation of the
mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 11 would
ensure that the impacts of this process are adequately
managed.
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW)
Part 1A of the EP&A Regulation relates to Major Development. Clause 8F of the EP&A Regulation addresses
owner’s consent or notification in relation to Major Development and states that:
1.
The consent of the owner of land on which a project is to be carried out is required for a
project application unless:
a)
the application relates to a mining or petroleum production project, or
b)
the application relates to a linear infrastructure project.
Under clause 8F, mining or petroleum production is deemed to include:
any activity that is related to mining or petroleum production, but does not include a project on land
that is a state conservation area reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974.
The Northern Expansion project comprises petroleum production and ancillary activities/works, therefore the
consent of the owner of land on which the Project is to be carried out is not required under the EP&A Regulation.
However, clause 8F states that, if consent is not required, the proponent is required to give notice of the
application as follows:
•
in the case of a linear infrastructure project (which would apply to the main spine gathering line and high
pressure supply pipeline) notice is to be given to the public by advertisement published in a newspaper
circulating in the area of the project before the start of the public consultation period for the project; and
•
in the case of a project that comprises mining or petroleum production (which would apply to the well surface
locations), notice is to be given to the public by advertisement published in a newspaper circulating in the
area of the Project before the end of the period of 14 days after the application is made.
th
The preliminary application was made on the 13 February 2009 and notice of the component parts of the Project
was given in accordance with the provisions of clause 8F through advertisements published on the 11th March
2009 in the Campbelltown-Macarthur Advertiser.
5.2.3
Environmental Planning Instruments
State, regional and local environmental planning instruments (EPIs) are encompassed in the EP&A Act
framework. A range of EPIs are created under the EP&A Act to provide further detailed guidance and regulation
for development at a State, regional and local level.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-4
AECOM
Section 75R of the EP&A Act provides that:
1.
Environmental planning instruments (other than State environmental planning policies) do
not apply to or in respect of an approved project.
Section 75J (3) provides that the Minister may (but is not required to) take into account the provisions of any EPI,
however, also states that the regulations may preclude approval for the carrying out of a class of project (other
than a critical infrastructure project) that such an instrument would otherwise prohibit.
Clause 8O of the EP&A Regulation states:
2.
For the purposes of section 75J (3) of the Act, approval for the carrying out of a project
may not be given under Part 3A of the Act for any project, or part of a project, that:
(a) is not the subject of an authorisation or requirement under section 75M of the Act to
apply for approval of a concept plan, and
(b) is prohibited by an environmental planning instrument that would not (because of
section 75R of the Act) apply to the project if approved.
As the Northern Expansion is not the subject of a Concept Plan, if the Project were to be prohibited under a local
environmental plan (LEP) and there were no State environmental planning policies that overrode such prohibition,
the Project would be prohibited. A discussion of the Project’s permissibility with the relevant LEP’s has been
provided in this EA (refer Section 5.3) and has determined that the Project is not prohibited.
The following State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) are of relevance to the Project:
•
SEPP 2005;
•
State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007 (SEPP
2007);
•
State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (SEPP Infrastructure);
•
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 (SEPP 2006);
•
State Environmental Planning Policy 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19);
•
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development (SEPP 33); and
•
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 – Koala Habitat Protection (SEPP 44).
These policies are discussed in relation to the proposed Project in Section 5.5 of this EA.
The following LEPs apply to land subject of the Project application:
•
Camden LEP 47(LEP 47);
•
Camden LEP 48 (LEP 48);
•
Camden LEP 74 (LEP 74)
•
Camden LEP (Camden Lakeside) 2009 (LEP 2009);
•
Draft Camden LEP 151 (El Caballo Blanco and Gledswood) (Draft LEP 151);
•
Draft Camden LEP 2009) (Draft LEP 2009);
•
Campbelltown (Urban Area) LEP 2002 (LEP 2002);
•
Campbelltown LEP District 8 (Central Hills Lands) (LEP D8);
•
Campbelltown Interim Development Order 15 (IDO 15); and
•
Campbelltown IDO 28.
The application of these plans to the Project is discussed in Section 5.3 of this EA.
5.2.4
Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991 (NSW)
The Northern Expansion project comprises the construction and operation of the third stage of the CGP in
accordance with its obligations under the terms and conditions of its PPL5 and PEL2 issued to AGL pursuant to
the PO Act. Additionally, a new PPL would be required to authorise petroleum production over that part of the
Northern Expansion that is not covered by PPL5.
Section 41 of the PO Act relates to the rights of holders of production leases and states:
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-5
AECOM
‘The holder of a production lease has the exclusive right to conduct petroleum mining operations in
and on the land included in the lease together with the right to construct and maintain on the land
such works, buildings, plant, waterways, roads, pipelines, dams, reservoirs, tanks, pumping
stations, tramways, railways, telephone lines, electric powerlines and other structures and
equipment as are necessary for the full enjoyment of the lease or to fulfil the lessee’s obligations
under it.’’
Environmental requirements under the petroleum production regime are specified by Part 6, Divisions 1 to 4 of the
PO Act and include:
•
The need to protect natural resources;
•
Conditions for protecting the environment;
•
Rehabilitation of areas damaged by operations;
•
Directions to rehabilitate land; and
•
Removal of petroleum plant at the expiration of the Petroleum Production Lease.
All activities carried out under the authority of a petroleum title are to be carried out in conformity with the former
DPI (now DII) Schedule of Onshore Petroleum Exploration and Production Requirements 1992.
Part 6 of the PO Act provides for consideration to be given to the protection of the environment before a
petroleum title is granted. It sets out the scope of PPLs, subject to the terms of the Act. The majority of the
proposed development within the Surface Project Area and subsurface drilling within the Subsurface Project Area
would be carried out under the existing PPL 5. Activities proposed to take place outside of PPL 5 would require a
new PPL. An application would be made for a new PPL in conjunction with the application for Project Approval
under Part 3A of the EP&A Act.
5.2.5
Pipelines Act 1967 (NSW)
The Pipelines Act 1967 (Pipelines Act) regulates the construction and operation of pipelines within the State, with
certain exemptions such as those operated for the purposes of supply of water or those to be constructed by a
public authority.
Section 11 of the Act provides that a pipeline (other than those identified as exempt) cannot be constructed or
operated without a licence. The Act also addresses the ongoing maintenance and management of pipelines.
The requirement for a licence in relation to a petroleum pipeline (one which conveys naturally occurring
hydrocarbons) generally relates to high pressure trunk lines and does not extend to gathering lines proposed
Construction and operation of the proposed gas gathering lines within the Surface Project Area would not require
a licence under Part 3 of the Pipelines Act.
5.2.6
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW)
Under the POEO Act it is an offence, for which there are penalties, to cause water, air or noise pollution without
authorisation for such under an Environment Protection Licence (EPL). Additionally, schedule 1 of the POEO Act
identifies “scheduled activities” which are required to be licensed by the DECCW.
The CGP is operated under separate premises-based EPLs to permit petroleum refining and waste generation
activities. The proposed wells and associated infrastructure that form the Northern Expansion would require a
new EPL or amendment of the existing EPL’s.
5.2.7
Heritage Act 1977 (NSW)
The purpose of the NSW Heritage Act 1997 (Heritage Act) is to protect and conserve non-Aboriginal cultural
heritage, including scheduled heritage items, sites and relics. The Heritage Act is administered by the NSW
Heritage Office.
The Heritage Act makes provision for a place, building, work, relic, moveable object, precinct, or land to be listed
on the State Heritage Register. If an item is subject of an interim listing, or is listed on the State Heritage Register,
a person must obtain approval under Part 4 Division 1 Subdivision 3 of the Heritage Act for the following works or
activities:
•
Demolition of the building or work;
•
Damaging or despoiling the place, precinct or land, or any part thereof;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-6
AECOM
•
Moving, damaging or destroying the relic or moveable object;
•
Excavating any land for the purpose of exposing or moving the relic;
•
Carrying out any development in relation to the land on which the building, work or relic is situated, the land
that comprises the place, or land within the precinct;
•
Altering the building, work, relic or moveable object;
•
Displaying any notice or advertisement on the place, building, work, relic, moveable object or land, or in the
precinct; and
•
Damaging or destroying any tree or other vegetation on or removing any tree or other vegetation from the
place, precinct or land.
Pursuant to section 75U(1)(c) of the EP&A Act, once the Project is approved under Part 3A of the EP&A Act, it is
exempt from requirements for approvals required under Part 4 of the Heritage Act.
In accordance with Section 146 of the Heritage Act, AGL would notify the Heritage Council of NSW if any
historical archaeological 'relics' within the meaning of the Heritage Act), are disturbed by the proposed works.
Heritage has been assessed within the EA in Chapter 15. AGL has an existing EMS which addresses procedures
for managing artefacts found during construction works. The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Sub Plan
would be updated to reflect the findings of the EA for the Northern Expansion.
5.2.8
Water Management Act 2000 (NSW)
Volumes of water incidentally taken in the course of aquifer interference activities, such as the water intercepted
during mining operations, have in the past required a licence under the Water Act 1912. These licence
requirements have been transferred to the provisions of the Water Management Act 2000 (WM Act).
Activities which intersect (‘interfere with’) an aquifer may involve:
•
the extraction of groundwater that flows into a void to allow the activity to operate safely. This is often called
de-watering, and the water extracted is often referred to as ‘incidental groundwater’
•
other impacts resulting from the intersection of the aquifer, such as changes to groundwater flow paths and
gradients, subsidence and cracking of river beds, river bank collapse, destruction/removal of the aquifer
structure, and artificial aquifer recharge.
Clause 56 of the WM Act outlines provisions for access licences:
(1) An access licence entitles its holder:
a)
to specified shares in the available water within a specified water management area or from a specified
water source (the share component), and
b)
to take water:
(i)
at specified times, at specified rates or in specified circumstances, or in any combination of
these, and
(ii) in specified areas or from specified locations, (the extraction component).
As such, AGL as an operator of activities which may intersect with an aquifer would be required to hold an access
licence under the WM Act and sufficient account volume to account for incidental water taken. The volumes of
groundwater expected to be produced from the extra gas wells associated with the Northern Expansion is likely
to be of the order of few megalitres (ML) per annum, and with the decline in produced water from gas wells in the
existing wellfield, the current allocation of 30 ML per year (under the Water Act 1912) should suffice for the
development. Therefore this licence would be transferred to a licence under the WM Act when the Water Sharing
Plan for the Greater Metropolitan Region Groundwater Sources 2010 is gazetted.
5.2.9
State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005
SEPP 2005 identifies classes of development to which Part 3A of the EP&A Act applies (subject to declaration by
the Minister). The class applicable to this project is:
Group 2 (6) (Petroleum (oil, gas and coal seam methane)) of Schedule 1 which includes:
1.
Development for the purpose of drilling and operation of petroleum wells (including associated
pipelines) that:
a)
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
has a capital investment value of more than $30 million or employs 100 or more
people, or
5-7
2.
b)
is in an environmentally sensitive area of State significance, or
c)
Is in the local government areas of Camden, Wollondilly, Campbelltown City,
Wollongong City, Wingecarribee, Gosford City, Wyong, Lake Macquarie City,
Newcastle City, Maitland City, Cessnock City, Singleton, Hawkesbury, Port
Stephens, Upper Hunter or Muswellbrook, but only if the principle resource
sought is coal seam methane.
AECOM
Development for the purpose of petroleum related works (including processing plants) that:
a)
is ancillary to or an extension of another Part 3A project, or
b)
has a capital investment value of more than $30 million or employs 100 or more
people.
SEPP 2005 provides the planning framework for assessment of major projects, previously classified as State
Significant Development. This Project represents an expansion of the CGP.
The recovery of CSM involves the drilling and operation of petroleum well surface locations, associated gas
gathering lines and ancillary works within the Northern Expansion Project Area which is located within the
Camden and Campbelltown LGAs. Therefore the Project falls within Group 2 (6) of Schedule 1of SEPP 2005. On
13 June 2003, the Minister declared the CGP as a State Significant Development.
5.2.10
State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production & Extractive Industries)
2007
SEPP 2007 applies to the whole of NSW and while recognising the importance of mining, petroleum production
and extractive industries within the State, requires the consent authority to consider factors such as land use
compatibility, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental management and resource recovery.
The Policy has the following aims:
a)
to provide for the proper management and development of mineral, petroleum and extractive material
resources for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the State, and
b)
to facilitate the orderly and economic use and development of land containing mineral, petroleum and
extractive material resources, and
c)
to establish appropriate planning controls to encourage ecologically sustainable development through the
environmental assessment, and sustainable management, of development of mineral, petroleum and
extractive material resources.
CSM falls within the definition of petroleum under clause 3 of SEPP 2007, and the works proposed are defined as
petroleum production.
Clause 7(2) of SEPP 2007 identifies development which can be carried out only with consent and includes the
following of relevance to the Project:
‘Petroleum production development for any of the following purposes:
a)
petroleum production on land which development for the purposes of
agriculture or industry may be carried out (with or without development
consent),
b)
petroleum production on land that is, immediately before the commencement of
this clause, the subject of a production lease under the Petroleum (Onshore)
Act 1991,….
c)
facilities for the processing or transportation of petroleum on land on which
petroleum production may be carried out (with or without development
consent), but only if the petroleum being processed or transported was
recovered from that land or adjoining land.
Clause 8(1) of the SEPP states that if an LEP provides that development for the purposes of mining, petroleum
production or extractive industry may be carried out on land with development consent if provisions of the plan are
satisfied:
a)
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
development for that purpose may be carried out on that land with development
consent without those provisions having to be satisfied, and
5-8
b)
AECOM
those provisions have no effect in determining whether or not development for
that purpose may be carried out on that land or on the determination of a
development application for consent to carry out development for that purpose
on that land.
Part 3 of SEPP 2007 sets out matters for consideration for development applications. The proposed project is the
subject of a Major Project Application and therefore this part of the SEPP does not strictly apply. However, for the
purposes of completeness the provisions of Part 3 of SEPP 2007 are considered in relation to the project.
Clause 12 specifies those matters that must be considered or evaluated by the consent authority before
determining a development application and clauses 14, 15, 16 and 17 identify those matters that must be
considered by the consent authority before granting consent. Table 5-3 references the sections of this EA which
address the matters for consideration under SEPP 2007.
Table 5-3: SEPP 2007 Matters for Consideration
Clause
Matters for consideration
Clause 12
(a)…..consider:
Compatibility with other land
uses
(i) the existing uses and approved
uses of land in the vicinity of the
development, and
(ii) whether or not the
development is likely to have a
significant impact on the uses that,
in the opinion of the consent
authority having regard to land use
trends, are likely to be the preferred
uses of land in the vicinity of the
development, and
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Reference Section
Chapter 5 and Chapter 8
Chapter 8
(iii) any ways in which the
development may be incompatible
with any of those existing, approved
or likely preferred uses, and
Chapter 8
(b) evaluate and compare the
respective public benefits of the
development and the land uses
referred to in paragraph (a) (i) and
(ii), and
(c) evaluate any measures
proposed by the applicant to avoid
or minimise any incompatibility, as
referred to in paragraph (a) (iii).
Chapter 8
5-9
AECOM
Clause
Clause 14
(1)…the consent authority must
consider whether or not the consent
should be issued subject to
conditions aimed at ensuring that
the development is undertaken in
an environmentally responsible
manner, including conditions to
ensure the following:
Natural resource management
and environmental management
(a) that impacts on significant
water resources, including surface
and groundwater resources, are
avoided, or are minimised to the
greatest extent practicable,
Clause 15
Resource recovery
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Reference Section
Chapter 9, 12 and 24
(b) that impacts on threatened
species and biodiversity, are
avoided, or are minimised to the
greatest extent practicable,
(c) that greenhouse gas
emissions are minimised to the
greatest extent practicable.
(2) …consider an assessment of
the greenhouse gas emissions
(including downstream emissions)
of the development, and must do so
having regard to any applicable
State or national policies, programs
or guidelines concerning
greenhouse gas emissions.
Chapter 14
(1) …. consider the efficiency or
otherwise of the development in
terms of resource recovery.
Chapter 22
2) …. consider whether or not the
consent should be issued subject to
conditions aimed at optimising the
efficiency of resource recovery and
the reuse or recycling of material.
Chapter 22
(3) The consent authority may
refuse to grant consent to
development if it is not satisfied that
the development will be carried out
in such a way as to optimise the
efficiency of recovery of minerals,
petroleum or extractive materials
and to minimise the creation of
waste in association with the
extraction, recovery or processing
of minerals, petroleum or extractive
materials.
5-10
AECOM
Clause
Reference Section
Clause 17
(1)….consider whether or not the
consent should be issued subject to
conditions aimed at ensuring the
rehabilitation of land that will be
affected by the development.
Chapter 21
Rehabilitation
(2) In particular, the consent
authority must consider whether
conditions of the consent should:
(a) require the preparation of a plan
that identifies the proposed end use
and landform of the land once
rehabilitated, or
(b) require waste generated by the
development or the rehabilitation to
be dealt with appropriately, or
(c) require any soil contaminated
as a result of the development to be
remediated in accordance with
relevant guidelines (including
guidelines under section 145C of
the Act and the Contaminated Land
Management Act 1997), or
(d) require steps to be taken to
ensure that the state of the land,
while being rehabilitated and at the
completion of the rehabilitation,
does not jeopardize public safety.
Chapter 21
Chapter 21
Those matters requiring consideration for development assessment under SEPP 2007 have been assessed in the
EA and those matters required to be considered prior to consent have been incorporated into the Statement of
Commitments in Chapter 24. The Project is therefore consistent with the requirements of the SEPP.
5.2.11
State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007
SEPP Infrastructure aims to facilitate the effective delivery of infrastructure across the State.
Clause 104 of the SEPP relates to traffic generating development and requires that certain development with the
potential to generate a substantial level of traffic be referred to the RTA for comment. Development to which the
clause applies is set out in Schedule 3 of the SEPP and includes development for any purpose not specifically
identified in the schedule with the potential to generate traffic of more than 200 vehicles.
The proposed development is unlikely to generate traffic of greater than 200 vehicles during the construction
period and is therefore not subject to this clause or Policy. However as part of the EA process, the RTA has been
consulted with respect to the proposed Project and associated works (as detailed in Chapter 6). The traffic and
access arrangements and potential impacts of the Project are considered in detail in Chapter 19 of this EA and a
range of mitigation measures have been recommended to ensure that these impacts are minimised.
5.2.12
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006
SEPP 2006 was gazetted on 28 July 2006 and will affect works within the CGP which are located within identified
growth centres.
The SEPP provides land use zones, objectives and land use tables which identify the permissibility of
development and matters for consideration by the consent authority.
Part 4 of SEPP 2006 identifies development controls and more specifically matters for consideration until final
planning of precincts are complete. Matters for consideration are taken directly from clause 16 (1) identified below
in Table 5-4
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-11
AECOM
Table 5-4: Matters for consideration
Comment
1) Until provisions have been specified in a Precinct Plan or in clause 7A with respect to the development of the
land, consent is not to be granted to the carrying out of development on land within a growth centre unless the
consent authority has taken into consideration the following:
(a) whether the proposed development will preclude
the future urban and employment development land
uses identified in the relevant growth centre structure
plan,
The proposed development would not preclude the
future urban and employment development land uses
identified in the SWGC structure plan.
(b) whether the extent of the investment in, and the
operational and economic life of, the proposed
development will result in the effective alienation of the
land from those future land uses,
The proposed works are not expected to result in the
alienation of land from future land uses. The proposed
works are for a temporary time frame and have been
planned in order to be compatible with existing and
future land use (refer Chapter 8)
(c) whether the proposed development will result in
further fragmentation of land holdings,
The proposed development will not result in
fragmentation of land holdings.
(d) whether the proposed development is incompatible
with desired land uses in any draft environmental
planning instrument that proposes to specify provisions
in a Precinct Plan or in clause 7A,
Relevant draft planning instruments have been
considered in this EA and the proposed development is
compatible with specified desired land uses in these
plans (Chapter 5).
(e) whether the proposed development is consistent
with the precinct planning strategies and principles set
out in any publicly exhibited document that is relevant
to the development,
Draft Development Control Plans and Precinct
Planning have been considered in this EA (Chapter 5
and 8) and the proposed development is consistent
with these Plans.
(f) whether the proposed development will hinder the
orderly and co-ordinated provision of infrastructure that
is planned for the growth centre,
The proposed development has considered plans for
the growth centre in the location of proposed works and
will not hinder planned infrastructure.
(g) in the case of transitional land—whether (in
addition) the proposed development will protect areas
of aboriginal heritage, ecological diversity or biological
diversity as well as protecting the scenic amenity of the
land.
Specialist studies have been undertaken (Chapter 11
and Chapter 15) and given the proposed
environmental safeguards it is unlikely the development
will significantly impact on areas of aboriginal heritage,
ecological diversity or biological diversity. It is expected
scenic amenity will be retained.
Clause 18A of Part 4 identifies development for the purposes of ‘public utility undertakings’ as being permissible
without consent on land to which the SEPP applies, however the matters for consideration have still been
addressed for the purposes of this EA and are referenced in Chapter 8.
5.2.13
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19) applies to all areas identified
in Schedule 1 of the SEPP. Schedule 1 of SEPP 19 identifies Camden and Campbelltown as areas to which the
SEPP applies therefore the SEPP is applicable to the Project. The general aim of the SEPP is:
to protect and preserve bushland within the urban areas referred to in Schedule 1 because of:
a)
its value to the community as part of the natural heritage,
b)
its aesthetic value, and
c)
its value as a recreational, educational and scientific resource.
The policy requires that consent be obtained for the clearing of bushland within areas zoned for public open
space. The Project does not propose to clear land within an open space zone, therefore the provisions of the
policy are not applicable.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-12
5.2.14
AECOM
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development
The aims of State Environmental Planning Policy 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development (SEPP 33) include
the amendment of definitions of hazardous and offensive industries where used in EPIs and to require
development consent for hazardous and offensive development.
State Environmental Planning Policy No.33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development (SEPP 33) applies to
industry that has the potential to create an off-site risk or offence to people, property or the environment. SEPP
33 has two categories of industry to which it relates, hazardous industry and offensive industry. Where there is a
potential to cause harm to humans or the environment a further distinction exists in relation to the potential harm.
The definitions most relevant are set out in clause 3:
potentially hazardous industry means a development for the purposes of any industry which, if
the development were to operate without employing any measures (including, for example, isolation
from existing or likely future development on other land) to reduce or minimise its impact in the
locality or on the existing or likely future development on other land, would pose a significant risk in
relation to the locality:
1)
to human health, life or property, or
2)
to the biophysical environment,
and includes a hazardous industry and a hazardous storage establishment.
potentially offensive industry means a development for the purposes of an industry which, if the
development were to operate without employing any measures (including, for example, isolation
from existing or likely future development on other land) to reduce or minimise its impact in the
locality or on the existing or likely future development on other land, would emit a polluting
discharge (including for example, noise) in a manner which would have a significant adverse impact
in the locality or on the existing or likely future development on other land, and includes an
offensive industry and an offensive storage establishment.
Should it be found that a proposed development has the potential to cause risk to humans or the biophysical
environment, or to emit a polluting discharge, then a Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) is required.
The document, Applying SEPP 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines was prepared
by the then Department of Urban Affairs and Planning in 1994 to provide assistance primarily to councils (but also
to industry, consultants and other government agencies) in implementing SEPP 33. The Guidelines recommend
a ‘risk screening’ method for determining whether a project is hazardous and provides guidance on assessing
potentially offensive development projects. The screening process considers the class and volume of waste
materials to be stored on the site and the distance of the storage area to the nearest site boundary.
The guidelines state that the first step to determining whether SEPP 33 applies to a project is to consider whether
the proposed use falls within the definition of ‘industry’ adopted by the planning instrument which applies.
The proposed Project is appropriately characterised as a utility installation or a public utility undertaking (see
Section 5.3.1) and therefore does not meet the definition of an industry. As such, the provisions of SEPP 33 do
not strictly apply and a PHA is not strictly required. However, in order to satisfy community and stakeholder
expectations regarding management of potential risk issues, a PHA has been prepared in respect of the Project
and is included as Appendix D of this EA. The PHA concludes that the proposed works do not pose a significant
risk to humans or the biophysical environment subject to recommended separation distances for SIS wells with a
six well configuration (refer Chapter 10).
With regard to risk to humans and the environment, AGL has designed the Project to incorporate technical
controls for the gas wellhead assemblies which comply with Section 2.3 of the DoP’s Locational Guidelines.
The Locational Guidelines provide guidance for separation distances between development and existing/ future
operating coal seam methane wells with a single well configuration. As mentioned above, the PHA undertaken in
respect of the Project provides revised separation distances for SIS wells with a six well configuration, as
proposed under the project application. Residential and sensitive land uses in the vicinity of wells which
incorporate the designs and operational controls specified in the Locational Guidelines and the PHA would not be
exposed to unacceptable risk.
AGL would update the existing CGP Emergency Response Plan to include the additional wells and gas gathering
lines for the Northern Expansion, along with other management sub plans within the EMS.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-13
5.2.15
AECOM
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 – Koala Habitat Protection
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 – Koala Habitat Protection (SEPP 44) applies to a range of LGAs
listed in Schedule 1 of the SEPP. SEPP applies to the Project Area as it encompasses a portion of the
Campbelltown LGA which is listed in Schedule 1. As set out in clause 3, the policy aims to:
‘encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation that provide
habitat for koalas to ensure a permanent free-living population over their present range and reverse
the current trend of koala population decline:
•
by requiring the preparation of plans of management before development consent can be granted in relation
to areas of core koala habitat, and
•
by encouraging the identification of areas of core koala habitat, and
•
by encouraging the inclusion of areas of core koala habitat in environment protection zones.’
The policy applies to land which is the subject of a development application (DA) and which is greater than 1
hectare in area. Whilst the proposed Project is not the subject of a DA the provisions of the SEPP have been
considered in relation to the Project.
Part 2 of SEPP 44 requires that prior to granting consent to a development on land subject to the policy, the
Council must consider whether the land constitutes ‘potential’ or ‘core’ koala habitat. Core koala habitat is defined
as areas which contain a resident koala population and potential koala habitat is defined as areas of native
vegetation where the trees of the type listed in Schedule 2 constitute at least 15% of the total number of trees in
the upper or lower strata of the tree component. Should core koala habitat be identified, a Plan of Management is
required to be prepared in respect of the habitat and any consent granted in respect of the land must be
consistent with the Plan of Management.
Part 3 of SEPP 44 sets the requirements for the preparation and approval of Plans of Management.
A targeted flora and fauna survey was undertaken within the Surface Project Area with full details provided in
Chapter 11 and Appendix E to this EA. Substantial core habitat was not identified during the survey and
therefore it is unlikely the area contains a resident koala population.
A Flora and Fauna Management Sub Plan has been prepared and forms part of the existing EMS for the CGP.
The results from the ecological assessment of the Northern Expansion would be included in the Flora and Fauna
Management Sub Plan and the EMS updated. Compliance with this EMS implies compliance with the
requirements of SEPP 44.
5.2.16
Metropolitan Strategy and Sub Regional Strategy
Released in December 2005, the City of Cities – A Plan for Sydney’s Future (Metropolitan Strategy) was
developed by the NSW DoP. The Metropolitan Strategy is a framework developed to promote and manage
Sydney’s growth and outline a vision for the future to 2031. It guides the process of planning for residential
locations, as well as employment, transportation and other infrastructure to deliver the best possible services to
the community and business across Sydney.
The Metropolitan Strategy is based on anticipated population, economic and demographic trends, and has been
developed with five aims: enhance liveability, strengthen economic competitiveness, ensure fairness, protect the
environment, and improve governance.
The Strategy sets residential and employment capacity targets for Sydney's subregions and strategic centres, as
well as outlining other land-use objectives. Subregions, known as Growth Centres are also defined under the
Strategy.
The Northern Expansion lies within the South West Region of the Metropolitan Strategy, and includes land
earmarked for future urban (residential, commercial, industrial) development as part of the South West Growth
Centre (SWGC) defined by the Growth Centres SEPP. The locational principles adopted for the Northern
Expansion and the EA approach have considered the future urban (rural, residential and commercial)
development in the Project Area (refer Chapter 8).
The Metropolitan Strategy is divided into seven subject areas, or strategies. These are:
•
Economy and Employment;
•
Centres and Corridors;
•
Housing;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-14
•
Transport;
•
Environment and Resources;
•
Parks and Public Places; and
•
Governance and Implementation.
AECOM
The Housing Strategy component of the Metropolitan Strategy contains a set of objectives and initiatives focusing
on:
•
ensuring an adequate supply of land and sites for residential development;
•
planning for a housing mix near jobs, transport and services; renewing local centres;
•
improving housing affordability; and
•
improving the quality of new development and urban renewal.
The Housing Strategy is designed to manage growth and change in Sydney for the next 25 years and targets the
provision of nearly 400,000 new dwellings and over 200,000 jobs in existing and future development areas in
Western Sydney by 2031. The DoP’s 2005 Managing Sydney’s Growth Centres document sets the direction and
context for new communities in Sydney’s South West and North West – the South West and North West Growth
Centres. The Growth Centres will accommodate 30 to 40 % of Sydney’s new housing over the next 25 to 30
years, providing more than 180,000 new dwellings.
Land earmarked for urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development within the SWGC is contained
within the existing CGP area and within the Northern Expansion Project Area (see Figure 11). The existing rural
character of the Northern Expansion Project Area is therefore predicted to change dramatically over the next 20
years as land within the SWGC is released and developed. The primary aim of the ‘environmental envelope’
assessment approach and the application of the locational principles described in Section 4.2 of the EA is to
allow the CGP and the Northern Expansion to adapt to and accommodate surrounding changes in land use
without resulting in land use conflict.
The nature of the proposed future development of the SWGC, and particularly those precincts within the Surface
Project Area is discussed further in Chapter 8 in order to establish the future land use context within which the
Northern Expansion project will sit.
5.2.17
Draft Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan
The Draft Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan (CPRP) represents the formal National and State Recovery Plan for a
variety of threatened species, populations and ecological communities endemic to the Cumberland Plain. The
Draft Plan was prepared by the DECCW and was publicly exhibited for a period of six weeks from November
2009.
The Draft CPRP has the overarching objective of providing for the long-term survival of the threatened biodiversity
of the Cumberland Plain and identifies actions for implementation by Federal, State and local government in
pursuit of this objective.
The Draft Plan identifies ‘priority conservation lands’ which are seen to represent the best remaining opportunities
to secure long-term biodiversity benefits in the region for the lowest possible cost (DECCW, 2009). These lands
include certain land within the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs in the vicinity of the Project Area.
Of relevance to the Northern Expansion project, the Draft CPRP identifies the following action:
•
Action 1.5: In circumstances where impacts on the Cumberland Plain’s threatened biodiversity are
unavoidable, as part of any consent, approval or licence that is issued, ensure that offset measures are
undertaken within the priority conservation lands where practicable.
The Project Area contains areas of Cumberland Plain Woodland – a CEEC. However, no removal of Cumberland
Plain Woodland is required as part of the Project. An offset package in respect of the CEEC is not required. It
should be noted, however, that Cumberland Plain Woodland species are often utilised in the rehabilitation of well
surface locations that form part of the existing CGP network.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-15
5.3
AECOM
Local Matters
The Northern Expansion extends over two different LGAs, being:
•
Camden; and
•
Campbelltown.
There are a variety of local EPIs which apply to the land the subject of the Northern Expansion works, identified in
the following table.
Table 5-5: Relevant Local Environmental Planning Instruments
Local Government Area
Camden
Relevant EPIs
LEP 45
LEP 46
LEP 47
LEP 48
LEP 74
LEP 117
LEP 121
LEP 2009
Draft LEP 2009
Draft LEP 151
Campbelltown
LEP 2002
LEP D8
IDO 15
IDO 28
5.3.1
Characterisation of the Development
Camden LEP 47
The Northern Expansion involves the development of well surface locations, gas gathering lines and associated
infrastructure for the recovery and sale of CSM.
Clause 7 of LEP 47 states that the Environmental Planning and Assessment Model Provisions 1980 (NSW)
(Model Provisions) are adopted for the purpose of the plan, except for:
(a) the definitions of child care centres, home industry, home occupation, map, professional consulting
rooms and residential flat building in clause 4(1) and clauses 8, 15 and 35(c).
The Model Provisions were repealed on 30 September 2005. However, pursuant to section 93 of the EP&A Act,
as LEP 47 was made prior to the date of repeal of the Model Provisions, certain provisions of the Model
Provisions still apply.
Part 2 of the Model Provisions provides definitions. The proposed development comprises a ‘public utility
undertaking’ defined as:
‘any of the following undertakings carried on or permitted or suffered to be carried on by or by
authority of any Government Department or under the authority of or in pursuance of any
Commonwealth or State Act:
(a)
railway, road transport, water transport, air transport, wharf or river undertakings,
(b)
undertakings for the supply of water, hydraulic power, electricity or gas or the provision of
sewerage or drainage services,
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-16
AECOM
and a reference to a person carrying on a public utility undertaking shall be construed as including a
reference to a council, county council, Government Department, corporation, firm or authority
carrying on the undertaking.’
The Project comprises the construction and operation of gas wells, gas gathering lines and associated
infrastructure, all of which is collectively required for the extraction and supply of gas.
AGL is the holder of a PEL issued for the Project Area under the PO Act. AGL also holds a PPL over part of the
Project Area. These titles give AGL the exclusive right to conduct petroleum mining and exploration operations in
and on the land included in the titles together with the right to construct and maintain on the land such works,
buildings, plant, waterways, roads, pipelines, dams, reservoirs, tanks, pumping stations, tramways, railways,
telephone lines, electric powerlines and other structures and equipment as are necessary for the full enjoyment of
the lease or to fulfil the lessee’s obligations under it.
An additional PPL would be required for the Northern Expansion and application would be made for this licence
following the issue of Project Approval. Once Project Approval is issued, the PPL must be substantially consistent
with the terms of Project Approval.
The Project comprises undertakings for the supply of gas carried on by a corporation (AGL) under the authority of
a State Act (the PO Act). The Project is therefore characterised as a ‘public utility installation’.
Under the Model Provisions a ‘utility installation’ is defined as:
‘a building or work used by a public utility undertaking, but does not including a building designed
wholly or principally as administrative or business premises or as a showroom’.
As detailed above, the Northern Expansion project is a ‘public utility undertaking’. The various Project components
constitute buildings or works used by a ‘public utility undertaking’ and are therefore characterised as a ‘utility
installation’.
Camden LEP 45
Clause 7 of LEP 45 adopts the Model Provisions, except for the definitions of child care centre, home industry,
home occupation, map and residential flat building and retail plant nursery set out under clause 4 (1) and clauses
8, 17, 22 and 33. The Project fits within the definition of a ‘utility installation’ as discussed above.
Camden LEP 46
Clause 7 of LEP 46 adopts the Model Provisions, except for the definitions of agriculture, home industry, home
occupation, map, professional consulting rooms, recreation facility, residential flat building, retail plant nursery and
tourist facilities set out under clause 4 (1) and clauses 8, 15, 35 (c) and 36. The Project fits within the definition of
a ‘utility installation’ as discussed above.
Camden LEP 48
Clause 6 of LEP 48 adopts the Model Provisions, except for the definitions of agriculture, home industries, home
occupation, hotel, map, professional consulting rooms, recreation facility, residential flat building and retail nursery
set out under clause 4(1) and clauses 8, 15, 16, 17 and 35 (c). The Project fits within the definition of a ‘public
utility undertaking’ and/or ‘utility installation’ as discussed above.
Camden LEP 74
Clause 5 of LEP 74 relates to the adoption of the Model Provisions, except for child care centres, home industry,
home occupation, map and residential flat building set out in clause 4(1) and clauses 8, 15 and 35(c). The Project
fits within the definition of a ‘public utility undertaking’ and/or ‘utility installation’ as discussed above.
Camden LEP 117
home occupation, map and residential flat building set out under clause 4 (1), and clauses 7, 8, 15 and 35 (c).
The Project fits within the definition of a ‘utility installation’ as discussed above.
Camden LEP 121
home occupation, map and residential flat building in clause 4 (1), and clauses 7, 8, 15 and 35 (c). The Project
fits within the definition of a ‘utility installation’ as discussed above.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-17
AECOM
Camden LEP (Camden Lakeside) 2009
Camden LEP 2009 was gazetted on the 22 May 2009 and relates to the Camden Lakeside Development Area
(see Figure 11).
Under LEP 2009, ‘public utility undertaking’ has the same definition as in the Model Provisions discussed above.
The Northern Expansion falls within the definition of public utility undertaking.
Camden Draft LEP 2009
The primary purpose of Draft Camden LEP 2009 is to consolidate Camden Council’s eight existing LEPs into one
comprehensive planning instrument.
Under the Camden Draft LEP 2009, ‘public utility undertaking’ has the same definition as in the Model Provisions
discussed above. The Northern Expansion falls within the definition of a public utility undertaking.
Camden Draft LEP 151
Draft LEP 151 relates to the El Caballo Blanco Development Area and will be incorporated into the Draft Camden
LEP 2009 upon gazettal.
Under the Camden Draft LEP 151, ‘public utility undertaking’ has the same definition as in the Model Provisions
discussed above. The Northern Expansion falls within the definition of a public utility undertaking.
Campbelltown (Urban Area) LEP 2002
Under Schedule 3 of LEP 2002 ‘public utility undertaking’ is defined substantially the same as the definition for a
‘public utility undertaking’ provided in the Model Provisions (discussed above). The Northern Expansion falls
within this definition of public utility undertaking.
As the proposed development is defined as a ‘public utility undertaking’ and the definition of a utility installation
involves ‘a building or work used by a public utility undertaking’, the proposed development may also be defined
as a ‘utility installation’ under the provisions of LEP 2002.
Campbelltown LEP D8
Clause 6 of LEP D8 relates to the adoption of the Model Provisions, except for the definitions of agriculture, hotel,
map and tavern set out under clause 4(1) and clauses 7, 8, 15-28 and 31-33 as described above. The Northern
Expansion fits within the definition of a ‘public utility undertaking’ and/or ‘utility installation’ as previously
discussed.
Campbelltown IDO 15
Clause 3 of IDO 15 relates to the adoption of the Model Provisions, except for the definitions of agriculture,
dwelling-house, general advertising structure and mine set out under clause 1 and clauses 3, 4, 5 and 8. The
Northern Expansion fits within the definition of a ‘utility installation’ under the provisions of IDO 15.
Campbelltown IDO 28
Clause 3 of IDO 28 relates to the adoption of the Model Provisions, except for the definitions of agriculture,
dwelling-house, general advertising structure set out under clause 1 and clauses 3, 4, 5 and 8. The Northern
Expansion fits within the definition of a ‘utility installation’ under the provisions of IDO 28.
5.3.2
Zoning and Permissibility of the Development
Overview
Well surface locations VV11, CU20, CU22, CU02 and CU06 lie within the 7(d) Environmental Protection (Scenic)
zone under Camden LEP 48. Within this zone, public utility undertakings are permissible with consent.
Well surface locations VV07, CU26, CU29, CU10, CU14, RA03 and RA09 are situated within the Environmental
Protection 7(d1) (Scenic) zone under Campbelltown LEP District 8. Within this zone, public utility undertakings are
permissible with consent.
As discussed above, within some zones of relevant LEPs, public utility undertakings are permissible. Within those
zones where ‘public utility undertakings’ are not permissible, clause 35(a) of the Model Provisions states that:
Nothing in the local environmental plan shall be construed as restricting or prohibiting or enabling
the consent authority to restrict or prohibit:
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-18
AECOM
the carrying out of development of any description specified in Schedule 1
Schedule 1 to the Model Provisions includes:
(2)
The carrying out by persons carrying on public utility undertakings, being water,
sewerage, drainage, electricity or gas undertakings, of any of the following development, being
development required for the purpose of their undertakings, that is to say:
(a)
development of any description at or below the surface of the ground,
or
(f)
any other development except:
(i) the erection of buildings, the installation or erection of plant
or other structures or erections and the reconstruction or
alteration, so as materially to affect the design or external
appearance thereof, of buildings, or
(ii) the formation or alteration of any means of access to a
road.
The gas gathering system and subsurface drilling of lateral well paths comprises development at or below the
surface of the ground and therefore fits within the parameters of Schedule 1 to the Model Provisions. These
Project components are therefore permissible in accordance with the provisions of clause 35 of the Model
Provisions.
Notwithstanding the above, clause 7 (2) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production
and Extractive Industries) 2007 (SEPP 2007) allows for certain development to be carried out with consent
including:
‘Petroleum production development for any of the following purposes:
(a) petroleum production on land which development for the purposes of agriculture or
industry may be carried out (with or without development consent),
(b) petroleum production on land that is, immediately before the commencement of this
clause, the subject of a production lease under the Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991,
(c) mining in any part of a waterway, an estuary in the coastal zone or coastal waters of
the State that is not in an environmental conservation zone,
(d) facilities for the processing or transportation of petroleum on land on which petroleum
production may be carried out (with or without development consent), but only if the
petroleum being processed or transported was recovered from that land or adjoining
land.
CSM falls within the definition of petroleum under clause 3 of SEPP 2007, and the works proposed are defined as
petroleum production, being:
the recovery, obtaining or removal of petroleum pursuant to a production lease under the Petroleum
(Onshore) Act 1991 or a production licence under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982, and
includes:
(a) the construction, operation and decommissioning of associated petroleum related
works, and
(b) the drilling and operation of wells, and
(c) the rehabilitation of land affected by petroleum production.
Therefore, in addition to the Model Provisions, well surface locations and associated works such as the gas
gathering system situated on land where agriculture or industry is permissible are permissible under the
provisions of clause 7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007.
Within the relevant Environmental Protection zones under Camden LEP 48 and Campbelltown LEP D8,
agriculture is permissible development therefore the proposed infrastructure is permissible in accordance with
clause 7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-19
AECOM
It is therefore concluded that the proposed works are permissible pursuant to the relevant provisions of SEPP
2007.
Summary of Zoning and Permissibility
Table 5-6 below summarises the zoning and permissibility of the Northern Expansion under the relevant local
EPIs. For the purposes of this assessment, future zoning under draft LEPs have also been considered and are
outlined separately in Table 5-7. It should be noted that some areas to which existing LEPs apply, are now zoned
under the Growth Centres SEPP to which the zoning under the SEPP would prevail (refer Section 5.5.4).
Table 5-6: Zoning and Permissibility of Northern Expansion Works
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
Permissible
Comment
Sub-surface infrastructure only.
2(d1) Residential “D1”
(Manooka Valley) Zone
9
Utility installations permissible
with consent.
Permissible pursuant to clause
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
discussed in Section 5.3.2.
5(a) Special Uses Zone
9
Camden LEP 47
7(d1) Environmental
Protection (Scenic) Zone
7(d2) Environmental
Protection (Urban Edge)
Zone
7(d3) Environmental
Protection (Bushland
Conservation and
Restoration) Zone
9
35(a) of the Model Provisions
as discussed in Section 5.3.2.
9
9
1(b) Rural B (2ha) Zone
9
Public utility undertakings
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
Camden LEP 48
5(a) Special Uses “A”
Zone
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
9
with consent
5-20
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
AECOM
Permissible
5(c) Special Uses (Botanic
Gardens)
Comment
with consent
9
7(d) Environmental
Well surface locations VV11,
CU20, CU22, CU02 and CU06
and associated access roads.
9
Public utility undertakings and
utility installations permissible
with consent.
7(2)(a) and (d) of SEPP 2007
R1 General Residential
9
Camden LEP (Camden
Lakeside) 2009
RE2 Private Recreation
9
7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007 as
1(d) Rural Future Urban
Zone
9
with consent.
7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007 as
2(b) Residential B Zone
Campbelltown (Urban
Area) LEP 2002
9
without consent.
7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007 as
5(e) Special Uses Public
Purpose Corridor
9
without consent.
7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007 as
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-21
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
7(d1) Environmental
Protection 100 hectares
Minimum Zone
AECOM
Permissible
Comment
9
without consent.
7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007 as
7(d5) Environmental
Protection 1 hectares
Minimum Zone
9
without consent.
7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007 as
7(d6) Environmental
Protection 0.4 hectares
Minimum Zone
9
without consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
Campbelltown LEP District
8 (Central Hills Lands)
5(a) Special Uses (Water
Supply) Zone
9
5(g) Special Uses (Botanic
Gardens) Zone
9
6(c) Open Space
(Regional) Zone
Permissible under clause 35(a)
of the Model Provisions.
of the Model Provisions and
clause 7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007
9
7(d1) Environmental
Well surface locations VV07,
CU26, CU29, CU10, CU14,
RA03 and RA09.
9
7(2) (a) of SEPP 2007 as
3(e) Town Centre
9
Camden LEP 45
3(f) Town Centre
(Support)
9
1(a) Rural (40 hectares)
Camden LEP 46
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
with consent.
9
5-22
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
AECOM
Permissible
2(a) Residential
9
2(b) Residential Medium
Density
9
3(b1) Business Support
9
5(a) Special Uses
9
6(a1) Open Space
Existing
9
6(b) Open Space
Proposed
9
with consent.
with consent.
6(c) Open Space Private
with consent.
9
2(d) Residential “D”
(Release Areas)
Comment
with consent.
9
3(b1) Business Support
with consent.
9
3(g) District Business
with consent.
9
4(b) Service Industrial
with consent.
Camden LEP 47
9
with consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
5(a) Special Uses (School)
9
6(d) Regional Open Space
9
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-23
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
7(d1) Environmental
Protection (Scenic)
AECOM
Permissible
9
1(a) Rural “A” (40ha)
9
1(b) Rural “B” (2ha)
with consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
9
1(c) Rural “C” (0.4ha)
with consent.
9
Camden LEP 48
3(c) Business
(Neighbourhood)
9
5(a) Special Uses “A”
Zone
9
5(c) Special Uses (Botanic
Gardens)
9
with consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
with consent
6(a) Open Space (Local)
with consent.
9
1(e) Rural “E” (0.6ha)
Permissible under clause
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007.
9
1(f) Rural “F” (0.2 ha)
with consent.
9
2(d) Residential
with consent.
Camden LEP 74
9
5(a) Cultural Landscape
with consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
9
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Comment
5-24
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
5(e) Special Uses—Water
Management
AECOM
Permissible
9
6(a) Open Space
with consent.
9
6(e) Open Space—
Waterway Buffer
9
7(a) Environmentally
Sensitive Land
9
7(d4) Environmental
Protection (EcoResidential)
Comment
with consent.
with consent.
9
2(d) Residential
with consent.
with consent.
Camden LEP 117
6(b) Open Space
Proposed
2(d) Residential
with consent.
with consent.
Camden LEP 121
7(a) Environmentally
Sensitive Land
1(a) Rural A
with consent.
9
2(b) Residential B
Campbelltown (Urban
Area) LEP 2002
9
3(a) General Business
without consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
9
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
with consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
without consent.
5-25
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
AECOM
Permissible
4(a) General Industry
9
5(a) Special Uses A
6(a) Local Open Space
without consent.
9
6(c) Private Open Space
without consent.
9
10(c) Local
Comprehensive Centre
without consent.
9
5(a) Special Uses (Military
Reserve & Water Supply)
without consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
9
IDO 15
Comment
without consent.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007 as
9
6(c) Open Space
(Regional)
9
7(c) Scenic Protection
Area
9
35(a) of the Model Provisions.
IDO 28
Table 5-7: Future Zoning and Permissibility Considerations Northern Expansion Works
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
Permissible
Comment
Draft Camden LEP 2009/
Draft Camden LEP 151 (El
Caballo Blanco and
Gledswood)
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
E3 Environmental
Management
Subsurface activities only.
9
Public utility undertakings are
permissible with consent
9
5-26
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
AECOM
Permissible
RU1 Primary Production
9
Comment
Well surface locations CU10
and CU14 along with
subsurface infrastructure.
RU2 Rural Landscape
9
well surface locations VV11,
CU20, CU22 and CU06 along
with subsurface infrastructure.
RE2 Private Recreation
9
SP1 Special Activities
9
SP2 Special Uses
Infrastructure (Water
Supply Canal)
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007.
7(2)(a) of SEPP 2007.
Subsurface infrastructure only.
9
7(2)(c) of SEPP 2007.
9
R5 Large Lot Residential
9
IN1 General Industrial
9
IN2 Light Industrial
9
9
Draft Camden LEP 2009
B1 Neighbourhood Centre
B2 Local Centre
9
B5 Business Development
9
RE1 Public Recreation
9
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
7(2)(c) of SEPP 2007.
5-27
Relevant EPI
Landuse Zone
E1 National Parks and
Nature Reserves
AECOM
Permissible
Comment
9
7(2)(c) of SEPP 2007.
* The Growth Centres SEPP applies to the Turner Road Development Area as specified in the Draft Camden LEP 2009 (Land
zoning map sheet LZN-017, 2009)
Permissibility of development forms one of the locational principles adopted in respect of the Northern Expansion
and is an important consideration in determining the location of the well surface locations and associated
infrastructure.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
5-28
6.0
AECOM
Consultation
This chapter provides a summary of the consultation undertaken as part of the EA process to date, including both
formal consultation undertaken by the NSW DoP with relevant regulatory authorities and independent consultation
undertaken by the Proponent with regulatory authorities, the local community and other stakeholders. The chapter
summarises the key issues raised by the consulted parties and references where these issues are addressed in
the EA document.
6.1
New South Wales Formal Procedures
This EA has been prepared in accordance with Part 3A of the EP&A Act and EP&A Regulation. Part 3A of the
EP&A Act ensures that the potential environmental effects of a Project are properly assessed and considered in
the decision making process.
In preparing this EA, of the Director-General’s EARs have been addressed as required by section 75F of the
EP&A Act. The key matters raised by the Director-General for consideration in the EA are outlined in Table 6-1
and Table 6-2 below, together with the relevant section of the EA which addresses that matter. A full copy of the
Director-General’s EARs for the Project is provided in Appendix A.
Table 6-1: Director-Generals General Requirements
General Requirement
Reference in EA
The Environmental Assessment of the project must include:
•
•
•
An executive summary;
Executive Summary
A detailed description of the following:
Chapter 1 and 4
-
Existing and approved operations/facilities; and
-
The existing environmental management and monitoring regime;
A detailed description of the project, including the:
-
Need for the project
-
Alternatives considered, including a justification for the proposed
project;
-
Likely interactions between stages 1, 2 and 3 of the Camden Gas
Project;
-
Likely staging of the project; and
-
Plan of any building works;
•
A risk assessment of the potential environmental impacts of the project on
the environment, identifying the key issues for further assessment;
•
A detailed assessment of the key issues specified below, and any other
significant issues identified in the risk assessment (see above), which
includes:
-
A description of the existing environment, using sufficient baseline
data;
-
An assessment of the potential impacts of all stages of the project,
including any cumulative impacts, taking into consideration any
relevant guidelines, policies, plans and statutory provisions (see
below);
-
A description of the measures that would be implemented to avoid,
minimise, and if necessary, offset the potential impacts of the project,
including detailed contingency plans for managing and potentially
significant risks to the environment;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Chapter 3 and 4
Chapter 10
Chapter 8 – 22, 23 and 24
6-1
AECOM
General Requirement
Reference in EA
•
A statement of commitments, outlining all the proposed environmental
management and monitoring measures;
Chapter 24
•
A conclusion justifying the project on economic, social and environmental
grounds, taking into consideration whether the project is consistent with the
objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; and
Chapter 26
•
A signed statement from the author of the Environmental Assessment
certifying that the information contained within the document is neither false
nor misleading.
At the front of this EA
Table 6-2: Director-Generals Key Issue Environmental Assessment Requirements
Key Issues
Reference in EA
Land Use Conflicts
•
Identify and address any potential land use conflicts between the project and
any future urban release areas proposed in south-west Sydney in
consultation with the relevant landowners
Chapter 8
Soil and Water
•
Proposed water management system during construction and operation; and
•
An assessment of the potential impacts of the project on the quantity and
quality (including salinity) of surface and groundwater resources.
Noise and Vibration
Chapter 13
Air Quality
•
Including potential dust and odour impacts.
Chapter 14
Greenhouse Gas
•
Include a quantitative assessment of the potential greenhouse gas
emissions of the project; and
•
Include a detailed description of the proposed measures that would be
implemented to minimise greenhouse gas emissions, and ensure the project
is energy efficient.
Chapter 14
Hazards
Chapter 10
Biodiversity
•
Include accurate estimates of any vegetation clearing; and
•
Include a detailed assessment of the potential impacts on any terrestrial and
aquatic threatened species, populations, ecological communities or their
habitats.
Chapter 11
Heritage
•
Including Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal.
Transport
•
Include an assessment of potential impacts of the project on the safety and
performance of the road network; and
•
Include a clear demonstration of how the project will not compromise the
future upgrade of Camden Valley Way or any other road corridor.
Chapter 19
Visual
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-2
Key Issues
AECOM
Reference in EA
Chapter 17
Rehabilitation
•
Include a detailed description of how each site would be progressively
rehabilitated and integrated into the surrounding landscape; and
•
Include a detailed description of the measures that would be put in place to
ensure that sufficient resources are available to implement the proposed
rehabilitation measures, and for the ongoing management of the site
following the cessation of gas production.
Chapter 21
Consultation
During the preparation of the Environmental Assessment, consultation should be
undertaken with the relevant local, State or Commonwealth government
authorities, service providers, community groups or affected landowners.
In particular, consult with the:
•
Owners of land to be used for the project;
•
Camden and Campbelltown Councils;
•
Department of Environment and Climate Change;
•
Department of Primary Industries;
•
Department of Water and Energy.
•
The consultation process, and the issues raised during this process, must be
described in the Environmental Assessment.
6.2
Consultation with Stakeholders and Other Relevant Authorities
The Proponent has undertaken consultation with key local and State Government agencies as specified in the
EARs during the preliminary design phase and preparation of this EA. The purpose of this consultation has been
to provide an overview of the Project and to seek input into matters they would like to see addressed in the EA.
In this regard, written comments were sought from relevant statutory agencies identified in the EARs to assist with
the preparation of the EA (and are provided in Appendix A). Table 6-3 below summarises the responses
received together with the relevant section of the EA which addresses the matter. It should be noted that the
comments received and summarised below were made with respect to the original project description which
included the CNGP. Therefore some of these comments are no longer relevant to the project.
Table 6-3: Stakeholder Consultation
Agency
Matters for Consideration
Reference in the EA
Campbelltown City
Council
Details of the finalised location of the plant and associated
infrastructure to Council for comment prior to the submission
of the EA by AGL.
Chapter 4
It is recommended that the Department encourage the
applicant to consult with Council's Environmental Planning
Section during the preparation of the EA due to the Local
Planning Strategy having relevance to the subject land.
Chapter 5 and
Chapter 6
Flora and Fauna
The proposed timeframe for completion of the EA is
questioned as compliance with DECCWs Guidelines for
Threatened Species Assessments may involve the conducting
of surveys at different times of the year.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Chapter 11 and
Appendix E
6-3
Agency
AECOM
Reference in the EA
Statutory Planning
The EA should have regard to Council’s Visual and
Landscape Analysis of the Scenic Hills and the Edge Scenic
Protection Lands study.
The EA should consider the following legislation and policy of
potential relevance to the project:
•
Catchment Action Plans
•
River Health Strategy for the Hawkesbury-Nepean
Catchment
•
SEPP 44
•
SEPP 19
•
Georges River Regional Environmental Plan
•
Noxious Weeds Act
•
Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995
•
Local Government Act 1993
•
National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974
Air Quality
The EA should assess the cumulative impacts of the
proposed development on the ambient air quality of the southwest region.
The EA should include assessment and monitoring of air
quality impacts from different stages of the operation of the
CNGP including start-up, shut-down and full and partial
loading.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The EA should comprehensively assess all direct, indirect,
upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions
associated with the proposed development and identify
measures to reduce the impact of the emissions.
Water Quality
Chapter 9
Chapter 17
Chapter 5 (where
relevant)
Impacts from the CNGP
are no longer relevant
to this EA
Chapter 14 and
Appendix G
Chapter 14 and
Appendix H
Chapter 9
The EA should provide an assessment of the potential
impacts of the project on surface water.
The preparation of the EA should take account of the fact that
Council has implemented a number of policies and projects in
both the Georges and Nepean River Catchments and has
also recently commenced preparation of a Strategic
Environmental Plan for the Upper Georges River Catchment.
A comprehensive assessment of the features of surface
waters within the subject site (both within the subject land and
downstream) should be conducted as part of the EA.
A Soil and Water Plan should be prepared in respect of the
project.
Geology and Soils
Chapter 18
Potential erosion impacts associated with the proposed
development should be addressed as part of the EA.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-4
Agency
AECOM
Reference in the EA
Ecology
Chapter 11
The EA should adequately assess potential impacts on habitat
corridors to avoid any adverse implications for Council’s future
Biodiversity Strategy.
The EA should comply with the requirements of all relevant
draft and adopted State and Commonwealth Recovery Plans
as well as Priority Action Statements.
Heritage
Listed environmental heritage items within Central Hills Lands
should be considered as part of the EA for the project.
Visual
Chapter 15 and
Chapter 16
Chapter 17
Ensure the protection of the scenic qualities of the area within
the boundaries of the 7(d1) (Environmental Protection
(Scenic) Zone.
Camden City Council
Heritage
The location of wells in relation to heritage items and the
potential impacts of the project on these items should be
assessed as part of the EA.
Chapter 15 and
Chapter 16
The EA should consider the potential impacts upon the Upper
Canal Water Supply, Gledswood Homestead and Varroville
House.
The EA should consider the requirements of the NSW
Heritage Act 1977.
Consultation
Chapter 6
Consultation to be undertaken with relevant parties
concerning future urban release areas including Turner Road,
Camden Lakeside, El Caballo Blanco/Gledswood and East
Leppington.
Consultation should be undertaken with the Sydney
Catchment Authority (SCA) regarding works on land owned by
this authority.
Department of
Environment, Climate
Change and Water
(DECCW)
The following environmental impacts of the project need to be
assessed, quantified and reported on (according to relevant
guidelines specified by DECCW):
Noise
Chapter 13
Demonstrate that all feasible and reasonable mitigation
measures have been implemented to minimise noise impacts
associated with any flaring, relief valve operations, blowdowns
or other such activities.
The development should be designed in accordance with the
NSW Government’s Industrial Noise Policy.
Noise assessment should be considered during construction,
production, post development and closure and final
rehabilitation stages.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-5
Agency
AECOM
Reference in the EA
Threatened Species
Chapter 11
A field survey of the site should be conducted and
documented in accordance with the draft ‘Guidelines for
Threatened Species Assessment’.
Likely impacts on threatened species and their habitat need to
be assessed, evaluated and reported on.
Describe avoidance and mitigation actions. Include an
assessment of the effectiveness and reliability of these
measures.
Chapter 15
The EA needs to clearly demonstrate that effective community
consultation with Aboriginal communities has been
undertaken in determining and assessing impacts, developing
options and making final recommendations.
Air Quality
Chapter 14
Examination on the use of offsets of best available technology
(BAT) to reduce NOx emissions.
GHG emissions
Chapter 14
Estimate Scope 1 and 2 emissions, and preferably Scope 3.
Water and groundwater quantity and quality
Provide an assessment demonstrating how pollution of
surface and groundwater will be avoided, and how polluted
water captured on site and redirected to reticulated sewer or
collected, treated and reused, will be achieved.
Department of
Primary Industries
(DPI) – Mineral
Resources (now DII)
Chapter 9 and Chapter
12
Details are required on the location of the proposed
development including the affected environment to place the
project in its local and regional environmental context
including surrounding land uses, planning zones, potential
sensitive receptors, surface and sub-surface area/features of
conservation significance, environmental sensitivity and
Aboriginal cultural heritage values.
Figure 3 and Chapters
2, 5, 8, 11 and 15
Describe mitigation and management options that will be used
to prevent, control, abate or mitigate identified environmental
impacts associated with the project and to reduce risks to
human health and prevent the degradation of the
environment. This should include an assessment of the
effectiveness and reliability of the measures and any residual
impacts after these measures are implemented.
Chapter 24
General
Chapter 12 and
Assessment of impacts of drilling fluids, lubricants and fracing
fluids of groundwater aquifers.
Chapter 24
Rehabilitation management plans to be developed in
consultation with the DoP.
A Petroleum Operating Plan (POP) will be required before
activities are undertaken.
Post-Activity land use
Chapter 4 and 21
Identify and assess final land use options.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-6
Agency
AECOM
Reference in the EA
Safety
Chapter 10 and
Chapter 24 and
Future design, construction and installation of all wellhead
devices should meet all appropriate Australian standards.
Appendix D
AGL good practice techniques should be maintained or
improved.
Department of
Primary Industries
(DPI) – Agriculture
and Fisheries (now
DII
In principle support for the project
Environmental Management and Impact Mitigation
Assess the impacts of drilling fluids, lubricants and fracing
fluids on groundwater aquifers.
Chapter 4, 9, 12 and
Chapter 21
Rehabilitation management plans prepared or required in
respect of the project should be prepared in consultation with
DPI (DII).
A Petroleum Operating Plan (POP) will be required before the
proposed activities are undertaken.
Post-Activity Land Use
Chapter 4 and 21
The EA should identify and assess final land use options and
detail the preferred outcome, including justification for the
preferred final land use.
Safety Issues
Design, construction and installation of infrastructure to meet
all relevant Australian Standards.
Chapter 10 and
Appendix D
EA to commit to maintaining and improving AGL’s existing
good practice techniques.
Proponent should commit to working with DPI-MR in
maintaining safety standards in relation to drilling, fracing and
construction operations.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-7
Agency
AECOM
Reference in the EA
Agriculture
Chapter 4 and
Chapters 8-22
The EA should consider:
•
Potential impacts upon the groundwater system;
•
Management of waste products to prevent
contamination;
•
Potential impacts on the rural community;
•
Siting of infrastructure in consultation with landowners to
minimise impacts on farm operations;
•
Management of the spread of noxious or agronomic
weeds;
•
Testing of any water to be reused as part of the project
to ensure acceptable salinity levels;
•
Potential impacts upon farm values, farm production and
transfer of property ownership;
•
Progressive and/or final land rehabilitation;
•
The use of containment bunds to isolate disturbed areas
from adjoining lands;
•
Provision of stock exclusion fencing around work areas
as required; and
•
Process for landowner compensation.
Fisheries
Chapter 9, 11 and 18
The EA should address the following issues:
Department of Water
and Energy (DWE)
•
Potential impacts upon aquatic habitat;
•
Sediment and erosion controls to be current best
practice;
•
Any 3rd order or above stream crossings should be
under-bored; and
•
Waterways crossings to comply with relevant DPI Policy
and Guidelines.
The EA to quantify volumes and detail management of
extracted groundwater.
Chapter 12
Chapter 9
The EA to consider stability of rivers and minor watercourses
in relation to crossings or other activities within riparian
corridors.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-8
AECOM
Agency
Reference in the EA
Roads and Traffic
Authority (RTA)
Detailed information to be provided with regard to any works
carried out along, or directly adjacent to Camden Valley Way.
Chapter 19 and
Chapter 24
Access arrangements for the project should not conflict with
the RTA’s access strategy for Camden Valley Way.
Detailed information to be provided regarding any works
proposed within or adjacent to a classified road corridor.
EA to provide details regarding proposed access
arrangements for the project. Vehicular access associated
with the operation of the development should be via the local
road network.
EA to provide details about the daily and peak traffic
movements associated with the project.
The RTA requires a detailed Traffic Management Plan for all
construction activities. The TMP should be submitted to the
RTA for review and comment.
Sydney Catchment
Authority (SCA)
Identification of the Upper Canal on all relevant plans.
Liaise with the SCA to negotiate access and maintenance of
the Upper Canal easement.
Chapter 6, Chapter 9,
Chapter 13, Chapter
15 and Chapter 16
The EA should consider the following key issues:
6.3
•
Potential impacts of the project upon the Upper Canal’s
operational capacity and how these impacts would be
managed;
•
Vibration impact assessment;
•
Potential impacts of the project on the heritage values of
the Upper Canal and details of mitigation measures as
appropriate;
•
Details of proposed stormwater and wastewater
management
Community Consultation
As part of the preliminary project planning for the proposed works, AGL undertook a program of community
consultation targeting local landowners and stakeholders through a program of meetings and workshops. Details
of this consultation program are provided in the following sections.
6.3.1
Objectives and Approach
Specific objectives of community consultation program for the Project were:
•
to ensure the community was aware of the Project and that an EA was being prepared for the Project;
•
to facilitate information exchange from an early stage between the study team and the community to enable
joint understanding of the key issues;
•
to provide opportunity for public comment and to assist and supply interested parties with information;
•
to provide an explanation of the EA process;
•
to identify, analyse and address community issues and suggestions;
•
to identify potentially conflicting issues at an early stage of the Project; and
•
to demonstrate that issues were being addressed.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-9
•
AECOM
The consultation strategy for the Project involves a variety of consultation techniques throughout the
different stages of the assessment and approvals process to enable information about the Project to
effectively reach target audiences. The key stages/timing of the consultation program is summarised in the
table below:
Table 6-4: Consultation Strategy
Stage in Assessment Process
Relevant Stakeholder
Consultation Technique
Lodgement of PEA
(Environmental Assessment
Scoping Report)
State and local government
Meetings
Preliminary Project Design
Landowners
Meetings
State Government Agencies
Meetings and discussions
During Field Surveys
Local Councils
Landowners
Preparation of EA
Adequacy Review and Public
Exhibition
Submissions Report
Issue of Project Approval
Landowners
Letters
Adjoining landowners
Letters
Local Councils
Letters/discussions
Local MPs
Letters/discussions
Letters/Meetings/discussions
Landowners
Letters/discussions
Adjoining landowners
Letters/discussions
Letters/discussions
Discussions/meetings
Landowners
Discussions/meetings
Advisory Letter
Landowners
Advisory Letter
Neighbours
Advisory Letter
Local MPs
Advisory Letter
Local Councils
Advisory Letter
The approach adopted to distribute information to the local community involved the following:
•
Discussions with landowners potentially affected by the proposed works;
•
Notification of the Project to the CGP Community Consultative Committee (CCC) and interested community
and business groups; and
•
Meetings with local council staff, Members of Parliament and government agencies.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-10
6.4
AECOM
Landowner Consultation
The Proponent has engaged in discussions with landowners potentially affected by the proposed works within the
Surface Project Area including the SCA and Dartwest Developers. Consultation undertaken with landowners is
summarised in the table below:
Table 6-5: Summary of Landowner Consultation
Landowner
Details of Consultation
SCA
Ongoing dialogue with various
levels of SCA including project
team meetings and site visits
from project inception to
present day.
Various
Developers
within the
Growth Centres
Discussions with developers
regarding well surface
locations, access roads, gas
gathering lines and appropriate
site for a storage yard.
Growth Centres
Commission
(GCC)
A presentation of the project
has been conducted with GCC,
with no major issues raised.
Landowners General
Letters sent out to directly
affected landowners providing
project information and updates
throughout the process.
Mount Annan
Botanical
Gardens
Several meetings and site visits
from project conception to
present day.
Issues Raised
•
Heritage listing of Upper Canal;
•
Detail of commercial arrangements;
•
Construction issues to be addressed;
•
Full risk assessment to be completed;
•
Certain previous work under the Canal successful;
•
Proposal for use of SCA land would have to be
presented to the Board.
•
Potential for storage yard at this location remains.
•
Various issues were raised with regard to final
location of well surface locations, access roads and
gas gathering lines.
•
Location of CU02 in relation to the proposed
development.
•
Timing of the gathering line construction along
Denham Court Rd, and the future plans for this road.
•
Various issues were raised with regard to well surface
location resulting in agreed final locations for
environmental assessment
•
Various issues were raised with regard to final
location of gas gathering line.
Landowner consultation is ongoing and involve all relevant components of the project. Agreements with the
landowner would be in place prior to construction.
6.4.1
Sydney Catchment Authority
The proposed main spine line is to be located on land owned by the SCA. A workshop was held between the
Proponent and SCA on 10th August 2009 to discuss the potential use of SCA land and to identify construction and
operational issues along the Upper Canal in relation to the siting of proposed infrastructure. Key personnel from
both AGL and SCA attended this meeting, along with specialists in the fields of hazard and risk and noise and
vibration.
The key issues raised by the SCA were:
•
Location of Upper Canal main spine gathering line corridor;
-
•
The need for more detailed drawings of where the gathering lines would cross the Upper Canal.
Construction and operation requirements for main gathering line;
-
Concerns for maintenance access, potential dilapidation reports, security of equipment and works
prone to vandalism;
-
SCA suggested regular inspections of the Upper Canal, regular slashings of vegetation, fences and
security patrols;
-
The location of existing services in the corridor; and
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-11
-
AECOM
AGL would need an “access consent” in order to allow continual access for AGL and contractors to the
Upper Canal corridor.
The issues raised by the SCA during the workshop have been addressed in Chapter 4 and 9 of this EA. During
the workshop the Proponent responded with methods and techniques proposed to mitigate any impacts on the
matters of concern regarding SCA infrastructure. These measures would be included in the EMS for the Project
and are included in the Statement of Commitments (Chapter 24).
6.4.2
Roads and Traffic Authority
The Project is expected to utilise several roads owned by the RTA as part of access routes for works associated
with well surface locations and gas gathering lines. As such, the RTA have been consulted and discussions are
ongoing.
Following the comments received from the RTA after their review of the scoping report as part of the DGR’s,
discussions with the Road Declaration & Telecommunications Manager has been ongoing and a Project brief has
been provided.
nd
A presentation was held on the 2 of December 2009 with the RTA Southwest Development Team to highlight
the Proponents undertaking of a Traffic Study as part of the EA, RTA’s involvement in the Project, and address
any areas of concern. The RTA expressed no major issues of concern, given that the EA satisfies the DGR’s
previously provided by the RTA.
AGL committed to attend regular quarterly meetings with the Southwest Development team and an inter-agency
communications group as part of ongoing consultation.
6.5
CGP Community Consultative Committee
The CGP Community Consultative Committee (CCC) was established as a requirement of past development
consents, and including representatives of each of the local Councils, the community residing in the areas subject
to current approvals, a local environmental group and the Proponent. The Northern Expansion proposal was first
th
tabled at the CCC meeting on the 19 March 2009. The Project Area was presented, elements of the proposal
were discussed, and a proposed timeline was provided. An update for the Project was provided at the following
th
meeting on the 16 July 2009, which outlined the progress of the Project. Further updates on the Project progress
th
and timeline were distributed to the CCC members on the 18 November 2009.
6.6
Local Government
A targeted program of consultation was undertaken with local government stakeholders, including local councils
and local MPs. The consultation program undertaken is summarised in the table below:
Table 6-6: Summary of Local Government Consultation
Stakeholder
Issues Raised
Geoff Corrigan –
Local MP
Meeting held on 9 February
2009 to inform of Project
status and detail.
Discussed future urban development in the Surface
Project Area.
Andrew McDonald –
Local MP
Meeting held on 26th February
status and detail.
Particularly interested in the potential implications of the
Project for his electorate.
Phil Costa – Local
MP/Water Minister
Meeting held on 24th March
status and detail.
Generally supportive of CGP along with plans to extend
and use SCA Upper Canal Corridor.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
th
6-12
AECOM
Stakeholder
Issues Raised
Graham West –
Local MP
Letter issued 10/06/09
informing of Project details and
status.
No major issues raised.
Pat Farmer – Local
MP
status.
Chris Hayes – Local
MP
status.
Camden Council
Initial meeting held with Chris
Lalor and the planning team on
26th February 2009. Meeting
was to inform Council of the
Project and discuss who
should be consulted within
Council.
Suggested that a presentation be made to relevant
Council Officers.
Presentation to discuss Project
th
and EASR on 18 March
2009.
Questions raised regarding the Project and the content
of the EASR.
Initial meeting with Felicity
Saunders and the planning
team on 12th March 2009.
Presentation of Project detail
and EASR. Various meetings
at adequacy review stage.
Questions raised regarding the Project and the content
of the EASR.
Campbelltown
Council
Discussion of issues to be addressed in the EA.
Discussion of issues to be addressed in the EA.
Camden and Campbelltown Councils were consulted by the DoP in relation to the issue of EARs for the Project.
Both Councils provided written responses detailing issues to be addressed as part of the EA. These issues and
the relevant reference in the EA are summarised in Table 6-3.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-13
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
6-14
7.0
AECOM
Issues Prioritisation
This chapter draws upon the feedback received from the relevant government authorities, the community and
other stakeholders during the consultation undertaken on the Project, as summarised in Chapter 6. The chapter
identifies the key issues of importance to the Project and applies a prioritisation matrix to rank issues in terms of
their relevance and importance to the assessment of the potential impacts of the Project. The results of the
prioritisation exercise are then used to establish the most appropriate level of assessment within the EA – high,
medium or low.
7.1
Issues Identification
7.1.1
Methodology
Consultation with relevant statutory authorities and meetings held with the local community and landowners, as
well as the Proponent’s experience with the Project to date, assisted with the identification of issues relating to the
Project.
7.1.2
The Issues
The environmental issues associated with the Northern Expansion identified through the EASR, consultation with
the community, State and local government agencies, and the Director-General’s EARs include:
•
land use (compatibility with future land use);
•
noise and vibration;
•
•
water management;
•
visual impact;
•
ecology (flora and fauna);
•
heritage;
•
hazard and risk;
•
transport and traffic;
•
geology and soils; and
•
social and economic impacts.
7.2
Prioritisation of Issues
7.2.1
Approach
The prioritisation of issues for the proposed Project is based on the need to recognise that the higher the potential
severity of adverse environmental effects and the greater the consequence of those unmanaged effects, the
higher the degree of environmental assessment required.
Where a high potential effect was identified, the attribute or issue was allocated a higher priority for assessment.
Table 7-1 provides the issues prioritisation matrix upon which the ranking of environmental issues has been
based. This method assesses priority on the basis of the potential severity of environmental effects and the likely
consequences of those potential effects if unmanaged. The potential severity and consequence of the
environmental effect are each given a numerical value between 1 and 3. The numbers are added together to
provide a result which is then ranked and shaded in the matrix by the level of priority being high, medium or low.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
7-1
AECOM
Table 7-1: Issues Prioritisation Matrix
Severity
Consequence of Unmanaged Effects
Of Effects
3 High
2 Medium
1 Low
1 Low
4
(Medium)
3
(Low)
2
(Low)
2 Medium
5
(High)
4
(Medium)
3
(Low)
3 High
6
(High)
5
(High)
4
(Medium)
7.2.2
Assessment
This assessment aims to allow the prioritisation of issues for assessment and does not consider the application of
mitigation measures to manage environmental effects. In all cases, appropriate and proven mitigation measures,
chosen based upon the experience of regulators and other similar projects would be used to minimise potential
impacts. These measures would be described in detail in the EA prepared for the proposed Project.
The allocation of risk is based upon the following considerations:
Severity of Risk
Low:
localised implications; imperceptible or short term cumulative impacts.
Medium: regional implications; modest or medium term cumulative impacts.
High:
inter-regional implications: serious or long term cumulative impacts.
Consequences of Unmanaged Effects
Low:
minor environmental change; offsets readily available.
Medium: moderate adverse environmental change; offsets available.
High:
important adverse environmental change, offsets not readily available.
The prioritisation of environmental issues shown in Table 7-2 related to the Project as initially submitted in the
EASR which incorporated the CNGP. It is noted that as the CNGP is no longer part of this Project Application and
therefore is not assessed as part of this EA. The revised prioritisation of issues for the Project which now excludes
the CNGP, is included in Table 7-3 and has formed the basis of the scope for this EA.
Table 7-2: Prioritisation Analysis
Issue
Severity
Consequence
Priority
Construction related impacts
on air quality such as dust
generation and vehicle
emissions
1
2
3 (Low)
Combustion (odour and
NOx) emissions from CNGP
during operations and
impacts on air shed of
surrounding area
2
2
4 (Medium)
Impacts on air quality such
as dust generation and
vehicle emissions during
production and post-
1
1
2 (Low)
Aspect: Air Quality
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
7-2
Issue
AECOM
Severity
Consequence
Priority
Odour emissions as a result
of drilling activities.
1
1
2 (Low)
Community concern
regarding degradation of air
quality.
2
1
3 (Low)
Regional and inter-regional
impacts upon air quality.
1
1
2 (Low)
Degradation of surface
water quality in the local
area during construction.
1
2
3 (Low)
Degradation of surface
water quality in the local
area during operation.
1
1
2 (Low)
Release of formation waters
into the surface drainage,
including the potential for
saline waters or sediment
laden waters
1
1
2 (Low)
Dewatering and disruption
to groundwater aquifers due
to activities
2
2
4 (Medium)
Reduction of groundwater
quality through connectivity
of aquifers and saline
groundwater storage on the
surface
2
1
3 (Low)
Surface water runoff into the
Upper Canal Water Supply
during construction and
operation of the CNGP
2
3
5 (High)
Temporary noise nuisance
to local residents during
construction of well surface
location and gas gathering
lines
2
2
4 (Medium)
Noise nuisance to local
residents during production
1
2
3 (Low)
Noise nuisance to local
residents during
maintenance
1
2
3 (Low)
Temporary noise during
construction of CNGP
1
2
3 (Low)
development activities
Aspect: Water
Aspect: Noise and Vibration
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
7-3
AECOM
Issue
Severity
Consequence
Priority
Noise nuisance during
operation of CNGP
2
2
4 (Medium)
Aspect: Hazard and Risk
Exposure of surrounding land
uses to risks and hazards
during construction.
2
2
4 (Medium)
Exposure of surrounding land
uses to risks and hazards
during operation.
2
2
4 (Medium)
Exposure of employees to
risks and hazards.
2
2
4 (Medium)
Aspect: Geology and Soils
Erosion and sedimentation
during construction.
2
1
3 (Low) Potential geotechnical
impacts as a result of drilling
and fracing operations.
2
2
4 (Medium) Potential sterilisation of coal
seams for future mining
activities.
1
2
3 (Low) Contamination and
sterilisation of land for future
uses.
1
2
3 (Low) Aspect: Ecological
Loss of habitat due to
clearing and development.
2
2
4 (Medium)
Reduction in biodiversity due
to loss of habitat for native
species.
1
1
2 (Low)
Spread of weeds and feral
animals.
1
2
3 (Low)
Impact upon threatened
species.
2
3
5 (High)
Aspect: Socio-Economic
Demand upon community,
natural or transport
resources.
1
1
2 (Low)
Impacts upon amenity of
surrounding properties such
as noise, visual, etc
1
2
3 (Low)
Job creation during
construction
1
1
2 (Low)
Job creation during
operation
1
1
2 (Low)
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
7-4
Issue
AECOM
Severity
Consequence
Priority
Impacts on Non-Indigenous
heritage (Upper Canal
Water Supply System).
2
2
4 (Medium)
Impacts on Indigenous
heritage.
2
1
3 (Low)
Visual impacts during
construction.
1
2
3 (Low)
operation of well surface
locations.
1
2
3 (Low)
operation of CNGP
2
2
4 (Medium)
Inappropriate use of land
1
1
2 (Low)
Incompatibility of land use
with surrounding
environment
1
2
3 (Low)
Incompatibility of land use
with new land uses
proposed for area
2
3
5 (High)
Aspect: Cultural Heritage
Visual Impacts
Aspect: Land Use
Aspect: Traffic and Transportation
Increase in traffic on local
road network during
construction.
1
1
2 (Low)
Increase in traffic on local
road network during
operation.
1
1
2 (Low)
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
7-5
AECOM
The table below presents the prioritisation of issues for the project as described in Chapter 4 (excluding the
CNGP) and has formed the basis for the scope of this EA.
Table 7-3: Revised prioritisation of environmental Issues
Low
Medium
Air Quality
Groundwater impacts
Geology and Soils
Surface Water (runoff into water
supply)
Ecology
Socio-Economic
Visual Impacts
Indigenous Heritage
High
Noise and Vibration Hazard and
Risk
Geology and Soils (Geotechnical
impacts)
Cultural Heritage
Land Use (compatibility with future
land use).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
7-6
8.0
AECOM
Land Use
This chapter addresses existing and proposed future land use in the areas affected by the proposed Project and
the relationship of the Project to these land uses. The chapter assesses the potential impacts of the Project upon
existing and future surrounding land use, including new developments proposed as part of the SWGC, and
presents mitigation measures where appropriate.
8.1
Existing Environment
8.1.1
Overview
The Northern Expansion is located approximately 60 km from Sydney, and includes portions of two LGAs
(Camden and Campbelltown), which form part of an area referred to as the Macarthur region in Sydney’s south
west.
The Camden LGA comprises a mix of agricultural lands, country towns and proposed future residential areas with
associated commercial and industrial developments. Smeaton Grange directly adjoins the Project Area to the
south and is the principal area for industrial activity in the Camden LGA, including industrial, warehouse and
business park land uses.
Campbelltown City is a significant regional centre offering a range of services including a major regional hospital,
a university, two TAFE campuses and a significant tourism industry including the Mount Annan Botanical
Gardens.
Each of the LGAs includes non-urban or rural lands, which are used for agricultural purposes, with mining and
extractive industries (gas, sand and coal) also present.
South west Sydney, including Camden and Campbelltown LGAs together with the adjoining Liverpool LGA to the
north, has provided a significant proportion of land in support of Sydney’s metropolitan growth over the past three
decades. Areas within the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas, including East Leppington and Turner Road
have been committed to form part of the SWGC to provide land for future urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development over the next 25 to 30 years.
Land within the Surface Project Area is serviced by the larger commercial centres of Narellan, Camden and
Campbelltown which are located to the south west, north west and east of the area, respectively. These centres
provide a range of land uses and services, including retail, commercial, medical, education and community
facilities.
8.1.2
Existing and Surrounding Land Use
General
The Surface Project Area broadly comprises parts of the suburbs of Currans Hill, Varroville, Raby and Denham
Court. These key areas are predominantly made up of semi-rural and rural residential developments, and
agricultural lands predominantly used for grazing, with isolated areas of remnant vegetation scattered throughout
the Surface Project Area. There are also significant areas of both public and private recreation spaces. Open
space in Camden and Campbelltown LGAs consists mainly of sports grounds, parks, and bushland.
The Surface Project Area is predominantly rural residential in nature. Residential development has occurred
mostly along the east and western edges of the Surface Project Area in suburbs such as Raby, Claymore and
Eschol Park in the east and Catherine Field in the west. The newer residential suburbs of Currans Hills and Mount
Annan adjoin the southern extent of the Surface Project Area.
The Subsurface Project Area is largely residential in nature, varying from rural-residential to residential housing.
The Subsurface Project Area broadly comprises the suburbs listed above in addition to the suburbs of Ingleburn,
Macquarie Links, St Andrews, Mount Annan and Harrington Park. Some rural and agricultural land is located to
the west of the Subsurface Project Area near Kirkham and Harrington Park, industrial land to the north east near
Ingleburn, and Defence land to the far south east extent of the Subsurface Project Area.
The Smeaton Grange Industrial Park is located within the Subsurface Project Area and influences the immediate
land use in the vicinity. Several golf courses, sporting complexes and recreational reserves are spread throughout
the Subsurface Project Area.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-1
AECOM
The Mount Annan Botanical Gardens located in the south of the Surface Project Area (Figure 6) is the largest
botanic garden in Australia and provides valuable tourism and environmental conservation values to the local
community. It covers 416 ha including some remnant Cumberland Plain Woodland and houses Horticultural
Research facilities.
The existing and future land use context of the Project Area is shown in Figure 11.
CSM production wells and associated infrastructure are an existing land use in the locality with established well
fields in the Menangle Park, Glenlee and Spring Farm areas. These well fields form part of previous stages of the
CGP and have demonstrated the ability of the CGP to coexist with a variety of land uses.
The majority of the existing CGP infrastructure was completed prior to urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development, with the exception of some final well locations approved as part of the Spring Farm and
Menangle Park Expansion. Spring Farm and Menangle Park are currently in the process of suburban
redevelopment.
Residential
The Northern Expansion Surface Project Area largely encompasses rural and semi-rural residential housing, with
the boundary fringing on more dense, established urban areas such as Currans Hill and Raby. Urban areas in the
vicinity are a mixture of historical precincts, established suburbs and new residential release areas. Residential
suburbs within the Surface Project Area include Currans Hill, Varroville, Raby and Denham Court.
Currans Hill is a relatively new suburb located in the southern part of the Surface Project Area. The suburb
exhibits a subdivision style commonly used throughout the 1980s and 90s, with a curvilinear street pattern, cul-desacs and smaller lots (Camden Residential Strategy 2008). Varroville is located in the Upper Surface Project Area
and is known for its beautiful hills, sweeping views and old farms. Varroville exhibits a less dense form of
residential development compared with neighbouring Raby.
The suburb of Raby is located on the eastern side of the Surface Project Area with the predominant form of
development being detached single dwellings. Parkland covers some 14% of the total area of the suburb which
supports a population of some 6,000 people within an area of 3 km² (RP Data, 2006).
Denham Court, in the far north of the Surface Project Area, is one of the more affluent suburbs in south western
Sydney. Since the 1970s, a row of mansions have been established along Denham Court Road, where a
prominent ridge allows views all the way to Sydney.
Residential suburbs in the immediate surrounds of the Surface Project Area (within the Subsurface Project Area)
include Narellan and Smeaton Grange, Catherine Field, Eschol Park and Mount Annan. Leppington is located in
north.
Smeaton Grange is the major industrial area in Camden and the Narellan Industrial Area is also located in this
suburb. Early residential development in Narellan was based on a grid pattern modified by topography (Camden
Residential Strategy 2008).
Catherine Field is located to the west of the Subsurface Project Area and is predominantly a low density
residential area with some farming and other rural based activities. The suburb is expected to experience change
as the SWGC develops.
Eschol Park is a residential area and includes estate type properties, such as those within the Highfield Estate.
The suburb of Mount Annan comprises of masterplanned neighbourhoods, a curvilinear street pattern, cul-desacs and smaller lot housing.
Leppington is a residential area that is earmarked to hold the Leppington town centre which will service the
adjoining future development areas such as East Leppington (refer Section 8.2).
Agricultural
Agriculture accounts for 0.6% of the Gross Regional Product of the Greater Western Sydney Region, equating to
8.7% of NSW Gross Regional Product in this sector. In terms of business numbers, agriculture represents 6.8% of
businesses in Camden LGA and 0.7% of businesses in the Campbelltown LGA (2006 Regional Economic Profile,
Greater Western Sydney Economic Development Board).
The majority of rural land within the Northern Expansion Project Area that is not residential is used for agricultural
purposes, predominantly grazing. Other agricultural activities within the Camden and Campbelltown areas (and
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-2
AECOM
not exclusively within the Project Area) include vegetable and flower growing, orchards, nurseries, and dairying
and poultry. Agriculture represents some 16% of land use in the Campbelltown LGA and is important within both
the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs not only for its economic benefits but also for its cultural and landscape
values.
Industrial
Smeaton Grange Industrial Park is an industrial area within the Camden LGA located within the south west
portion of the Subsurface Project Area. Smeaton Grange contains warehousing and heavy industrial activity, as
well as some business park type uses. Industrial lands are also located in nearby Narellan.
Environmental Protection and Open Space
Large areas of land forming part of the Subsurface and Surface Project Area within the Campbelltown and
Camden LGAs are zoned for environmental protection due to their scenic value. These lands are generally
located on either side of the Upper Canal easement.
The Mount Annan Botanic Gardens – Sydney’s largest Botanical Garden lies in the south of the Surface Project
Area with a portion of the gathering system encroaching within the gardens to tie-in to the existing Menangle Park
gathering system.
A small area of land in the north west of the Surface Project Area is zoned as regional open space however none
of the proposed infrastructure encroaches within this land. Further north, some 10 km from the Subsurface Project
Area are the Western Sydney Parklands. The Western Sydney Parklands comprise over 5,000 ha of recreational
land containing world class sporting facilities, picnic areas, cycling and walking tracks and native bushland. The
Parklands are managed by the Western Sydney Parklands Trust, established by the NSW Government.
Mining and Petroleum Production Activities
Mining in the general area is limited to a sandstone quarry and sand and soil extraction to the south of the Project
Area at Menangle Park. Coal mining leases have been issued for the area over the south western section of the
Campbelltown LGA and whilst there has been exploration undertaken there has not been any coal extraction to
date. Coal seams have instead been utilised for the extraction of CSM for supply into the Sydney gas market,
largely through the CGP.
8.2
Future Land Use
It is has been estimated that Sydney will grow by an additional 1.1 million people by 2031, resulting in the need for
an estimated 640,000 additional new homes and 500,000 new jobs. To accommodate Sydney's future growth
and change, an expected 60 to 70% of new homes will be in Sydney's existing suburbs, and the remaining 30 to
40% of homes will be in land release areas (DoP, 2005).
The future land use context of the Northern Expansion is discussed below, particularly in relation to the integration
of the proposed infrastructure within the Surface Project Area with planned future land uses.
It should be noted that the environmental envelope approach and application of the locational design principles
described in Section 4.2 of the EA aim to enable the infrastructure proposed as part of the Northern Expansion to
integrate and co-exist with future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development within the Surface
Project Area.
8.2.1
Sydney Metropolitan Strategy
The Metropolitan Strategy sets the vision for the future of Sydney in accommodating its population growth. The
Metropolitan Strategy is discussed in detail in Section 5.5.8 and establishes the future land use context within
which the Northern Expansion will sit.
8.2.2
South West Growth Centre
The Metropolitan Strategy identifies the SWGC within the boundaries of four LGAs - Liverpool, Wollondilly,
Camden and Campbelltown. It comprises 18 Precincts and is approximately 17,000 ha in area with an
approximate capacity for around 110,000 new homes within future residential land and 89,000 new jobs within
future employment lands. The majority of the SWGC is within Camden and Liverpool LGAs, with approximately
55,000 new dwellings to be provided in the Camden LGA alone.
The Northern Expansion spans portions of the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs and encounters land earmarked
for future development as part of the SWGC, namely the Turner Road and East Leppington Development Areas
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-3
AECOM
within the Surface Project Area (Figure 11). Other Development Areas within the Subsurface Project Areas (and
not subject to surface impacts) include Leppington, Catherine Fields and Catherine Fields North.
Turner Road Development Area
The Turner Road Development Area was released in June 2006 and is one of the first precincts released as part
of the SWGC. The future vision for this area is a series of urban villages or separate towns situated within a rural
setting.
The precinct is 536 ha in area and will comprise of land zoned for future urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development including 96 ha of employment land and 77ha of open space. The area is likely to
accommodate over 4,000 new homes and create around 5,000 jobs. New dwellings are expected to be provided
in a range of housing forms including single dwellings on individual lots, attached housing and multi-unit housing,
2
together with land uses required to support the residential population such as recreational land. A 15,000 m town
centre has also been proposed.
Within the Turner Road precinct, two districts have been released – Gregory Hills and the Central Hills Business
Park.
Gregory Hills is expected to feature 2,400 new homes, a primary school and a town centre. Construction for Stage
One of this district began in September 2009.
The Central Hills Business Park is located next to Gregory Hills and would offer a range of lot sizes for a wide
range of business development and general industrial uses including retail, bulky goods and industrial zonings.
Central Hills is the first employment area to be released in the SWGC. Construction of infrastructure servicing,
water and sewer systems to the Central Hills Business Park commenced in December 2009.
Two well surface locations, CU06 and CU02 are located within the Turner Road precinct and zoned under the
Growth Centres SEPP (Figure 11). CU06 is located within land earmarked for General Residential and CU02
within land earmarked for Business Development under the zoning plan.
CU06 is located within the final stages of the Turner Road development, therefore would be complete prior to
development of this area. Discussions with DartWest development were undertaken (refer Chapter 6) which
highlighted areas of open space within the Development Area. CU06 and CU02 would utilise future open space
areas within Turner Road.
East Leppington Development Area
The East Leppington precinct would accommodate between 2,000 and 3,000 new dwellings and approximately
6,000 residents along with two neighbourhood centres. The East Leppington precinct straddles the Camden and
Campbelltown LGA boundary within the Upper Project Area.
The East Leppington precinct will take advantage of its proximity to the North Leppington release area which will
provide a new major town centre for South Western Sydney.
Precinct zoning for East Leppington has not yet been finalised however, the precinct is being considered for
release under the Precinct Acceleration Protocol. This Protocol allows landholders to have the release of a
Precinct within the Growth Centres accelerated ahead of the planned land release program.
No well surface locations are proposed within the East Leppington Development Area.
Leppington
The Leppington precinct has not yet been released however it has been identified that the Development Area is
expected to accommodate 12,000 dwellings and a population of approximately 33,000 residents. The residents of
the Leppington Development Area would access neighbouring town centres (such as East and North Leppington).
The proposed South West Rail Link would join Glenfield station to a new station at Leppington via Edmonson
Park, linking the South West to the Sydney CBD.
No well surface locations or surface infrastructure are proposed within the Leppington Development Area,
therefore potential impacts upon this area would be indirect only.
Catherine Fields
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-4
AECOM
The Catherine Fields precinct would accommodate approximately 8,000 dwellings and a population of
approximately 22,000 people. In addition, Catherine Fields would accommodate one mixed use town centre, 6-7
neighbourhood centres and designated employment land.
No well surface locations or surface infrastructure are proposed within the Catherine Fields Development Area,
therefore potential impacts upon this area would be indirect only.
Catherine Fields North
The Catherine Fields North precinct will accommodate 9,500 dwellings and a population of 26,000 residents.
Similarly to the neighbouring Catherine Fields, Catherine Fields North will have a mixed use town centre, 8
neighbourhood centres and designated employment land.
No well surface locations or surface infrastructure are proposed within the Catherine Fields North Development
Area, therefore potential impacts upon this area would be indirect only.
8.2.3
Council Development Areas
Camden Council has adopted a Residential Strategy which aims to reflect the objectives of the Metropolitan
Strategy described above.
Over the next thirty years, continued growth will see Camden move from a predominantly rural and rural
residential character to a more residential and urban character. In response to the State initiative of urban
consolidation, Camden has initiated several proposed development areas as well as other residential planning
activities.
An extension of Currans Hill to the north has been planned to accommodate approximately 400 new dwellings.
This area is known as Manooka Valley. It is expected that Manooka Valley will provide a physical and visual
transition between rural/scenic protection areas and Currans Hill. Other planned development growth areas by
Camden Council are outlined below.
Camden Lakeside
The existing Camden Lakeside development consists of a Golf and Country Club. The proposed Camden
Lakeside Development Area will extend to incorporate residential, recreational and environmental conservation
zones as well as the existing activities.
Preliminary designs for the future Camden Lakeside area include the redevelopment of the Camden Valley Golf
Resort into a residential estate that incorporates a new golf course, a mixed-use entertainment precinct and
approximately 25 ha of employment lands. The development would integrate with the future surrounding
environment including the El Caballo Blanco and Gledswood Development Area (described below) and the Turner
Road Development Area.
No infrastructure is proposed within this area.
El Caballo Blanco and Gledswood
The ECBG area comprises approximately 207 ha (APP, 2008) and includes the Gledswood Homestead and
Winery property, the former El Caballo Blanco site and three adjoining sites to the east of the Upper Canal
(Figure 11).
The ECBG area has been rezoned and will include land for general residential and low density residential uses.
These areas of residential land are surrounded by a significant portion of private recreational space. Some land
has been allocated as rural landscape and a portion has been allocated as large lot residential site with
preliminary plans for a hotel resort under consideration. Approximately 860 dwellings are estimated to be
developed within the ECBG area.
Two well surface locations, CU20 and CU22, area located within the ECBG Development Area. They are located
on land currently zoned as Environmental Protection (Scenic) under the current Camden LEP 48, and designated
for Private Recreation under Draft Camden LEP 151 (to be consolidated into Draft Camden LEP 2009).
8.2.4
Summary
Table 8-1 below summarises the future growth areas located within the Surface Project Area within both Camden
and Campbelltown LGAs.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-5
AECOM
Table 8-1: Growth areas and projected population within the Project Area
Land Zoned for
Residential Purposes
Projected Number of
Lots
Projected number of
People
Timing/Staging
Manooka Valley Estate –
Currans Hill
400
1,240
Majority of dwellings to be
released by 2012.
Narellan Vale, Mount
Annan and Currans Hill
155
481
Majority of dwellings to be
released by 2012.
Turner Road
4,020
12,266
Construction commenced
on first suburb for
residential release.
Central Hills
870
2,780
Unknown
ECBG
860
2,650
Master Planning
Camden Lakeside
150*
380-440*
Master Planning
Stage Two of the Precinct
Acceleration Protocol
Growth Centre Precincts (not yet released)
East Leppington
3,000
6,000
Total
9,455
25,797
Source: Camden residential strategy 2008, GCC and Camden Council DCP 2006
* indicative numbers based on zoning
8.3
Potential Impacts
The most significant potential land use impacts of the Project are related to the potential for the sterilisation of
land for future development. The proposed Project has been designed and planned with a degree of flexibility in
order to accommodate future development in the surrounding areas, including both residential and other forms of
development. As existing and future planned land use is one of the key considerations in the siting of the
infrastructure, well surface locations have been chosen in consultation with landowners and negotiations with
landowners are ongoing.
As activities within the Subsurface Project Area are limited to the drilling of subsurface lateral well paths only,
there are expected to be no direct land use impacts resulting within this part of the Project Area due to the
distance of the activities from the surface.
Overall, the flexibility built into the Project should ensure that there is no significant detrimental impact or
constraint imposed upon land uses or future development on surrounding land as a result of the proposed Project.
Potential land use impacts are discussed in more detail in the following sections in terms of each phase of the
Project.
8.3.1
Construction
As identified in Chapter 4 of this EA, construction activities include the preparation of access roads and drill pads,
installation of environmental controls, construction of gas gathering and water lines and the drilling, fracing (where
required) and completion of wells. Earthmoving equipment, drill rigs and fracing equipment are used during the
construction period for well surface locations.
Given the program for implementation and staging of the Northern Expansion works, construction activities are
largely expected to be completed prior to the development of release areas within the Surface Project Area. The
impact of the proposed construction activities is therefore largely considered in the context of existing land uses
which are predominantly rural/agricultural in nature. Activities within the Subsurface Project Area (subsurface
drilling only) are not expected to impact on the surface environment or existing and future land use due to the
distance of the activities from the surface.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-6
AECOM
Infrastructure proposed within the Turner Road Development Area has been located in the final stages of the
planned development to avoid land use conflict. Further, given the establishment of the Precinct Acceleration
Protocol, the timing of development of the SWGC precincts may be subject to change. However, in respect of the
indicative timing of future development as shown in Table 8-1, the Proponent would seek to ensure construction
of proposed works are completed prior to development of these precincts. In this respect, AGL’s drilling program
is somewhat flexible and could be adapted to changing conditions to surrounding land use and development
where necessary.
AGL has consulted with the Growth Centres Commission (GCC) and local Councils with regard to the Northern
Expansion project. This consultation has included discussions around the timing of construction and production
phases of the Project in relation to the future development of land release areas within the Surface Project Area.
As part of the detailed programming for the Northern Expansion project, AGL would consult with these parties to
confirm details around the timing of construction and to identify any potential issues for the construction. AGL
would adapt the staging of construction works to accommodate development in the surrounding area to avoid
significant conflicts, It is anticipated that potential issues could be effectively managed through close consultation
and adaptive management measures.
The potential impacts of construction activities on the use of the land on which the wells and associated
infrastructure are proposed on surrounding land uses mainly relate to amenity impacts such as:
•
noise impacts;
•
•
short term visual impacts on surrounding land uses, particularly associated with site disturbance, removal of
minimal vegetation and location of equipment on the site; and
•
construction traffic.
•
These impacts are discussed in Chapter 13, 14, 17 and 19 of this EA respectively.
The most significant noise impacts would be during construction, however the temporary nature of these impacts
along with the availability of mitigation measures means that these impacts can be managed to maintain
acceptable levels of noise for existing residents (see Chapter 13 and Appendix F). Given the timing of
construction, future residents would not be affected.
Similarly, in relation to construction traffic, the potential impacts upon existing surrounding land uses would be
temporary and relatively short term. Access to well surface locations for construction have been identified through
consultation with landowners and the RTA (Chapter 6). AGL would consult with the RTA, GCC and Council
before utilising new roads constructed as part of Development Areas, subject to road capacity and in
consideration of the most viable route for construction and maintenance vehicles. Construction traffic impacts
would be managed through the implementation of a TMSP as described in Chapter 19 of the EA.
Air quality impacts during the construction period are largely related to the potential for dust due to the
disturbance of soils. These impacts would be effectively managed with appropriate sediment and erosion controls
and any air quality impacts would be expected to be highly localised and temporary.
The visual impacts of the Project during construction would be most significant during the construction phase due
to the presence of earth moving machinery and equipment required for drilling. However, these impacts would be
temporary and as construction is likely to be completed prior to residential development and occupation of release
areas, these impacts would not affect future residents.
In addition to the potential amenity impacts, the construction phase of the development would also impact upon
existing surrounding land use in the following ways:
•
Potential disruption to existing farming and agricultural operations due to requirements for access to land for
construction purposes;
•
Temporary occupation of land required for the establishment of the construction area; and
•
Potential for indirect impacts upon agricultural land uses resulting from impacts upon water quality and
potential spread of weeds.
The siting of proposed infrastructure, including well surface locations, gathering lines and access roads was
determined in consultation with affected landowners, thus reducing the potential for adverse impacts in relation to
the disruption of existing land use practices and operations.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-7
AECOM
Further, upon completion of construction and rehabilitation of surplus construction areas, land affected by the
proposed wells and infrastructure would be significantly reduced to a footprint of approximately 45m x 45m,
thereby minimising the area of land permanently impacted by the proposed works.
Construction management measures including erosion and sediment controls and weed management measures
are contained within AGL’s existing EMS which would be applied to the Northern Expansion Project. AGL has
extensive previous experience and a proven track record in relation to the CGP with construction activities for
previous stages of the Project managed successfully with no significant land use issues arising.
Given the temporary and short-term nature of the construction process for the access roads, wells and associated
gas gathering system, as well as proposed initial rehabilitation techniques (see Chapter 4 and Chapter 24), it is
expected the impacts on land use are manageable. Mitigation measures for the construction phase are outlined in
Section 8.4.
8.3.2
Production
During the production phase, the primary land use impacts of the Project relate to the potential loss of existing
land uses such as agriculture, the potential sterilisation of land for future development, the potential constraints
posed by the operating infrastructure upon surrounding land uses, and the potential amenity impacts described in
Chapter 17. A key issue for the consideration of impacts associated with the production phase of the Project is
the changing nature and character of land use within the Surface Project Area as a result of the development of
identified release areas.
The amenity impacts of the Project during the production phase would be significantly reduced from that of the
construction phase. Potential amenity impacts in relation to noise, air, visual impact and traffic are discussed in
detail in Chapters 13, 14, 17 and 19 of the EA with the relevant assessments concluding that impacts in this
regard are considered to be minimal and/or manageable with appropriate mitigation measures.
The proposed Project infrastructure would result in the development of certain land which is currently largely
undeveloped or used for agricultural purposes. Much of this land has been rezoned or is proposed to be rezoned
under a Draft LEP. It is therefore important to note in this regard, that planned future growth in the area will result
in large portions of currently undeveloped land being released and developed for a variety of land uses, thereby
resulting in the loss of existing rural and agricultural land. The character of land use within and surrounding the
Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are therefore set to change dramatically as a result of these State and
local government initiatives and the changes proposed as a result of the Northern Expansion Project are in
comparison considered to be insignificant.
In relation to well head infrastructure and the gas gathering system, the potential for the loss of existing land uses
and/or sterilisation of land for future development is considered to be low. Final wellhead infrastructure would
require a minimal area of land along with an appropriate buffer to certain land uses. The location of this
infrastructure has been selected in consideration of both existing and future land use and it has been
demonstrated through previous stages of the CGP that this infrastructure can co-exist within an urban
environment with no significant residual impact.
Constraints to the use of land during the production phase of the Project would be limited to the presence of
infrastructure at the well heads, which would limit the use of a relatively small area of land surrounding the
infrastructure for some forms of land use.
The gas gathering system, once laid would limit certain activities within a 5 m buffer of the gathering line such as
deep ripping or the use of heavy farm machinery. However, the location of gathering lines – determined in
consultation with affected landowners and following existing fencelines where possible, means that these impacts
are minimised.
Wells are expected to operate until such a time when gas production within the Northern Expansion area ceases.
Over this timeframe the surrounding environment within the Northern Expansion is expected to change
significantly. The existing rural/agricultural character of the surrounding land will likely become more urban and
population densities are likely to significantly increase with the establishment of future urban (residential,
commercial and industrial) development areas within and surrounding the Surface Project Area.
Provided that appropriate separation distances are maintained to residential and other sensitive land uses, the
proposed infrastructure can co-exist within an urban environment without significant residual impact. This is
demonstrated through existing stages of the CGP within areas such as Spring Farm and Menangle Park.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-8
AECOM
In relation to those well surface locations situated within identified Development Areas, where land use zoning is
available, this has been considered in the proposed siting of the infrastructure. Consultation with relevant
stakeholders would be ongoing throughout the Project to ensure that the infrastructure can integrate into the
surrounding environment with minimal impact. As previously stated, existing CGP development demonstrates the
ability of this infrastructure to be accommodated within a variety of urban environments.
The proposed well surface locations have been sited a significant distance (in all cases greater than 300m) from
the nearest existing residential property. With future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development
potentially encroaching within this distance, a minimum buffer of 20 m to the nearest residential development is
recommended by the DoPs Locational Guidelines. For the purposes of previous stages of the CGP, AGL
contributed to the update of these guidelines to consider a 6 well configuration, thus representing a worst-case
scenario in terms of hazard and risk. In all cases, the maintenance of this buffer distance would be ensured
through consultation with relevant stakeholders such as GCC and local Councils.
The hazard and risk assessment undertaken in respect of the Project indicates that these separation distances
are sufficient to ensure that risk is maintained at an acceptable level (see Chapter 10).
During maintenance and work over activities, rigs and associated equipment such as generators and heavy
vehicles would be required. The works are site specific and of a temporary nature, with all equipment removed
once the works are complete. Similar impacts to the construction phase are expected although over a much
shorter period, with noise impacts expected to generate the most concern from adjacent land uses. It should be
noted that maintenance is a temporary activity and would be carried out during normal daytime hours and in
accordance with the EMS.
The potential impacts discussed outline compatibility concerns with future urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development within the Surface Project Area due to the proposed surface infrastructure works within
this area. However, given the approach taken to the siting of infrastructure, the extensive consultation undertaken
with relevant stakeholders and the success of previous stages of the CGP, these potential impacts are expected
to be generally minor and manageable through the implementation of recommended mitigation measures.
8.3.3
Post Development
The primary activities occurring during the post development phase of the Project include the development of new
well fields, the upgrade of gas gathering lines where required and re-fracture stimulation.
For re-fracture stimulation, rigs and associated equipment similar to that required for initial fracture stimulation
would be required. The works are site specific and once completed the associated equipment is removed. Similar
impacts to the construction phase are expected, with noise impacts expected to generate the most concern from
adjacent land uses. Re-fracture stimulation would occur in daytime hours, and in accordance with a Re-fracture
Management Plan and the EMS.
The impacts associated with post development activities are site specific and temporary in nature, and have been
addressed in other sections of this EA.
8.3.4
Final rehabilitation would be undertaken in two stages:
•
Initial rehabilitation of surplus construction area; and
•
Closure and final rehabilitation following cessation of gas production from a well surface location.
Potential land use impacts during these stages of work would relate to the noise, visual, air and water impacts.
These potential impacts are likely to result from traffic and equipment used to plug and abandon the well and
remove the surface well head equipment. Rehabilitation practices for the plugging and abandonment of wells are
further detailed in Chapter 21.
These impacts would be temporary, and would result in the site being rehabilitated to pre-existing land use
conditions or better, or to a condition agreed with the landowner. The location of the well would be surveyed and
logged in accordance with DII guidelines.
Similarly the gas gathering lines would be purged and removed, and the land rehabilitated to either the original
land use condition or to a condition agreed with the landowner. Operations of the CGP to date have only required
the plugging and abandonment of a few wells and sections of gas gathering lines and none of the landholders
affected have yet required the gas gathering lines to be removed, preferring instead to have the lines cleaned for
irrigation use, or left in situ to prevent unnecessary soil disturbance.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-9
AECOM
The Proponent is required by DII to remove the steel/ pipe casing from the coal seam as part of the title
conditions.
8.4
Environmental Safeguards
Safeguards to minimise the potential impacts of the Project upon existing and future land use include:
•
Ongoing consultation with the relevant authorities managing the release of land for urban development
within the Surface Project Area to ensure that Project activities and management of infrastructure is
effectively integrated with future development in the area.
•
Allowance for a single change in the level of wells to accommodate future development which may require
re-levelling such as road construction associated with future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development;
•
Where possible, subject to detailed programming, AGL would seek to stage the development such that the
construction period (where the most significant potential impacts are likely to occur) would be complete prior
to development of the surrounding land for urban purposes to minimise impacts upon future residents in the
area.
•
Initial rehabilitation including screening and revegetation of the construction footprint of well surface
locations and the gas gathering system;
•
Design of the wellhead surface facilities to fit with the future land use and provide adequate security as
appropriate; and
•
Use of a flexible ‘environmental envelope’ approach which allows well infrastructure to move within a 200m
radius and 25 m either side of the assigned route of gathering lines and access roads, in order to adapt to
changing conditions on the ground and deal with future issues as they arise.
Given that many of the land use impacts relate to amenity issues discussed elsewhere in this EA the measures
proposed in Chapters 9 to 18 to manage air quality, water quality, hazard and risk, noise, visual and traffic
impacts would also assist in managing potential land use impacts.
8.5
Conclusion
The impact of works proposed for the Northern Expansion of the CGP on land use is not considered to be
significant. Many of the potential land use impacts are related to amenity issues which can be effectively managed
through the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures.
The nature and scale of the proposed infrastructure is such that it would not result in the loss of significant areas
of productive land or sterilise large areas of land for future land use. The siting of the proposed infrastructure has
been selected in consideration of existing and future planned land use and in consultation with affected
landowners.
The Subsurface and Surface Project Area are set to experience significant land use changes over the life of the
Project and as such, the Project has been designed to adapt and integrate with that change. Previous stages of
the CGP demonstrate the ability of the proposed infrastructure to co-exist within a variety of environments with
minimal impact and it is anticipated that the Northern Expansion would integrate effectively with both existing and
future planned land uses in the area.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
8-10
9.0
AECOM
Surface Water
This chapter assesses water quality and management issues associated with the Northern Expansion. Potential
impacts and mitigations during the construction, operation and rehabilitation phases of the Project are outlined.
9.1
9.1.1
Overview
The Surface Project Area is located in south-western Sydney within the Camden and Campbelltown LGA’s and
covers an area of approximately 3,900 ha. The majority of the Surface Project Area is largely undeveloped and is
generally semi-rural in character, with agricultural lands, predominantly used for grazing, scattered between
isolated areas of remnant vegetation and land designated for future (residential, commercial and industrial)
development. The Surface Project Area is surrounded by residential areas to the north, east and west including
Raby, Eaglevale and Leppington respectively. There are also significant areas of both public and private
recreation within the area.
The Subsurface Project Area covers approximately 10,500 ha of land and is largely residential (varying from ruralresidential to residential housing) with some agricultural and rural properties scattered throughout. Residential,
commercial and industrial land dominates the southern and eastern portions of the Subsurface Project Area.
Agricultural and rural land is generally to the west of the Subsurface Project Area and predominately used for
grazing.
Wells and other infrastructure associated with the CGP are an existing land use in the locality notably within the
Menangle Park, Glenlee and Spring Farm areas. Impacts to surface water processes including drainage and
water quality as a result of the construction and operation of wells and infrastructure associated with the CGP in
these areas have been minimal.
The works proposed are an expansion of the CGP and involve the construction and subsequent operation of up to
12 well surface locations, together with associated infrastructure and post development activities, which deliver
gas to the existing CGP network.
9.1.2
Catchments
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are located within the Hawkesbury-Nepean and Georges River
subcatchments. The boundary between the Nepean and Georges River catchments generally occurs at the centre
of the Surface Project Area, marked by the presence of an area of higher elevation trending in a north south
direction. Tributaries of the Georges River generally drain the eastern portion of the Project Areas, whereas
tributaries of the Nepean River generally drain the western portion.
The Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment is large and covers a total area of approximately 22 000 km². The Georges
River catchment covers nearly 1,000 km², covering 14 local government areas and a large portion of the Sydney
metropolitan area.
Within the Surface Project Area, elevation ranges between approximately 50 m Australian Height Datum (AHD) in
the north west to 196 m AHD at Badgelly Hill located in the south of the Surface Project Area (Figure 6).
Elevation generally decreases towards the north west and north east of the Surface Project Area.
The Georges River runs along the western border and within the far southeast of the Subsurface Project Area.
Other rivers that flow within the Subsurface Project Area include Kemps Creek to the northwest and the Nepean
River to the southwest.
A number of small tributaries enter the Surface Project Area including Bunbury Curran Creek, Cottage Creek and
South Creek (Figure 16). Bunbury Curran and Cottage Creeks enter the Surface Project Area from the east and
are tributaries of the larger Bow Bowing Creek, part of the Georges River subcatchment. South Creek enters the
Surface Project Area from the south west and is a tributary of the Nepean River. A number of other smaller,
unnamed tributaries exist within the Surface Project Area, tributaries to Rileys Creek and Kemps Creek entering
from the west to north west, both draining to the Nepean River.
Within the Surface Project Area, tributaries are generally located in the headwaters of the catchments and are
largely intermittent and ephemeral creeks likely to have limited base flow. These creeks could potentially be
inundated during periods of peak rainfall and may be utilised to convey flood waters under the current flow
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
9-1
AECOM
regime. A number of perennial water bodies and dams are also located on these tributaries. The presence of
constructed dams may have resulted in a reduction in base flow downstream of these structures.
9.1.3
The Upper Canal Water Supply System
The Upper Canal transects the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas generally north-south and is formed by a
system of tunnels and open channels. The Upper Canal is part of the Upper Nepean Scheme and transports
water via gravity flow from two small weirs located across the Nepean and Cataract Rivers to Prospect Reservoir,
Sydney’s main drinking water storage. The Upper Canal enters the Surface Project Area at its south east
boundary at the Mount Annan Botanical Gardens and continues passage to the northern boundary at Denham
Court Road. Within the Surface Project Area, the canal is generally an open, concrete lined channel which varies
between approximately 5-6m in width and 2-3 m in depth. Studies conducted within the area have indicated that
surface water is diverted either above or below the Upper Canal where it intersects with drainage lines. An access
track is maintained alongside the Upper Canal for the duration of its passage within the Surface Project Area.
The Northern Expansion intends to utilise the existing Upper Canal access corridor for the main spine line of the
gas gathering system. The Upper Canal is considered a vital component of Sydney’s drinking water supply and
therefore warrants careful consideration when designing and implementing mitigation measures to minimise the
potential impacts of the Project to surface drainage and surface water quality. Mitigation measures would also be
implemented to ensure there are no adverse impacts on the structural integrity of the Upper Canal or the water it
transports. Mitigation measures would also ensure there are no adverse impacts on the downstream environment,
by limiting potential impacts within the Surface Project Area. These measures are outlined in Section 9.3.
9.1.4
Flood Prone Areas
Parts of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are located within the floodplain of tributaries of both the
Nepean and Georges Rivers and would therefore have the potential to be located within flood prone areas.
Flooding from the Nepean River is considered relatively common in the Camden region, although flooding within
the Project Areas are likely to be restricted to some of the more low lying regions located in the north east and
south west portions of the site.
Small tributaries within the Project Areas located within the Bow Bowing and Bunbury Curran Creek catchment
previously mentioned, are subject to the Campbelltown Flood Mitigation Scheme. The Campbelltown Flood
Mitigation Scheme was adopted in 1985 by Campbelltown City Council to assess flood issues within the LGA and
has involved the construction of a number of basins distributed throughout the catchment. Construction of many of
the basins within the Bow Bowing and Bunbury Curran Creek catchment is yet to commence and will be reviewed
as part of the Bow Bowing/Bunbury Curran Creek Floodplain Risk Management Plan, likely to be completed by
the end of 2010.
Camden Council applies a Flood Risk Management Policy to flood prone land within the Camden LGA. The Flood
Risk Management Policy establishes flood risk management planning and development procedures for flood
prone land to ensure development on flood prone land is compatible with the flood hazard for that area. Flood
prone land is defined under Camden Councils Flood Risk Management Policy as land that is susceptible to
flooding by the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) event. The PMF refers to the largest conceivable flood at any
particular place and is usually estimated from the probable maximum precipitation (Camden Council 2006).
A draft flood study of the South Creek catchment is currently being prepared by Camden Council. The study is to
be made available late this year by Camden Council and would be relevant to the construction an operational
works associated with well sites and gas gathering lines located within the Camden LGA (Pers. Comm. Nunn,
November 2009).
9.2
Potential Impacts
Potential surface water impacts of the Project are limited to the Surface Project Area as activities proposed within
the Subsurface Project Area would not result in measurable impacts at the surface. Subsurface drilling activities
would take place at some 700 m below ground level with potential impacts expected to be negligible. Potential
impacts in relation to groundwater and subsidence are discussed elsewhere in this EA.
Potential impacts to surface water processes including surface water quality in the Surface Project Area as a
result of the proposed works would be most likely to occur during the construction and production phases of
development. Potential impacts during each phase of development are identified in Table 9-1.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
9-2
AECOM
Table 9-1: Potential Impacts on Surface Water Processes and Surface Water Quality
Development
Phase
Construction
Production
Potential Impacts
•
Increased turbidity of surface waters resulting from surface erosion and the transport
of sediment laden runoff as a result of earthworks and construction traffic;
•
Increased turbidity of surface waters as a result of water and wind erosion of
stockpiles, access roads, gas gathering lines and well surface locations and the
subsequent deposition of sediment in surface water bodies;
•
Contamination of surface waters as a result of accidental spillage of fuel from vehicles
or equipment;
•
Increased salinity of surface waters resulting from accidental release of saline
production water during drilling and well installation, and
•
Destabilisation of channel bed and banks as a result of construction works associated
with the installation of gas gathering lines and associated infrastructure at creek
crossings.
•
Increased turbidity of surface waters resulting from sediment-laden runoff being
transported from well surface locations and access roads;
•
Contamination of surface waters as a result of accidental spillage of fuel from vehicles
or equipment;
•
Increased salinity of surface waters resulting from accidental release of produced
water from storage tanks or during the transport of saline waters to and from the
tanks; and
•
Contamination of surface water caused by flooding of components of infrastructure
(such as the metering facility and instrumentation) at proposed well surface locations.
Post Development
No additional potential impacts to surface water quality have been identified for the post
development phase to those already noted above.
Closure and Final
Rehabilitation
During the closure and rehabilitation phase, potential impacts to surface water quality may
result from the release of sediment-laden runoff, resulting in increased turbidity of surface
waters. Erosion and sedimentation could potentially occur as a result of stockpiles of soil
being disturbed and areas being exposed during the rehabilitation of well surface locations.
Potential impacts associated with the release of saline drilling, frac and formation waters would be minimised by
operational and design measures. Drilling and fracture stimulation water required to stimulate the coal seam
would be delivered from previous drilling and fracture stimulation campaigns, other approved sources or from
licensed stand-pipes in the local area. The delivered volume required for fracing a well is generally in the order of
500 kL, depending on the frac design and geological parameters.
The proposed works would include the construction of water storage tanks at some locations. Water lines may
also be co-located with gas gathering lines, enabling the transfer of water to a central collection point (where
feasible). Water storage tanks would be utilised for the storage of saline water produced from the wells during
fracing. Produced water would either be stored for future re-use in subsequent drilling or fracing operations or
would be disposed of at an appropriately licensed off-site facility. Disposal would occur in the case that the waters
were of poor quality.
Gas gathering lines would be installed in the vicinity of watercourses as shown on Figure 16 of the EA. However,
the majority of these watercourses are ephemeral. After sufficient rehabilitation is undertaken (as described in
Chapter 21), no significant impacts on watercourses are expected to occur. Watercourse crossings within the
Mount Annan Botanic Gardens would be underbored to minimise potential impacts.
9.2.1
Flooding
Given the location of parts of the Surface Project Area within the floodplain of tributaries of both the Nepean and
Georges Rivers, there is potential for the well surface locations, access roads, gathering lines and associated
infrastructure to be located in areas prone to flooding. The main spine line would be located subsurface along the
Upper Canal corridor. Although the main spine line would not be located on land defined as flood prone according
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
9-3
AECOM
to Camden Council, given its proximity to the Upper Canal appropriate mitigation measures would be adopted in
respect of preventing potential impacts on the water supply (refer Section 9.3.1),
Potential impacts to the flood regime as a result of works proposed within the Surface Project Area may include:
•
Localised disruptions to the flow of flood waters due to the presence of infrastructure at well surface
locations;
•
Localised increase in susceptibility of the channel bed to erosion where gathering lines intercept creeks
(during construction); and
•
Localised increases in the volume of surface water delivered to tributaries in response to reduced infiltration.
During all phases of development, it is considered that there would be sufficient warning prior to the occurrence of
a significant flood event, thereby allowing mobile equipment, if on-site, to be removed from the flood zone.
Furthermore, once commissioned, generally only permanent equipment would be present at well surface locations
during the production phase of development. Equipment at the well surface locations would be minimised during
this period. Design measures would allow the wellhead, separator and meter run to be safely submerged for an
extended period of time with no risk to the environment or to the infrastructure.
Subsurface drilling activities within the Subsurface Project area would not be affected by flooding events due to
the distance of the activities from the surface.
9.2.2
Upper Canal Water Supply
The construction of the main spine line would utilise the existing SCA maintenance and access track along the
Upper Canal. The laying of the gas gathering system would require the trenching of the existing easement
alongside the Upper Canal (i.e. the easement furthest from the Upper Canal), with the gathering lines being laid
approximately 700 - 1200 mm below the surface.
Potential environmental impacts in relation to the construction and operation of the main spine line in this location
have been considered in Table 9-1 of this EA. In addition, impacts to the structural integrity of the Upper Canal
are likely to contribute to potential water quality impacts such as increased turbidity, contamination of water supply
and loss of water through cracking or fracturing.
Mitigation measures have been recommended in Section 9.3.1 below and Chapter 24 of this EA. The risk to the
structural integrity of the Upper Canal is considered low given the implementation of the outlined mitigation
measures.
9.2.3
Downstream Impacts
As previously discussed surface water impacts are limited to the Surface Project Area as activities proposed
within the Subsurface Project Area would not result in measurable impacts at the surface. Downstream impacts
would be limited to impacts on water quality. Watercourses within the Surface Project Area and the surrounding
Macarthur region are largely ephemeral, flowing after periods of rainfall. Gas gathering lines may be required to
cross ephemeral watercourses however no changes to the channel stability or flow regime are expected given the
implementation of mitigation measures (Section 9.3) and are therefore unlikely to impact on the flow regime
downstream.
.Mitigation measures would be implemented to ensure no adverse impact on water quality would occur within the
Surface Project Area (Section 9.3). Subsequently, these measures would ensure there would be no adverse
impact on the water quality of downstream environments, specifically with regard to the Upper Canal.
9.3
Potential impacts to surface water quality, surface drainage and channel stability would be minimised through
design measures incorporated into established and proven construction and operational procedures throughout
the duration of the works. Drill and frac water management would be carried out generally in accordance with the
measures described in Chapter 4 and as detailed in the overall EMS.
The following mitigation measures would also be implemented specifically to minimise potential surface water
impacts as a result of the proposed works:
•
Soil and Water Management Plans (SWMPs), the Emergency Response Plan, and Flood Management Plan
(where necessary) would be implemented or updated in the existing EMS to minimise impact on water
quality throughout all phases of the development;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
9-4
AECOM
•
The SWMPs would include detail on the construction of silt fences and other erosion control measures that
would be implemented to minimise surface erosion, sediment loading of surface water and subsequent
impacts to surface water quality;
•
A water management system, including water gathering lines where necessary, would be employed to
enable collection, management and appropriate reuse of water produced as a result of the drilling fracture
stimulation and production operations including the storage of saline production water in storage tanks.
Where feasible, a central water collection point would be considered;
•
Infrastructure would be inspected and audited following a flood event to ensure that all elements are
operating effectively, and necessary rehabilitation works are carried out immediately;
•
Gas wells would be located at a minimum distance of 20 m from creeks;
•
Appropriate crossing locations would be selected on dry creek beds for the installation of gathering lines and
the area rehabilitated suitably following any earthworks; and
•
Under-boring would be used for the installation of gas gathering lines where permanent water flows occur
and for crossings of watercourses in the vicinity of the Mount Annan Botanic Gardens;
•
Rehabilitation of areas where earthworks have taken place to a surface profile similar to the original profile,
particularly where gathering lines have been installed by either trenching or under-boring. Rehabilitation
works would be in accordance with AGL’s established and proven LRMSP as detailed in the existing EMS.
Saline water produced from the wells would be stored either in lined drill pits or water storage tanks. Bunding
would be in place around lined pits to reduce the potential for saline waters contained within the pits to be
liberated during a flood. The water level and quality of water stored within the lined drill pits would be monitored
regularly to ensure sufficient space is available for rainfall contribution and to ensure that the quality of the water
is acceptable for the proposed future use.
Generally, the gathering system would be buried to a minimum depth of 750 mm and up to 1,200 mm (refer to
Section 1.4). Overlying disturbed areas would be rehabilitated to minimise the likelihood of piping and
infrastructure becoming exposed in the event of a flood. In addition, design measures would be incorporated to
enable the isolation valves on the gathering system to be closed in the event of exposure to flooding, isolating
each well field and shutting off gas flow to prevent uncontrolled release.
9.3.1
The Upper Canal
Additional mitigation measures would be implemented specifically to minimise potential impacts to the quality of
the water being transported via the Upper Canal and the stability of the channel:
•
Gathering lines would be located and installed adjacent to the roadway that is present alongside the Upper
Canal within the existing easement;
•
Gathering lines would be laid progressively in sections typically in the order of 100 m in order to reduce the
potential for stormwater runoff and sediment to enter the Upper Canal from a stockpile or exposed trench;
•
Personnel involved in maintenance works (if required) for the gas gathering lines within the Upper Canal
corridor would undergo a formal induction and would be required to obtain a permit from SCA prior to
commencing any works in the vicinity of the Upper Canal;
•
Sediment and water containment controls such as silt fences and bunding would be utilised where
appropriate to prevent the transport of sediment laden runoff in the vicinity of the Upper Canal. This would
include the installation of silt fences around stockpiles or areas where earthworks are taking place. The use
of sediment controls in relation to the Upper Canal would be included in the SWMSP to be updated as part
of the overall EMS for the Project;
•
Ongoing maintenance of wells and infrastructure would include regular maintenance checks of equipment. In
conducting regular maintenance checks, the likelihood of leakage from equipment and failure of silt fences is
reduced, thereby reducing potential impact to water quality within the Upper Canal;
•
Development of appropriate contingency measures to ensure that in the event of a spill or failure of a silt
fence, the situation is rectified immediately to ensure that spilt chemicals or sediment laden runoff is
contained and is not able to enter the Upper Canal;
•
The preparation of an Emergency Response/Contingency Plan in consultation with the SCA;
•
Rehabilitation of areas where earthworks have taken place to a surface profile similar to the original profile,
thereby maintaining effective surface water diversions and drainage paths in the vicinity of the Upper Canal.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
9-5
AECOM
Rehabilitation works would be in accordance with AGL’s established and proven LRMSP as detailed in the
existing EMS, and in consultation with the SCA; and
The mitigation measures identified in Section 16.4 of this EA.
9.4
Conclusion
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas drain both the Nepean and Georges River catchments. A number of
small tributaries are located within the Project Areas, many of which are either ephemeral or perennial.
Potential impacts associated with the proposed works generally centre on the Surface Project Area and include;
•
The potential to reduce the quality of surface waters including the water in the Upper Canal, particularly by
the liberation of sediment and subsequent increase in turbidity during the construction and productions
phases of the Project;
•
The potential to reduce the quality of surface waters as a result of the release of saline produced waters
during the transport and storage of these waters to and from lined drill pits and storage tanks; and
•
The potential to cause channel instability as a result of the construction and installation of gas gathering
lines where either under-boring or trenching is adopted.
Potential impacts to surface water as a result of the construction and operation of the wells and gathering lines
are not considered significant provided appropriate mitigation measures are implemented. Impacts to surface
water should therefore not represent a significant constraint to the proposed development.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
9-6
10.0
AECOM
Hazard and Risk
A Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) was prepared in respect of the proposed Project by Planager and is
provided in Appendix D. This chapter provides a summary of the PHA including a description of the study scope
and methodology used, identification of hazards, consequence assessment and the findings of the quantitative
risk assessment. The chapter also provides recommended mitigation measures in respect of hazard and risk and
draws conclusions with regard to the residual risks of the Project in this regard.
10.1
Overview
The document, Applying SEPP 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines was prepared
by the NSW Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (now the NSW DoP) in 1994 to
provide assistance primarily to councils and to industry, consultants and other government agencies in
implementing SEPP 33.
The Guidelines recommend a risk screening method for determining whether a project is hazardous and provide
guidance on assessing potentially offensive development projects. The screening process considers the class and
volume of materials to be stored on the site and the distance of the storage area to the nearest site boundary.
The guidelines state that the first step to determining whether SEPP 33 applies to a project is to consider whether
the proposed use falls within the definition of industry adopted by the planning instrument which applies.
The proposed Northern Expansion does not fall within the definition of industry under the relevant EPIs (refer
Chapter 5), therefore the provisions of SEPP 33 do not strictly apply.
Further, no flammable gas would be stored during normal operation at the gathering lines or well surface
locations. The CGP does not fall within the definition of potentially hazardous development.
However, in order to comprehensively address the issue of hazard and risk in relation to the Project, a detailed
quantitative PHA has been prepared. It should be noted that this does not imply that the development necessarily
falls under the definition of potentially hazardous industry under SEPP 33. Rather, it demonstrates AGL’s desire to
ensure that any risks in relation to the Project are addressed as part of the EA process.
Planager prepared a PHA in respect of the Northern Expansion in order to assess the hazards and risks
associated with the proposed works. The PHA has considered the risks of the wells with respect to design and
location as well as the operation of the gas gathering system.
Potential impacts to the Surface Project Area from subsurface activities at the wells, in terms of hazard and risk,
are included in this assessment for activities relating to workover operations (which consist essentially of
maintenance activities of the wells). This is consistent with the approach in the DoP’s Locational Guidelines
There was no potential hazards identified in relation to subsurface drilling activities therefore this component of
the Project was not considered further in the PHA.
10.2
Methodology
10.2.1
Study Scope
The PHA is provided in full in Appendix D and assessed the following Project components:
•
12 new coal seam methane (CSM) gas well surface locations, each having up to 6 well heads; and
•
The gathering system used to gather CSM from the wells and transporting it to the CGP network.
10.2.2
Risk Analysis
The assessment was undertaken as per the NSW DoP’s Guidelines for Hazard Analysis No 6 and Risk Criteria for
Land Use Planning No 4. The five stages in risk assessment are as follows:
Hazard Identification
The hazard identification includes a comprehensive identification of possible causes of potential incidents and
their consequences to public safety and the environment, as well as an outline of the operational and
organisational safety controls required to mitigate the likelihood of the hazardous events from occurring.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10-7
AECOM
The initial hazard identification has been based on the site and well layouts, pipeline routing, flow diagrams,
material properties and proposed operating and control strategies of facilities.
The hazard identification process used in the PHA has been based on the following reviews:
•
Assessment of the hazardous properties inherent to gas processing and handling;
•
Historical review of incidents and near misses which have occurred on similar facilities;
•
Assessment of location specific issues and threats;
•
Definition of the relevant hazardous incident scenarios.
Quantitative Consequence and Effect Analysis
The consequences of identified hazards are assessed using current techniques for risk assessment. Well
established and recognised correlations between exposure and effect on people are used to calculate impacts.
Quantitative Frequency Analysis
For incidents with significant effects (heat radiation, explosion overpressure), whether on people, property or the
biophysical environment, the incident frequencies are estimated.
Quantitative Risk Analysis
The frequency and consequence analysis results are combined in order to generate risk results. If required,
depending on the population potentially exposed, information on this population is included in the calculations (for
so called societal risk calculations). The risk results are then assessed against the guidelines adopted by the
NSW DoP, Hazardous Industry Planning Advisory Paper Nº 4: Risk Criteria for Land Use Planning.
Risk Reduction
Where possible, risk reduction measures are recommended.
10.2.3
Approach to Assessment
The assessment of risk to the public around the proposed Project involves the application of the basic steps
outlined in Section 10.2.2 above. The methodology used attempts to take account of all possible hazardous
situations that may arise, and that have the potential to cause an off-site risk. A probabilistic approach to the
failure of vessels and pipes is used to develop consequence and frequency data on potentially hazardous
incidents.
The combination of the probability of an outcome (such as injury or death) with the likelihood of an event produces
the risk of the event. In order to assess the merit of the Project, risk was calculated at a number of locations so
that the overall impact could be assessed.
The results of the risk analysis are presented in three forms:
•
Individual Fatality Risk;
•
Injury and Propagation Risk; and
•
Societal Risk.
Having determined the risk from a development, it must then be compared with accepted criteria in order to
assess whether or not the risk level is tolerable. If not, specific measures must be taken to reduce the risk to a
tolerable level and to ensure that the proposed Project is compatible with the surrounding land uses.
10.3
Land use within the Surface Project Area comprises mainly of agricultural and rural residential land uses. The
Project Area also includes land designated for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development.
Well surface locations have been chosen in consideration of environmental constraints and in consultation with
landowners with a minimum buffer of some 200 m maintained between well heads and existing residences.
Well surface locations are indicated throughout the Surface Project Area and are situated predominately on rural
lands. Three well surface locations are within future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development
areas (refer to Chapter 8).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10-8
AECOM
Gas Gathering System
The land uses surrounding the proposed gas gathering system comprise mainly rural and rural residential land
uses. The proposed gathering system has a main spine along the Upper Canal and connects to each individual
well surface location.
10.4
Potential Impacts
The main potential hazard associated with the Project is related to the production and handling of CSM, which is a
flammable gas held under pressure.
Hazards from all sources have been grouped and discussed in the following sections.
10.4.1
Occurrence/Causes of Hazards
The general initiating causes of hazards are identified in Table 10-1. For the proposed development, including the
gas wells and gas gathering system, the predominant source of hazard, is associated with a leak of CSM. This
would generally only have the potential to cause injury or damage if there was ignition, which resulted in a fire or
explosion incident.
Table 10-1: General Causes/Hazards
Gas gathering system
•
Loss of containment due to pipe failure;
•
•
Pressure vessel failures;
•
Construction defect / material failure;
•
Confined explosion;
•
Corrosion;
•
Pump failures; and
•
Ground movement;
•
Failure during workover operation.
•
Hot tap by error; and
•
Other / unknown causes.
External interference;
Further detail on potential incidents and associated leak sizes is provided in Appendix D.
10.4.2
Potentially Hazardous Materials
The following potentially hazardous materials have been identified:
•
CSM (extracted from the coal seam);
CSM is a buoyant, flammable gas which on release in the open, if not ignited, would tend to disperse rapidly at
altitude. On release in an enclosed area with an ignition source, an explosion or a flash fire is possible. CSM is
non-toxic, posing only an asphyxiation hazard. However, due to its buoyancy, any release of credible proportions,
in the open, would not present an asphyxiation hazard.
10.4.3
CSM leaks
The potential impacts of the proposed Project in terms of hazard and risk are related to both the risk to human
health and the risk to the environment. The potential impacts of CSM wells in this respect are generally related to
flammable events which could occur due to a loss of containment of CSM coupled with an ignition event. A CSM
release may be a result of equipment failure and mal-operation. Initiating release scenarios include:
•
Leaks during routine operation from fixed piping, valves, or separator vessel due to equipment failure or
mechanical damage; and
•
Leaks during equipment maintenance or work over operations.
A consequence assessment was undertaken in order to evaluate potential incidents and associated leak sizes.
These were calculated using consequence modelling techniques and considered such scenarios such as flashfire
and jet fire. Evaluation techniques included:
•
Leak rates;
•
Duration;
•
Radiation effects; and
•
Explosion effects.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10-9
AECOM
The above techniques allow the level of radiation or overpressure resulting from fires and explosions to be
determined at any distance from the source.
10.4.4
Failures
The failure modes assessed in the PHA were derived from historical failures of similar facilities and equipment.
For the facilities which form part of the development, the predominant mode in which a hazardous incident may be
generated is associated with a leak as discussed in Section 10.4.3. This would generally only have the potential
to cause injury or damage if there was ignition, which resulted in a fire or explosion incident.
For a failure to be a risk, people must be present within the harmful range (consequence distance) of the fire or
explosion. The consequence distances of some incident scenarios extend beyond the CSM well compound or the
gathering line easement. However, after the likelihood of occurrence has been taken into account, they may not
contribute significantly to the cumulative individual risk of fatality at that location.
The following were taken into account when determining the consequence and frequency analysis as part of the
risk assessment:
•
Generic equipment failures;
•
Human error;
•
Probability of flammable outcome; and
•
Domino Effects of gas wells.
10.4.5
Location Specific Hazards
The aim of the location analysis is to provide information on the nature and ecology of the land and populations
which could be threatened by a loss of pipeline integrity, and to identify activities that are a potential threat to the
pipeline integrity.
The location analysis of the area covered by the gathering system, included the following:
•
Location specific issues / hot spots and potential high risk areas (e.g. high density populated areas);
•
Access to valve stations and other potential leak sources;
•
Security aspects of the valve stations;
•
Current status of 3 party involvement in the areas of the pipelines;
•
Proximity to potential hazards such as major roads and railways;
•
Proximity of the natural gas pipeline and other pipelines;
•
Proximity to high voltage overhead transmission power lines;
•
Potential for aircraft accidents (not Applicable for these locations); and
•
Potential for seismic surveys in the area.
rd
10.5
Quantitative Risk Analysis
The quantitative risk assessment undertaken in respect of the Project considers the potential hazards associated
with the proposed Project activities, taking into account the consequences of such incidents and the predicted
frequency of these events.
The quantitative analysis showed that:
•
The risk of fatality at the nearest residential area is well below the criterion for new installations of one
-6
chance in a million per year (1 x 10 /yr) for the gas wells and for the gathering system.
•
The risk associated with the gathering systems is well below all current criteria for new development. The
maximum risk level experienced at 5 metres from the gathering lines is 0.1 x 10-6 per year (compared with
-6
the most stringent criteria of 0.5 x 10 per year for schools and hospitals).
•
As the risk of fatality does not extend anywhere close to any residential areas and is well within the criteria
for business / industrial areas it is considered that the proposed Project does not have a significant impact
on societal risk.
Risk profiles and contours for the assessed Project components in respect of Individual Risk of Fatality, Injury and
Propagation Risk, and Societal Risk are provided in Appendix D.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10-10
AECOM
10.6
10.6.1
CSM well pressure may fluctuate and therefore control of overpressure is required through the use of a number of
independent mechanisms, as described in Table 10-2 below. These mechanisms would be implemented where
required for the proposed works.
Table 10-2: CSM Well Overpressure Control Mechanisms
Type of control
Equipment
Overpressure control
Pressure monitoring
and control
Complete facility from
well head to meter run
Pressure transmitters transmit pressure information (and alarm
conditions) from the wells to the SCADA control room at the
RPGP (which is monitored 24hr/7 days). Ability to shut down
the well from remote location. There are also closed loop high
pressure shutdown controls that doesn’t require input from the
control room.
Variable choke acts as pressure control valve to limit the
maximum flow from the well.
Pressure rating of
equipment
Well head casing and
tubing
Schedule 80. Pressure rated to 25.5MPa and 53MPa
respectively, or more than 30 times higher than operating
pressure for a new well or more than 7 times the shut-in
pressure of a new well.
Well head and well
head manifold
Schedule 80. Pressure rated to 13MPa, or more than 15 times
higher than operating pressure for a new well or 3 times the
shut-in pressure of a new well.
Water separator and
piping connecting to
the meter run (flow
line inlet piping).
Schedule 80. Pressure rated to 850kPa, or about 2 times the
operating pressure.
Instrumented
protective features
Casing, tubing, well
head and well head
manifold; and Water
separator and piping
connecting to the
meter run.
Pressure switch high would initiate emergency shut down
(ESD), including shut in the well head upstream of the
automatic shut down valve and alarming in the control room.
Pressure relief
From well head to
meter run (or, if shutdown valve closed,
from shutdown valve
to meter run)
Pressure relief on the water separator in the form of a
Pressure Safety Valve (PSV), set to open at 500 kPa and
designed to relieve the total overpressure of the system. The
vent line is vertical and at least 2m above the top of the
enclosure or 3m above ground level or any platform on which
a person can stand, whichever is the higher. The PSV would
reseat after relieving excess pressure.
A Blow-Out Preventer (BOP) is fitted to each well head,
protecting the well during workover operations.
Technical risk management features in case of CSM leak or fire are shown in Table 10-3 below.
Table 10-3: Leak and Fire Protection
Type of control
Equipment
Instrumented
protective features
Well head facility
Flow switch low (if the leak is upstream of the sensor) and flow
switch high (if it is downstream) would initiate emergency shut
down (ESD), including shutting in the well head upstream of the
automatic shut down valve and alarming in the control room.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10-11
AECOM
Type of control
Equipment
Fire detection
Well head facility
Fusible loop in the form of black poly-piping, looped around high
risk areas and linked to the shut down valve. In case of a fire, the
poly-pipe would burn through and initiate ESD.
10.6.2
Specific mitigation and control measures to be applied to the gas gathering system include the following:
•
PE pipe would be buried in accordance with the requirements of AS/NZS 3723-1989 (typically at a depth of
between 0.75 and 1 metre);
•
Signage would be installed as per Australian Standards requirements to ensure public knowledge of the
location of the line after construction
10.6.3
General
The following mitigation measures would be adopted in order to minimise potential risks associated with the
Project. These include:
•
Ensuring appropriate security of access to wells through the use of locks and fencing.
•
The management of well sites and gathering system easement would include a requirement to control the
vegetation in the vicinity of the facilities.
•
A comprehensive safety management system (SMS) would be implemented, including a requirement for
appropriate internal and external audits to assure that the SMS is functioning properly and that it is
appropriate to the hazards of the facilities.
•
The fenced area of the final well compounds would encompass the Hazardous Area Zone (as defined in the
Australian Standard for electrical zoning in potentially flammable areas).
•
Bollards or other physical protection in high risk areas would be installed to protect the installation against
damage from vehicles or other moving machinery.
•
General inspection and maintenance of wells would form part of the ongoing operation of wells in order to
maintain the integrity of the equipment and systems. Measures include:
-
Visual inspections of each well (at least three-weekly);
-
Regular leak testing (soap testing at least 6-monthly or more often depending on the location of the
well in relation to urban development); and
-
Regular (at least yearly) testing of pressure safety valves, as per regulatory requirement.
10.7
Conclusion
A PHA has been prepared in respect of the Project in accordance with the NSW DoP’s Guidelines for Hazard
Analysis No 6 and Risk Criteria for Land Use Planning No 4. The risk assessment has taken into account
individual risk of fatality, risk of injury and propagation, and societal risk. The assessment has concluded that risks
associated with the Project are acceptable provided the environmental safeguards are implemented.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10-12
11.0
AECOM
Ecology
An Ecological Assessment was undertaken by Biosis which considered threatened species, populations and
communities listed under both State and Commonwealth legislation that have been recorded within the
Subsurface and Surface Project Areas. This assessment identifies potential impacts on threatened species and
details measures to avoid or mitigate impacts identified. Residual ecological risks associated with the construction
and operation of the proposed infrastructure are identified and discussed. The Ecological Assessment is provided
in full in Appendix E and discussed in the sections below.
11.1
Overview
Ecological field investigations were undertaken in May 2009, June 2009, August 2009 and September 2009 in
order to account for seasonal variation in species. The investigations focussed on the proposed well surface
locations, gathering lines and access road locations and were undertaken within the Surface Project Area only as
proposed subsurface drilling activities would not impact upon flora and fauna at the surface. Targeted searches
for threatened flora species, populations and ecological communities were carried out where suitable habitat was
present in areas that were likely to be affected by the proposal.
The study area for each proposed well surface location comprised a circle with a 200 m radius, centred on the
well surface location. In cases where the study area was intersected by a road, property boundary or railway line,
the study area was reduced to fit within these borders as the final well location would not be placed outside these
boundaries. Investigations of gathering lines and access roads were undertaken within 25 m either side of the
proposed routes. Wells and associated infrastructure could therefore be located anywhere within these assessed
areas in the knowledge that ecological impacts upon surrounding flora and fauna would be acceptable, subject to
the recommendations made in the report and summarised in this chapter.
11.2
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas spans several suburbs within the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs
as identified on Figure 3. The Surface Project Area lies east of Camden Valley Way extending from the southern
railway line at Mount Annan in the south to Denham Court Road in the north.
The general landscape within the Surface Project Area is primarily semi rural and agricultural lands. Native
vegetation has been extensively cleared over the southern two thirds of the Surface Project Area with some larger
and moderately well connected patches of remnant and regrowth Cumberland Plain Woodland over the hills and
lower slopes of the northern section.
The geology of the region consists of sandstones and shales from the mid-Triassic as described in Chapter 18.
The Project Areas are located on the eastern margin of the Cumberland Plain formed on the sediments of the
Wianamatta Group shales, in particular the Bringelly Shales. They comprise shale, with occasional calcareous
claystone, laminate and coal. This southern area of Cumberland Plain generally comprises gently undulating
plains and low rolling hills.
The climate at Campbelltown consists of mild summers with an average maximum of 28.5 degrees Celsius and
minimum of 16.9 degrees Celsius in February, and cold, wet winters with an average minimum of 3.2 degrees
Celsius and a maximum of 17.1 degrees Celsius in July (BoM, 2009). The mean annual rainfall is 831 millimetres
(BoM, 2009).
11.3
Methodology
The flora and fauna assessment was based upon a desktop study and field survey. Flora and fauna survey and
assessments were carried out with reference to the Draft Guidelines for Threatened Species Assessment
prepared by the DEC and DPI (2005).
11.3.1
Desktop Review
The desktop review was based on a review of literature and databases including:
•
Records of threatened species, populations and communities from the DECCW Atlas of NSW Wildlife within
a 10 km radius of the Study Area and from the Birds Australia Database.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-1
•
AECOM
Potential occurrences of threatened species, populations and communities listed on the EPBC Act from the
DEWHA EPBC Online Database within a 10 km radius of the Study Area.
11.3.2
Field Surveys
Field surveys were undertaken with respect to the Surface Project Area only as subsurface drilling activities within
the Subsurface Project Area would not result in impacts on the surface and would therefore not impact upon
ecology. To provide a reliable assessment of the presence or absence of threatened species, populations and
ecological communities for the Surface Project Area, field surveys encompassed the geographic extent of the
proposal sampling major habitat stratification units. Field survey effort focused on the locations within the Surface
Project Area with the highest potential for threatened species, population and ecological communities or their
habitats to occur and that would likely be directly or indirectly affected by the proposal. In determining the focus
areas for field survey effort Biosis Research field staff were accompanied by AGL field and planning staff who
provided specific detail on the likely locations of project infrastructure.
Flora
A field survey was undertaken of each of the 12 well surface locations, gas gathering lines and access tracks to
record information on:
•
Location, community structure and composition, the presence of threatened plants and ecological
communities (or their potential habitat), land use history, condition, dominant flora species inventory, target
searches for threatened flora species where suitable habitat was present and habitat description.
•
Vegetation condition according to the degree to which it resembles relatively natural, undisturbed vegetation.
Vegetation was assessed as being in Good, Moderate or Poor condition or Disturbed according to the
following criteria:
-
Species composition (species richness, degree of weed invasion);
-
Vegetation structure (representation of each of the original layers of vegetation); and,
-
Resilience (This is the capacity of a site for natural regeneration. This is primarily linked to the degree
to which the natural soil profile of the area has been disturbed).
Fauna
The fauna survey was undertaken primarily as a habitat based assessment as, with the exception of targeted
searches for the Cumberland Plain Land Snail (CPLS), no active searching or trapping for animal species was
undertaken due to the nature of the project and the condition of existing habitat potential. Fauna investigations
included:
•
Compilation of a fauna species inventory, including fauna species likely to occur in the study area based on
records from the DECCW Atlas of NSW Wildlife.
•
A Fauna Habitat Assessment based on the presence of one or more of the following features:
-
•
•
vegetation cover;
-
size range and abundance of tree hollows;
-
rock outcrops, overhangs or crevices;
-
freestanding water bodies, ephemeral drainage or seepage areas;
-
disturbances including weed invasion, clearing, rubbish dumping or fire;
-
connectivity to offsite habitats; and,
-
surrounding habitat.
Habitat value was evaluated as being Good, Moderate or Poor.
Diurnal surveys involving:
-
Direct incidental visual and aural observation for bird and frog calls;
-
Searches for Meridolum corneovirens in locations of suitable habitat; and
-
Noting fauna habitat resources such as waterbodies and locating hollow bearing trees by GPS.
11.4
Results
A search of the databases specified in Section 11.3.1 was undertaken as part of the assessment and details are
included in Appendix E. Database searches for the Surface Project Area indicated the following:
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-2
AECOM
•
A total of 35 threatened flora species listed on the TSC Act and/or the EPBC Act have been either previously
recorded or have potential habitat within the locality; and
•
A total of 52 threatened and migratory fauna species or their habitat have been previously recorded within
the locality (DECC Atlas of NSW Wildlife DEWHA EPBC Online Database and Birds Australia Database).
This includes 15 threatened species with dual listing under the TSC and EPBC Acts, 26 species solely listed
under the TSC Act and 12 EPBC Act migratory species.
The survey results are discussed in the following sections with respect to the well surface locations and
associated gathering system.
11.4.1
Flora
A total of 147 plant species were recorded in the Surface Project Area, including 85 native species, 1 non-locally
occurring species and 61 exotic species.
Plant Communities
Five native plant communities have been mapped as occurring in the Surface Project Area (Figure 17, 18 and
19), being:
•
Cumberland Plain Woodland;
-
Shale Hills Woodland (575 ha mapped in Project Area; 46 ha within the vicinity of proposed works);
-
Shale Plains Woodland (265 ha mapped in Project Area; 18 ha within the vicinity of proposed works);
•
Alluvial Woodland (59 ha mapped in Project Area; 24ha within the vicinity of proposed works which was
redefined and assessed as CPW);
•
Moist Shale Woodland (36 ha mapped in Project Area; 1 ha within the vicinity of proposed works);
•
Western Sydney Dry Rainforest (5 ha mapped in Project Area; none identified within the vicinity of proposed
works); and
•
Closed Grassland.
The main vegetation community occurring in the Surface Project Area and proposed works is Closed Grassland
which is not listed as an EEC under the TSC Act.
The well surface locations are shown on Figure 17, 18 and 19. Each site was recorded and mapped as part of the
survey and existing vegetation noted. Table 11-1 provides a summary of the vegetation encountered at the
proposed well surface locations (including 200m assessment envelope).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-3
AECOM
Table 11-1: Flora/Vegetation Summary of well surface locations within the Project Area
Project Site
Type
Present Vegetation
Vegetation
condition
Potential
Habitat for
Listed Species*
Disturbed
Low
Disturbed
Low
Disturbed - Poor
Low
CU29
Grazed
paddock
The closed grassland is
dominated by Pennisetum
clandestinum, Paspalum
dilatatum and annual and
perennial herbs. Native grasses
and herbs are present .
Within the 200m envelope to
the site centroid there is a stand
of Bursaria spinosa on the
slopes to the north of the
alluvial flat and a small stand of
CPW with canopy consisting of
a few mature trees, regrowth
and patches of native
groundcovers to the south on
the drainage line.
CU26
Grazed
paddock
The closed grassland is a
mixture of exotic and native
grasses and herbs.
There are several stands of
Bursaria spinosa with the
groundcover stratum composed
of mixed native and exotic
grasses and herbs in the 200m
search area.
CU22
Grazed
paddock
grasses and herbs.
Within the 200m envelope to
the site centroid there is a small
stand of trees consisting of
Eucalyptus tereticornis and
Eucalyptus moluccana
A patch of the SHW sub-unit of
CPW is mapped within the
survey envelope on the western
side of Upper Canal.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-4
AECOM
Project Site
CU20
Type
Present Vegetation
Grazed
Paddock
grasses and herbs. There is a
stand of Bursaria spinosa near
the fenceline with the
groundcover stratum mixture of
native and exotic grasses and
herbs.
Vegetation
condition
Potential
Habitat for
Listed Species*
Disturbed
Low
Moderate CPW
Within the 200m envelope there
is a stand of regrowth CPW on
the western side of Upper
Canal.
CU14
Grazed
Paddock
dominated by a mixture of
exotic and native grasses and
herbs.
Disturbed
Low
CU10
Grazed
Paddock
dominated by exotic grasses
and herbs with some commonly
occurring native grass.
Disturbed
Low
Disturbed - Poor
Low
A stand of MSW EEC within the
northern section of the 200m
site footprint on Badgelly Hill.
CU06
Grazed
Paddock
Area dominated by exotic
pasture grasses and
herbaceous weeds, with a few
scattered trees of some
Eucalyptyus species.
CPW is mapped in the southern
section of the 200m envelope
CU02
Grazed
Paddock
Area dominated by exotic
pasture grasses and
herbaceous weeds, with a few
scattered trees of Eucalyptyus
tereticornis in decline.
Disturbed
No
RA09
Grazed
Paddock
dominated by Paspalum
dilatatum, Nassella neesiana
and Plantago lanceolata and
other exotic annual and
perennial herbs. CPW is
mapped within some areas of
the 200m footprint.
Disturbed
Low
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Good –
Moderate CPW
11-5
AECOM
Project Site
RA03
Vegetation
condition
Potential
Habitat for
Listed Species*
Type
Present Vegetation
Grazed
Paddock
Area is dominated by exotic
pasture grasses and
herbaceous weeds. Microlaena
stipoides var stipoides is the
most common native
groundcover and there is small
stand and scattered occurances
of mature Eucalyptyus
tereticornis and Eucalyptus
moluccana present in the
survey zone.
Disturbed
No
Vegetation of the proposed well
surface location and associated
infrastructure is highly modified
due to the previous rural land
use. Canopy is a mix of
introduced and locally occurring
native tree species, planted
exotic shrubs are present and
groundcovers of the mown area
are dominated by exotic
perennial grasses and
herbaceous annual and
perennial weeds.
Disturbed
Low
Disturbed
Low – High
VV11
Due to the current and previous
disturbances there is low
potential habitat for threatened
flora at the proposed well
surface location.
Remnant and regrowth CPW
occurs in other areas of the
200m assessment envelope.
CPW at this well surface
location supports potential
habitat for threatened flora
species known from the Surface
Project Area..
VV07
Closed
grassland
Species composition is a
grasses and herbs.
Good CPW
No EEC recorded within the
disturbed central section of the
200m envelope, however
remnant and regrowth SHW is
present within the 200m site
envelope which has the highest
potential habitat for threatened
species to occur.
* denotes reference to any species listed within the direct impact zone, i.e. within the construction footprint
CPW = Cumberland Plain Woodland; SHW = Shale Hills Woodland; MSW = Moist Shale Woodland
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-6
AECOM
Gathering Lines
The gathering lines are shown on Figure 17, 18 and 19. Each location was recorded and mapped as part of the
survey and existing vegetation noted. Table 11-2 provides a summary of the vegetation encountered at the
proposed locations of gathering lines including within the 25m assessment corridor.
Table 11-2: Flora/Vegetation Summary of gas gathering lines within the Project Area
Project Site
Type
Present Vegetation
Patches of
CPW
Scattered patches of CPW
occur along the Upper Canal
with the majority on the western
side.
Vegetation
condition
Potential
Habitat for
Listed Species*
Poor-Good
Low-Moderate
Disturbed
Low
Gas Gathering Lines
Upper Canal main
spine line
Areas considered to be in Good
condition support a high species
diversity and relatively natural
structure, despite being
regrowth.
Areas considered to be in a
Moderate condition support a
less diverse array of native
species and have a sparse
understorey.
Areas considered to be in a
Poor condition have an altered
structure, generally supporting a
relatively diverse native
understorey with no tree
canopy.
Cleared Areas
The majority of the area along
the Upper Canal is mostly
cleared of native vegetation,
supporting mown and slashed
exotic grasses and herbaceous
species.
Scattered regrowth native
vegetation occurs in this area
and also supports a dense
shrub layer of the exotic Olea
europaea subsp. cuspitata.
CU14 to CU10 to
main spine line
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Cleared and
Disturbed –
Grazed
Paddock
herbs.
Disturbed
No
SHW
The access track to CU10 and
CU14 passes through SHW.
Canopy is dominated by
characteristic trees species with
understory primarily cleared and
the groundcovers a mix of
native and exotic species.
Good
Moderate
11-7
AECOM
Project Site
CU06 to CU02
Type
Present Vegetation
Cleared and
Disturbed –
Grazed
Paddock
The majority of the impact areas
are grazed paddock and
existing access tracks. The
dominant plant community is a
closed grassland that varies in
composition from areas of
mixed native and exotic
groundcovers to areas entirely
dominated by exotic herbs and
grasses.
Vegetation
condition
Potential
Habitat for
Listed Species*
Disturbed-Poor
Low
Scattered individuals of
Eucalyptus tereticornis and
Eucalyptus moluccana are
present along this alignment in
the survey zone.
In view of the previous and
current landuse the majority of
vegetation in the main
construction footprint is
assessed as Disturbed with the
two isolated two stands of trees
assessed as in a Poor
condition.
CU29 and Access
Track
CU26 to main spine
line
Cleared and
Disturbed –
Grazed
Paddock
herbs.
Disturbed
No
CPW
Several small patches of SHW
and SPW occur along the
section of the access track from
the Mount Universe gate to the
CU29 well surface location.
Moderate
Moderate
Cleared and
Disturbed –
Grazed
Paddock
herbs.
Disturbed
No
Moderate-Good
Moderate
There are several patches of
Bursaria spinosa either on or
adjacent to the gathering line.
VV07 GGLs and
VV07 access track
CPW
CPW is mapped in this GGL
assessment area by NPWS
2002 and vegetation condition
is likely to vary between
Moderate to Good.
There is likely to be some
potential habitat for some
threatened flora species
previously recorded in the
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-8
AECOM
Project Site
Type
Present Vegetation
Cleared and
Disturbed –
Open Pasture
The main impact area for this
GGL and VV7 access track
would be through open pastures
and existing access tracks.
These closed grasslands are
grasses and herbs that vary in
composition throughout the
alignments.
Vegetation
condition
Potential
Habitat for
Listed Species*
Disturbed
Low
Good
Moderate
Disturbed
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Disturbed
No
current landuse vegetation in
the main construction footprint
is assessed as Disturbed.
VV11 GGL and
access track
CPW
CPW is mapped in this GGL
assessment area by NPWS
2002 and vegetation condition
is Good.
There is likely to be some
potential habitat for some
threatened flora species
previously recorded in the
Cleared and
disturbed
The GGL and access track
would be through cleared and
disturbed areas and existing
access tracks. These closed
grasslands are mixture of exotic
and native grasses and herbs
that vary in composition
throughout the alignments.
current landuse vegetation in
the GGL construction footprint
and access track is assessed
as Disturbed.
RA09 and access
track
CPW
A small patch of SHW occurs in
the central section of the
gathering line and access track.
Canopy is dominated by
regrowth Eucalyptus tereticornis
and although exotic shrubs
dominate the native species are
present in the understorey.
Groundcovers are a mosaic of
patches of native grasses and
herbs with exotic groundcovers
also present in large patches or
present through the native
dominated areas.
Cleared and
Disturbed –
Managed
Pasture
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
The closed grasslands are
dominated by pasture grasses
and annual and perennial
weeds.
11-9
AECOM
Project Site
Vegetation
condition
Potential
Habitat for
Listed Species*
Type
Present Vegetation
RA03 to
Campbelltown Rd
Cleared and
Disturbed –
Grazed
Paddock
Vegetation of gathering line
alignment is dominated by
exotic pasture grasses and
herbaceous weeds and
Microlaena stipoides var
stipoides is the most common
native groundcover.
Disturbed
No
Integral Energy
Easement - Mount
Annan
Patches of
Cumberland
Plain Woodland
Several patches of SHW occur
in this gathering line.
Poor-Moderate
Moderate
Cleared and
Disturbed
Closed grasslands are present
throughout the gathering line.
Disturbed
Low
Species composition is variable
throughout but includes large
swards of exotic grasses and
herbs and patches dominated
by native groundcovers. Native
and exotic shrubs such are
present in patches or scattered
throughout .
* denotes reference to any species listed within the direct impact zone, i.e. within the construction footprint
CPW = Cumberland Plain Woodland; SHW = Shale Hills Woodland; MSW = Moist Shale Woodland
The potential for threatened species ranges from no potential, to moderate potential. However, minimal to no
clearing is proposed for the gas gathering route.
11.4.2
Fauna
Incidental observations of fauna species utilising the Surface Project Area are listed in Appendix E and include 3
amphibian species, 32 bird species, 1 mammal species (introduced) and 1 reptile species. Of the 32 bird species
recorded in the field surveys 3 are introduced.
Native fauna recorded in the field surveys are considered common and abundant within their range and
distribution in NSW, the Sydney Basin Bioregion and the locality.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-10
AECOM
Fauna Habitat
Habitat features and species associations within the Surface Project Area include:
•
Woodlands;
•
Cleared Areas; and
•
Waterbodies (Farm Dams, Sydney Water Canal and Drainage lines).
The fauna habitats within the Surface Project Area consists largely of partially structured regrowth Woodland and
well structured remnant Woodland that mainly correspond to the SHW and SPW plant communities. Other
landscape scale fauna habitats present in the Surface Project Area are small to large constructed waterbodies
and ephemeral drainage lines. Finer scale habitat features include, hollow bearing trees, leaf litter, fallen logs,
damp areas, soaks, buildings and agricultural debris which may occur within the main Woodland habitat unit or as
isolated occurrences in extensively cleared areas. Animal species may utilise some of these features wholly or
partly, in conjunction with one another, or may depend entirely on one specific habitat type.
A description of fauna habitat recorded for each of the Project components is provided in the following sections.
The habitat potential was assessed at well surface locations and the potential for threatened fauna species
indicated. Table 11-3 provides a summary of the potential fauna habitat encountered at the proposed well surface
locations (including 200m assessment footprint).
Table 11-3: Summary of fauna habitat potential of well surface locations within the Project Area
Project Site
Fauna Habitat
Habitat
Condition
Potential for
Threatened
Species*
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
CU29
Fauna habitats are highly modified in the direct
impact zone of the well surface location.
Within the 200m survey footprint the main fauna
habitats are damp areas of the drainage line, the
stand of Bursaria spinosa on the slopes to the north
of the alluvial flat, the small stand of CPW to the
south and the constructed dam to the west.
CU26
habitats are the stands of Bursaria spinosa.
CU22
habitats are the canopy of the small stand of trees
and the SPW to the west of Upper Canal.
CU20
habitats are the stand of Bursaria spinosa east of the
surface well centroid, several large logs on the
ground, the SPW to the west of Upper Canal and the
constructed dam in the south.
The CPW west of the Upper Canal within the well
surface location may provide some sheltering,
roosting, nesting and foraging and habitat for
threatened birds, microchiropteran bats and CPLS.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-11
AECOM
Project Site
Fauna Habitat
Habitat
Condition
Potential for
Threatened
Species*
CU14
Fauna habitats are highly simplified in the impact
zone.
Poor
Low
CU10
zone.
Poor
Low
CU06
Highly disturbed area and no large trees in the
impact zone.
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Within 200 m of the site there are a number of large
Eucalypts that were heavily flowering at the time of
the survey, providing foraging resources for a range
of vertebrate fauna.
CU02
zone.
Some scattered Eucalyptyus tereticornis in decline
within 200m site radial support small to medium
sized hollows that may provide nesting and roosting
habitat for birds and microchiropteran bats. Also
within the 200m survey zone are several small soaks
and damp areas in the ephemeral drainage.
RA09
impact zone of the surface well.
habitats are the various stands of CPW and two
constructed dams.
The CPW areas within the 200m survey footprint and
extending into adjoining areas may provide
sheltering, roosting, nesting and foraging and habitat
for CPLS, threatened birds and microchiropteran
bats.
RA03
zone.
The mature trees may provide sheltering habitat for
birds and megachiropteran and microchiropteran
bats.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-12
Project Site
Fauna Habitat
VV11
Fauna habitats are highly modified in the area of
disturbed vegetation and are assessed as Poor.
AECOM
Habitat
Condition
Potential for
Threatened
Species*
Low
Poor
Within this area the main fauna habitats are the
scattered native and exotic trees.
Some highly mobile threatened fauna such as birds
and microchiropteran bats may forage over the
nearby intact native vegetation and extend these
activities over this modified habitat at times.
However these fauna would not be reliant on this
simplified habitat either permanently or temporarily
and are likely to preferentially utilise the larger and
more complex habitats of the larger adjoining CPW.
Edges of this area to the adjoining CPW may provide
some marginal habitat for CPLS.
Fauna habitats in the regrowth and remnant CPW of
the VV11 envelope are in a Moderate to Good
condition with structured native vegetation and other
features such as timber on the ground and
connectivity are providing habitat for CPLS and a
range of ground dwelling, arboreal species, avifauna
and bats.
VV07
impact zone of the surface well.
Poor
Low-Good
habitat is the large stand of CPW.
The CPW areas within the 200m survey footprint and
extending into adjoining areas may provide
sheltering, roosting, nesting and foraging and habitat
for threatened birds and microchiropteran bats and
CPLS,
* (TSC and/or EPBC)
The habitat potential was assessed along locations of gathering lines and the potential for threatened fauna
species indicated. Table 11-4 provides a summary of the potential fauna habitat encountered at the proposed
locations of gathering lines including the 25m corridor either side of the proposed route.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-13
AECOM
Table 11-4: Summary of Fauna Habitat Potential of gas gathering lines within the Project Area
Project Site
Fauna Habitat
Habitat
Condition
Potential for
Threatened
Species*
Cumberland Plain Woodland:
Moderate-Good
Low-Moderate
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Moderate
Low-Moderate
Poor
Low
Gas Gathering Lines
Upper Canal Main
spine line
Patches of regrowth CPW in the vicinity of the main
gas gathering spine vary in condition in terms of
fauna habitat, where these patches are adjacent to
larger patches.
Multiple hollow bearing trees were identified within
these patches of CPW. The ground layer in many
areas provides potential habitat for the CPLS, with
abundant fungi, leaf litter and detritus.
Canopy, nectar and flowering resources were
reasonably scarce given the age of most of the
trees however there was abundant mistletoe which
provides foraging resources for a number of
common or threatened woodland birds.
Cleared and Disturbed Areas:
Fauna habitats in the cleared areas along the
Spine Line are highly modified. Although the
scattered native shrub and canopy vegetation in
the cleared areas provides some sheltering,
roosting and foraging habitat, mainly for native
birds and microchiropteran bat species, this is likely
to be less preferential to adjoining areas supporting
partially or fully structured native plant
communities.
CU14 to CU10 to
Spine
Cleared and Disturbed:
zone.
SHW:
This stand of SPW may provide sheltering, roosting
and foraging habitat for a suite of fauna such as
arboreal mammals, birds, and bats.
Some highly mobile threatened fauna such as birds
and microchiropteran bats may forage in and over
this stand of SHW and adjacent areas.
CU06 to CU02
zone.
The small stands of native and exotic trees are
providing some sheltering, roosting and foraging
resources mainly for bird and microchiropteran
bats.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-14
Project Site
AECOM
Fauna Habitat
Habitat
Condition
Potential for
Threatened
Species*
CPW
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Moderate
Low
Poor
Low
Moderate
Moderate
zone and are assessed as Poor.
The small stands of native and exotic trees are
providing some sheltering, roosting and foraging
resources mainly for bird and microchiropteran
bats.
Although some highly mobile threatened fauna
such as birds and microchiropteran bats may
forage over the survey and adjacent areas there is
very little potential habitat for any threatened fauna
species within the GGL construction footprint.
CU29 and Access
Track
zone.
The two constructed dams near the CU29 well
surface locations provide sheltering and foraging
habitat for waterbirds, amphibians and reptiles.
Additionally microchiropterna bats may forage over
these water bodies
CPW:
Fauna habitats in these patches of CPW primarily
provide habitat for avifauna and microchiropteran
bats.
CU26 to main
gathering spine
zone.
The several patches of Bursaria spinosa and
several dead trees along the gathering line
alignment may be providing some fauna habitat
primarily for small to large bird species including
foraging and roosting resources.
species within the gathering line construction
footprint.
VV07 and access
track
CPW:
Fauna habitats in these patches of Woodland are
primarily providing habitat for avifauna and
microchiropteran bats.
species in these patches.
Some potential habitat for the CPLS in these areas.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-15
Project Site
AECOM
Fauna Habitat
Habitat
Condition
Potential for
Threatened
Species*
Poor
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Poor
Low
Moderate
Low
Poor
Low
Poor
Low
Fauna habitats are highly simplified in the cleared
and disturbed areas and these are assessed as
Poor.
species within the Disturbed areas of the GGL
construction footprint. More preferable fauna
habitats are located in nearby patches of
Woodland.
VV11 and access
track
CPW
Fauna habitats in these patches of Woodland are
primarily providing habitat for avifauna and
microchiropteran bats.
species in these patches.
Some potential habitat for the CPLS in these areas.
Cleared and Disturbed
Fauna habitats are highly simplified in the cleared
and disturbed areas and these are assessed as
Poor.
species within the Disturbed areas. More
preferential fauna habitats are located in adjoining
Woodland.
RA09 and access
track
CPW:
Fauna habitat in this patch of CPW is likely to
provide habitat for ground dwelling and arboreal
fauna, avifauna and microchiropteran bats. This
patch has some level of connectivity to the larger
area of CPW to the west.
zone.
There is a constructed dam to the south of the
gathering line alignment providing sheltering and
foraging habitat for waterbirds, amphibians and
reptiles.
RA03 to
Campbelltown Rd
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
zone.
11-16
AECOM
Project Site
Fauna Habitat
Habitat
Condition
Potential for
Threatened
Species*
Integral Energy
Easement - Mount
Annan
Patches of CPW:
Patches of CPW are likely to provide habitat for
ground dwelling and arboreal fauna, avifauna and
microchiropteran bats. Hollow bearing trees are
present in several locations of the gathering line
alignment.
Moderate
Moderate –
Good
Poor
Low
Some of these patches of CPW provide potential
habitat for CPLS. Additionally some highly mobile
threatened fauna such as birds and
microchiropteran bats may shelter, forage or roost
in these CPW patches and adjacent areas
Generally fauna habitats are highly simplified in the
cleared areas.
There are several scattered small waterbodies and
soaks along the length of the gathering line and
these may provide habitat for reptiles and
amphibians.
11.5
Threatened and Endangered Species
Search results including the likelihood of occurrence of threatened and endangered flora and fauna are shown on
Figure 17, 18 and 19, and included in Appendix E.
11.5.1
Flora
Threatened Species
A total of 32 threatened flora species listed on the TSC Act and/or the EPBC Act have been either previously
recorded or have potential habitat within the locality. A complete list of threatened flora species previously
recorded within 10km of the Study Area are provided in Appendix E. Records from the Biosis Research
Threatened Flora Database have also been included from previous work in the locality.
No threatened flora species were recorded within the subject site during the current surveys. However, based on
habitat assessments during the field surveys and other criteria the there is a medium to high likelihood of
occurrence for six threatened flora species previously recorded in the locality. The species are Acacia pubescens,
Cynanchum elegans, Marsdenia viridiflora ssp viridiflora, Pimelea spicata, Pomaderris brunnea and Thesium
australe (refer Appendix E).
Endangered Ecological Communities
As previously mentioned in Section 11.4.1, five vegetation communities are present within the Project Area. Four
of these native plant communities are listed as EECs on the TSC Act. CPW incorporating the SHW and SPW subunits is also listed as CEEC on the EPBC Act. Table 11-5 shows the relationship of the listed plant communities
to EECs under the relevant legislation.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-17
AECOM
Table 11-5: Endangered Ecological Communities in the study area
Plant
Community
EEC on TSC Act
CEEC on TSC Act
CEEC on EPBC Act
Shale Hills
Woodland
Cumberland Plain
Woodland
Shale Plains
Woodland
Cumberland Plain
Woodland
Alluvial
Woodland
River-Flat Eucalypt Forest on
coastal floodplains of the NSW
North Coast, Sydney Basin and
South East Corner Bioregions.
N/A
N/A
Moist Shale
Woodland
Moist Shale Woodland in the
Sydney Basin Bioregion.
N/A
N/A
Western Sydney
Dry Rainforest
Western Sydney Dry
Rainforest in the Sydney Basin
Bioregion.
N/A
N/A
11.5.2
Fauna
Threatened Species
A total of 52 threatened and migratory fauna species or their habitat have been previously recorded within the
locality (DECC Atlas of NSW Wildlife, DEWHA EPBC Online Database and Birds Australia Database). This
includes 15 threatened species with dual listing under the TSC and EPBC Acts, 15 species solely listed under the
TSC Act and 11 EPBC Act migratory species.
A list of Threatened and migratory fauna species previously recorded within 10km of the Study Area is provided in
Appendix E.
The distribution of previous records of 50 of these species derived from DECC Atlas of NSW Wildlife and EPBC
Act Protected Matters data, is illustrated in Figure 17, 18 and 19.
No threatened fauna species were recorded within the subject site during the current surveys. However, based
on habitat assessments during the field surveys and other criteria the there is a medium to high likelihood of
occurrence for;
•
Five threatened bird species - Bush Stone-curlew Burhinus grallarius, Speckled Warbler Pyrrholaemus
sagittatus, Diamond Firetail Stagonopleura guttata, Hooded Robin Melanodryas cucullata cucullata, Swift
Parrot Lathamus discolour;
•
Six threatened bat species - Eastern Freetail-bat Mormopterus norfolkensis, Grey-headed Flying-fox
Pteropus poliocephalus, Eastern False Pipistrelle Falsistrellus tasmaniensis, Eastern Bentwing Bat
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis, Large-footed Myotis Myotis macropus (adversus) and Greater Broadnosed Bat Scoteanax rueppellii; and
•
The threatened invertebrate, CPLS.
11.5.3
EPBC Act Significant Impact Criteria
Under the Commonwealth EPBC Act, if the Project has the potential to have an adverse impact on threatened
biota listed on the Act, the Project must be referred to the Federal Minister for the Environment for further
consideration.
The Significant Impact Criteria are used to assess the likelihood of a significant impact of an action (in this case
the current project) (DEH, 2006). Following the application of these criteria a ‘significant impact’ can be
considered as an impact which is important, notable, or of consequence, having regard to its context or intensity.
Whether or not an action is likely to have a significant impact depends upon the sensitivity, value, and quality of
the environment which is impacted, and upon the intensity, duration, magnitude and geographic extent of the
impacts (DEH, 2006).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-18
AECOM
EPBC Act Assessments addressing the Significant Impact Criteria are presented in Appendix E. Assessments of
the Significance Impact Criteria have been prepared for the species identified in Section 11.5.2.
The Significant Impact Criteria Assessments under the EPBC Act found that the proposal is not likely to have a
significant impact on threatened species and ecological communities or their habitats, as listed on the EPBC Act,
provided recommended mitigation measures are implemented and project design and construction principles are
adopted. These design and mitigation measures are as follows;
•
Each of the twelve well surface locations would be located within an existing disturbed area of the
assessment footprint to avoid any area mapped as CPW or an area of biodiversity constraint where
possible;
•
Gas gathering lines would conform to the construction methods proposed in Chapter 4 of the EA; and
•
Access roads and ancillary infrastructure, including storage yard(s), where required would be located in
areas that do not encroach into CPW and would remain within existing access and infrastructure corridors or
other disturbed areas where possible.
Accordingly, the Project will not be referred to the DEHWA for the Minister and does not require approval under
the EPBC Act.
11.6
Potential Impacts
The potential direct impacts of the Project on flora and fauna include:
•
vegetation clearance;
•
the removal of potential habitat for threatened flora and fauna; and,
•
the fragmentation of potential habitat for threatened flora and fauna.
Potential indirect impacts that may result from the Project include:
•
erosion;
•
edge effects;
•
weed invasion; and,
•
elevated noise and light levels associated with increased human activity within or adjacent to sensitive
habitat areas.
The potential ecological impacts of the Project are related to the surface infrastructure components and are
therefore generally limited to the Surface Project Area. The potential ecological impacts of proposed subsurface
drilling activities are considered to be negligible. Potential impacts related to each of the Project components are
summarised in the table below.
Table 11-6: Potential ecological impacts
Project Component
Main Spine Line
Vegetation Communities & Associated Habitat within Assessment
‘Envelopes’
No clearing of native vegetation communities is likely to be required for the
construction of the Main Gas Gathering Spine Line. Construction of the Main
Spine Line through cleared areas is unlikely to have an impact on native flora
and fauna or their habitats.
Construction of the main spine line would be sited such that clearing of CPW
within the assessment envelope would be avoided.
Clearing of native vegetation communities would not occur at RA03.
RA03
Construction of the well head and associated infrastructure is likely to have little
or no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats.
GGL RA03 to RA09 &
Access Tracks
Avoid trees along proposed GGL and access tracks by altering alignments.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
No clearing of native vegetation required for the GGL and access track.
11-19
RA09
AECOM
Construction of the well head and associated infrastructure in disturbed or
cleared areas within the assessment footprint at RA09 is likely to have little or
no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats of the site.
Construction works would be sited such that clearing of CPW within the
assessment envelope would be avoided.
GGL RA09 and Access
Track
Avoid small patch of CPW identified along access track to RA09.
No clearing of native vegetation required for the GGL and access track.
Construction of the well head and associated infrastructure in the Disturbed
vegetation at the VV07is likely to have little or no impact on the native flora and
fauna or their habitats of the site.
VV07
VV11
GGL VV07 & Access Tracks
CU20
Approximately 0.1 ha of CPW along the gas gathering line west of VV07 is
likely to be affected by construction works. Suitable rehabilitation techniques
including the use of CPW would be undertaken immediately following
construction. Impacts on the net community are not considered significant.
Some clearing at VV11 would be required but would be limited to Closed
Grassland which is not mapped as a native plant community by NPWS (2002).
Construction of the wellhead within the disturbed vegetation at the WSL is likely
to have little or no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats..
No clearing of native vegetation required for the north/south GGL and VV07
access track in cleared and disturbed areas.
No clearing of native vegetation communities is likely to be required at CU20
east of Upper Canal for the construction of the well head infrastructure.
Construction of the well head and associated infrastructure east of Upper Canal
is likely to have little or no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats
of the site.
Construction works at CU20 has been designed such that it is able avoid
adverse impacts on CPW.
CU22
east of Upper Canal for the construction of the well head infrastructure.
Construction of the well head and associated infrastructure east of Upper Canal
is likely to have little or no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats
of the site.
CU26
Clearing of native vegetation communities is likely to be required for the
construction of the well head infrastructure at this location. Construction works
would be sited such that clearing of CPW within the assessment envelope
would be avoided.
or no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats of the site
GGL CU26 & Access Track
No clearing of native vegetation required for GGL.
GGL CU29 & Access Track
No clearing of native vegetation required for GGL.
CU29
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
No clearing of native vegetation communities is likely to be required for the
construction of the well head infrastructure at this location.
11-20
AECOM
Clearing of native vegetation communities would not occur at CU02.
CU02
or no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats of the site.
GGL CU02 & CU06 &
Access Tracks
No clearing of native vegetation is required for these GGLs and access roads..
Clearing of native vegetation communities is unlikely to occur at CU06.
CU06
CU10
Construction works would be sited such that clearing of MSW or CPW within
the assessment envelope would be avoided.
No clearing of native vegetation communities would occur for the construction
of the well head infrastructure at this location.
CU14
GGLs CU10 & CU14 &
access
GGL between Main Spine
Line GGL & MP05
11.6.1
No clearing of native vegetation required for GGL and access road.
Use of existing tracks to reduce impacts to identified vegetation.
No clearing of native vegetation required for GGL and access road as the
existing Integral Energy easement and access would be utilised.
There would be no impact on the native flora and fauna or their habitats along
the already cleared easement.
The main disturbance at most well surface locations would be earthworks including drilling for the establishment
of wells and cut and fill for finished levels to construct the wells and associated infrastructure.
Approximately 36ha of CPW and 0.8ha of MSW is estimated to lie within the 200m assessed area of the well
surface locations. However, all well surface locations are proposed to be situated in cleared and disturbed areas
of the 200m assessment envelopes where possible, thereby avoiding impacts to this vegetation.
The establishment of drilling compounds for the project would result in the temporary disturbance of up to 12ha of
Closed Grasslands across the Surface Project Area. Following the rehabilitation of the drilling compound, the
2,
2
total loss of vegetation at a well surface location would be approximately 360m or some 4320m (0.43ha) of
Closed Grassland across the Surface Project Area. This would represent approximately 0.01% of the vegetation
of the Surface Project Area not mapped as a native plant community by NPWS (2002e).
The construction and operation of the proposed well surface locations is therefore unlikely to have a significant
impact on the native flora and fauna of the Project Area including TSC and EPBC Act listed species provided
mitigation measures, including the existing EMS, are implemented.
11.6.2
Construction and establishment of this linear infrastructure would involve earthworks over narrow construction
footprints. In addition to the trenches there would be some disturbance for machinery and vehicle access.
The design of the main spine line, gathering line network and access tracks has considered alignments through
disturbed areas wherever possible. Upgrading or establishment of access tracks has followed the same principle
and access for construction works or maintenance during operation would, for the most part, be restricted to
existing tracks.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-21
AECOM
Avoidance of significant flora and fauna habitats such as regrowth and remnant CPW and other features such as
water bodies and hollow bearing trees has been a continuous process through inception phases and field
surveys, culminating in the current design. The bulk of the main spine line and gathering line network would be
through disturbed areas that have been substantially cleared of native vegetation and are under agricultural
management practices.
Approximately 152 ha of vegetation occurs in the assessment envelopes of the main spine line, gas gathering
network and access tracks incorporating some 30 ha of CPW and 121 ha of Closed Grasslands. Construction
works would be sited such that clearing of CPW within the assessment envelope would be avoided, where
possible. Approximately 0.1 ha of CPW west of VV07 is likely to be affected by the construction of the gas
gathering line to the main spine line. Suitable rehabilitation techniques including the use of CPW (as discussed in
Chapter 21) would be undertaken immediately following construction.
The area of disturbance for the gas gathering lines will vary throughout the Surface Project Area within a corridor
of a maximum of 10 m including trenches, soil stockpile areas and vehicle, equipment and operational areas. As
such over the entire project, some 1.5 ha of vegetation is expected to be temporarily affected by the construction
of gas gathering lines. Vegetation disturbed would largely be limited to the groundcover stratum. Following
completion of the construction of the gathering system, soil profiles would be returned to pre-construction levels
and vegetation would be reinstated. There is unlikely to be a long term net loss of native or derived plant
communities as a result of the construction and operation of the proposal.
CPW is mapped along the gathering line that traverses the eastern area of Mount Annan Botanic Gardens,
however it is noted here that this gathering line is proposed to be installed within the Integral Energy easement
currently under construction (refer Table 11-6).
Construction of well surface locations and ancillary infrastructure would be largely though existing cleared and
disturbed areas supporting Closed Grasslands dominated by exotic pasture grasses and annual and perennial
weeds and is therefore unlikely to have a significant impact on the native flora and fauna of the Surface Project
Area including TSC and EPBC Act listed species, provided the recommended mitigation measures are
implemented.
11.7
In general, the ‘envelope’ approach adopted in respect of the project in itself acts as a safeguard to constrain
potential impacts to native flora and fauna and their habitats within the Surface Project Area through a strategy of
avoidance.
11.7.1
Mitigation Measures
As part of the existing EMS for the CGP, a Flora and Fauna Management Sub Plan (FFMSP) has been
developed. This FFMSP would be applied to the Northern Expansion and would be updated to include other
specific flora and fauna management measures relevant to the Northern Expansion (where necessary) as outlined
in Appendix E and in Table 11-7 below.
Table 11-7: Flora and Fauna Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures for Project Components
•
Where possible, the well head and associated infrastructure should be constructed in existing cleared and
disturbed areas of the well surface location. Well heads would be sited to minimise the removal of any trees.
•
Stands of CPW and MSW would be avoided, where possible.
•
Stands of Bursaria spinosa in the well surface location would be avoided wherever possible
•
Sediment and erosion controls would be in place around the construction footprint
•
Vehicles and heavy equipment movements would avoid drainage lines and damp areas
•
Vehicles and heavy equipment movements and parking would be restricted to designated access and
storage/parking areas
•
Large logs present within a well surface location would be retained where possible
•
Native trees within disturbed and cleared areas would be retained (where possible)
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-22
AECOM
Mitigation Measures for Project Components
Gas Gathering Lines
•
The gathering lines would be constructed within existing cleared areas and easements wherever possible
•
Clearing would be avoided within areas mapped as supporting CPW
•
Sediment and erosion controls would be used around the construction footprint to reduce impacts to
adjoining native vegetation
•
Removal of large trees would be avoided
•
In areas of likely CPLS habitat, pre-clearing fauna surveys would be undertaken to target CPLS. Any
identified CPLS would be relocated into nearby areas that would not be disturbed.
•
Fauna disturbed during construction activities would be similarly relocated
•
Temporary exclusion fencing would be used during the construction phase to define the development
footprint and limits of clearing (if required)
•
Earthworks within 2 m of drip line of tree canopies would be avoided wherever possible in order to minimise
impacts to tree roots
•
Impacts to patches of native trees and shrubs would be avoided where possible
•
storage/parking areas
•
Damage to low tree limbs as a result of truck or heavy plant movements would be assessed and managed
by a qualified Arborist
In addition, further mitigation options would be considered as follows:
•
Further adjustments in locating the developments including well heads within the well surface locations,
gathering lines and access tracks to avoid native trees and other habitat features such as waterbodies,
where possible;
•
In locations where native plant communities will be disturbed temporary exclusion fencing would be installed
around vegetation that is to be retained with no access to occur in the fenced areas. Signs would be placed
on the fencing that identify these areas as no access zones.
•
Trees with hollows would be retained and protected, with no excavation within the critical root zone
(extending to 2 m beyond the drip line) of the trees;
•
Any trimming of branches along existing access tracks to accommodate heavy equipment or large vehicles
would be carried out by a qualified Arborist. Should large branches with hollows be required to be removed,
a suitably qualified ecologist would be on site during clearing to ensure no resident fauna are harmed.
Cleared branches would be placed in adjoining vegetation, as they may provide habitat for fauna;
•
Pre-clearing fauna surveys would be carried out targeting CPLS in areas supporting CPW in Moderate to
Good condition. CPLS need to be relocated into nearby areas that will not be disturbed. A qualified
ecologist would be on site during clearing to collect and relocate any fauna disturbed during the clearing
phase including inspection of excavated trees stumps following clearing for CPLS;
•
A local wildlife rescue organisation would be contacted should any vertebrate fauna be injured during
construction;
•
Where possible in areas supporting CPW, surface soils to 100mm depth would be scalped and stockpiled.
Following bulk earthworks, such as levelling and back filling, the stockpiled surface soil would be spread
back over areas that will not be disturbed in the future as part of the operation of the development.
Stockpiled topsoil would be respread as soon as possible to prevent loss of the native seed bank as a result
of composting;
•
Excess subsoil remaining as a result of displacement from the main spine line and gathering lines is to be
removed from site. Ideally this soil would be used elsewhere on the Project as fill to achieve finished levels
around well surface locations. Alternatively this excess soil would be removed following backfilling of
trenches and disposed of at a registered waste facility;
•
Sediment and erosion control measures need to be installed and maintained during construction particularly
in areas where there are sensitive receiving environments such as native vegetation and waterways.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-23
AECOM
Sediment and erosion controls would stay in place until construction footprints and associated disturbed
areas are stabilized;
•
To prevent the dispersal of weed seed or soil borne pathogens into regrowth or remnant native vegetation
hygiene protocols would be implemented for vehicles, heavy equipment and machinery used for earthworks.
This equipment would be washed down prior to entering a site;
•
storage/parking areas during and post construction at the well surface locations;
•
Site supervisors would be provided with aerial images of the construction footprint that show the Biodiversity
Constraints Zones in Figures 6a to 6c of Appendix E; and
•
The project manager and site supervisors would consult with suitably qualified ecologist should flora and
fauna issues arise during the construction phase.
These mitigation measures would be incorporated into the existing EMS for the CGP and applied to the Northern
Expansion.
11.8
Conclusion
The design and assessment methodology of the current proposal have been guided by an over-arching principle
to avoid areas known or likely to support threatened biodiversity (such as CPW) or potential habitats. As such,
most of the infrastructure would be located in existing disturbed areas with minimal potential for ecological impact.
The ecological assessment undertaken identified and evaluated the potential impacts of the project on flora and
fauna. Assessments of significance were carried out according to Part 3A of the EP&A Act (DEC & DPI 2005) and
concluded that the proposal is likely to have a minor impact on threatened flora and fauna species, flora
populations and ecological communities, as listed on the TSC Act, provided recommended mitigation measures
are implemented during the project. Similarly, assessments carried out for threatened flora and fauna species and
ecological communities according to the EPBC Act Significant Impact Guidelines (DEH 2006) have determined
that the proposal is not likely to have a significant impact on threatened species and ecological communities, or
their habitats, as listed on the EPBC Act, provided recommended mitigation measures are implemented. The
potential ecological issues associated with the development would be managed through the existing FFMSP and
updated to include specific management principles relevant to the Northern Expansion works (refer to
Chapter 24).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
11-24
12.0
AECOM
Groundwater
The potential for impacts to groundwater resulting from the Northern Expansion were assessed to determine
appropriate management and mitigation measures required as part of the Project.
Based on review of existing data, a conceptual model of the hydrogeological regime within the Project Area has
been developed. This chapter discusses the conceptualisation and data used to develop the model as well as
potential impacts and mitigation measures for the well field and associated infrastructure.
12.1
The groundwater of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are well known due to the existing CGP
operations. Given the history of coal seam gas well development within the CGP, previous assessments of
impacts to groundwater from other developments were reviewed for the purpose of this assessment and include:
•
Environmental Impact Statement: Camden Gas Project Stage II, Sydney Gas Operations, 2003;
•
Environment, Health and Safety Management Plan: Drilling, Completion and Testing Operations, Sydney
Gas Operations, 2006;
•
Camden Council Spring Farm Urban Release Area Local Environmental Study, Issue No. 7a, October 2000,
Patterson Britton & Partners (PBP, 2000);
•
Menangle Park Preliminary Local Environmental Study, September 2004, MG Planning (MG Planning,
2004);
•
Environmental Assessment: Razorback Drilling Program, Camden Gas Project Wells RB04 – RB12 PPL4,
AGL Gas Production and Sydney Gas Operations, 2006; and
•
Environmental Assessment: EMAI Stage II Drilling Program Camden Gas Project Joint Venture Wells EM23
– EM37 PPL1 / PPL4, AGL Gas Production (Camden) and Sydney Gas Operations, 2006.
12.1.1
Geology and Geomorphology
The Permian Illawarra Coal Measures occur within the Project Area between approximately 700 to 1000 m depth.
Coal seam methane resources are concentrated in the upper coal measures, and coal seam methane extraction
within the Project Area would target the Bulli and Balgownie seams, located at approximately 700 m depth.
In the vicinity of the Northern Expansion Project Area, the Illawarra Coal measures are overlain by a thick
sequence (approximately 700 m) of sedimentary strata which comprise a non-uniform sequence of interbedded
sandstone, siltstone and shale of differing grainsize and strength properties. This distribution invariably gives rise
to layers of rock with a wide range of permeabilities, which form a sequence of aquifers and aquitards within the
overburden.
Deposits of unconsolidated silts, sands and minor gravels of mixed colluvial and alluvial origin occur in valleys,
creeks and gullies within the Project Area. Where the colluvial and alluvial deposits are not present, sedimentary
strata of the Wiannamatta Group are exposed at the surface. The Wianamatta Group is characterised by shales
of low permeability, low storage and high groundwater salinity as a consequence of the marine depositional
environment during the mid Triassic period. These characteristics generally render groundwater within the shales
unsuitable for beneficial use (DMR, 1980).
Underlying the Wianamatta Group is the Mittagong Formation comprising interbedded shale laminate, mediumgrained quartz sandstone and black siltstone (SCA, 2007). The Mittagong Formation is a relatively thin layer
within the strata and forms a transitional zone between the Ashfield Shale and the Hawkesbury Sandstone.
The Hawkesbury Sandstone is generally a medium to coarse grained quartz rich sandstone with claystone,
siltstone, minor shale and shale lenses. The Hawkesbury Sandstone is known to contain significant amounts of
groundwater in some areas of the Sydney Basin. It is the major aquifer across the southern Sydney Basin.
The Narrabeen Group, present between the Hawkesbury Sandstone and Illawarra Coal Measures, consists of a
fine to coarse grained quartz lithic sandstone with a similar matrix to the Hawkesbury Sandstone. The Narrabeen
Group is generally more cemented, contains less quartzose, is less porous and therefore has a low yield
compared to the Hawkesbury Sandstone.
The regional stratigraphy is summarised in the following table.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12-1
AECOM
Table 12-1: Stratigraphy of the Project Area: Camden
Period
Group
Wianamatta
Group
Stratigraphic
Unit
Indicative
Depth (m)
Lithology
Bringelly
Shale
60
Shale, carbonaceous claystone,
claystone, laminate, fine to
medium grained sandstone, rare
coal and tuff.
Minchinbury
Sandstone
70
Fine to medium grained quartz
lithic sandstone.
110
Dark grey to black claystone,
siltstone and fine, sandstonesiltstone laminate.
Comments
Aquitard
TDS > 3000 mg/L
Minor Aquifer
Aquitard
Ashfield Shale
Transmissivity = <1
m²/day
TDS >3000 mg/L
Mittagong Formation
120
Interbedded shale, laminate and
medium grained quartz
sandstone.
300
Medium to coarse grained
sandstone, minor laminated
mudstone and siltstone lenses.
Aquifer
Hawkesbury Sandstone
Triassic
Newport
Formation
320
Interbedded shale, laminate and
quartz to quartz-lithic sandstone.
Garie
Formation
340
Clay-pellet sandstone.
Bald Hill
Claystone
360
Dominantly red-brown claystone
and red shale with fine to
medium grained sandstone.
TDS 1000-5000 mg/L
Yields: 0.2 to 2 L/sec
Transmissivity = 1-5
m²/day
Aquifer
Transmissivity = 0.11 m²/day
Aquifer
Transmissivity = 0.11 m²/day
Aquitard
Minor Aquifer
Narrabeen
Group
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Bulgo
Sandstone
610
Fine to medium grained quartzlithic sandstone with lenticular
shale interbeds.
Stanwell Park
Claystone
640
Red, green and grey shale and
quartz-lithic sandstone.
Scarborough
Sandstone
660
Quartz-lithic sandstone, pebbly
in parts.
Wombarra
Claystone
670
Grey shale and minor quartzlithic sandstone.
TDS 1500-5000 mg/L
pH = 7.9
Transmissivity = 0.12
0.5 m /day
Aquitard
Minor Aquifer
Transmissivity = 0.10.5 m²/day
Aquitard
12-2
Period
Group
Permian
Illawarra
Coal
Measures
Stratigraphic
Unit
AECOM
Indicative
Depth (m)
700
Lithology
Comments
Medium grained quartz lithic
sandstone, siltstone, claystone,
laminate and coal.
Minor Aquifers
TDS >5000mg/L
pH = 8.7
Reference: Adapted from Sydney Catchment Authority, 2007. Submission to Inquiry into the NSW Southern Coalfields.
Appendix 5: The Design of a Hydrological and Hydrogeological Monitoring Program to Assess the Impact of Longwall Mining in
SCA Catchments, July 2005.
Groundwater salinities, yields and transmissivities will generally be lower in this area compared to primary
recharge areas to the south and west.
12.1.2
Aquifer Systems
Perched / Alluvial Aquifers
Deposits of unconsolidated silts, sands and minor gravels of mixed colluvial and alluvial origin occur in valleys,
creeks and gullies within the Project Area. The alluvial deposits present are thin and laterally discontinuous, and
hence do not have significant groundwater storage capacity. Due to the shallow and permeable nature of the
alluvial deposits, any groundwater they contain is highly responsive to rainfall and stream flow. Recharge is
predominantly through rainfall infiltration and any water present is likely to drain rapidly into the creeks and gullies.
Therefore, the alluvial deposits are not considered a significant aquifer or water resource in the vicinity of the
Project Area.
Bedrock Aquifers
Strata overlying the coal measures in the vicinity of the Project Area generally have low permeabilities and are low
yielding. However, there are a number of layers that are reported to exhibit slightly higher permeabilities and are
considered aquifers. The few aquifers to occur at depth are considered fractured bedrock aquifers which display
permeabilities up to two orders of magnitude greater than the surrounding strata due to the presence of
interconnected bedding, joint and fracture patterns.
The Hawkesbury Sandstone and the Bulgo Sandstone are the most significant aquifers present with the bedrock
overlying the coal measures. Aquitards are formed by the shales within the Wianamatta Group, the Bald Hill
Claystone and the series of claystones between the Bulgo Sandstone and coal measures. (refer to Table 12-1).
The Hawkesbury Sandstone is known to contain groundwater suitable for extraction and augmentation of
Sydney’s potable water supply in some areas within the Sydney Basin. However these areas occur to the south of
the project area around Kangaloon, and in Western Sydney.
Extraction of groundwater from this aquifer generally targets naturally occurring fractured zones where the
secondary porosity provides greater yield. Based on drilling data and Department of Natural Resources records,
the Hawkesbury Sandstone in the vicinity of the Project Area yields between 0.2 to 2 L/sec, considerably lower
than other areas of the Sydney Basin. The variation in bore yields within the Hawkesbury Sandstone can be
attributed to a highly variable sandstone sequence with varying permeabilities and localised barriers, such as
siderite and clay or shale lenses.
The strata in the vicinity of the Project Area dips at less than two degrees to the east, and as such, groundwater
flow is generally horizontal. Groundwater recharge is generally via lateral migration through the individual strata.
There is limited vertical migration of groundwater..
Groundwater quality in the vicinity of the Project Area ranges from brackish to saline, with salinity generally
increasing with depth. The infiltration of groundwater through the saline Ashfield Shale contributes to the brackish
conditions reported for the Hawkesbury Sandstone aquifer in the vicinity of the Project Area.
Coal Measures Aquifers
Although the strata of the Illawarra Coal Measures are essentially impermeable, some coal seams in the Coal
Measures form minor aquifers due to fracturing and jointing within the seams. Groundwater flow within the coal
seams is almost exclusively horizontal as they are bounded by fine-grained sediments which act as aquitards.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12-3
AECOM
Groundwater within the coal seams is generally of poorer quality (more saline) than in the near-surface sandstone
aquifers.
Groundwater Usage
A database search of bores in the vicinity of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas reported there were 10
registered bores within the Surface Project Area itself and a further 27 bores located within an approximate 5 km
radius. The maximum bore depth was 297 m and bores were generally screened within sandstone or shale units.
The bores in the area were registered for irrigation, monitoring and stock watering purposes. There is no
information available regarding water usage but volumes are expected to be low based on bore yield and water
quality constraints. None of the registered bores in the vicinity of the Project Areas were installed within the coal
measures aquifers.
Water Sharing
The Draft Water Sharing Plan for the Greater Metropolitan Region Groundwater Sources 2010 is applicable to the
Subsurface and Surface Project Area, which is within the Sydney Central Basin Groundwater Source.
Volumes of water incidentally taken in the course of aquifer interference activities, such as the water intercepted
during mining or CSG operations, currently require a licence under the Water Act (1912). Access licences and
works approvals will be required under the Water Management Act 2000 when the Water Sharing Plan is gazetted
and implemented (refer to Section 5.2.8). AGL holds licences for its existing wellfield development under the
Water Act.
The volumes of groundwater expected to be produced from the extra gas wells associated with this new project is
likely to be of the order of few megalitres (ML) per annum, and with the decline in produced water from gas wells
in the existing wellfield, the current allocation of 30 ML per year should suffice for the development.
12.2
Potential Impacts
Activities which are likely to encounter groundwater and potentially alter the hydrogeological regime in the vicinity
of the Project Area comprise:
•
Installation and operation of the gas production wells;
•
Hydro-fracturing (fracing) within the coal seams; and
•
Subsurface drilling of lateral well paths and extraction of methane and associated groundwater from the coal
seam.
Adverse impacts to the groundwater regime as a result of these activities is not considered likely. Past experience
has shown that the standard procedures used for the construction of wells and methane extraction mitigate the
potential of negative impacts occurring. However, the potential impacts have been assessed to ensure
appropriate management and mitigation measures are put in place to minimise the likelihood of their occurrence.
Impacts with the potential to result from the above activities include:
•
Increased permeability and subsequent flow rate within the coal measures aquifer;
•
Dewatering and depressurisation of the coal measures aquifers; and
•
Reduction in groundwater quality.
These potential impacts are discussed in more detail following.
12.2.1
Increased Aquifer Permeability and Flow Rate
The minor coal measures aquifers would have increased (local) permeability as a result of fracing and subsurface
drilling activities, which would subsequently result in increased groundwater flow rates within the close proximity
of the CSG wells.
Fracturing stimulation, or hydro-fracturing (fracing), involves injection of water and sand at pressures exceeding
the maximum strength of the coal. When the injection pressure becomes greater than the coal strength and
confining pressures, fractures are propagated through the seam. The fractures propagate outwards from the
initiation point along the path perpendicular to minimum stress . As the coal is much softer than the interburden,
the fractures propagate along the coal rather than into the surrounding rock. Sand is injected with the water to
hold the newly formed fractures open, thus maintaining the higher conductive pathways induced by the process of
fracing.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12-4
AECOM
Technical review and modelling of fracture lengths in existing production wells within the Project Area indicate an
average fracture length of approximately 50 metres. Fracture heights are generally confined to the coal seam due
to the large stress contrast between the coal and interburden.
Fracing would be conducted at depths of approximately 700 metres within the targeted coal measures.
Subsurface drilling for the purposes of the Project involves the continued penetration of the underlying geology
where the drilling deviates from a central point on the surface and continues along a subsurface lateral path some
distance from its origin (refer Section 4.3.2).
Subsurface drilling will be conducted from a point of origin, being each well surface location, and follow a lateral
in-seam well path for up to 2,500m.
12.2.2
Dewatering of the Coal Measures Aquifers
Well installation procedures are designed to negate the potential of aquifer connectivity and subsequent drainage
of shallow aquifers to deeper levels. Existing production wells within the Project Area have reported limited
volumes of groundwater inflow during drilling, mainly from the Hawkesbury Sandstone unit. All production wells
are cased to full depth during installation to prevent inflow of shallow water supply aquifers.
The extraction of groundwater in association with the methane gas would result in drawdown and dewatering of
groundwater levels within the target coal seams. As the number of operational wells increase, so too will the
volume of groundwater being extracted.
The extraction of methane and groundwater from the existing 130 wells has already resulted in dewatering of the
target coal seams on a regional scale. As such, further extraction will have little additional impact, if any, and as
there are no beneficial users of the coal measures aquifers in the vicinity of the Project Area, adverse impacts as
a result of aquifer dewatering are not anticipated.
The presence of the relatively impermeable Narrabeen Group overlying the coal measures will aid in confining the
impacts of groundwater extraction to the coal measures. Impacts to overlying aquifers are not anticipated as a
result of dewatering the coal measures aquifers due to proven drilling techniques of the existing CGP (refer
Section 4.3.2)
Fracing is unlikely to result in dewatering of overlying aquifers as the fracture lengths and heights are not
expected to reach overlying aquifers, the closest being the Bulgo Sandstone which is approximately 100 metres
above the coal measures. Subsurface drilling of lateral well paths would remain within the coal seam and is
therefore equally unlikely to result in dewatering of overlying aquifers.
12.2.3
Reduction in Groundwater Quality
Analytical results of groundwater from existing production wells within the vicinity of the Project Area indicate the
water quality within the coal measures is brackish to saline with a slightly alkaline pH. Aquifers overlying the coal
measures are of better quality, however as discussed previously, connectivity between aquifers as a result of this
development is not anticipated.
The storage of produced (saline) water at the surface has the potential to impact shallow, less saline aquifers in
the unlikely event of an uncontrolled water spill. However, as AGL intend to use storage tanks or lined ponds for
the water storage, infiltration of produced water to shallow soils and aquifers would be prevented.
The use of drilling additives during the installation of production wells has the potential to result in a short term
impact to groundwater if not managed correctly. Drilling fluids are used to stabilise the walls of the borehole and
reduce wear and tear on the drilling equipment. Potassium chloride is also commonly used in the southern
coalfields for the stabilisation of shales and to control swelling clays during drilling.
Once well are completed to full depth they are usually stimulated to increase gas production by fracing the target
coal measures. Fracing fluid typically consists of 90% water, 9.5% sand and 0.5% additives by volume. The main
purpose of the majority of the additives is to form a gelled frac fluid allowing the sand to be suspended within the
frac fluid. Some of the constituents of the frac fluid are utilised to breakdown the gel once the frac is completed.
These are highly diluted and are then further diluted by the groundwater in the coal seam.
The additives used may include:
•
Sodium hypochlorate (commonly used in swimming pools)
•
Hydrochloric acid (commonly used in swimming pools)
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12-5
•
AECOM
Surfactants (used in soaps)
•
Cellulose (an organic compound derived from plants)
•
Acetic acid (used in vinegar)
•
Bactericides (to prevent bacteria from forming corrosion)
Some of the additives have a toxic nature when they are in a pure form, however many of these are commonly
used in households and in a diluted form (as for fracing) they present a minimal risk for a variety of reasons:
•
The fracing fluid is only injected into coal seams, and does not come into contact with shallow aquifers;
•
When the frac fluid is injected, the well has been encased with steel and concrete which is perforated only
across the coal seam;
•
From a health perspective there are typically less than 0.5%of the total frac fluid volume is made up of
additives and it is therefore very diluted as compared to their natural form and further diluted by the
groundwater within the coal seam.;
•
The vast majority of the frac fluid injected into a well is recovered and removed for treatment and reuse. This
leaves only a very small proportion of the frac fluid within the coal measures aquifers and, notwithstanding
this, the dilution factor, as noted above, would further reduce the concentration.
The drilling additives and polymers used are biodegradable and would not result in the degradation of
groundwater quality. In addition, standard procedures following drilling of the borehole to the required depth
include flushing the borehole with fresh water to remove additives and minimise the viscosity of the gels lining the
borehole wall, further minimising any potential of groundwater impact. Adverse impacts to groundwater quality as
a result of drilling and fracing fluids are not anticipated.
12.3
Salinity Risk
Salts are naturally present in soil and rock and mobilised in the subsurface by groundwater movement. Urban and
dryland salinity is primarily caused by rising water tables (due to altered land use practices) and/or disrupted
groundwater flow paths. Salts deposited from shallow groundwater can be highly corrosive to surface structures.
Occurrence of saline soils are known to occur in western Sydney and the region has been recognised by the
NSW Office of Water (NOW) as prone to the development of dryland salinity. To improve awareness of salinity
hazards in western Sydney, a map of the salinity potential in western Sydney was published by the Department of
Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources in 2002. The map takes into account the topography, known
salinity occurrences, bedrock and soil types to divide western Sydney into areas of very low, moderate or high
salinity potential. Known areas of salinity are also mapped.
The Project Area is mapped as presenting a very low to moderate risk of salinity. The construction requirements
of the production wells, discussed in Section 4.3.2, would mitigate impacts to shallow aquifers and subsequent
formation of saline soils. The connecting gathering lines between wells are laid at relatively shallow depth and are
not expected to intersect the water table and impede the flow of shallow groundwater.
12.4
Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems
Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems (GDE’s) are defined as ecosystems which rely on groundwater for their
survival, examples of which include wetlands, red gum forests, springs, hanging valleys and swamps.
No GDE’s have been identified within the Project Area. The Draft Water Sharing Plan for the Greater Metropolitan
Region groundwater sources (NOW, 2010) does not identify any high priority GDE’s in the immediate vicinity of
the Project Area. O’Hares Creek and associated wetlands, located approximately 5 km east of the Project Area
was the closest GDE identified to the Project Area.
Based on the distance between the Project Area and the closest identified GDE (O’Hares Creek Wetlands), the
low level of connection between the surface and bedrock aquifers in the Sydney Central Basin (NOW, 2010), the
depth from which groundwater would be extracted, the saline nature of the groundwater to be extracted, and the
construction requirements of the production wells (Section 4.3.2), impacts to any (non mapped) GDE’s in the
vicinity of the Project Area are not anticipated.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12-6
12.5
AECOM
Environmental safeguards discussed in the following sections would be adopted to mitigate impacts on
groundwater quality and are generally consistent with the existing EMS. The EMS would be updated where
necessary to reflect the specific activities of the Northern Expansion.
12.5.1
Well Construction
The construction requirements of gas production wells are an important component in mitigating the potential
impacts associated with well installation and development on groundwater quality.
Gas production wells are constructed using pressure rated steel casing and are triple cased and grouted to the
depth of the target coal seam, in accordance with the requirements of the DII. The casing provides support for the
wells when subjected to the high pressures associated with gas extraction and grouting assists in maintaining
segregation of aquifers within the geological formations. Segregation of the aquifers is important in reducing the
potential for cross contamination between aquifers. The 2008 Annual Environmental Monitoring Review (AGL,
2008) reported that the adoption of practices in well construction such as grouting rendered connection between
the coal measures aquifer and the overlying aquifers extremely unlikely.
Decommissioned and abandoned wells would be backfilled with cement to avoid inter-mingling of aquifers once
production has ceased, and casing cut and removed 1 m below ground level. By cementing the well head casing
to the surface, inundation of the well with surface water is not possible.
Given the construction requirements of the wells, the limited volumes of water generated during well installation
and the geology of the formations overlying the target coal seams, a reduction in water quality or dewatering of
aquifers with a beneficial use is not expected as a result of well installation.
12.5.2
Produced Water Containment
Water produced during methane extraction would be collected in either lined drill pits or storage tanks. Stored
water would be either reused for subsequent well development, reused or would be disposed of to an
appropriately licensed offsite facility. The use of storage tanks or lined drill pits would minimise the potential for
leakage of water into the underlying soil and shallow aquifers. The integrity of drill pits and storage tanks would be
monitored regularly to minimise the likelihood of leakage into the underlying soil and shallow aquifers. Water
levels within lined pits or storage tanks would also be monitored to ensure overflow does not occur, thereby
reducing the likelihood of produced water contributing to surface runoff. Appropriate mitigation and contingency
measures would be in place and would be detailed in the SWMSP which would be updated accordingly with
respect to the Northern Expansion Project.
12.6
Conclusion
The assessment of groundwater impacts did not identify any issues considered to represent a significant
constraint to the proposed development. No adverse impacts to the groundwater regime or surrounding beneficial
users of the groundwater resources are considered likely to result as a result of the proposed development.
Dewatering of the aquifers within the target coal seams is likely to have already occurred as a result of the
existing development to the south. Further extraction would have little additional impact, if any, and adverse
impacts to beneficial users in overlying aquifers is not anticipated as a result.
Fracing and subsurface drilling activities are unlikely to have any measurable effect on the groundwater regime,
and there are no beneficial users of the deep coal measures aquifers due to its low yields and poor quality.
Approved well construction methods and the containment of produced water in accordance with current
management practises would further minimise the potential of adverse groundwater impacts occurring.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12-7
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
12-8
13.0
AECOM
Noise
An assessment of the potential noise and vibration impacts of the Project was undertaken by Heggies Pty Ltd
(Heggies). The assessment considers the construction and operational noise associated with the various Project
components within the Surface Project Area. This chapter provides a summary of the noise assessment, the
potential impacts identified and mitigation measures recommended. The full technical report, including
methodology employed and details of all criteria and sound power levels, is provided in Appendix F.
13.1
Overview
Responsibility for the control of noise emission in NSW is vested in Local Government and DECCW. The
Industrial Noise Policy (INP) was released in January 2000 and provides a framework and process for deriving
noise criteria for consents and licences enables DECCW to regulate premises that are scheduled under the
POEO Act.
The specific policy objectives are:
•
To establish noise criteria that would protect the community from excessive intrusive noise and preserve
amenity for specific land uses.
•
To use the criteria as the basis for deriving Project specific noise levels.
•
To promote uniform methods to estimate and measure noise impacts, including a procedure for evaluating
meteorological effects.
•
To outline a range of mitigation measures that could be used to minimise noise impacts.
•
To provide a formal process to guide the determination of feasible and reasonable noise limits for consents
or licences that reconcile noise impacts with the economic, social and environmental considerations of
industrial development.
•
To carry out functions relating to the prevention, minimisation and control of noise from premises scheduled
under the Act.
The INP provides two forms of noise criteria with the aim of achieving environmental noise objectives;
•
to account for intrusive noise which involves setting a noise goal relative to the existing acoustic
environment; and
•
to protect the amenity of particular land uses.
•
Potential noise sources associated with the Project are related to surface infrastructure only, therefore the
noise assessment does not consider activities within the Subsurface Project Area.
13.2
13.2.1
Sensitive Receivers
Noise receptor locations have been identified in the surrounding residential environment indicative of the
following:
•
Catherine Field (1A and 1B);
•
Leppington (2 and 3);
•
Raby/Kearns (4); and
•
Currans Hill (5)
Other sensitive receivers within the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas include the Upper Canal with respect
to vibration impacts.
13.2.2
Local Meteorological Conditions
The effects of meteorological conditions can enhance or reduce noise propagation and noise experienced at
distant receptors. In the near field, wind has minor influence on measured downwind sound levels. Wind effects
become more important as distances increase. Seasonal wind records of Camden Airport weather station indicate
that winds from 0.5 m/s to 3 m/s do not exceed the 30% threshold and are therefore not a feature of the area.
Consequently, prevailing wind was not considered as part of the noise assessment.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-1
AECOM
Meteorological data was not available from the Camden Airport weather station to allow the determination of the
percentage occurrence of temperature inversions during winter nights. A worst case analysis was therefore
undertaken and the occurrence of temperature inversion during the night-time period was considered as part of
the noise assessment.
13.2.3
Ambient Noise Environment
An assessment of the existing ambient noise was undertaken to assist in the assessment of potential noise
impacts from the proposed Northern Expansion works. The measurements included attended audits to define the
character of noise contributing to the ambient noise and unattended noise monitoring. The results of monitoring
were evaluated in accordance with the INP to confirm the Rating Background Levels (RBLs) and ambient noise
levels. The results of ambient noise monitoring are detailed in Appendix F and are shown in Table 13-1.
Table 13-1: Summary of Existing Ambient Noise Levels (dBA)
Location
1a*
1b
2
3
4
5
Locality
(Noise Amenity Area)
Catherine Field
(Suburban)
Catherine Field
(Suburban)
Leppington
(Suburban)
Leppington (Suburban)
Raby/Kearns
(Suburban)
Currans Hill (Suburban)
Period
Rating Background
Level (RBL)
Measures Industrial
Contribution LAeq(Period)
Day
42
<49
Evening
45
<39
Night
36
<34
Day
49
<49
Evening
48
<39
Night
33
<34
Day
45
<49
Evening
43
<39
Night
37
<34
Day
35
<49
Evening
37
<39
Night
35
<34
Day
33
<49
Evening
37
<39
Night
33
<34
Day
35
<49
Evening
42
<39
Night
40
<34
* Due to concerns from the resident the logger was relocated from this location to location 1b after four (4) days of monitoring.
13.3
Assessment
13.3.1
Assessment Criteria
The identified ambient noise levels were used to develop noise goals for construction and operation of the
development in accordance with DECCW INP, Interim Construction Noise Guideline and NSW Environmental
Noise Control Manual (ENCM) as described in Appendix F.
As the Upper Canal has been identified by the SCA as potentially fragile due to its age and is heritage listed, it is
intended to be conservative in the vibration guidelines selected for this structure. To this end the German
Standard DIN 4150-3:1999 “Structural Vibration Part 3: Effects of vibration in structures” was used to assess
vibration for the upper canal. This standard was favoured as it gives specific reference to structures that are
particularly sensitive to vibration for example those listed under a preservation order or heritage listed structures.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-2
AECOM
Specific assessment criteria for the Northern Expansion is shown in Tables 13-2 to 13-5 below and include:
•
Construction noise at identified receptor locations (Table 13-2);
•
Operational noise at identified receptor locations (Table 13-3);
•
Sleep disturbance at identified receptor locations (Table 13-4); and
•
Vibration upon the Upper Canal and residential receivers (Table 13-5).
Table 13-2: Construction Noise Goals
Location
Locality
(Noise Amenity
Area)
Noise Goal LAeq(15minute)
Period
Noise Affected (dBA)
Highly Noise
Affected (dBA)
Day
52
75
Evening
47
n/a
Night
38
n/a
Day
45
75
Evening
40
n/a
Night
40
n/a
Day
55
75
Evening
48*
n/a
Night
42
n/a
Day
43
75
Evening
38*
n/a
Night
38
n/a
Day
45
75
Evening
40
n/a
Night
40
n/a
Classrooms at schools and other educational institutions
When in use
Internal noise level
45 dBA
Active recreation areas1
When in use
External noise level
65 dBA
When in use
External noise level
60 dBA
1
2
3
4
5
Catherine Field
(Suburban)
Leppington
(Suburban)
Denham Court
(Suburban)
Raby/Kearns
(Suburban)
Currans Hill
(Suburban)
Passive recreation areas
2
For Monday to Saturday, Daytime 7.00 am - 6.00pm; Evening 6.00pm - 10.00pm; Night-time 10.00pm - 7.00am.
On Sundays and Public Holidays, Daytime 8.00am - 6.00pm; Evening 6.00pm - 10.0 pm; Night-time 10.0 pm - 8.00am.
1. Characterised by sporting activities and activities which generate their own noise or focus for participants, making them less
sensitive to external noise intrusion.
2. Characterised by contemplative activities that generate little noise and where benefits are compromised by external noise
intrusion, for example, reading, meditation.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-3
AECOM
Table 13-3: Operational Project Specific Noise Criteria
Period
Intrusiveness
Criteria
LAeq(15minute)
(dBA)
Amenity Criteria
LAeq(Period)
(dBA)
Day
47
55
Evening
47*
45
Night
38
40
Day
40
55
Evening
40
45
Night
40
40
Day
50
60
Evening
48*
50
Night
42
45
Day
38
55
Evening
38*
45
Night
38
40
Day
40
55
Evening
40*
45
Night
40*
40
School classroom - internal
When in use
n/a
35
Active recreation areas
When in use
n/a
55
Location
Locality
1
Catherine Field**
(Suburban)
2
3
4
5
Leppington
(Suburban)
Denham Court
(Suburban)
Raby/Kearns
(Suburban)
Currans Hill
(Suburban)
For Monday to Saturday, Daytime 7.00 am - 6.00pm; Evening 6.00pm - 10.00pm; Night-time 10.00pm - 7.00am.
On Sundays and Public Holidays, Daytime 8.00am - 6.00pm; Evening 6.00pm - 10.0 pm; Night-time 10.0 pm - 8.00am.
*These criteria have been determined with reference to the NSW INP Application Notes given the community expectation that
evening and night-time noise criteria should not be greater than the daytime criteria.
**The criteria for each period at Catherine Field have been adopted from the lowest of the RBL’s measured at each location (as
a conservative approach).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-4
AECOM
Table 13-4: Sleep Disturbance Criteria
Location
Locality
Period
Sleep Disturbance Criteria
LA1(1minute) dBA
1
Catherine Field
(Suburban)
Night
48
2
Leppington
(Suburban)
Night
50
3
Denham Court
(Suburban)
Night
52
4
Raby/Kearns
(Suburban)
Night
48
5
Currans Hill
(Suburban)
Night
50
Table 13-5: Guideline Values for vibration velocity for evaluating short-term vibration on structures
Guideline Values for velocity mm/s
Type of Structure
1 Hz to 10 Hz
10 Hz to 50 Hz
50 Hz to 100 Hz*
Buildings used for commercial purposes,
industrial buildings and buildings of similar
design
20
20 to 40
40 to 50
Dwellings and buildings of similar design
and/or occupancy
5
5 to 15
15 to 20
Structures that, because of their particular
sensitivity to vibration cannot be classified
under the above categories and are of great
intrinsic value (e.g. listed buildings under
preservation order)
3
3 to 8
8 to 10
*at frequencies above 100 Hz the values given in this column may be used as minimum values
13.3.2
Noise
Assessing Intrusiveness
For assessing intrusiveness, the background noise level must be measured. The intrusiveness criterion
essentially means that the equivalent continuous noise level (LAeq) of the source should not be more than five
decibels above the measured background level (LA90).
Assessing Amenity
The amenity assessment is based on noise criteria specific to land use and associated activities. The criteria
relate only to industrial-type noise and do not include road, rail or community noise. The existing noise level from
industry is measured. If it approaches the criterion value, then noise levels from new industries need to be
designed so that the cumulative effect does not produce noise levels that would significantly exceed the criterion.
Assessing Sleep Disturbance
The relationship between maximum noise levels and sleep disturbance is not currently well defined. Criteria for
assessing sleep disturbance has not been identified under the INP and hence, sleep arousal has been assessed
using the guidelines set out in the ENCM. To avoid the likelihood of sleep disturbance the ENCM recommends
that the LA1(1minute) noise level of the source under consideration should not exceed the background noise level
(LA90) by more than 15 dBA when measured outside the bedroom window of the receiver during the night time
hours (10.00 pm to 7.00 am).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-5
AECOM
Assessing Construction Noise
DECCW released the Interim Construction Noise Guideline in July 2009. The guideline sets out noise
management levels, in relation to construction type activities, for residential and other sensitive receivers and how
they are to be applied. The guideline suggests restriction to the hours of construction that apply to activities that
generate noise at noise-sensitive receivers above the ‘highly affected’ noise management level.
13.3.3
Vibration
Assessing Vibration
As the upper canal has been identified by the SCA as potentially fragile due to its age and is heritage listed, it is
intended to be conservative in the vibration guidelines selected for this structure. Thus the German Standard DIN
4150-3:1999 “Structural Vibration Part 3: Effects of vibration in structures” has been used to assess vibration for
the Upper Canal.
This standard gives specific reference to structures that are particularly sensitive to vibration for example those
listed under a preservation order or heritage listed structures. The recommended guide vibration velocity level to
be adopted for the Upper Canal is 3 mm/sec.
Residential Receivers
When dealing with vibration from construction activities, the effects on buildings and/or occupants can be divided
into three main categories:
•
Those in which the occupants or users of the building are inconvenienced or possibly disturbed;
•
Those in which the integrity of the building or the structure itself may be prejudiced; and
•
Those where the building contents may be affected.
Vibration levels based on human comfort for residential receivers have been set with reference to DECCW’s
“Assessing Vibration: a technical guideline”. This guideline is based on those contained in British Standard BS
6472-1992 which refers only to the human comfort criteria for vibration. It also contains a formula for the Vibration
Dose Value (VDV), which can be used to evaluate intermittent vibration or vibration levels that vary significantly
over time. As the vibration becomes continuous, this VDV trends to the continuous vibration criterion.
For daytime activities, the limiting objective for continuous vibration (e.g. continuous construction or maintenance
activity) at residential receivers is Vrms 0.4 mm/s, and Vrms 0.8 mm/s for commercial receivers. Furthermore
DECCW’s Technical Guideline sets a daytime limiting objective for impulsive vibration (e.g. the occasional loading
and unloading, or dropping of heavy equipment) of Vrms 12 mm/s for residences, and 26 mm/s for commercial
receivers.
13.3.4
Modelling Parameters
A computer model was used to predict noise emissions from construction and operation of the proposed Northern
Expansion of the CGP. The model used a three-dimensional digital terrain (topography) map, together with noise
source data, ground cover, shielding by barriers and/or adjacent buildings and atmospheric information to predict
noise levels at the nearest potentially affected receivers.
Prediction of noise emission levels was carried out under calm and prevailing atmospheric conditions
(temperature inversion) in order to assess a worst-case scenario. Atmospheric parameters under which noise
predictions were made are given in Appendix F.
Sound power levels of relevant equipment were obtained from measurements of similar plant already operating as
part of the CGP or sourced from a Heggies database of similar equipment. Relevant noise source data is
contained within Appendix F.
Assumptions
The following assumptions were made in modelling construction noise from the proposed wells:
•
A worst case analysis which considered the drilling of the up to six well heads at each proposed location.
•
A timeframe of typically 24-hour drilling for SIS wells over a period of approximately 25 days per well.
Fracing of each well typically takes up to one day for each well.
•
The drill-rig and associated equipment would be the only plant in operation during the night-time period and
that adjacent wells would not be drilled concurrently.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-6
AECOM
The following assumptions were made in modelling operational noise from the proposed wells:
•
Six (6) pump assisted wells operating simultaneously and continuously at each well surface location.
Enclosures were not included however it is noted that well-heads are likely to be enclosed once constructed.
It should be noted that the constructional and operational scenario modelled represents an acoustically worstcase scenario. The limiting case was at night during prevailing weather conditions (temperature inversion). Noise
contours were produced for each well surface location..
As detailed plans of future residential locations within the Turner Road, El Caballo Blanco and Camden Lakeside
Development Areas were not available at the time of this assessment and there were no existing residences in
this area, a noise contour for both free flowing wells and pump assisted wells was provided to indicate a potential
area of affectation. Refer to Appendix F for additional information.
13.4
Potential Impacts
The noise and vibration assessment has considered the following potential environmental impacts:
•
Construction noise impacts from access to and drilling of the gas wells
•
Construction noise and vibration impacts of installation of the gas gathering systems
•
Noise impacts of the operation of the gas wells
Potential impacts have been considered with respect to the Surface Project Area and the immediate surrounding
residential suburbs that have the potential to be affected by noise impacts resulting from surface infrastructure
works due to distance. Potential impacts of subsurface drilling activities in terms of noise are considered negligible
due to the distance from the surface and therefore the nearest receptor.
13.4.1
Noise
Construction Noise
The limiting case with regard to potential noise impacts will be at night during prevailing weather conditions
(temperature inversion). Noise contours for site construction works including the effect of a temperature inversion
are provided in Figures 20, 21and 22.
There may be exceedances of the construction noise criteria during the excavation and earthmoving activities
in duration.
Operational Noise
The limiting case was at night during prevailing weather conditions (temperature inversion). Noise contours were
produced for the operation of the Project including the effect of a temperature inversion and are shown in
Figures 23, 24 and 25.
The contour plots shown in each figure represent the limiting noise criteria surrounding each location. The noise
criteria used in each contour plot is shown in Table 13-6.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-7
AECOM
Table 13-6: Operational Noise Criteria for each Well Location
Well Location
Period
Intrusiveness Criteria
LAeq(15minute) dBA
CU10, CU14
Night
40
CU06
Night
38
CU02, CU20, CU22
Night
38
CU26, CU29
Night
38
RA03, RA09
Night
42
VV11,VV07
Night
40
Operational noise emission levels from the 12 proposed well locations are predicted to meet the relevant Project
specific noise goals at all existing residential dwellings.
It is also noted that operational noise emission levels have potential to impact on the proposed Turner Road
Development Area. Noise mitigation options for the proposed wells in the vicinity of Turner Road have been
provided however, it should be noted, that ambient noise levels in this area are likely to increase as the area is
developed. Ambient background levels and subsequent relevant noise criteria would be re-evaluated at that time.
Additional noise mitigation for the proposed wells at CU02, CU20 and CU22 would be considered prior to
commissioning.
Sleep Disturbance
Given the relative constant nature of the noise sources it is not likely that sleep disturbance will occur as a result
of operation of the gas wells.
Cumulative Noise Assessment
Potential cumulative noise impacts from existing and successive developments are embraced by the INP
procedures by ensuring that the appropriate noise emission criteria (and consent limits) are established with a
view to maintaining acceptable noise amenity levels for residences. Therefore, the cumulative impact of proposed
northern expansion of CGP with existing industrial noise sources in the surrounding industrial area have been
assessed in the determination of the amenity levels at each receiver location
13.4.2
Vibration
The major vibration generating construction activity will occur during the installation of the gathering and spine
lines. The equipment used in these activities are outlined in Appendix F.
The major contributors to vibration emissions from the construction activities are due to the following activities:
•
Excavating the trenches for the gas gathering and spine lines; and
•
Trench backfilling and compaction for gas gathering and spine lines.
Prediction of Vibration Levels from Construction
Due to a range of factors, there is inherent variability in ground vibration predictions without site specific
measurement data such as frequency content, stiffness of the medium/ground, the type of wave (surface or body)
and the ground type. However, potential vibration impacts were predicted for gas gathering lines within the Upper
Canal:
Vibration measurements were conducted for gathering lines which demonstrated PVV levels ranged from 0.2
mm/s at a distance of 10 m to a maximum of 0.7 mm/sec at a distance of 1 m. The maximum vibration level from
excavation in the vicinity of the Upper Canal is predicted to be 0.3 mm/s when operating at 3 m from the Canal.
The excavating of trenches for the laying of gas pipes for the gathering and spine lines would generally occur at
distances greater than 3 m from the Upper Canal and hence the maximum vibration level is predicted to be below
the 3 mm/s limit set for the Upper Canal at all times during the construction of the gathering lines.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-8
AECOM
Under-boring Operations
With under-boring operations, significant variations in vibration versus distance occurs under actual site
conditions, due primarily to specific make and model of equipment being used, operational factors, local
geotechnical conditions, structural response of the structure and coupling of the structure to the ground.
In order to reduce this uncertainty, if this activity is to be undertaken in the vicinity of the upper canal, a generated
set of Project Specific Vibration versus Distance Curves for the area surrounding the site of the under-boring
would be utilised.
Site Vibration Control
A vibration monitoring system would be considered for works operating within close proximity to the Upper Canal.
The vibration monitor would be configured to record the peak vibration levels as well as to trigger a visual and
audible alarm when predetermined vibration levels are approached or exceeded. These thresholds would
correspond to an “Operator Warning Level” and an “Operator Halt Level”, where the warning level is 80% of the
halt level. These thresholds are outlined below.
Table 13-7: Recommended Site Vibration Control Criteria
Site Control Criteria
Structure
Upper Canal
Operator Warning
Level
Operator Halt
Level
2.4 mm/s
3 mm/s
Minimal Risk of Cosmetic
Damage Criteria
3 mm/s
An exceedance of the “Operator Warning Level” would not require construction activities to cease, but would
proceed with caution at a reduced force or load. An exceedance of the “Operator Halt Level” would require the
construction activities to cease and alternative construction techniques implemented.
Residential Vibration Levels
Due to the distance between residences and the construction activities the vibration level at the residential
receivers is predicted to be negligible and below levels for human perception.
Operational Vibration
Due to the negligible vibration caused by the operating wells and pipelines, the predicted vibration at the Upper
Canal is expected to be considerably below the thresholds for even cosmetic damage.
Similarly, vibration caused by the operating wells and pipelines the vibration level at the residential receivers is
predicted to be below levels for human perception.
Noise and Vibration in the Subsurface Project Area
It is expected that given noise and vibration levels can be maintained within Project specific goals within the
Surface Project Area, it is unlikely there would be any noise and vibration impacts on the Subsurface Project Area
due to its distance from the surface environment and activities.
13.5
The Proponent has taken into account the effectiveness of noise strategies in determining how much noise
reduction is achievable for this Project. As a result specific noise and vibration control measures would be
undertaken, including:
•
The use of temporary or permanent barriers (where required) to attenuate noise and acoustically shield
residences from drilling during construction of the gas wells. These barriers could include measures such as
shipping containers, fencing, or earth mounds.
•
Use of equipment to achieve a noise reduction of approximately 3 dBA. This would include taking advantage
of the orientation of noise sources and directing noise away from nearby residences. The actual method by
which this reduction would be achieved would depend greatly on the specific drill rig and associated
equipment.
•
If required for some areas with greater affectation, additional measures such as full-enclosures of well heads
or reducing the number of well heads at each location would be considered.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-9
AECOM
•
For under-boring operations within the vicinity of the Upper Canal (if required), a set of in-situ vibration
validation tests would be undertaken involving the actual equipment to be used in order to generate a set of
Project Specific Vibration versus Distance Curves for the area.
•
Management controls such as:
-
Setting safe working distances for equipment with the potential to cause vibration impacts. This
includes:

-
With respect to gas gathering lines, no construction operations are to occur within 3 m of the
Upper Canal.
The following recommended vibration thresholds would be adopted for the purposes of the Project in
areas within the Upper Canal:

Operator warning level – 2.4 mm/s

Operator halt level – 3 mm/s
-
Should the operator warning level be exceeded, construction works would proceed with caution at a
reduced force or load.
-
Should the operator halt level be exceeded, construction activities would cease and alternative
construction techniques would be implemented.
-
Restricting the use of certain equipment during times of greatest noise sensitivity.
For the majority of well surface locations within the Surface Project Area, no mitigation measures are required.
However, where attenuation is required, the measures outlined above would be implemented. Where a proposed
mitigation strategy is not likely to achieve the desired noise reduction and has the potential to leave a residual
noise impact, other management measures may be implemented including:
•
Communication with potentially affected residents regarding the nature and duration of the works, as well as
relevant contact details;
•
Regular inspection and maintenance of equipment to ensure it is in good working order, including the
condition of mufflers and enclosures;
•
Consideration to scheduling of noisy work during periods when people are least likely to be affected,
particularly with relevance to schools and residential locations; and
•
Implementation of an effective complaints handling system.
13.6
Conclusion
Operational noise emission levels from the 12 proposed well locations are predicted to meet the relevant Project
specific noise goals at all existing residential dwellings.
There may be exceedances of the construction noise criteria during the excavation and earth-moving activities
in duration.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
13-10
14.0
AECOM
Air Quality
Potential air quality impacts from the Project have been assessed by means of an air quality impact assessment
(AQIA). As per the DGRs, the AQIA was prepared in accordance with
•
Assessment and Management of Odours from Stationary Sources in NSW – Technical Framework and
Technical Notes (DECC, 2006);
•
Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW (DEC, 2005); and
•
Approved Methods for the Sampling and Analysis of Air Pollutants in NSW (DEC, 2005).
The AQIA has been prepared by PAE Holmes Pty Ltd and is presented in full in Appendix G.
This chapter of the EA summarises the AQIA in terms of the pollutants emitted by the Project, the qualitative
assessment methodology, background air quality, potential impacts and the mitigation requirements to ensure
compliance with DECCW ambient air quality criteria.
14.1
14.1.1
Project Area
The Northern Expansion Project Area is located approximately 60 km south west of the Sydney CBD and is a
largely undeveloped rural area with pockets of rural residential, recreational and future development lands in a
predominantly cleared landscape. As such, it is anticipated that air quality would be generally good with few
potential pollution sources. Other external and surrounding uses such as the Smeaton Grange Industrial Park,
however, would also have the potential to affect air quality within the Surface Project Area. Other factors directly
affecting air quality in the area include:
•
Local and regional sources of air pollution;
•
Seasonal wind patterns;
•
Temperature inversions; and
•
Local topography.
14.1.2
Meteorology
The temperature, wind speed and rainfall data were obtained from the Camden Airport Automatic Weather Station
(Bureau of Meteorology, 2010) as shown in Table 14-1, and used to compile the background air quality data for
the region.
Table 14-1: Climate statistics for Camden Airport
Statistics
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
Temperature
Mean
maximum
temperature
(°C)
29.5
28.5
26.8
23.8
20.6
17.8
17.2
19.0
21.9
24.1
26.0
28.5
23.6
Mean
minimum
temperature
(°C)
16.8
16.8
14.7
11.0
7.2
4.4
2.9
3.8
6.7
9.9
12.8
15.1
10.2
Mean
rainfall
(mm)
74.7
104.2
83.7
64.4
59.9
58.2
39.0
43.4
39.5
67.1
74.0
54.8
764.4
Median
rainfall
(mm)
54.0
79.8
61.3
36.4
37.2
35.4
29.0
19.8
36.0
48.4
67.8
39.8
798.8
Rainfall
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-1
Statistics
Jan
Feb
AECOM
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
Other Daily Elements
Mean
number of
clear days
5.9
4.6
6.6
7.8
8.0
9.5
10.5
11.7
9.6
7.1
6.1
6.1
93.5
Mean
number of
cloudy days
10.8
10.2
9.6
8.8
8.9
7.3
6.3
5.0
6.5
9.1
9.5
8.6
100.6
9 am conditions
Mean 9am
temperature
(°C)
21.6
20.9
19.6
16.9
13.0
9.6
8.5
10.7
14.6
17.7
18.7
20.9
16.1
Mean 9am
wind speed
(km/h)
6.5
5.5
6.0
6.3
5.4
5.9
5.8
7.9
9.0
9.3
8.0
7.9
7.0
3 pm conditions
Mean 3pm
temperature
(°C)
7.7
26.9
25.4
22.5
19.3
16.5
16.0
17.7
20.3
22.4
24.3
26.8
22.2
Mean 3pm
wind speed
(km/h)
17.2
15.5
15.0
13.8
12.5
13.9
14.7
16.7
18.1
17.7
17.7
18.5
15.9
Source: Bureau of Meteorology Camden Airport weather station.
The annual average maximum and minimum temperatures experienced at Camden Airport are 23.6°C and
10.2°C respectively. On average January is the hottest month with an average maximum temperature of 29.5°C.
July is the coldest month, with average minimum temperature of 2.9°C. Rainfall data collected at Camden shows
that February is the wettest month, with an average rainfall of 104.2 mm. Wind speeds in the area throughout the
year peak in the spring months with a reasonable level of consistency throughout the rest of the year.
14.1.3
Regional Air Quality
The DECCW’s air quality criteria refer to pollutant levels which include the contribution from specific projects and
existing sources. To fully assess impacts against all the relevant air quality criteria, it is necessary to have
information or estimates on existing pollutant concentrations in the area in which the Project is likely to contribute
to these levels. This section discusses monitoring data available in the study area.
DECCW measures NO2, PM10, SO2 and CO concentrations at Macarthur, approximately 10 km south of the
proposed location. Table 14-2: presents the measured available pollutant concentrations for the most recent
year (DECCW, 2009).
Table 14-2: DECCW air quality monitoring data collected at Macarthur (2007)
3
3
3
NO2 (µg/m )
PM10 (µg/m )
SO2 (µg/m )
1 hr
24 hr
1 hr
24 hr
Average
Average
CO
Average
1 hr
8 hr
Maximum
97
64
52
47
43
11
9
2.4
2.3
Average
-
48
-
30
-
-
7
-
-
DECCW Criteria
246
62
50
30
570
228
60
30
10
Days of Exceedances
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Data converted from pphm to µg/m³ for NO2 and SO2 and ppm to mg/m³ for CO
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-2
14.2
AECOM
Methodology and Assessment
Potential sources of emissions associated with the Project are related to surface infrastructure within the Surface
Project Area as discussed below.
14.2.1
Emissions
The air emissions associated with the operational phase of the gas processing are specific to the fuel type, i.e.
combustion of CSM gases. The AQIA has quantified the following pollutants for the purpose of this assessment:
•
Nitrogen oxides (NOX);
•
Sulfur dioxide (SO2);
•
Particulate matter less than 10 µm (PM10);
•
Carbon monoxide (CO); and
•
Total volatile organic compounds (TVOC);
Potential odour impacts are considered unlikely based on AGL’s past experience from similar drilling operations
and considering the distance between well surface locations and the nearest residential receivers.
14.2.2
Assessment Criteria
Assessment criteria are implemented to provide benchmarks, which if met, are intended to protect the community
against the adverse effects of air pollutants. These criteria are generally considered to reflect current Australian
community standards for the protection of health and protection against nuisance effects. Table 14-3 summarises
the DECCW air quality assessment criteria for pollutants that are relevant to the air quality assessment for the
Northern Expansion.
Table 14-3: Air quality assessment criteria
Pollutant
Criterion
Unit a
Averaging period
246
µg/m³
1-hour
62
µg/m³
Annual
712
µg/m³
15 minutes
570
µg/m³
1-hour
228
µg/m³
24-hour
60
µg/m³
Annual
50
µg/m³
24-hour
30
µg/m³
Annual
Total Suspended Particulates
90
µg/m³
Annual
Dust Deposition
4
g/m²/month
Annual
Carbon monoxide
100
mg/m³
15 minutes
30
mg/m³
1-hour
10
mg/m³
8-hour
Nitrogen dioxide
Sulfur dioxide
Particulate matter <10 µm
a) µg/m³ = micrograms per cubic metre, mg/m³ = milligrams per cubic metre
14.2.3
Meteorology
Wind
Wind roses show the frequency of occurrence of winds by direction and strength. Winds from south west region
are annually predominant. In autumn and spring winds blows predominantly from south west. In summer winds
from east and southeast and in winter winds from west-southwest are most common. Wind speeds comprise of
relatively frequent light and moderate winds, with strong winds (greater than 6 m/s) occurring approximately 8% of
the time.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-3
14.3
AECOM
Potential Impacts
Pollution sources from the Northern Expansion are likely to include:
•
Combustion emissions from mobile industrial equipment and vehicles;
•
Dust generation during use of unsealed roads; and
•
Venting of gas during well commissioning;
These potential pollution sources are discussed with reference to the phases of development of the Project and
the associated potential impacts on air quality.
Potential impacts in terms of air quality resulting from subsurface drilling activities are related only to equipment
used for the drilling process which would be situated at the well surface location within the Surface Project Area.
These impacts are considered along with others in the following sections.
14.3.1
Construction
The construction phase includes activities required to physically develop the wells, gas gathering lines, access
roads and supporting infrastructure.
Potential emissions from construction would include:
•
Dust (including PM10) from earthworks and vehicle movements along access roads, as well as combustion
emissions from construction machinery and vehicles;
•
Emissions of CSM gas from leakages during drilling of construction of wells;
•
Gas vented following well shut in periods (only for underbalanced vertical wells and very rare in occurrence);
and
•
Odour (if oxygenation of aquifer waters occurs).
It should be noted that these potential emissions during construction are not necessarily considered significant
given AGL’s past experience from similar operations and considering the development of well drilling technologies
such as surface casing to prevent and isolate surface aquifers from having an influence on the drilling process,
and the use mud or water as drilling fluid to prevent the release of gases to surface.
Environmental safeguards would include the management measures identified in the existing EMS to ensure
potential air quality impacts during construction are minimised.
14.3.2
Production
Potential emissions to air during the production phase are related to the following:
•
Venting of gas during well commissioning;
•
Combustion emissions from mobile industrial equipment and vehicles; and
•
Dust generation during use of unsealed roads.
There is limited venting of gas required for production testing in the well commissioning phase for certain types of
wells. Typically this requirement is only for wells that have been fracture stimulated. The venting of gas is
necessary to bypass the gas and water separator to ensure that the large initial volumes of water produced in the
first days and weeks after fracture stimulation do not cause damage to the separator. There are several options
to control emissions during this production testing phase, i.e., controlled venting of gas, or venting of gas to a
mobile flare, or an immediate tie-in to the gas gathering system. Some of these options significantly limit or even
remove the need for venting.
The wells proposed for the southern part of the Project would include immediate tie-in of gas gathering lines to the
existing RPGP during commissioning, which would remove the need to vent emissions. As the CGP develops
(through the commissioning of additional wells), venting will be less required as tie-ins to the existing system
become more feasible.
There is low potential for emissions through maintenance and work over activities at the gas wells, however these
impacts are infrequent, minor and occur only for short periods of time.
The potential for dust generation is significantly reduced once construction is complete. During the production
phase, dust generating activities largely relates to vehicles movements on unsealed roads to undertake routine
inspections (daily/weekly) and well work over maintenance which may be required occasionally and usually occur
over a week period.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-4
AECOM
Traffic control techniques for the management of vehicle movement would be implemented throughout all stages
of the Project, such as enforcing speed limits, use of water carts (where necessary) and minimising disturbance to
groundcover. The access to each of the well surface locations is not expected to disturb existing vegetation and
surrounding land uses.
14.3.3
Post Development
Post development activities may include re-fracture stimulation, re-drilling of wells or upgrades of the gasgathering line.
The main air quality impacts would be combustion emissions from equipment and vehicles transporting equipment
and staff to and from each site and potentially dust emissions from vehicles using unsealed roads. However these
vehicle movements would predominantly be isolated vehicles undertaking general maintenance activities and are
not expected to cause significant impacts.
14.3.4
Closure and final rehabilitation of the well surface locations would result in disturbance of surfaces for landscaping
and combustion emissions from additional vehicles and equipment to remove infrastructure. These activities
would occur when the productive life of a well surface location is finished.
Closure and final rehabilitation activities are located within areas where final land uses have not yet been
determined and as a result it is difficult to predict long term impacts. Due to the intended planned future growth of
the subject areas and associated increase in vehicle use, it is anticipated that an increase in emissions within the
local area will occur. However, the emissions associated with the closure and rehabilitation activities are
considered to be relatively minor and due to the fact that this period would be short term and temporary, adverse
impacts upon air quality as a result of closure and rehabilitation works are not expected.
14.3.5
Other Regional Sources of Air Pollutants
Australian industries are required to monitor, measure and report their emissions and transfer of toxic substances
as a part of the National Pollutant Inventory (NPI).
The aims of this program are to:
•
Maintain and improve air and water quality;
•
Minimise environmental impacts associated with hazardous waste; and
•
Improve the sustainable use of resources.
Information from the NPI is available for the Campbelltown Local Government Area (LGA), identifying other
sources of pollutants emitted in the vicinity of the Project.
The following substances have been identified as being emitted by industries in the Campbelltown LGA during the
2008/2009 reporting period (NPI, 2010):
•
Total Volatile Organic Compounds;
•
Carbon monoxide;
•
Oxides of Nitrogen;
•
Particulate Matter (PM10); and
•
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH’s).
In addition, there are also a number of diffuse emissions which are a result of emissions from households and
those emitted by motor vehicles which have also been identified and include:
•
Total phosphorous;
•
Total Volatile Organic Compounds;
•
Total Nitrogen;
•
Toluene; and
•
Xylene.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-5
14.4
14.4.1
Construction
AECOM
The following mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce potential impacts at the site during
construction. These environmental safeguards should are incorporated in conjunction with the existing EMS to
ensure potential air quality impacts during construction are minimised.
•
Earthworks, vegetation clearing and soil disturbance would be minimised at all sites to the extent that is
possible;
•
Disturbed surfaces would be remediated as soon as practical after disturbance with minimal lag time
between clearing and remediation;
•
Construction activities would be monitored to identify excessive dust generation. Dust control measures
(such as the use of water carts) would be implemented in the event of excessive dust generation;
•
Stockpiles and unsealed surfaces would be sprayed with water to minimise excessive dust generation (if
necessary);
•
During high wind conditions, activities likely to generate dust would be minimised or ceased wherever
possible;
•
Machinery, plant and equipment would be serviced, in good working order and would be fitted as required
with appropriate exhaust emission control devices;
•
Unnecessary traffic movements would be eliminated or minimised;
•
Traffic movement would be managed via traffic control techniques, such as reduced speed limits.
•
Access to each of the well surface locations would be designed and constructed in a manner that minimises
significant disturbance to existing vegetation and surrounding land uses.
•
Welding procedures would be undertaken in accordance with relevant Australian Standards and guidelines;
and
•
Surrounding residents would be notified prior to the start of construction activities and contact details would
be provided to enable feedback during construction as well as reporting and further information.
14.4.2
Production
•
An immediate tie-in to the gas gathering system to limit the need for venting CSM emissions.
•
Regular monitoring of dust generating activities, largely through routine inspections (daily/weekly).
•
Traffic control techniques (as per the TMSP, part of the EMP) for the management of vehicle movements
throughout the production phase.
•
Gas well surface locations would be monitored remotely from the control room at the RPGP and inspected
regularly for gas leaks and emissions.
14.4.3
•
Post Development
Activities would be designed and monitored as part of the EMS for the Project to ensure emissions are in
accordance with relevant guidelines and requirements.
14.4.4
•
During high wind conditions, activities likely to generate dust would be minimised or ceased wherever
possible.
•
Machinery, plant and equipment would be serviced, in good working order and would be fitted with
appropriate emission control devices.
Measures to mitigate the cumulative impact of increased exhaust emissions on the regional air quality include
regular maintenance of all equipment and trucks associated with the proposed operation in an efficient manner
and monitoring of service records.
14.4.5
Cumulative Impacts
The contribution of the proposed Northern Expansion to the overall emissions identified in the NPI for the
Campbelltown LGA are not considered significant, and subsequently are, unlikely to result in any discernable
increase in emissions in the region.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-6
14.5
AECOM
Conclusion
The AQIA assessed the potential air quality impacts that would arise due to the proposed Northern Expansion of
the CGP. The potential impacts were identified and assessed at different stages of the Project.
The potential impacts released during construction, production, post development maintenance or closure and
final rehabilitation were assessed qualitatively. Emissions during each of these stages were determined to be
minor and to occur infrequently or intermittently and are typically able to be managed via well established
environmental mitigation measures.
The existing air quality is currently compliant with the DECCW criterion and generally below the applicable air
quality goals.
Subsequently, emissions from the CPG would not be significantly altered and would not be likely to result in any
detectable change at sensitive receptors. It is therefore concluded that the Project would have no discernable
impact on air quality.
14.6
Greenhouse Gas Assessment
14.6.1
Overview
Greenhouse gas assessment was undertaken as part of the EA and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have been
estimated based on the methods outlined in the following documents:
•
The World Resources Institute/World Business Council for Sustainable Development Greenhouse Gas
Protocol (WBCSD/WRI, 2005)
•
National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (Measurement) Determination 2008 (DCC, 2008).
•
The Australian Government Department of Climate Change National Greenhouse Accounts Factors (DCC,
2009c).
Three ‘scopes’ of emissions (scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3) are defined for greenhouse gas accounting and
reporting purposes. This terminology has been adopted in Australian greenhouse reporting and measurement
methods and has been used in this assessment. The ‘scope’ of an emission is relative to the reporting entity,
indirect scope 2 and scope 3 emissions will be reportable as direct scope 1 emissions from another facility.
•
Scope 1 - Direct Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Direct greenhouse gas emissions are defined as those
emissions that occur from sources that are owned or controlled by the reporting entity.
•
Scope 2 - Energy Product Use Indirect Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Scope 2 emissions are a category of
indirect emissions that accounts for greenhouse gas emissions from the generation of purchased energy
products (principally, electricity, steam/heat and reduction materials used for smelting) by the entity.
•
Scope 3 - Other Indirect Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Scope 3 emissions are defined as those emissions
that are a consequence of the activities of an entity, but which arise from sources not owned or controlled by
that entity.
Direct greenhouse gas emissions are those emissions that are principally the result of the following types of
activities undertaken by an entity:
•
Generation of electricity, heat or steam. These emissions result from combustion of fuels in stationary
sources;
•
Physical or chemical processing. Most of these emissions result from manufacture or processing of
chemicals and materials, e.g., the manufacture of cement, aluminium, etc;
•
Transportation of materials, products, waste and employees. These emissions result from the combustion of
fuels in entity owned/controlled mobile combustion sources, e.g., trucks, machinery, trains, ships,
aeroplanes, buses and cars;
•
Fugitive emissions. These emissions result from intentional or unintentional releases, e.g., equipment leaks
from joints, seals, packing, and gaskets; methane emissions from coal mines and venting; and methane
leakages from gas transport;
Scope 2 in relation to the Project covers purchased electricity defined as electricity that is purchased or otherwise
brought into the organisational boundary of the entity. Scope 2 emissions physically occur at the facility where
electricity is generated. Entities report the emissions from the generation of purchased electricity that is
consumed in its owned or controlled equipment or operations as scope 2.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-7
AECOM
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol provides that reporting scope 3 emissions is optional. If an organisation believes
that scope 3 emissions are a significant component of the total emissions inventory, these can be reported along
with scope 1 and scope 2.
Under the NGER Act, facilities triggering greenhouse emission and energy usage thresholds are required to
report scope 1 and scope 2.
AGL supports government initiatives in the reduction of GHG footprint of development and has adopted its own
Greenhouse Gas Policy. The GHG Assessment was prepared in consideration of Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and
based on a worst case scenario (Appendix H).
14.6.2
Potential Emissions of the Northern Expansion
Potential sources of material greenhouse gas emissions from the Project are related to:
•
Combustion emissions from mobile industrial equipment and vehicles;
•
Mobile flaring of gas during production (if required);
•
Fugitive emissions from production; and
•
Electricity consumed by facilities.
The wells proposed for the southern part of the Project would include immediate tie-in of gas gathering lines to the
existing CGP network (which flows to RPGP) during commissioning, which will limit the amount of venting
emissions. As the CGP develops, venting will be less required and this trend is expected to continue as link-ins to
the existing system will become more feasible.
Further mitigation measures for GHG emissions for the Northern Expansion are outlined in Section 14.6.3.
This GHG assessment considered the material emissions of greenhouse gases associated with the Project as
summarised in Table 14-4.
Table 14-4: Greenhouse gas emission sources included in the assessment
Scope 1 Emissions
Scope 2 Emissions
Scope 3 Emissions
Combustion of diesel
Electricity usage for facilities
Electricity usage for facilities
Fugitive CSM during production and
field maintenance
Product transmission losses
Product distribution losses
Product usage in NSW domestic
market
Greenhouse gas emissions were calculated for each component identified in Table 14-4 above using approved
emission estimation techniques and a worst case scenario (refer Appendix H). A summary of results and the total
greenhouse gas emissions for the Project and the estimates provided for Global, Australian and NSW emissions
are provided in Table 14-5 below.
Table 14-5: Estimated annual greenhouse gas emissions
Source
Scope 1
(t CO2-e)
Scope 2
(t CO2-e)
Scope 3
(t CO2-e)
TOTAL
(t CO2-e)
% of Total
Proposed Northern Expansion
Diesel Combustion –
Transport
734
734
60.1
Diesel Combustion –
Stationary
320
320
26.2
Fugitive – Maintenance
7
7
0.6
160
13.1
1,221
100
Electricity (Scope 2)
TOTAL (Scope 1 & 2)
Proposed Project
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
160
14-8
Source
Scope 1
(t CO2-e)
AECOM
Scope 2
(t CO2-e)
Scope 3
(t CO2-e)
TOTAL
(t CO2-e)
Electricity (Scope 3)
32
32
Product Transmission
Losses
523
523
Product Distribution
Losses
55,988
55,988
Product Use
653,417
653,417
TOTAL (Scope 1, 2 & 3)
% of Total
709,960
Full Fuel Cycle
Proposed Project
Existing Camden Gas Project
TOTAL – (Scope 1 & 2)
Existing CGP (a)
13,773
Expanded Camden Gas Project
TOTAL (Scope 1 & 2)
Expanded (Existing &
Proposed)
14,994
Global Emission
Estimate
28,478,000,000
Australian GHG
Emissions (2007)
597,200,000
NSW GHG Emissions
(2007)
162,700,000
a.
2008/2009 AGL NGERS Estimate for CGP.
14.6.3
Mitigation measures have been built into the design of the Project in order to reduce its GHG footprint.
Typical mitigation measures would be implemented at the site during construction, production, post development
and closure and final rehabilitation, these are outlined in Table 14-6 below.
Table 14-6: Greenhouse Emission Mitigation Measures
Construction
•
Conserve fuel and use low emission fuels where possible
•
Minimise any gas losses and keep equipment in good operating order to maintain efficiency
•
Incorporating and considering GHG in the CEMP to ensure potential greenhouse gas impacts during
construction are minimised
Production
•
Gas gathering lines would be tied-in to the gas gathering system of the existing CGP network (which flows to
RPGP) to limit the amount of venting CSM emissions.
•
Traffic control techniques for the management of vehicle movements would be implemented throughout the
production phase. Planning for vehicle movements on site would consider the most efficient way to limit
vehicle kilometres travelled.
•
Gas well surface locations would be monitored remotely from the control room and inspected regularly for
gas leaks and emissions.
•
Opportunities would be sought to replace the use of electricity with energy provided by combustion of CSM
gas onsite, where this is feasible and safe.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-9
AECOM
Post Development
•
Activities would be designed and monitored as part of the EMS for the Project to ensure emissions are
minimised, in accordance with AGL’s Greenhouse Gas Policy.
•
Machinery, plant and equipment would be serviced and kept in good working order throughout the
rehabilitation stage.
•
Regular maintenance of equipment would be conducted to ensure operation in an efficient manner and
monitoring of service records would be kept
14.6.4
Summary
Total direct greenhouse gas emissions resulting from operation of the Project were estimated to be approximately
1,221 t CO2-e per year. This represents approximately 0.00075 % of the total greenhouse gas emissions from
NSW in 2007 (162.7 Mt CO2-e) and 0.0002 % of the total GHG emissions from Australia (597.2 Mt CO2-e).
14.7
Conclusion
The potential impacts associated with the Project include emissions from combustion emissions from vehicles and
machinery and a small contribution from flared gas and electricity use.
Based upon observation of existing well fields and AGL’s previous experience, operational activities are expected
to have minimal impacts on air quality. Provided the proposed mitigation measures are effectively implemented,
the proposed works are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts on air quality of the region.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
14-10
15.0
AECOM
This chapter investigates Aboriginal Cultural Heritage issues associated with the Project, in relation to the
construction and operation of gas wells at up to 12 well surface locations and associated gas gathering lines and
access tracks. Potential impacts and mitigations are investigated in this Chapter which is based on the specialist
Heritage Assessment Report prepared by Biosis and provided in Appendix I.
15.1
Overview
Archaeological evidence of Aboriginal occupation of the Cumberland Plain indicates that the area was previously
intensively occupied. Based on previous records which depict this occupation to be some 4,000 years BC, dates
of inhabitancy are probably more a reflection of conditions of archaeological site preservation and sporadic
archaeological excavation, rather than actual evidence of the presence or absence of an Aboriginal huntergatherer population.
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are situated on the northern margin of what was historically known as
the ‘Cowpastures’. The fertile soils of the low-lying plains ensured that this land was sought after by early
pastoralists and cultivators, and following extensive clearing and burning, agriculture was developed despite the
constant threat of flooding. Farming practices included grain crops, orchards, beef cattle and dairying.
The resultant high level of ground surface disturbance from these factors will have affected the survival of many
archaeological sites within the Project Areas. Impacts to archaeological sites would have occurred through direct
processes such as vegetation clearance, ploughing, trenching, road building, urban development and
infrastructure construction.
As no surface disturbance would occur within the Subsurface Project Area as a result of subsurface drilling
activities, the field survey and assessment has focused on the Surface Project Area and the potential impacts of
proposed surface infrastructure.
15.2
The Surface Project Area comprises undulating hills and ridges, surrounded by open floodplain on a number of
minor and major creek lines and drainage features. The area has been cleared of most tree cover, however there
are localised pockets of Cumberland Plain Woodland vegetation. Most of the Surface Project Area consists of
pasture grasses, and some open cropped paddocks.
Despite conflicting views between historical sources of the exact boundaries of tribal groups in the region, the
linguistic evidence does identify distinct language groups at the time of European contact. Based on this
information it appears that the Project Area was situated close to the boundary of three Aboriginal language
groups, the Darug, Dharawal and Gandangara.
The Surface Project Area is characterised by the open undulating plain and distinctive ridge lines typical of the
Cumberland Plain. Most of the Surface Project Area occurs within erosional or residual soils landscapes. The
depths of these soils are generally shallow across ridge lines and associated slopes and therefore subject to
erosional processes, resulting in the exposure or movement of archaeological material. Disturbance related to
land use history has greatly increased the likelihood of exposure and movement of cultural material across these
landforms. Low lying areas along drainage features and creeks would be favourable for accumulation, preserving
archaeological material. These areas are rare within the Surface Project Area.
15.3
Methodology
15.3.1
Cultural Consultation
The objectives of the consultation process are to ensure that an opportunity is given to a broad range of
Aboriginal stakeholders to express their cultural heritage values for the Surface Project Area, including spiritual
connections, recorded archaeological sites, and the natural environment and landscape values.
The cultural consultation process undertaken was in accordance with relevant DECCW guidelines and involved
the following:
•
Distribution of a Project information pack that outlined:
-
The proposed works within the Surface Project Area;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-1
•
AECOM
-
Proposed methods of archaeological assessment of the Surface Project Area;
-
Findings of previous archaeological assessments within the Surface Project Area, including detailed
mapping of previously recorded sites and areas of Aboriginal archaeological potential; and
-
An outline of key themes relating to cultural values that were to be discussed during organised
consultation meetings (meeting program outlined below).
Face to face meetings. The key themes discussed during community consultation meetings included:
-
Affiliation to country - being traditional and/or contemporary;
-
Places, sites, traditional resources and landscape values that are identified as significant;
-
Identified connection to place, sites or landscape - physical or spiritual; and
-
Related stories - historical or contemporary that reinforce the significance of place.
•
Identification of management issues and recommendations relating to cultural values within the Surface
Project Area
•
Identification of places and sites that are significant to stakeholders and discussion of options for avoidance
by the proposed works;
•
Identification and acknowledgment of community management strategies for physical and spiritual sites and
places; and
•
Discussion of requirements or restrictions within the Surface Project Area which may occur if Aboriginal
objects or places were identified within the impact area of the Project.
A register for interested parties was opened on 11 March 2009 and offers for registrations were open until 25
March 2009. Registrations of interest were received from the following stakeholders:
•
Registrar of Aboriginal Owners.
•
Campbelltown City Council.
•
Camden Council.
•
Cubbitch Barta Native Title Claimants Aboriginal Corporation.
•
Tharawal Local Aboriginal Land Council.
The Cubbitch Barta Native Title Claimants Aboriginal Corporation and Tharawal Local Aboriginal Land Council
also accepted an invitation to participate in the Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment fieldwork program,
conducted between 11 May 2009 and 30 September 2009. Meetings were undertaken both informally during the
field surveys, and formally following the completion and distribution of the Draft Aboriginal archaeological report.
15.3.2
Background and Database Review
A background and database review was conducted and included:
•
A search of the DECCW’s Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS);
•
Literature review of relevant cultural heritage and archaeological reports and publications for the local area
and region;
•
A search of the NSW Heritage Branch State Heritage Inventory (SHI) and State Heritage Register (SHR);
and
•
Consultation of historical source material (including historical maps and aerial photography) to determine
land-use history.
A search of the NSW DECCW AHIMS database was conducted on 2 November 2009. The search results listed
87 previously identified Aboriginal archaeological sites within a 6 x 6 km search area, encompassing the Surface
Project Area. Of these, 43 are located within the Surface Project Area and have been mapped on Figures 26, 27
and 28. The DECC AHIMS results were also forwarded to registered stakeholders as part of the consultation
process.
15.3.3
Archaeological Survey
An archaeological survey and assessment was undertaken within the Surface Project Area respective of the
Project components, including the 12 well surface locations (including 200 m envelope), associated gas gathering
lines (including 50 m assessment footprint) as well as proposed and existing access tracks (with 50 m
assessment footprint).
The assessment utilised targeted pedestrian survey methods which included:
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-2
AECOM
•
Surveying where team members (minimum of 3 people at all times) traverse along the entire length of
component corridors or throughout each envelope;
•
Attention paid to key sensitive landforms or features (creek banks and remnant vegetation) with a high
likelihood for the presence of Aboriginal archaeological sites;
•
Inspection of identified areas of ground surface exposure, regardless of archaeological potential; and
•
Where vegetation remained, old growth trees were closely examined for scarring or other culturally
manufactured features or cultural markers relating to burials.
Notable features and aboriginal archaeological sites within the Surface Project Area corridor were recorded using
GPS. Topographic and aerial maps and a GPS were used to navigate across the Surface Project Area and to
areas of identified archaeological sensitivity. Survey data was recorded on Transect Data Sheets and Site Plans
drawn for each well surface location envelope (Appendix I).
Archaeological Sensitivity
An assessment of potential Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity has been developed, based upon previous
studies in similar landscapes, known sites within the region, knowledge of recent land uses and the results of the
field survey. An Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity map has been developed within the proposed development
envelopes and has also been considered as part of this EA (Refer to Section 15.4.1).
15.4
Results
During the site survey four previously registered sites and two Potential Archaeological Deposits (PADs) were resurveyed and 28 new Aboriginal archaeological sites were recorded within the Surface Project Area (Table 15-1
below; Figures 26, 27 and 28). Of the newly registered sites within the Surface Project Area, 12 comprise artefact
scatters, 12 are isolated artefact occurrences and four are possible scarred trees.
An Archaeological significance assessment was undertaken for the newly recorded sites with details provided in
Appendix I. Of the 28 sites recorded, four (15%) have moderate archaeological significance; and 24 (85%) have
low archaeological significance (Table 15-1).
Table 15-1: Aboriginal archaeological sites located within the proposed areas of development
Site Name
Site Type
Location Development Envelope
Archaeological
Significance*
Previously Recorded Aboriginal Archaeological Sites
CH 12 IF 3
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
CU 20 WSL envelope
N/A
TR-2
Open Campsite
Gas gathering line between CU 6 and CU 2
well surface locations
N/A
TR-13
Scarred Tree
CU 22 WSL envelope
N/A
Previously Recorded Potential Archaeological Deposits (PADs)
PAD – TR3
Potential
Archaeological
Deposit
CU 02 WSL envelope
N/A
PAD – 4
Potential
Archaeological
Deposit
CU 20 Access track
N/A
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-3
Site Name
Site Type
AECOM
Archaeological
Significance*
Newly Recorded Aboriginal Archaeological Sites
CG-IA-01
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
Main Spine Line in Upper Canal Easement
Low
CG-IA-02
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
Low
CG-IA-03
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
RA 03 WSL envelope
Low
CG-IA-04
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
Low
CG-IA-05
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
Gas gathering line between CU10 and Main
Spine Line
Low
CG-IA-06
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
Gas gathering line between Main Spine Line
and MP 05 WSL
Low
CG-IA-07
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
and MP 05 WSL
Low
CG-IA-08
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
and MP 05 WSL
Low
CG-IA-09
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
and MP 05 WSL
Low
CG-IA-10
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
and MP 05 WSL
Low
CG-IA-11
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
and MP 05 WSL
Low
CG-IA-12
Isolated Artefact
Occurrence
and MP 05 WSL
Low
CG-OCS-01
Open Campsite
Low
CG-OCS-02
Open Campsite
Low
CG-OCS-03
Open Campsite
RA 09 WSL envelope and gas gathering line
Low
CG-OCS-04
Open Campsite
Low
CG-OCS-05
Open Campsite
Low
CG-OCS-06
Open Campsite
Moderate
CG-OCS-07
Open Campsite
Low
CG-OCS-08
Open Campsite
Low
CG-OCS-09
Open Campsite
Moderate
CG-OCS-10
Open Campsite
and MP 05 WSL
Moderate
CG-OCS-11
Open Campsite
and MP05 WSL
Low
CG-OCS-12
Open Campsite
VV 07 WSL envelope
Moderate
CG-TRE-01
Scarred Tree
Low
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-4
AECOM
Site Name
Site Type
Archaeological
Significance*
CG-TRE-02
Scarred Tree
Low
CG-TRE-04
Scarred Tree
CU 29 access track
Low
* Determined for newly recorded sites
Note: Well Surface Location = WSL
Overall, the results of the archaeological survey within the Surface Project Area reflect the predictive modelling for
the Cumberland Plain in that the most likely site types to occur are open lithic scatters and isolated artefact
occurrences. In addition, a small number of scarred trees were identified.
st
nd
The majority of sites were located within close proximity to 1 and 2 order drainage lines or on hill and ridge
crests. Areas of archaeological potential were identified throughout the Surface Project Area as shown on
Figures 26, 27 and 28. Almost all of the sites were considered to be situated within a disturbed context.
15.4.1
Assessment of Archaeological Sensitivity
Based on the findings of the field survey and the wider archaeological literature relevant to the Surface Project
Area, a relative assessment of archaeological sensitivity was undertaken for the areas to be potentially impacted
by the gas gathering lines, well surface locations, and access roads. Areas of archaeological sensitivity are
identified in Table 15-2.
Areas of no, low, moderate and high Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity were identified across the Surface
Project Area. These were defined based on levels of disturbance, sensitive landforms, survey results and the
likelihood of intact archaeological deposits. Overall, a small number of high areas of sensitivity were identified,
mainly on ridge crests, creek spurs and on flat ground near the confluence of creeks (Figures 26, 27 and 28).
Table 15-2: Areas of Archaeological Sensitivity
Area Description
No Archaeological Sensitivity:
Archaeological areas of no
archaeological sensitivity within the
Surface Project Area and Project
components including areas of:
•
Areas where the original
ground surface and
landscape have been
severely altered or the
topography was unsuitable
for use. There is no
possibility that any
archaeological sites would
have survived.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
Excavated farm dams;
•
Sealed roads;
•
House allotments;
•
Telecommunications tower
compound;
•
Upper Canal channel; and
•
Highly modified sports fields
associated with St Gregory’s.
Relevant Project Components
•
Well surface locations:
•
RA03, RA09, CU29, CU20,
CU06, CU14
Gas Gathering Lines:
•
between CU26 & CU29
15-5
AECOM
Area Description
Low Archaeological Sensitivity:
Archaeological areas of low
Well Surface Locations:
•
Areas that have been
identified as having
specific locations where
there has been a high
degree of disturbance
since the arrival of nonAboriginal people, where
the impact has been to the
extent where no intact or
remnant soil deposits are
believed to be present.
Areas may also include
steep slopes or plains
away from water sources.
Artefacts found in this area
are likely to be isolated,
representative of
‘background scatter’, or in
a highly disturbed context.
•
Open flat featureless undulating
plain;
•
Construction of Upper Canal &
spoil heaps, associated
infrastructure, cut drains on the
west and east boundaries and
vehicle maintenance access
tracks;
•
Areas where minor post
contact disturbance has
occurred; the area is
located along creeks and
waterways where short
term campsites may have
been present. Artefact
scatters are likely to vary
in density, but are
concentrated in small
areas.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
RA03, RA09, VV11, VV07,
CU20, CU22, CU02, CU26,
CU29, CU06, CU10, CU14
•
To well surface locations: CU20,
CU22, CU02, and CU06;
•
between VV07, VV11 & main
spine line;
•
between CU26 & CU 29;
•
between CU10 & CU14;
•
Open flat cleared paddocks that
have been preciously tilled,
drainage modification;
•
from RA03 & RA09 to main
spine line; and
•
Main spine line corridor.
•
Open flat cleared paddocks,
moderate eroding slopes;
Access arrangements:
•
Road construction and heavily
modified road reserve
easement, house allotments;
•
RA03 access;
•
RA09 and RA09 access;
•
VV11, VV07, CU20, CU02,
CU26, CU29, and CU06 access
routes; and
•
Access between CU10 & CU14.
•
Moderate Archaeological
Sensitivity:
•
Former house allotment,
pipeline, electricity easement,
existing vehicle track;
•
Existing sealed road and
modified road reserve and
easement;
•
Moderate hill slopes and
disturbed ridge crests; and
•
Gentle mid, steep and eroding
slopes.
Archaeological areas of moderate
•
•
•
RA09, VV07, CU02, CU20,
CU29, CU06, CU10 and CU14
Lower, gentle and moderate
slopes and drainage features;
and
Ridge crests.
•
between CU26 & CU29
•
between CU02 & CU06; and
•
Main spine line.
15-6
AECOM
Area Description
High Archaeological Sensitivity:
Archaeological areas of high
High Pressure Supply pipeline
•
Areas associated with
major creek lines, raised
flat landforms, adjacent to
other natural resources, or
where there has been
minimal disturbance to the
specific area and it is
believed that an intact
remnant landscape exists
in the area. Artefacts
remains within these areas
are likely to be dense and
large in size.
15.5
•
Remnant vegetation containing
possible scarred trees;
•
Open undisturbed areas
(including remnant vegetation,
ridge slopes, ridge crests, spur
lines); and
•
•
RA09, VV07, VV11, CU20,
CU22, CU26 and CU29
•
between VV07 & VV11
Access arrangements:
•
To well surface locations: VV07,
CU20, and CU22
Moderate hill and ridge crests
and drainage features.
Potential Impacts
Construction activities associated with the Northern Expansion would involve the excavation and disturbance of
soils to allow for the construction of the gas wells and trenching for the installation of gas gathering lines. Minor
landform alteration would occur during site preparation, including levelling and grubbing activities (where required)
and construction of access roads, with excavated materials being stockpiled on site.
Potential impacts would be limited to the Surface Project Area as subsurface drilling activities within the
Subsurface Project Area would have a negligible impact on heritage due to the distance from the surface and
subsequent lack of surface disturbance. To date there have been no issues associated with subsidence related to
the CGP, and a report prepared by Mine Subsidence Engineering Consultants (MSEC) in 2007 concludes that the
conditions for significant subsidence to occur are not present and that the potential for subsidence to occur as gas
is extracted is negligible. No significant subsidence has been observed within existing CGP well fields and is
unlikely to have impacts on known and unknown Aboriginal archaeological sites within both the Surface and
Subsurface Project Areas.
The potential for the existence of Aboriginal artefacts is dependent on the archaeological sensitivity of the land
and is generally limited to within the “A” horizon of the soil at the surface and as such, proposed surface drilling
activities is unlikely to have an impact at this depth.
Construction activities likely to disturb soils within the Surface Project Area include:
•
Removal of topsoil from well surface location
•
Levelling of each well surface location in preparation for drill rigs and machinery (where necessary);
•
Introduction of shale for hardstand well pad;
•
Drilling of wells;
•
Excavation of drill pits;
•
Trenching for gas gathering system; and
•
Access road and infrastructure construction or upgrade.
Disturbance of soils during construction would temporarily increase potential erosion and sediment loads within
the vicinity of the activity with the potential to impact on waterways and drainage lines near the sites concerned.
Additionally, excavation activities have the potential to disturb Aboriginal archaeological sites, should they be
present.
Potential for geotechnical impacts to the surface as a result of the drilling and fracture stimulation operations
include:
•
Soil erosion on unprotected cut and filled areas;
•
Impact to known / unknown Aboriginal archaeological sites; and
•
Impact on nearby structures such as the Upper Canal.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-7
AECOM
Alteration to landform would occur during the initial construction phase through the construction of access roads
and minor earthworks for site preparation, including the possible clearing and re-levelling of the landscape in
order to establish a stable, level drill pad for the drill rig set up.
All of these ground disturbance activities have the potential to impact on Aboriginal archaeological sites within the
The construction of the wells, gas gathering lines, access roads and supporting infrastructure have the potential to
disturb soil profiles and in consequence, to impact on Aboriginal heritage items and places located within the
Project Area. However, impacts to cultural heritage would be mitigated by the location of proposed well heads and
associated infrastructure to avoid archaeological sites where possible.
15.6
As part of the overall EMS for the CGP, an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Sub Plan (ACHMSP) has
been developed. This ACHMSP would be updated where necessary to incorporate further recommendations
relevant to the Northern Expansion as identified in this EA.
A number of management recommendations have been formulated for the Surface Project Area in respect to
potential archaeological impacts. These recommendations have been included in the mitigation measures
identified in Table 15-3 and generally include safeguards relevant to the following:
•
Conservation;
•
Further Archaeological Work;
•
Aboriginal Stakeholder Consultation;
•
Ongoing Management;
•
Unanticipated Aboriginal Sites; and
•
Human Remains.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-8
AECOM
Table 15-3: Mitigation measures
Proposed Gas Well,
Access & Gas
Gathering Lines
Archaeological sites
Affected
Mitigation Measures
Main Spine Line
CG-IA-01 and CG-IA02
Registered Aboriginal archaeological sites located within
the Main Spine Line envelope should be avoided where
possible. To facilitate this:
CG-OCS-01, CG-OCS02, CG-OCS-04, CGOCS-06, CG-OCS-07
CG-OCS-08 and CGOCS-09
•
It is recommended that open campsites to be fenced
for avoidance. If these sites cannot be avoided then
cultural material should be collected and reinstated in
the same location following the completion of works.
•
Further archaeological work, in the form of salvage,
would be required at site CG-OCS-06 and CG-OCS09 if they cannot be avoided. Due to the construction
for Upper Canal, the immediate area is considered to
have moderate likelihood for medium density cultural
material in a highly disturbed context.
•
It is recommended that isolated artefact occurrences
be flagged for avoidance. If these sites cannot be
avoided then cultural material should be collected
and reinstated in the same location following the
completion of works. None of these sites were
deemed to be associated with sub-surface
archaeological deposit.
•
An existing cut drain and disturbed area is located
along the eastern boundary of the Upper Canal
easement that should be considered for the
placement of the Main Spine Line as this area is
already highly disturbed.
•
Access along the Main Spine Line should utilise the
existing Upper Canal vehicle access road / track
Areas of Moderate
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
Avoid impact to areas of moderate archaeological
sensitivity associated with sites CG-OCS-06 and CG-OCS09.
Areas of Low
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
No further archaeological work required in these areas.
Gas Gathering Line
between RA09 the Main
Spine Line
Low areas of
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
No further archaeological work required in these areas due
to high levels of disturbance associated with the
construction of Denham Court Road.
RA09
CG-TRE-01 and CGTRE-02
It is recommended that the registered Aboriginal
archaeological sites CG-TRE-01 and CG-TRE-02 be
fenced off and flagged for avoidance.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
If areas of moderate Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity
cannot be avoided, further investigative archaeological
work would be required.
15-9
AECOM
Proposed Gas Well,
Access & Gas
Gathering Lines
Affected
Mitigation Measures
Gas Gathering Line
between RA09 & RA03
CG-OCS-03
Aboriginal archaeological site CG-OCS-03 is situated on
the northern boundary of the 200m RA09 envelope and
should be avoided.
The site can be flagged to notify personnel of its location.
If the site cannot be avoided it should be collected and
reinstated in the same location following the completion of
works.
The gas gathering line should be placed within previously
disturbed areas of the road reserve to reduce overall
environmental impacts.
Access to RA09
RA03 & access track
High and Moderate
areas of Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
The areas of high and moderate Aboriginal archaeological
potential should be avoided by the proposed gas well head
location.
No and Low areas of
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
to high levels of disturbance.
Low areas of
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
CG-IA-03
Aboriginal archaeological site CG-IA-03 is situated on the
eastern boundary of the 200m RA03 envelope and should
be avoided.
If areas of high and moderate Aboriginal archaeological
sensitivity cannot be avoided, further archaeological
investigative work would be required.
The access track should utilise the existing farm vehicle
track to minimise overall environmental impacts.
works.
Areas of low Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
VV11
archaeological
sensitivity
Access to VV11
archaeological
sensitivity
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-10
AECOM
Proposed Gas Well,
Access & Gas
Gathering Lines
Affected
Mitigation Measures
Gas gathering line
connecting VV11 and
VV07
Area of high Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
The area of high Aboriginal archaeological potential on the
northern edge of the 50m gas gathering line envelope
should be avoided.
Further archaeological work would be required if this hill
crest cannot be avoided.
This area can be avoided by placing the proposed gas
gathering line along the existing farm vehicle track to
minimise overall environmental impacts.
VV07
Area of low Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
CG-OSC-12
Aboriginal archaeological site CG-OCS-12 should be
avoided by the proposed access track.
The site should be flagged to notify personnel of its
location.
works.
Area of high and
moderate Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
Areas of high and moderate archaeological sensitivity
have been identified in association with drainage features
and a ridge and should be avoided by the proposed gas
well head location.
Further investigative archaeological work would be
required if these areas cannot be avoided.
Access to VV07 WSL
archaeological
sensitivity
to high levels of disturbance and steep slopes.
CG-OSC-12
Aboriginal archaeological site CG-OCS-12 should be
avoided by the proposed access track.
location.
works.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
archaeological
sensitivity
Areas of high archaeological sensitivity have been
identified in association with drainage features and a ridge
and should be avoided by the proposed GGL
archaeological
sensitivity
15-11
AECOM
Proposed Gas Well,
Access & Gas
Gathering Lines
Affected
Mitigation Measures
CU20 and GGL
52-2-3300
Aboriginal archaeological site 52-2-3300 is situated on the
south eastern boundary of a dam bank within the 200m
CU20 envelope and should be avoided by the proposed
gas well head location.
relocated to the same location following the completion of
works.
Area of high and
moderate Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
have been identified within the 200m envelope in
association with drainage features and a ridge spur.
The areas of sensitivity should be avoided by the proposed
Further investigative archaeological work will be required if
these areas cannot be avoided.
Area of no and low
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
Access to
CU20 WSL
PAD-4 (AMBS 2006)
Remain on existing farm vehicle track to minimise impacts.
If track requires significant ground disturbance through this
area, further investigative archaeological work is required.
Access to
CU22 WSL
archaeological
sensitivity
archaeological
sensitivity
identified within the 200m envelope in association with hill
crest.
CU22 WSL & GGL
track to minimise impacts.
CU26
archaeological
sensitivity
archaeological
sensitivity
identified within the 200m envelope in association with
ridge crest.
archaeological
sensitivity
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-12
AECOM
Proposed Gas Well,
Access & Gas
Gathering Lines
Affected
Mitigation Measures
CU26 & CU29 Access
tracks
archaeological
sensitivity
GGL between CU26 &
CU29
Area of moderate
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
Areas of moderate archaeological sensitivity have been
identified within the 200m envelope in association with
ridge crest.
GGL.
CU29 WSL
No and low areas of
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
Areas of high and
moderate Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
association with ridge crest.
CU02 WSL
Areas of No and Low
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
TR-03 PAD (JMCHM
2007e)
The area of previously identified area TR-03 PAD should
be avoided by the proposed gas well head location.
the TR-03 PAD cannot be avoided.
Area of moderate
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
Areas of moderate and high archaeological sensitivity
association with ridge crest.
GGL & access to CU02
archaeological
sensitivity
52-2-3558
Aboriginal archaeological site 52-2-3558 should be
avoided by the proposed GGL.
The proposed GLL should remain within the existing road
reserve as this area is highly disturbed.
If the site cannot be avoided cultural material should be
collected and relocated to the same location following the
completion of works.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-13
Proposed Gas Well,
Access & Gas
Gathering Lines
AECOM
Affected
Mitigation Measures
Areas of moderate
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
Outside of the existing road easement, further investigative
archaeological work will be required if areas of moderate
Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity are impacted by the
GGL and access track.
The access and GGL should utilise the existing road and
disturbed road reserve easement to minimise overall
archaeological
sensitivity
Areas of moderate
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
The areas of moderate Aboriginal archaeological
sensitivity located on the ridge crest should be avoided by
the proposed gas well head location.
Areas of no and low
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
to high levels of ground disturbance
archaeological
sensitivity
Area of moderate
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
A small area of moderate Aboriginal archaeological
sensitivity is located on the southern margin of the CU10
WSL envelope and should be avoided by the proposed
archaeological
sensitivity
GGL & access between
CU10 & CU14
archaeological
sensitivity
Access to both CU10 &
CU14
CG-IA-05
Aboriginal archaeological site CG-IA-05 should be avoided
by the proposed access track.
CU06
CU06 GGL & access
CU10 WSL & GGL
disturbed road reserve easement to minimise
If areas of moderate Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity
cannot be avoided, further investigative archaeological
work will be required.
Existing farm tracks should be utilised to access CU06
WSL
location. If the site cannot be avoided it should be
collected and relocated to the same location following the
completion of works.
archaeological
sensitivity
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
disturbed road reserve easement to minimise overall
15-14
AECOM
Proposed Gas Well,
Access & Gas
Gathering Lines
Affected
Mitigation Measures
CU14 WSL
Area of moderate
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
A small area of moderate Aboriginal archaeological
sensitivity is located on along drainage features within the
200m envelope and should be avoided by the proposed
If these areas cannot be avoided, further investigative
archaeological work will be required.
GGL Main Spine Line &
MP03
Areas of no and low
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
CG-IA-06, CG-IA-07,
CG-IA-08, CG-IA-09,
CG-IA-10, CG-IA-11,
CG-IA 12, CG-OCS-10
and CG-OCS-11
All registered Aboriginal archaeological sites located within
the Main Spine Line envelope should be avoided where
possible. To facilitate this:
•
It is recommended that open campsites to be fenced
for avoidance. If these sites cannot be avoided then
cultural material should be collected and relocated to
the same location following the completion of works.
•
It is recommended that isolated artefact occurrences
be flagged for avoidance. If these sites cannot be
avoided then cultural material should be collected
and relocated to the same location following the
completion of works. None of these sites were
deemed to be associated with sub-surface
archaeological deposit.
The existing access track should be utilised for the
proposed GGL and access as this area is already highly
disturbed.
Low areas of
Aboriginal
archaeological
sensitivity
15.7
Conclusion
The Aboriginal archaeological assessment indicated that the potential for impacts to heritage items would be
generally minimal due to the existing disturbed nature of land within the Surface Project Area, and the identified
mitigation measures (some of which have already been incorporated into the design of the Project). Subsurface
drilling activities would have a negligible impact on heritage at the surface. Potential impacts would be minimised
through the implementation of the existing ACHMSP in addition to other general environmental safeguards and
management options identified in this EA for heritage sites and artefacts.
Given the implementation of environmental safeguards and management measures identified, the impacts
associated with Aboriginal heritage are not expected to be significant.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-15
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
15-16
16.0
AECOM
European Heritage
This chapter investigates European Heritage issues associated with the Project, in relation to the development of
well surface locations and associated gas gathering lines and access tracks. Potential impacts and mitigations are
investigated in this chapter which is based on the specialist report prepared by Biosis and provided in [Appendix
J].
16.1
Overview
An assessment of historical heritage was undertaken as part of the EA. The assessment considered the broad
scale historical heritage issues of the region and the results of specific investigation through a field survey of the
proposed works.
The field survey methods were designed to locate historical archaeological sites with reference to the following
information:
•
The proposed development ‘envelopes’ surrounding each Project component;
•
Previously registered and identified Heritage sites and places located within the assessed ‘envelopes’; and
•
Areas of archaeological potential, based on the background research predictive model (previous land grants,
aerial photography, parish plans, etc).
Based on previous archaeological assessment within the region, particular attention was paid to known historic
features and those areas most likely to contain historic archaeological sites or features.
The assessment and field survey was undertaken with respect to the Surface Project Area as it is considered that
subsurface drilling activities within the Subsurface Project Area would not impact on historical heritage at the
surface.
16.2
The Northern Expansion exhibits a cultural landscape that reflects development from the early colonial period to
the present. The rural character of the area retains solid visual links to the place’s past. The historical context and
development of the Surface Project Area is described in detail in Appendix J.
The Surface Project Area lies in south western Sydney in an area that was historically populated, in general, with
wealthy landowners who built large homesteads on their estates.
Listed Items of Significance
A search of the relevant heritage registers was conducted and existing sites located within the Surface Project
Area are shown on Figure 29 and Table 16-1 below. Several other heritage items occur outside the Surface
Project Area such as Denham Court Estate, however these have not been assessed as it is considered heritage
items outside the Project Area would not be impacted by the proposed works.
Campbelltown LEP
District 8
campbelltown lep
2002
National Trust
Y
Blairmount, Badgally Road, Blairmount
Camden lep No.48
Camden lep 2009
(draft)
sydney water s.170
SHR
NHL
CHL
Item
RNE
Table 16-1: Summary of known heritage items within the Project Area
Y
Y
Y
Y
Campbelltown Reservoir, Narellan Road,
Kenny Hill
Y
Stations of the Cross, Narellan Road,
Campbelltown
Varroville, St Andrews Road, Varroville
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Y
Y
Y
Y
16-1
Sydney Water Upper Canal
Gledswood Homestead
Y
Y
Y
Y
Kenny Hill Reservoir (WS0390)
Y
Y
National Trust
campbelltown lep
2002
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Ingleburn Dam
St Gregory’s Agricultural College
Campbelltown LEP
District 8
Camden lep No.48
Camden lep 2009
(draft)
sydney water s.170
SHR
NHL
Item
CHL
RNE
AECOM
Y
Y
Y
Y
Milestones, Campbelltown Rd
Y
Y
The National Heritage List (NHL) provides protection to places of cultural significance to the nation of Australia. The
Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL), Register of the National Estate (RNE), State Heritage Register (SHR), State Heritage
Inventory (SHI)
Nine listed heritage items occur within the Surface Project Area, with 3 of those sites occurring within the
envelope of proposed works. These 3 sites are the Upper Canal, St Gregory’s Agricultural College and Ingleburn
Dam.
Five potential archaeological sites were also identified, four of which are cottage sites associated with the
maintenance of the Upper Canal. Cottages were built to house canal maintenance staff along the Upper Canal. All
of the cottages have since been demolished and are likely to survive as archaeological sites. The CMP states that
remnant items such as a water tank and tank stand are the surviving remnants of the cottages and that they
possess archaeological significance.
The fifth potential archaeological site comprises potential relics of the former homestead ‘Molles Mains’. The
location of Molles Mains has been identified (with some certainty) as being within the boundary of the Camden
Valley Golf Course, thus impacts to this potential archaeological site are not anticipated.
Field Survey Results
The field survey identified the following within the environmental envelope of the proposed works within the
Surface Project Area:
•
Four house sites were identified within the Upper Canal easement and therefore potentially within the
proposed development footprint
•
A horse-jump composed of re-used sandstone blocks and does not possess heritage significance.
•
Two listed heritage items occurring within the envelopes:
-
The Upper Canal, which is comprised of the main water conduit and components such as steps,
culverts, bridges etc that are all of heritage value.
-
St Gregory’s Agricultural College, which comprises of a number of buildings within a large curtilage.
CH06 and CH10 are both located within the curtilage of St Gregory’s Agricultural College.
The field survey also located a number of potential heritage items within, or in close proximity to, the envelopes of
proposed works. The items identified were:
•
Four demolished houses along the length of the canal – and remnant plantings
•
Possible remains of structures associated with construction camps
•
Remains of earlier post and three rail fencing, and gates, etc
•
Structural items, and plants such as avenue of trees at Kenny Hill
•
Possible locations of construction camps
•
Spoil heaps
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
16-2
16.3
AECOM
Potential Impacts
The construction of well surface locations, gathering lines, access roads and supporting infrastructure would have
the potential to disturb soil profiles and in consequence, to impact on historic archaeological and cultural heritage
items and places located within the Surface Project Area. There would be no impacts on historic heritage resulting
from subsurface drilling activities in the Subsurface Project Area due to the distance of drilling activities from the
surface.
It should be noted however, that the degree of impact resulting from the Project components is likely to vary given
the implementation of the environmental envelope method of assessment. Where impact is likely to occur,
damage to cultural heritage would be mitigated by the relocation of proposed wells and associated infrastructure
where possible. Where impact is unavoidable, impacts would be mitigated through archaeological excavation.
Potential impacts would be impacts to items that are not recorded in documentary sources and not visible above
the ground surface. These items may include construction camp sites, which have been identified at Devines
Tunnel and the Nepean Creek Aqueduct and beyond the Surface Project Area.
Historical research combined with current cadastral information indicates that the proposed works associated with
the Northern Expansion have the potential to impact upon:
•
The Upper Canal and associated infrastructure;
•
Upper Canal Managers’ cottage sites;
•
Potential construction camp sites;
•
Potential archaeological sites associated with the former homestead “Molles Maines”;
•
Ingleburn Dam; and
•
St Gregory’s Agricultural College.
In addition, given the original size of the historical properties and the potential for satellite outbuildings and
infrastructure, there is a small possible that the Project would impact upon archaeological items associated with
the larger homesteads such as wells, barns and stockyards. The proposed works also have the potential to
impact on the landscape character of the Surface Project Area.
A summary of potential impacts specific to each component of the Project is shown in Table 16-2.
Table 16-2: Summary of Potential Impacts
Project Component
Sites Located within Assessment Envelopes
•
The Upper Canal and associated infrastructure:
Molles Main Tunnel
Badgally Tunnel
Steps
Main Spine Line
Bridges
Culverts
Cottage Site 17 – Section 7
All WSL
Gas gathering line between RA09 &
RA03
•
Ingleburn Dam
•
St Gregory’s Agricultural College
•
Potential archaeological sites related to early homesteads (unlikely
but should be considered)
•
Milestones – should be on the eastern side of the road on the
opposite side to the development, however personnel should be
aware that they may occur on the western side of the road
•
The Upper Canal and associated infrastructure:
Cottage Site 17
Gas gathering line between VV07 &
VV11
Bridges & Steps
Canal overbridge
•
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Ingleburn Dam
16-3
AECOM
Project Component
Sites Located within Assessment Envelopes
CU20
•
The Upper Canal
CU22
•
The Upper Canal
•
Potential archaeological site related to “Molles Maine” (unlikely but
should be considered)
•
•
Access Track to CU02
CU02
Gas gathering line between CU02 &
CU06
•
The Upper Canal – Badgally Tunnel
CU06
•
St Gregory’s Agricultural College (within curtilage)
CU10
•
CU14
•
Gas gathering line between CU10 &
CU14
•
Gas gathering line from spine CU10
to spine line
•
Access track to and between CU10
& CU14
•
16.3.1
Upper Canal
The risk to the structural integrity of the Upper Canal is considered low given the outlined mitigation measures (in
Section 9.3.1 of the EA).
The construction of the main spine line would utilise the existing SCA maintenance and access track along the
Upper Canal. Only small machinery is required for the laying of the pipeline. The use of this type of machinery is
not considered to pose a risk to the structural integrity of the Canal. Upper Canal crossings would be avoided
where possible and light construction vehicles and machinery would utilise appropriate access points to the SCA
maintenance track as directed by SCA.
The laying of the gas gathering system would require the trenching of the existing easement alongside the Upper
Canal (i.e. the easement furthest from the Upper Canal). Trenching would require a small lightweight trencher with
the gathering lines being laid approximately 700 - 1200 mm below the surface.
It is considered potential impacts on the structural integrity of the Upper Canal include:
•
The collapse of bridge crossings; and
•
Cracking/fracturing of canal walls.
16.3.2
Molles Main
The results of the field survey conducted by Biosis Research did not record any potential historical sites in the
location of the CU02 and CU06 and their associated gathering line and access track. This area is historically
associated with the property “Molles Mains”. The proposed locations of CU02 and CU06 do not appear to be in
the areas where potential archaeological sites on Molles Mains have been suggested; however the specific
location of these sites has not been confirmed through primary sources.
16.3.3
Gledswood
The SHR listed Gledswood homestead is situated on the western edge of the overall Study Area between the
Upper Canal and Camden Valley Way. Well surface locations CU20 and CU22 are proposed to be situated due
south of Gledswood homestead on the opposite side of the Upper Canal. The proposed locations of CU20 and
CU22 are around 600 m and 1200 m respectively from the homestead complex and are not within the SHR
curtilage of Gledswood.
Several studies of Gledswood have been completed each of which identify significant views and vistas to and
from the item and provide recommendations to conserve its visual curtilage. These studies generally identify
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
16-4
AECOM
views towards the north of the homestead (in an arc from east to west) as being of most significance. Views to the
south are of less value to the visual curtilage of the item. The proposed CU20 and CU22 (situated to the south)
would therefore not be located within a critical part of the visual curtilage of Gledswood. .
16.3.4
Varroville
The SHR listed homestead of Varroville is also situated within the Study Area. The study Colonial Landscapes of
the Cumberland Plan and Camden (Morris and Britton, 2000) has identified a significant view corridor from
Varroville north east towards Denham Court and Macquarie Fields House (which are situated outside the Study
Area), as well as enclosed views to the north and north west, limited by a ridgeline (Morris and Britton, 2000:98,
Figure 4.27.28). The latter ridgeline separates Varroville from the proposed well surface locations VV07 and VV11
which are situated some distance to the north-west. There is therefore no impact on the visual curtilage of
Varroville in this direction. In terms of the view corridor north east towards Denham Court and Macquarie Fields
House, the proposed well surface locations RA03 and RA09 may be visible. While most of the intervening
landscape is still rural in character, there are existing buildings dotted around the landscape which are of a greater
scale and visual presence than the proposed infrastructure and visual impacts on this view corridor from Varroville
are predicted to be negligible.
16.4
The European Heritage Management Sub Plan (EHMSP) as part of the existing EMS would be updated (where
necessary) to reflect the management historical heritage items specific the proposed works associated with the
Northern Expansion. Recommendations identified in Appendix J would be considered in addition to the mitigation
measures described in the EHMSP and in addition to those described in Table 16-3 below.
Table 16-3: Mitigation measures for European heritage sites within the Study Area.
Project Component
Heritage Sites
Main Spine Line
•
The Upper Canal & associated
infrastructure:
Mollesmain Tunnel – Section 6
Badgally Tunnel – Junction of Section 6/5
Steps
Bridges
Culverts
Cottage Site 17 – Section 7 (lot 1 DP 610146)
Mitigation Measures
Avoid Canal components by ensuring
that the Main Spine Line and
associated construction impacts are
confined to the existing drainage ditch
and track on the eastern side of the
Canal. Impacts on the Upper Canal
would be avoided through the use of
operating distances as recommended
by the vibration assessment.
Gathering lines would cross the Canal
in tunnelled locations and underbored only if necessary.
•
Ingleburn Dam – Section 7/Item 9 (lot 1 DP
1086624)
Avoid impacts
•
St Gregory’s Agricultural College (lot 100
DP 1119742)
Place CU06, CU10 and CU14 as far
as practicable from buildings
associated with the College.
Consider screening the WSLs with a
vegetation screen to obscure them
from the College buildings. Consult
with Camden Council on appropriate
species.
All WSL
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
Potential archaeological sites related to
early homesteads (unlikely but should be
considered)
Ensure that Project personnel are
aware of the ‘stop work provision’
should relics be unearthed during any
phase of the Project work.
16-5
Project Component
Gas gathering line
between RA09 &
RA03
Gas gathering line
between VV07 &
VV11
Heritage Sites
•
•
AECOM
Mitigation Measures
Milestones – should be on the eastern side
of the road on the opposite side to the
development, however personnel should be
aware that they may occur on the western
side of the road
Identify and avoid impacts. Should
impacts be unavoidable, consultation
with Campbelltown Council would be
required.
The Upper Canal and associated
infrastructure in Section 7 :
Avoid impacts to components
associated with the Upper Canal.
Cottage Site 17 – Item 17 ( lot 1 DP 610146)
Bridges & Steps – Item 16
Canal overbridge – Item 15
It is unlikely that milestones are
located on the western side of
Campbelltown Rd.
Create an exclusion zone around
Cottage Site 17 to avoid inadvertent
impacts.
Consider under-boring the gas
gathering line to cross the Canal.
Ensure that the gas gathering line
corridor follows already disturbed
routes such as existing tracks
•
Ingleburn Dam- Section 7/Item 9 (lot 1 DP
1086624)
Avoid impacts to the Dam.
CU20
•
The Upper Canal - Section 6
Move the WSL to the easternmost
position within the assessment
envelope
CU22
•
The Upper Cana l – Section 6
Move the WSL to the easternmost
position within the assessment
envelope
•
Potential archaeological site related to
“Molles Maine” (lot 2 DP 360116) (unlikely
Apply the “Unanticipated historical
archaeological sites”
recommendation: Stop work
•
•
•
The Upper Canal – Badgelly Tunnel
Consult with SCA to ensure that the
integrity of the Badgelly Tunnel is not
compromised.
•
St Gregory’s Agricultural College (within
curtilage) (lot 100 DP 1119742)
Ensure that the WSL is placed away
from any College buildings
•
from any College buildings.
Access Track to
CU02
CU02
Gas gathering line
between CU02 &
CU06
CU06
CU10
If the WSL is within view of College
buildings, consider screening with
vegetation.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
16-6
Project Component
Heritage Sites
CU14
•
AECOM
Mitigation Measures
from any College buildings.
If the WSL is within view of College
buildings, consider screening with
vegetation.
Gas gathering line
between CU10 &
CU14
Gas gathering line
from CU10 to spine
line
•
does not impact on any vegetation
avenues or screens or College
structures.
•
structures.
Ensure that components associated
with the Upper Canal are not
impacted through the use of operating
distances as recommended by the
vibration assessment.
Access track to and
between CU10 &
CU14
•
structures.
Mitigation measures to protect the structural integrity of the Upper Canal include limits to equipment operating and
moving through the maintenance track, limits on tonnage of machinery, working within the existing easement and
other mitigation measures implemented for the control of sediment such as silt fencing and stockpiles being
placed on adjacent lands (in consultation with the landholder).
16.5
Conclusion
The Surface Project Area is a cultural landscape resulting from European settlement in the earliest days of the
colony. A number of listed items on Commonwealth and non-statutory registers have been identified as occurring
Potential impacts on historical heritage have been identified and given appropriate recommendations and
mitigation measures are implemented, impacts are considered unlikely or minimal. Mitigation measures have
already been incorporated into the design of the Project through the environmental envelope approach. The
EHMSP of the existing EMS would also be updated to reflect the Northern Expansion.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
16-7
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
16-8
17.0
Visual
17.1
17.1.1
Project Area
AECOM
The Surface Project Area is the visual catchment of the proposed surface infrastructure works. No surface
infrastructure is to be located within the Subsurface Project Area and as such this area has not been considered
in the visual assessment. However, consideration has been given to the visual reaches of the Surface Project
Area into the Subsurface Project Area (up to 2,000m visual distance from the surface component).
The Surface Project Area is located in south-western Sydney within the Camden and Campbelltown LGA’s and
covers an area of approximately 3,900 ha. The majority of the Surface Project Area is largely undeveloped and is
generally semi-rural in character, with agricultural lands, predominantly used for grazing, scattered between
isolated areas of remnant vegetation and land designated for future (residential, commercial and industrial)
development. There are also some significant areas of both public and private recreation and scattered timber
present across much of the area. The Mount Annan Botanical Gardens comprises 416 ha of hills and lakes and
forms the southernmost aspect of the Surface Project Area. The Surface Project Area is surrounded by residential
areas to the north, east and west including Raby, Eaglevale, Claymore and Leppington respectively.
The landform of the Surface Project Area is gently undulating with steeper sections to the south of the site
reaching elevations of 196 m AHD at Badgelly Hill.
The proposed well surface locations are scattered throughout the Surface Project Area as shown on Figure 30.
They have a predominantly north east to north western aspect with views across the extensive Nepean and
Georges River floodplains.
17.1.2
Sensitive Receivers
The locations for the proposed well surface locations shown in Figures 4, 5 and 6. The potential visual receptors,
subject to distance and vegetation density and height, would include:
•
Motorists travelling along surrounding major roads and sub-regional roads such as the Camden Valley Way;
•
Rural and suburban residents and their visitors;
•
Employees and visitors associated with existing golf courses and schools (Marist Brothers);
•
Future urban residents and future commercial/ industrial employees and their visitors;
•
Employees and visitors associated with the Smeaton Grange Industrial Park;
•
Future joggers/ walkers; and
•
Employees and visitors associated with Mt Annan Botanical Gardens.
For the purpose of this assessment, visual receptors are those receptors such as residential dwellings with
potential views of Project components such as well site locations. Thirty-two visual receptors within and
surrounding the Surface Project Area have been identified, which are those areas from where Project components
are likely to be within the viewshed of the receptor. These fixed visual receptor locations will also be
representative of those listed in this section.
Visual receptors identified as part of the visibility assessment include residential dwellings within and surrounding
the Surface Project Area. Visibility is a measure of the extent to which the Project components are visible from the
surrounding visual catchment. Visibility is dependent on a number of factors, including the extent of visibility and
viewing distance:
•
Extent of visibility: extent to which Project components are visible from a point, i.e. whether the view is
interrupted by other landscape features such as vegetation, buildings, or the horizon. Also includes the view
duration i.e. residents would be considered to have a permanent view, while motorists driving past would
have a transient view.
•
Viewing distance: the distance from which the Project components are viewed. Distance acts to attenuate
visibility of Project components from view points.
•
Number of Viewers: the number of people with views of Project components. The greater the number of
viewers, the greater the potential impact.
The identified receptors are shown on Figure 30.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
17-9
17.2
AECOM
Methodology
The potential for the Northern Expansion to impact upon the visual environment and sensitive receivers would be
dependent on the visibility of the activities involved in the site preparation and construction of the proposed well
surface locations and the impact of the production phase standing structures on the environment. The Visual
Absorption Capacity of the landscape of the site affects the extent to which the Project would impact upon the
landscape. The methodology is described in Sections 17.2.1 below.
17.2.1
Visibility Assessment
To assess the visual impact of the Surface Project Area, the viewsheds of the proposed well sites were modelled
to determine visibility from residential receptors. Topographic data were input to a computer modelling program
known as Vertical Mapper to produce a visibility map. Local topography was mapped and a visibility assessment
undertaken to determine the visibility of the well sites in relation to surrounding receivers. This analysis enabled
the potential visual impacts of the Project to be identified and assessed. This visibility assessment is solely based
on topography and does not take into account the screening effect of vegetation or other built infrastructure on the
landscape. However, a qualitative assessment of screening effects is considered as described in Section 17.2.2
and discussed in Section 17.3.1.
The visibility assessment calculated the number of well sites that could be seen from a single visual receptor
within a viewshed with a radius of 2 km. This radius has been used as 2 km is the furthest extent of the human
eye, thus the furthest visible impact has been assessed. It should be noted that a conservative approach has
been used in order to assess the worst case scenario. Based on observations of existing well sites in the greater
CGP, at this distance, the visibility of the operational infrastructure is only slight, with other elements of landscape
dominating the observer’s field of view. Views of the well sites resulting from this assessment are shown in
Figures 31, 32 and 33.
17.2.2
Visual Absorption Capacity has been defined as:
An estimation of the capacity of the landscape to absorb developments without its character being
significantly changed or its scenic quality reduced (Gosford City Council, Development Control Plan
No.89, Scenic Quality, Nov.1996).
The Visual Absorption Capacity (VAC) of the surrounding landscape is dependent on the appearance of the
Project component and the interaction between landscape features such as vegetation cover, existing built
structures and topographic landforms in the immediate area. For example, it is usually considered that coastal
areas have a low VAC due to their potential for water views, and flat or gently undulating open forest generally
has a higher capacity to visually absorb development than steeper cleared ridges or slopes.
Another element to be considered is the level of visual contrast between the existing components of the
landscape and the proposed Project. For example, if an area is undeveloped then the capability of the area to
visually absorb a prominent development is lower than an area that already contains similar forms of
development.
The visibility assessment considers the visibility and visual absorption capacity discussed above for each surface
location and allocates each with a visual absorption rating of high, medium or low for nearby receivers, where a
high visual absorption rating indicates significant ability for the proposed works to be absorbed by the surrounding
environment and low indicates minimal absorption ability. The rating system is further defined below:
High:
The surrounding environment provides a significant level of screening and generally absorbs
most objects of similar visual aspect including colour and height.
Moderate: The surrounding environment provides an adequate level of screening and absorbs some
objects of similar visual aspect including colour and height. Some objects may appear to be
slightly more prominent.
Low:
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
The surrounding environment provides a poor level of screening and objects may generally
be more visually prominent.
17-10
17.3
AECOM
Results
The visibility assessment considers the visibility and visual absorption capacity discussed above for each surface
location. The visibility assessment includes a worst-case scenario during construction with machinery and
vehicles required on site simultaneously.
Receivers
The results of the visibility assessment for well surface locations are summarised in Figure 31, 32 and 33 and
Table 17-1 below.
Table 17-1: Well sites visible from sensitive receivers
Number of Well Sites Visible (2 km
radius)
Number of Receptors with Well Site Visible in Viewshed
0
9
1
15
2
8
3
0
Total
32
The visibility assessment indicates the majority of receivers would have either one or no well sites visible, and
only eight with views of two well sites. Visibility of these well sites would be greatest during the construction period
when drill rigs and other equipment are present at these sites.
9 identified receptors would not have a well site located within their respective viewsheds, therefore potential
visual impacts would be negligible at these receptors.
Photographic montages were taken at each of the well surface locations in order to assess viewpoints and to
assess the VAC of each site with the existing landscape character. These montages are shown in Figures 34
to 45. VAC for the well surface locations is described in Table 17-2.
Table 17-2: Montages
Well Surface
Location ID
Surrounding Environment
Absorption Capacity Rating
Figure
Reference
CU02
Open grassland. Some distant trees
provide screening from a southwest
aspect.
Low-Moderate
34
CU06
Open grassland. Some trees to
provide limited screening.
Low
35
CU10
Open grassland with gently
undulating hills. Visible from a
southerly aspect
Low
36
CU14
Open grassland with gently
undulating hills.
Moderate
37
CU20
Open grassland with trees to provide
screening to the west. CU20 is on
higher land and not highly visible.
High
38
CU22
Open grassland with rolling hills.
Nearby infrastructure include
overhead transmission lines and
Upper Canal.
High
39
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
17-11
AECOM
Well Surface
Location ID
Surrounding Environment
Absorption Capacity Rating
Figure
Reference
CU26
Open grassland, largely cleared.
Rolling hills provide screening.
Moderate-High
40
CU29
Rural, open grassland.
Moderate-High
41
Some dense vegetation and
surrounding hills to provide
screening.
RA03
Open paddock. Nearby infrastructure
includes local road, transmission line,
fencing and farm buildings. RA03
would be partially absorbed by the
existing infrastructure.
Low-Moderate
42
RA09
Grassland surrounded by dense
vegetation to provide screening
Moderate
43
VV07
Grassland with some trees to provide
screening. Gently rolling hills.
Moderate
44
VV11
Dense vegetation significantly
screens site from the north
Moderate-High
45
As discussed previously, the VAC of the Project can be considered to be the level of visual contrast between the
proposed well site development and the context in which it is placed. The topography of the area, where the well
surface locations would be sited varies between gently undulating and flat land, which has undergone previous
disturbance due to the clearing of natural vegetation for grazing and other rural land uses. Few surface locations
are surrounded by bushland, while the majority are located in cleared paddocks. The capacity of the area to
visually absorb the proposed works will therefore vary depending on their location in relation to the surrounding
land.
The capacity of the area to absorb the proposed works when surrounded by existing modified or remnant
bushland is much higher than it is when located in cleared areas.
The visibility assessment undertaken in Table 17-2 concluded that 8 of the 12 well surface locations are in areas
rated as moderate to high VAC suggesting an overall capacity for potential visual impacts to be absorbed by the
existing surrounding environment and topography.
A majority of the wells are located in cleared and open grazing and pasture land. The lack of existing vegetation
surrounding wells gives rise to potential uninterrupted views of the well surface location particularly during
construction and maintenance activities. However, given the temporary and infrequent nature of the activities of
the proposed development which have the potential to alter the visual absorption of the Project, the
implementation of site specific mitigation measures would ensure the minimisation of potential visual impacts to
these locations.
17.4
Potential Impacts
Due to the fact that the operational life of the proposed development is potentially in excess of 15 years, the future
urban release areas require consideration for potential visual impacts from the Project. The visual receptors
would comprise future residents and their visitors within these future release areas.
As previously discussed visual impacts are most significant during the construction phase. The visibility
assessment has considered all phases of the Project from construction to closure and final rehabilitation.
However, it is important to note that as landscaping and initial rehabilitation works are completed at the end of the
construction phase, visual impacts are reduced in subsequent phases. Another contributing factor to a reduction
in visual impacts following construction is related to the size and scale of equipment required for a producing well
footprint being considerably less than what is required during construction. Therefore as the footprint and scale of
equipment decrease so too do the visual impacts.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
17-12
17.4.1
AECOM
Construction
The construction phase of the Project would involve equipment of a substantial scale operating at variable periods
at a time at each well site. The entire Northern Expansion is expected to be developed over a flexible period of
time and therefore not all well sites would be developed at once.
A summary of the required equipment for the construction phase include:
•
Drilling rigs;
•
Earth movers and graders;
•
Excavators and trenchers;
•
Water storage tanks or lined ponds; and
•
Delivery vehicles.
Equipment would be delivered to each well site at the commencement of construction, and would generally
remain on site for the duration of construction works. These activities would potentially be visible from receptors
within the viewshed of some well surface locations.
The initial well site construction footprint would be up to 10,000 m² in area which is reduced to an approximate 45
m x 45 m area. Once well completion has been undertaken the well surface infrastructure is typically enclosed in
a final area approximately 20 x 20 m. Figure 12 shows the initial and reduced well sites, after rehabilitation.
Gas and water gathering lines would be laid in the same trench and where possible, trenching would be
undertaken along fence lines and existing access roads to minimise ground disturbance and associated visual
impacts. Once construction is completed for the gas gathering system, they would be below the ground surface
and the surface of the land returned to its original state, therefore removing the visual impact. Given the access
roads are primarily pre-existing roads or tracks within the general area and that they are at ground level, visual
impacts associated with the access roads are considered minor.
Given the substantial scale of equipment required during the construction of well sites, visual impact is anticipated
to be greatest during the construction period. However given the temporary nature of construction works,
potential visual impacts would be limited to a finite period, and are likely to be significantly reduced during
operation.
17.4.2
Production and Post-development
Once the Northern Expansion has been developed, there will be 12 operational well sites present. These
operational well site locations are reduced to a 15 x 15 m operational footprint with initial rehabilitation undertaken
as per consultation with the landowner (refer Chapter 21).
Operational well head equipment is described in Chapter 4 and shown in Figure 13. The scale of operational
equipment that would remain on site is not considered to be substantial, and have been designed to consider the
surrounding environment in terms of materials, colour schemes and landscaping, and is therefore not considered
to be visually intrusive. Given this, and the overall temporary nature of the Project, the scenic value for the area is
maintained. It is considered that tourism activities (such as the Mount Annan Botanical Gardens) on the basis of
the scenic values of the area would not be impacted as a result of this design.
Post development activities such as re-fracture stimulation would require the use of rigs and associated
equipment such as generators and heavy vehicles. These may be visible from surrounding areas however, these
activities would be infrequent.
17.4.3
The closure and final rehabilitation of a well surface location is expected to occur after some 10 - 15 years in the
case of typical wells. Closure and final rehabilitation involves the removal of the well head infrastructure, cement
capping of the wells and final rehabilitation of the site. Heavy vehicles and earthworks equipment would be
utilised and may be visible from surrounding areas, however, visual impacts from rehabilitation works would be
temporary. Final rehabilitation activities would be designed to return the surface location to the original land use
condition or better or to a condition agreed with the landowner.
17.5
The visual impact of the proposed works would be further reduced by the implementation of the following
mitigation measures.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
17-13
AECOM
•
A Landscape Management Plan would be prepared (or the existing LRMSP updated as part of the overall
EMS) in respect of the proposed Project to identify appropriate landscaping to be implemented at well
surface locations along with a program of long-term maintenance for landscape works;
•
Earthworks, vegetation clearing and soil disturbance would be limited to the construction and operational
footprint as appropriate;
•
Existing vegetation will be maintained wherever possible;
•
Dust control measures would be implemented during construction and operation;
•
Screening in the form of appropriate fencing and landscaping will be implemented at well surface locations
as necessary and in accordance with the Landscape and Rehabilitation Management Sub Plan for the
Project;
•
Environmentally friendly colour schemes would be utilised for each well surface location in order to minimise
visual impacts with respect to the existing surrounding environment;
•
Initial rehabilitation of the well surface locations and gathering lines are to be consistent with the established
character of surrounding land;
•
Construction activities for the gas gathering lines will be rehabilitated to be consistent with the established
character of the land; and
•
With regard to the future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) land release areas, where well
surface locations are expected to be near residential development, material used for fencing or the
enclosure would be chosen to integrate with the surrounding urban form.
•
For well surface locations where residents may be exposed to extended periods of uninterrupted views
during construction, green mesh or other appropriate fencing is to be erected around the construction
compound.
17.6
Conclusion
Potential visual impacts have been identified as being most significant at the construction phase of the proposed
development due to the size of the construction footprint and scale of equipment required. As the footprint and
scale of equipment significantly reduced in later phases, the potential visual impacts are also reduced.
Given the existing nature of the area the visual impacts are considered to be minimal provided the recommended
mitigation measures are implemented. Therefore the proposed development is considered acceptable in terms of
visual impacts.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
17-14
18.0
AECOM
Geology and Soils
This chapter provides an overview of the existing environment of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas in
terms of its underlying geology and soil types and the potential opportunities and limitations arising from these
characteristics in relation to the proposed Northern Expansion. This chapter assesses the potential impacts of the
proposed activities upon geology, soils and landform within the Project Areas and recommends appropriate
mitigation and management measures to ensure that these impacts are minimised.
18.1
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are located in south-western Sydney within the Camden and
Campbelltown LGA’s. The area has been largely cleared of natural vegetation and is generally semi-rural in
character, with agricultural lands, predominantly grazing, scattered between isolated areas of remnant vegetation.
18.1.1
Geology
The Sydney Basin is part of the Sydney-Gunnedah-Bowen Basin, a major foreland basin system which extends
from southern coastal New South Wales to Central Queensland. The Project Areas are located within the PermoTriassic Sydney Basin which contains coal bearing strata concentrated in two major sequences of terrestrial
sediments. These are informally known as the Upper and Lower Coal Measures and are separated by a thick
interval of marine strata (Sydney Gas, 2003). The Upper Coal Measures in the Southern Coalfield are defined as
the Illawarra Coal Measures, and contain significant CSM resources.
The Illawarra Coal Measures were formed during the early Permian and the late Triassic (Wollongong – Port
Hacking Geological Series Sheet (reference 9029 – 9129) and Penrith Geological Series Sheet (reference 9030))
and occur within the Project Areas between approximately 700 and 1000 m depth. The development of the coal
measures was terminated by rapid climate change and renewed basin uplift at the end of the Permian age.
The coal measures have an approximate thickness of 350 m within the Surface Project Area, with the main coal
seams targeted by the Northern Expansion being the Bulli and Balgownie seams which occur at the top of the
Illawarra Coal Measures at a depth of some 700 m.
In the vicinity of the Project Areas the Illawarra Coal measures are overlain by a thick sequence (approximately
700 m) of sedimentary strata which comprise interbedded sandstone, siltstone and shale of differing grain size
and strength. The Project Area comprises exposed surface areas of sedimentary strata of the Wiannamatta
Group (Hazelton and Tille, 1990). To the south west of the Project Areas, Quaternary alluvium gravels and sands
are present around the Nepean River flats and lower slopes. These comprise mainly silica sand with high clay
content and provide evidence of landscape forming features when the Nepean River was flowing at higher levels.
A few small locations of Tertiary Sand mineral deposits are scattered around the Project Area.
Underlying the Wianamatta Group, the Mittagong Formation forms a thin transitional zone between the Ashfield
Shale and the underlying Hawkesbury Sandstone (refer Table 12-1). The Mittagong Formation comprises
interbedded shale laminate, medium-grained quartz sandstone and black siltstone (SCA, 2007). The Hawkesbury
Sandstone is generally a medium to coarse grained quartz rich sandstone with claystone, siltstone, minor shale
and shale lenses. Beneath the Hawkesbury Sandstone and above the Illawarra Coal Measures lies the Narrabeen
Group which comprises fine to coarse grained quartz lithic sandstone with a similar matrix to the Hawkesbury
Sandstone (refer Table 12-1)
18.1.2
Soil Landscapes
A review of the Soil Conservation Service maps was undertaken to determine the distribution of soil landscapes
within the Northern Expansion Project Area. Based on the Wollongong – Port Hacking Soil Landscape Series Map
Sheet 9029-9129 and the Penrith Soil Landscape Series Sheet 9030, five soil groups apply to the Surface Project
Area and would be subject to the proposed surface infrastructure works. The characteristics of the applicable soils
landscapes are summarised in Table 18-1.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
18-1
AECOM
Table 18-1: Soil Landscapes within the Project Area
Soil Group
Characteristics
Blacktown
•
The landscape is described as gentle undulating with the general fertility of the soils
moderate to low.
•
Vegetation is described as extensively cleared eucalypt low open-forest and eucalypt low
woodland with sclerophyllous shrub understorey.
•
Erosion hazard for non-concentrated flows is generally moderate and may range from slight
to extreme.
•
Landscape is described as undulating to rolling low hills on Wianamatta Group shales, often
associated with Minchinbury sandstone.
•
The general fertility of the soils is low to moderate.
•
Vegetation is described as extensively cleared dry sclerophyll open forest.
•
Limitations associated with this soil type include high soil erosion hazard, localised
impermeable highly plastic subsoil and moderately reactive soil materials.
•
Landscape is described as steep to precipitous hills on Wianamatta Group and derived of
shale colluvial materials, usually having a southerly aspect.
Luddenham
Picton
Berkshire
Park
South Creek
•
Vegetation is described as extensively cleared wet sclerophyll open forest.
•
This soil type has a moderate to low fertility with landscape limitations of the soil including
extreme erosion hazard, mass movement and steep slopes.
•
Landscape is described as gently undulating low rises on the Tertiary terraces of the
Hawkesbury/Nepean River system.
•
Very little natural vegetation remains.
•
Limitations associated with this soil type include moderate to high erosion hazard
•
Landscape is described as flat to gently sloping alluvial plain with floodplains, valley flats and
drainage depressions.
•
Vegetation is described as mainly cleared with some tall shrubland on elevated
streambanks.
•
Limitations associated with this soil type include flood hazard and very high to extreme
erosion hazard.
The limitations of the individual soil types may influence the range of activities possible at any site. Possible soil
limitations relevant to the Surface Project Area may include:
•
reactive soils, which are a foundation and structure hazard due to soil shape and soil structure changes;
•
plastic soils, which do not support loads well and have poor trafficability when wet;
•
erodible soils, which, if disturbed can increase sedimentation potential;
•
flooding/ waterlogging, which has implications for access and useability of the site; and
•
mass movement, which provides limitations to excavation and landscape alteration potential.
18.1.3
Acid Sulphate Soils
Soils can contain iron pyrite in an unoxidised state and when air comes in contact with them they oxidise forming
Acid Sulphate Soils (ASS). When water passes through the ASS, sulphuric acid leaches out and passes into
waterways. ASS were formed in the Holocene geological period (<11 000 years before present) where marine
sediment was deposited. These soils generally occur below and up to 5 m AHD in estuaries, rivers, floodplains,
backswamps and sand dunes and are therefore typically associated with low-lying coastal areas, including
estuarine flood plains, rivers and creeks.
The elevation of the Surface Project Area is greater than 5 m AHD and it is not located in a coastal area.
Therefore the likelihood of ASS occurring is considered to be low. Previous soil assessments within the locality
have not identified the presence of ASS. Previous testing by Harvest Scientific Services (2001) in the general
vicinity of the Northern Expansion area identified that the soils in the Blacktown Soil Landscape are strongly acidic
(4.5 – 5.0) with a non-saline to slightly saline character (1.7 – 2.7 dS/m). The soils were reported to vary
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
18-2
AECOM
significantly in fertility. No known elevated acidity levels have been recorded in the Luddenham Soil Landscapes
(Sydney Gas, June 2003). Construction works and subsurface drilling activities are unlikely to unearth any acid
sulphate soils for these reasons.
18.1.4
Saline Soils
Areas that are underlain by shale with a shallow water table are generally classified as having a high probability of
salinity impacts. In the western Sydney area, salinity is generally associated with the Wianamatta Group shales
and is predominantly associated with drainage systems of soil types including the Blacktown Soil Landscape
(DNR 2006). Within the Blacktown Soil Landscape, localised recordings of saline soils have been recorded.
Reference to the Salinity Potential in Western Sydney 1:100,000 sheet (DIPNR, 2003), indicates that the Project
Area has a moderate to high salinity potential.
Salinity can result in the deterioration of road and concrete surfaces and the disturbance of saline soils can result
in an increased saline load in surface runoff. Salinity may also result in the deterioration of rural and agricultural
land use.
18.1.5
Contaminated Soils
There is potential for historic land uses within the Project Areas, such as livestock intensive industries to result in
soil contamination. The infrastructure proposed as part of the Northern Expansion would be located on land
largely used for agricultural land purposes, therefore there is potential for contaminated land to exist in areas
where infrastructure is planned to occur.
An investigation of the DECCW record of notices issued under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997
(CLM Act) for the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs identified no records existing within the Camden LGA and
one record existing within Campbelltown LGA, being 62 Blaxland Road, Campbelltown. This site is located within
the Subsurface Project Area but outside the boundary of the Surface Project Area, and would therefore not be
affected by the proposed surface infrastructure works.
Given the nature of the proposed works, and the design and siting of the infrastructure, it is not expected that
contaminated soil would be encountered, however should works be proposed in areas potentially affected by
contamination, a Contaminated Lands Management Plan (CLMP) would be prepared to ensure the proper
management of such contaminated soil.
18.2
Potential Impacts
18.2.1
Construction
Construction activities associated with the Northern Expansion would be largely limited to the Surface Project
Area and involve the excavation and disturbance of soils to allow for the construction of gas wells and trenching
for the installation of gas gathering lines. Minor landform alteration would occur during site preparation, including
levelling and grading activities (where required) and construction of access roads, with excavated materials being
stockpiled on site. Potential impacts on soils within the Subsurface Project Area are considered negligible due to
the distance of subsurface drilling activities from the surface.
Construction activities likely to disturb soils within the Surface Project Area include:
•
Removal of topsoil material from well surface locations;
•
Levelling of each well surface location in preparation for drill rigs and machinery (where necessary);
•
Introduction of shale for hardstand pad at well sites;
•
Drilling of wells;
•
Excavation of drill pits;
•
Trenching for supply pipeline and gas gathering system; and
•
Access road and infrastructure construction or upgrade.
Disturbance of soils during construction would temporarily increase potential erosion and sediment loads within
the vicinity of the activity with the potential to impact on waterways and drainage lines near the sites concerned.
Additionally, excavation activities have the potential to disturb existing ASS and saline soils and contaminated
soils at well surface locations and within gas gathering line construction sites, should they be present. There is
also the potential for soils to be contaminated through fuel, chemical and oils spillages from vehicles and
machinery on site.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
18-3
AECOM
The construction of the main spine line has the potential to result in sediment and erosion which may
subsequently impact upon the Upper Canal. Construction activities likely to result in potential impacts on the
Upper Canal include dust generation from trenching equipment and sediment from stockpiles. Mitigation
measures such as silt fencing and bunding would be implemented to ensure there is zero impact on the Upper
Canal. Mitigation measures are discussed in Section 18.3 and Chapter 24 of this EA.
Potential for geotechnical impacts to the surface as a result of the drilling and fracture stimulation operations
include:
•
Changes to stability along cut and filled areas;
•
Soil erosion on unprotected cut and filled areas;
•
Vibration associated with drilling and well development, with potential to impact on nearby structures such as
the Upper Canal; and
•
Potential for sterilisation of coal seams for future coal mining activities.
Alteration to landform would occur during the initial construction phase through the construction of access roads
and minor earthworks for site preparation, including the possible clearing and re-levelling of the landscape in
order to establish a stable, level drill pad for the drill rig set up. Implementation of erosion and sedimentation
controls and temporary stockpiles of soil may also alter the landform in the short term. Subsurface drilling is
unlikely to result in geotechnical impacts of the surface due to drilling techniques and management measures
used as previously demonstrated by the existing stages of the CGP.
Subsidence
The use of SIS technology which enables the Proponent to access gas reserves from land constrained by surface
development up 2,500m from the drilling origin (and into the Subsurface Project Area), may raise concerns
amongst the community in respect of the potential for such technologies to cause subsidence (with consequent
impacts to the environment and surface structures).
To date there have been no issues associated with subsidence related to the CGP, however a report for AGL was
prepared by Mine Subsidence Engineering Consultants (MSEC) in 2007 (and included Appendix K of this EA)
examining the potential for subsidence to occur as a result of the extraction of gas as undertaken by the CGP.
The report concluded that surface subsidence would not occur unless:
•
Large voids are created in the strata by the mining or extractive activity, leading to subsequent failure of
remnant pillars and subsidence of the overlying strata.
•
Large voids are created in the strata by the mining or extractive activity leading to subsequent collapse,
consolidation and subsidence of the overlying strata.
•
Unconsolidated beds of strata are present, which can subsequently be consolidated by the weight of the
overburden, following the removal of interstitial fluids.
The proposed extraction of gas would not create large voids in the strata, nor leave remnant pillars. The strata
within the coal measures are not unconsolidated and in fact are hard and well consolidated rocks. The conditions
for significant subsidence to occur are not therefore present and it is concluded that the potential for subsidence
to occur as gas is extracted or as a result of subsurface drilling activities is considered to be negligible.
The report finds that there could be some shrinkage of the coal seam due to the extraction of the gas, but that
such shrinkage would be in the order of a few millimetres and therefore subsidence that might occur at the
surface due to shrinkage of the coal seam would be negligible. This level of subsidence is not sufficient enough to
have a noticeable impact or cause damage.
No significant subsidence over the last decade has been observed within existing CGP wellfields.
18.2.2
Production
The production phase of the Project would result in potential minor disturbances to soils due to vehicles traversing
access roads to access well surface locations for maintenance and monitoring purposes. Impacts in this regard
are considered to be negligible given the expected frequency of maintenance activities and the type of vehicles
used (mainly light vehicles).
18.2.3
Closure and final rehabilitation works have the potential to disturb surfaces through additional vehicles, removal of
infrastructure, plantings and landscaping works. Proposed activities likely to cause disturbance include:
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
18-4
•
Landscaping and planting;
•
Restoring/ shaping of landform to original state; and
•
Soil ripping and site rehabilitation.
AECOM
The disturbance of soils would temporarily increase potential erosion and sediment loads, however, on completion
of works the well surface locations would be restored to a condition equal to or generally better than that of the
original landscape. Erosion and sediment controls would be installed and routinely checked to minimise potential
impacts in the locality.
Steel cased gas wells potentially present a danger to future coal mining activity if left in the coal seam as the
longwall may strike the casing causing a significant safety risk potentially resulting in damage to equipment or
spark and explosion. Similarly, there is some risk of losing drill tools down the hole with similar potential
consequences.
Guidelines issued by the DPI (now DII) require the removal of casing from coal seams to prevent underground
safety issues and coal sterilisation. Once drilled and again at the time of final closure of a well, the Proponent is
required to log the location of the well and lodge that information with the DPI and dial before you dig. Therefore,
the potential for sterilisation as a result of the proposed activities is not considered to be a significant issue.
18.3
The following mitigation measures include those from the existing EMS for the CGP which would be implemented
to minimise the potential for impacts to occur on the landform, geology and soils of the Surface Project Area. The
following mitigation measures also include additional recommendations which would be incorporated and updated
into the EMS such as any necessary mitigation measures for the Subsurface Project Area. As the potential
impacts in terms of landform, geology and soils are expected to be largely the same as those encountered in
respect of Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the CGP, it is anticipated that similar mitigation measures would be
implemented in respect of the Northern Expansion and existing environmental management systems and subplans are considered adequate. The revised and updated EMS would be applied to the proposed works where
necessary.
18.3.1
•
Construction
The existing SWMSP would be revised and updated accordingly with respect to the earthworks and
construction activities associated with the Northern Expansion. The SWMSP would be updated to include
the following in respect of the 12 well surface locations and infrastructure within the Surface Project Area;
-
Property description;
-
Level datum;
-
Location of site boundaries and adjoining roads (where applicable);
-
Approximate grades and indications of direction of fall;
-
Approximate location of mature trees;
-
Location of access roads and gates;
-
Nature and extent of earthworks including cut and fill and drill pit location;
-
Location of all soil stockpiles; and
-
Location and type of proposed erosion and sediment control measures.
•
Prior to commencing earthworks, necessary erosion and sediment control measures would be installed.
These would then be inspected on a daily basis during construction to ensure that they remain functional;
•
Contaminated lands with the potential to be impacted by the Project would be identified and a Contaminated
Lands Management Plan (CLMP) created (if required);
•
Erosion and sediment control measures shall be implemented where necessary to prevent erosion and
water contamination and shall be in place prior to the commencement of works with the potential to cause
erosion. Measures would include, but are not limited to, surface drains and berms and sediment traps such
as silt fences and straw bales;
•
Erosion control berms and drains would be designed and constructed so as to ensure that runoff water does
not result in off-site effects of erosion or sedimentation;
•
Areas designated for ground disturbance, including well surface locations and minor vegetation clearing
would be clearly marked on site plans and on the ground surface and would be minimised wherever
possible;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
18-5
•
AECOM
Works (including stockpiling of gas gathering line sections) shall be confined to identified areas within the
gas gathering system route, designated parking and lay down area and access routes;
•
The period between clearing, trenching and rehabilitation would be minimised;
•
Soil stockpiles would be located away from drainage lines and shall be designed to minimise runoff. Soil
stockpile sites would be enclosed within a bunded area to reduce the likelihood of sediment entering
drainage lines. Stockpiles would be located at safe distances from the Upper Canal and would be
determined in consultation with the SCA and adjoining landholders;
•
Graded soil and cleared vegetation shall not be stockpiled where it has the potential to disrupt surface water
flow;
•
Erosion and sedimentation controls would be checked and cleaned weekly to ensure effective operation;
•
Refuelling of vehicles and machinery would be undertaken by suitably trained personnel within a levelled
area with a spill kit present, preferably on a hardstand area, to minimise contamination from spills;
•
Fuels, chemicals and liquids would be stored in a bunded area to minimise the potential for spills to escape
off site; and.
•
A spill kit would be taken on site for all construction activities.
Production
•
Where erosion does occur, the area shall be stabilised as soon as practicable and measures taken to
rehabilitate the site;
•
Refuelling of machinery would be undertaken by suitably qualified personnel within a levelled area,
preferably on a hardstand area with a spill kit present, to minimise contamination from spills; and
•
A spill kit would be located in all production vehicles.
Post Development
•
No specific mitigation measures are required in respect of the post development phase of the Project. Any
post development would be subject to the same mitigation measures for construction referred to in the EMS.
•
Rehabilitation of disturbed areas would be undertaken as soon as practical with the restoration of site to
natural contours wherever possible;
•
Stockpiled top soil and seed stock shall be respread across the work areas from which it was removed;
•
Compacted areas shall be deep ripped or scarified for relief as required; and
•
Routine inspections of well sites would be undertaken to ensure rehabilitation and regeneration activities are
successful and to identify areas of subsequent erosion.
18.4
Conclusion
The soils and geology of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are well known due to the existing CGP
operations. The potential for impacts resulting from the Northern Expansion include the disturbance of soil and
minor alterations to landform due to trenching, drilling and excavation for the construction of well surface
locations, gas gathering systems, and access roads. However, these impacts are expected to be minor and are
anticipated to have a negligible effect on the area. Erosion and sedimentation controls would be implemented to
minimise potential impacts to the locality with disturbed areas rehabilitated as soon as practical after works. The
potential for subsidence to occur at the surface is considered to be negligible.
It is not anticipated that the construction and operation of the Project would result in significant adverse effects on
the landform, geology or soils within the Surface Project Area or the Subsurface Project Area.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
18-6
19.0
AECOM
This chapter assesses the potential impacts of the Northern Expansion in terms of traffic on the surrounding local
and regional road networks. In this regard, consideration is given to anticipated vehicle movements during the
construction, operation and closure phases of the Project and proposed methods for the management of traffic
generated by the proposed works.
19.1
19.1.1
Road Network
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas spans across two LGAs, Camden and Campbelltown (see Figure 3),
which are located in the Macarthur Region south-west of Sydney’s CBD. These LGAs are the southern boundary
of the Greater Sydney Metropolitan area forming the northern boundary of the Wollongong Region. The Macarthur
Region is an important hub for south-western Sydney’s industrial and residential zones, with several important
transport corridors linking Sydney to the south coast of NSW and Victoria.
Major roadways that service the region are:
•
M7 Western Sydney Orbital (Westlink);
•
M5 South-West Motorway;
•
F5 – South-western Freeway;
•
Northern Road;
•
Raby Road;
•
Campbelltown Road
•
Narellan Road; and
•
Camden Valley Way.
The Westlink M7 connects the Western Sydney road network by providing a 40 km uninterrupted journey between
the M2, M4 and M5 motorways. The M7 connects with the M2 at Baulkham Hills in the north and with the M5 and
F5 at the Cross Roads at Prestons in the south thereby creating a ring road highway (RTA, 2006).
The M5 Motorway opened in August 1992 and provides a high-speed transit corridor spanning 22 km of Sydney's
south west from Prestons to Beverly Hills. The M5 is approximately 5 km north of the Subsurface and Surface
Project Areas where it continues on to become the F5. It is one of the main routes linking the south west to
Sydney CBD.
The F5 Freeway extends south of the M5 Motorway from Prestons at the Cross Roads and is the principal route
serving Macarthur and the Southern Highlands. The F5 is the primary link between Canberra and Sydney and
forms part of the national highway network (RTA, 2006).
Narellan Road and Camden Valley Way form part of the arterial road network of the South West Sydney Region
providing entry and exit to the aforementioned freeways and motorways. Raby Road has undergone a recent
upgrade and is also a major road servicing this region.
The existing road network of the Northern Expansion is shown in Figure 46. The roads within and surrounding the
Project Areas include:
•
F5 – South-Western Freeway, which is a dual carriageway with lanes ranging from two to three in each
direction, and runs north to south abutting the eastern boundary of the Surface Project Area;
•
M5 – South West Motorway, which is a dual carriageway with lanes ranging from two to four lanes in each
direction and is north east of the F5;
•
Camden Valley Way, which is planned for upgrade, however, currently has one lane travelling in each
direction, and runs north to south abutting the western boundary of the Surface Project Area;
•
Northern Road – which generally has one lane in each direction running north-south to Narellan within the
Subsurface Project Area;
•
Narellan Road, which is a four to six lane divided road ranging from two to three lanes in each direction, and
runs east to west abutting the southern boundary of the Surface Project Area;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-1
AECOM
•
Denham Court Road, which has one lane in each direction running west to east abutting the northern
boundary of the Subsurface and Surface Project Area;
•
Raby Road, which generally has one lane in each direction through the Surface Project Area however
extends to two lanes either direction as it travels through Raby;
•
Campbelltown Road, which generally has two lanes in each direction within the Subsurface Project Area;
•
St Andrews Road, which travels from Varroville into the Surface Project Area with one lane in either
direction; and
•
Turner Road, a single carriageway with one lane in each direction and soon to service the future Turner
Road estate within the Surface Project Area.
Narellan Road provides an interchange with the South Western Freeway as well as a direct connection to the
Campbelltown CBD. Narellan Road joins Camden Valley Way at its western end, and provides major access into
the developing areas of Mount Annan, Narellan Vale and Currans Hill.
19.1.2
Current Road Use and Capacity
Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)
The most current RTA Traffic data for the Sydney Region (2005) has been used to provide estimates of AADT for
the abovementioned roadways within and surrounding the Surface Project Area where the majority of vehicle
movements associated with the Project would occur. A summary of the data is provided in Table 19-1 below.
Table 19-1: Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)
Station
Recording Location
1999
2002
2005 AADT
85.034
Narellan Road, MR178
Narellan – E of MR620, Camden Valley Way
30 881
32 172
32 912*
85.031
Campbelltown – W of F5, South Western Fwy
46 000
56 320
59 076*
85.035
Narellan Road, MR 178
Narellan – E of Hartley Road
40 521
45 427
49 320*
84.131
Raby Road, RR7194
St Andrews – W of MR177, Campbelltown Road
22 310
21 102
21 040
85.156
Raby Road, RR7194
Catherine Field – E of MR620, Camden Valley Way
9 822
10 704
11 850
85.010
Camden Valley Way, MR620
Catherine Field – S of Cobbitty Road
18 859
20 296
21 280
85.019
Leppington – S of Heath Road
19 428
21 023
20 820
84.127
Denham Court Road, SL4
Leppington – At Water Supply Channel
5 965
6 061
6 743
Source: RTA Traffic Data for the Sydney Region 2005
* Converted to axle pairs
As shown in Table 19-1, the majority of recording locations have experienced traffic volume increases since 1999,
likely as a result of population and industry growth in the area.
Major traffic routes can also be inferred from the AADT as can be seen along Narellan Road, stations 85.034,
85.031, and 85.035. The localised traffic generation from Smeaton Grange Industrial Park contributes significantly
to the higher volumes of traffic along Narellan Road. Narellan Road is also a major collector road for the area to
the South Western Freeway.
Camden Valley Way is a major road connecting Campbelltown and Liverpool with Camden. Traffic increases
along this route can be attributed to population growth and the number of vehicles using the route to commute to
work or travel between LGAs as well as being a B-Double route.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-2
AECOM
It should be noted that the figures provided do not include the predicted traffic generation from the new land
release areas within the region. The region has experienced an increase in urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development since the date of AADT recordings and is expected to increase further as a result of the
SWGC developments.
Small declines in traffic volume such as those from Raby Road count station (84.131) could be a result of minor
and major road upgrades or intersection upgrades. Declines could also be due to the redirection of traffic to other
servicing roads.
Lane Capacity and Level of Service
The Level of Service (LOS) provides an indication of the traffic efficiency for roads and is used as a performance
standard. The LOS provides a qualitative assessment of the quantitative effect of factors such as speed, volume
of traffic, geometric features, traffic interruptions, delays and freedom to manoeuvre. When considering a
development project, the objective is to maintain the existing LOS.
There are six LOS, as described below, from AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 2:
Roadway Capacity (AUSTROADS, 1988).
•
Level of Service A. A condition of free flow in which individual drivers are virtually unaffected by the
presence of others in the traffic stream. Freedom to select desired speeds and to manoeuvre within the
traffic stream is extremely high, and the general level of comfort and convenience provided is excellent.
•
Level of Service B. This level is in the zone of stable flow and drivers still have reasonable freedom to
select their desired speed and to manoeuvre within the traffic stream, although the general level of comfort
and convenience is little less than that of the level of Service A.
•
Level of Service C. This service level is also in the zone of stable flow, but most drivers are restricted to
some extent in their freedom to select their desired speed and to manoeuvre within the traffic stream. The
general level of comfort and convenience declines noticeably at this level.
•
Level of Service D. This level is close to the limit of stable flow but is approaching unstable flow. All drivers
are severely restricted in their freedom to select their desired speed and to manoeuvre within the traffic
stream. The general level of comfort and convenience is poor, and small increases in traffic flow will
generally cause operational problems.
•
Level of Service E. This occurs when traffic volumes are at or close to capacity and there is virtually no
freedom to select desired speeds or to manoeuvre within the traffic stream. Flow is unstable and minor
disturbances within the traffic stream will cause a traffic-jam.
•
Level of Service F. This service level is in the zone of forced flow. With it, the amount of traffic approaching
the point under consideration exceeds that which can pass it. Flow break-down occurs and queuing and
delays result.
The above descriptions characterise LOS for uninterrupted flow conditions, i.e. no interruption to traffic occurs
because of factors external to the traffic stream, such as intersection controls. Table 19-2 shows the LOS for
count stations used in this traffic assessment. For the purpose of this assessment, the 2005 AADT was used to
provide an indicative summary of the average condition of the local network.
Table 19-2: Level of Service for roadways relevant to the Northern Expansion
Station
Recording Location
2005
AADT
volume
Volume per hour
85.034
Narellan – E of MR620,
Camden Valley Way
32 912*
1 371
2-3
B
85.035
49 320*
2 469
2-3
E
85.031
Campbelltown – W of F5,
South Western Fwy
59 076*
2055
2
D
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Lanes
Level of
Service
19-3
Station
Recording Location
84.131
AECOM
2005
AADT
volume
Volume per hour
Raby Road, RR7194
St Andrews - W of MR177,
Campbelltown Road
21 040
877
2
A
Raby Road, RR7194
Catherine Field – E of MR620,
Camden Valley Way
11 850
494
1
C
Catherine Field – S of Cobbitty
Road
21 280
887
1
D
85.019
20 820
868
1
D
85.127
Leppington – At Water Supply
Channel
6 743
281
1
B
85.156
85.010
Lanes
Level of
Service
* Converted to axle pairs
Road Hierarchy Classification
The classification of roads on the existing road network can be used as an indication of the function each road
plays with respect to the volume of traffic they should appropriately carry. The RTA has developed a set of road
hierarchy classifications, detailed in Table 19-3 below, indicating typical nominal volumes expressed in terms of
average annual daily traffic (AADT) served by various classes of roads.
Table 19-3: Road hierarchy classification
Type of Road
Traffic Volume (AADT)
Peak Hour Volume (vph)
Arterial Road
> 15 000
1 500 – 5 600
Sub-Arterial Road
5 000 – 20 000
500- 2 000
Collector Road
2 000 – 10 000
250 – 1 000
Local Road
< 2 000
0 - 250
Source: RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (www.rta.nsw.gov.au)
Using the road hierarchy classification (Table 19-3) and AADT data (Table 19-1) for identified roadways, along
with information gained through consultation with relevant local government authorities, the classification of
roadways to be utilised to access the Surface Project Area during the construction and operation phases of the
Project are provided in Table 19-4 below.
Table 19-4: Roadway Classification
Station
Recording Location
2005 AADT
85.034
Narellan – E of MR620, Camden Valley
Way
32 912*
85.035
49 320*
85.031
Campbelltown – W of F5, South
Western Fwy
59 076*
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Classification
Council Authority
Arterial Road
Camden
Arterial Road
Camden
Arterial Road
Campbelltown
19-4
AECOM
Station
Recording Location
2005 AADT
84.131
Raby Road, RR7194
St Andrews - W of MR177,
Campbelltown Road
21 040
Raby Road, RR7194
Catherine Field – E of MR620, Camden
Valley Way
11 850
85.010
Catherine Field – S of Cobbitty Road
21 280
85.019
20 820
85.127
Leppington – At Water Supply Channel
6 743
85.156
Classification
Council Authority
Arterial Road
Campbelltown
Sub-Arterial Road
Camden
Arterial Road
Camden
Arterial Road
Camden
Collector Road
Camden
* converted to axle pairs
As is shown in Table 19-4 above, the majority of AADT data identifies a major arterial road network surrounding
the Surface Project Area. No AADT data is available for the minor roads servicing the area, however, it is
assumed that they range from a local classification to collector roads. These include St Andrews Road and Turner
Road, as well as other Council managed roadways.
Assessment of Intersection Function
The Camden Valley Way / St Andrews Road intersection is planned to undergo upgrade as part of the RTA’s
Camden Valley Way Upgrade Project. As part of preliminary investigations for this EA, an investigation of the
intersection performance during the existing peak hours of the St Andrews Road / Camden Valley Way
intersection was undertaken in order to assess potential impacts from the Project (AECOM 2009, unpublished
report).
A traffic count survey was conducted on Tuesday 24 November 2009 at Camden Valley Way / St Andrews Road
intersection, in order to gather traffic volume currently using the intersection during the morning and evening peak
periods.
‘Light’ (LV) and ‘Heavy’ (HV) vehicles were counted separately during the survey for analysis purposes. Observed
morning and evening peak period flows are detailed in Figure 48. It was observed that the morning peak hour for
the intersection is from 07:45 - 08:45 and from 16:00 – 17:00 in the evening peak.
According to RTA Guidelines for Traffic Generating Developments (RTA, 2002), signals can be considered to
operate at a satisfactorily level if they operate between LOS A through LOS D during peak periods.
The intersection of Camden Valley Way / St Andrews Road currently operates as a give-way intersection.
Camden Valley Way is a two-lane, two-way arterial road while St Andrews Road is a local. Table 19-5 details the
results from the analysis for morning and evening peak periods respectively.
Table 19-5: Peak intersection performance summary
Approach
Degree of
Saturation
Level of Service
(LoS)
Average Delay
(sec)
95% Back of
Queue (m)
AM Peak intersection performance summary
CVW (south)
0.73
A
13.7
150
CVW (north)
0.33
A
0
0
St Andrews Road
0.06
C
40.5
2
PM Peak intersection performance summary
CVW (south)
0.34
C
28.9
99
CVW (north)
0.68
A
0
0
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-5
AECOM
Approach
Degree of
Saturation
Level of Service
(LoS)
Average Delay
(sec)
95% Back of
Queue (m)
St Andrews Road
0.04
E
67.1
1
CVW = Camden Valley Way
It was observed that traffic on Camden Valley Way is of a ‘tidal’ nature with heavier flows northbound on Camden
Valley Way (towards the city) in the morning peak and southbound (away from city) in the evening peak period.
Results indicate significant queuing on the Camden Valley Way (south) leg of the intersection, which is in line with
on-site observations.
Results show significant delay experienced by vehicles turning from St Andrews Road into Camden Valley Way.
The delay is an effect of the heavy through traffic movement on Camden Valley Way and lack of gaps in the traffic
for the vehicles exiting to negotiate a turning movement. It should be noted that the delay only applies to a very
low traffic flow on St Andrews Road, which is also reflected in the low degree of saturation for this approach. The
lack of critical gaps in the southbound through movement also leads to some delay for northbound right turning
traffic from Camden Valley Way into St Andrews Road. From site observations during the evening peak,
southbound traffic on Camden Valley Way experiences delay due to downstream traffic at intersections further
south. The slow moving queue provides gaps for traffic exiting St Andrews Road, with drivers allowing vehicles to
exit across the queue or enter the queue. Therefore, the theoretical delay values indicated by the modelling are
higher than what would be actually be experienced by vehicles exiting St Andrews Road, and are thus considered
conservative.
B-Double Routes
The main roads utilised by B-Doubles immediate to the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas are the South
Western Freeway, Narellan Road, Campbelltown Road, the Camden Valley Way and Camden Bypass to South
Camden. Smeaton Grange Industrial Area lies within a B-Double approved zone and would generate a large
proportion of the heavy vehicle traffic on Narellan Road.
19.1.3
Other Transportation Routes
Bus Routes
Within the Macarthur Region, Busways provides the majority of suburban services which covers a large part of
South-West Sydney including Campbelltown, Narellan, and Camden. Busways routes within and surrounding the
Project Area provide transport to the suburbs of Currans Hill, Smeaton Grange, Harrington Park, Catherine Field,
Blair Athol, Claymore, Eagle Vale and Kearns.
The Busabout company is a smaller service which provides transport through the Project Areas, namely the
Catherine Field to Minto route which runs all the way along Raby Road.
Narellan Road was identified as a Strategic Bus Corridor with aims to reduce traffic congestion along this route.
Both infrastructure and technological solutions have been implemented to improve the average bus speed and
bus priority within the local area.
South Railway Line
The main railway line servicing the area within and surrounding the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas is the
South Line which travels from Sydney CBD to Campbelltown. It runs generally parallel and east of the F5
Freeway and connects to some suburban bus routes (previously mentioned). The main railway stations for this
area include those from Campbelltown in the south up to Glenfield in the north.
19.2
Future Development
19.2.1
South West Rail Link
The South West Rail Link (SWRL) has been proposed to meet the needs of the SWGC which is further discussed
in Section 19.2.2.
The SWRL, typically an extension of the South Line, is a proposed new 13 km twin track passenger rail line from
Glenfield to Leppington via Edmondson Park. It includes two new stations at Edmondson Park and Leppington, an
upgrade to Glenfield Station and new train stabling facility west of Leppington. This is located to the north of the
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-6
AECOM
Project Area and would benefit residents from the East Leppington Precinct within the Surface Project Area, as
part of the SWGC.
Initially, the State Government had not yet provided timeframes for the finalisation of the SWRL. In 2008, the
NSW Premier revealed that only stage one of the SWRL project, the upgrade of Glenfield Station, would proceed
given budgetary constraints. However, in November 2009 it was announced by the NSW Premier that stage two,
the construction of the rail line from Glenfield to Leppington including two new train stations, would also be
undertaken and will commence construction in mid 2010 for completion in 2016.
19.2.2
Development Areas
The LOS of the existing roadways in the Project Areas are likely to be affected by the proposed new release
areas within the region. Release areas known as the Turner Road and East Leppington Precincts or Development
Areas are within the Surface Project Area, and Leppington, Catherine Fields and Catherine Fields North are within
the Subsurface Project Area. These are five of eighteen areas in the Sydney’s southwest committed for release,
with the remaining development areas located outside the Subsurface Project Area. Two Council Development
Areas are also located within the Surface Project Area as described in Chapter 8.
The development of the new release areas has the potential to create over an additional 9,000 dwellings within
the Surface Project Area alone (refer Table 8-1). The resultant increase in private vehicles within the Surface
Project Area could therefore be in the order of 10 000 vehicles. It is anticipated that the subsequent increase in
vehicle movements on local roads within and surrounding the Subsurface and Surface Project Area would
generate a need for improved road services in the medium to long term.
The M5, Camden Valley Way and Narellan Road, are moving towards reaching capacity (see Table 19-2) as
traffic demand in the area increases. Even with planned public transport corridors (such as the SWRL), the arterial
road network will need to be upgraded and extended to serve the SWGC. Planned upgrades include bus priority
measures to facilitate the operation of the Strategic Bus Corridors.
Several roads have already undergone road carriageway upgrades and/or intersection upgrades to cope with
future volume increases in traffic, including as Raby Road and Narellan Road. New roads would also be
developed within the Project Areas as part of the future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development within the identified Development Areas.
19.2.3
Road Upgrades
Camden Valley Way Upgrade and Access Strategy
The upgrade of Camden Valley Way is a State Government initiative to provide a safe and efficient vehicle route
through the south west sector where major residential growth is planned (RTA, 2009).
The Camden Valley Way is a major arterial road linking Liverpool, Camden, Narellan and Harrington Park.
Currently, up to 40,000 vehicles per day travel on Camden Valley Way through the south west sector (RTA,
2009). With development of the SWGC progressing, it is required that the Camden Valley Way be upgraded in
order to increase its capacity due to the predicted traffic increases from the future development areas.
The Camden Valley Way is to be widened from a two lane road to a four lane divided road between the
Cowpasture Road intersection at Horningsea Park and the Narellan Road intersection at Narellan, nearly all of
which borders/defines the north-west boundary of the Surface Project Area.
The 14km length of road will be upgraded in stages to reflect the development of the SWGC, with the first stage
being from Narellan Road to Cobbitty Road to tie-in with the development of the Turner Road area. Twelve
signalised intersections are proposed for the length of the route, spaced about 1km apart. This part of the upgrade
also includes implementing a four way traffic signal at Raby Road and the St Andrews Road intersection, which
borders the Surface Project Area. The upgrade to St Andrews Road intersection (Figure 47) is part of this staged
approach, which is expected to commence in late 2010.
With the future upgrade of the Camden Valley Way / St Andrews Road intersection, the whole operation of the
intersection would be altered. As part of this EA, an investigation of the intersection performance during the
existing peak hours of the St Andrews Road / Camden Valley Way intersection was undertaken in order to assess
potential impacts from the Project which are discussed in Section 19.3.
Other intersections may be added to the route once adjacent future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
developments are finalised.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-7
AECOM
F5/M5 Upgrade
The F5 Freeway between Narellan Road and Brooks Road has recently undergone an upgrade with works being
completed in early 2009. Future works of this section of the freeway would border the Surface Project Area.
Works currently under construction/tender on the F5 freeway and affecting the Surface Project Area include the
following:
•
Brooks Road to Raby Road (widening from four lanes to eight lanes); and
•
Raby Road to Narellan Road (widening from four lanes to six lanes).
The 11km length of road to be upgraded commenced work in January 2009 is expected to be continued
progressively and be complete by 2011. The works aim to improve travel times for local and long-distance traffic
by alleviating congestion by adding extra lanes to improve traffic flow. The works also aim to meet the needs of
the SWGC and aid travel to employment areas for commuters.
Council Traffic Plans
As part of the Infrastructure Plan for the South West Sector, Campbelltown City Council has identified a number of
existing potential traffic stress points that are likely to or may require works in order to accommodate growth in
traffic resulting from future development. The roads identified by the Council that are in the vicinity of the Project
Areas include the M5/F5 leading to Liverpool, and Campbelltown Road at Raby Road and St Andrews Road.
In order to examine traffic issues, Campbelltown Council is developing a traffic model that will allow future traffic
demands to be quantified and implications of possible improvement options to be assessed.
There will also be significantly increased traffic demand on other cross regional links that connect the SWGC to
the existing urban areas of Campbelltown and Liverpool, such as Badgally Road, Raby Road and Denham Court
Road. It is proposed in the Growth Centre Infrastructure Plan (GCC, 2006) for the South West Sector that the
cross regional roads would be upgraded as collector roads.
New Roads
Plans have also been made for a new four lane road linking Campbelltown to Camden via St Gregory’s College.
This would be an alternative to alleviate traffic along Narellan Road. It is proposed to begin at the Camden Valley
Way, pass through the future suburb of Gregory Hills (Turner Road estate), and will join the existing end of
Badgally Road.
Construction of the future Badgally Road from the Camden Valley Way began in 2009.
19.3
Potential Impacts
Access to the well surface locations would be along existing public roads and private tracks within the relevant
property boundary. Emergency access would be from the eastern side of the canal to the site and would only be
utilised where necessary and once the emergency response procedure has been implemented.
Earthworks may be required to construct or upgrade access roads to new well surface locations to enable
sufficient access to the sites. Where practicable, existing road and track access would be utilised to minimise
construction activity and environmental disturbance.
The location of proposed access roads would be adapted in consideration of the construction of new roads
resulting from the SWGC developments, if required.
Proposed access roads are depicted in Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10. Private roads and tracks used during operations
would be returned to their previous state, or to a condition agreed by the landholder.
The RTA has development plans for the intersection of Camden Valley Way and St Andrews Road. There are
also plans to upgrade St Andrews Road as part of the East Leppington development.
The Project would result in additional vehicles, including vehicles and transport machinery and personnel to and
from well surface locations with the most significant impact being through the construction phase of the Project.
The production and post development phases of the Project would result in intermittent vehicle activity associated
with maintenance and testing and re-fracture stimulation of wells. Similarly, the closure and final rehabilitation
phase of the Project would result in some additional vehicle movements over a relatively short period of time. In
this way, potential impacts relative to the construction and final rehabilitation and closure of the Project are
temporary and are therefore unlikely to result in any long term impacts on the traffic of the area.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-8
19.3.1
AECOM
Construction
Gas Gathering Line Construction
Parts of the gas gathering line may need to be installed adjacent to roadways, within the road reserve, which may
result in temporary disruptions to traffic flows. These works would be undertaken in consultation with the RTA or
Council, out of peak traffic times and would be conducted under traffic conditions described in traffic control plans,
thereby minimising impacts to road users.
The construction of gas gathering lines requires excavators, graders and chain trenchers to be transported to site
on semi trailers and prime movers. Some gas gathering lines may also require the under-boring of some
roadways. In such circumstances, traffic management measures, such as Traffic Control Plans, would be
implemented to minimise disruption to traffic flows and ensure the safety of the public.
A secondary impact as a result of the construction of the well surface locations would be the installation of gas
gathering lines to connect with the existing gathering system within parts of the road reserve. The gas gathering
lines would extend from the individual well surface locations to interconnect with existing low pressure gas
gathering lines. This would involve trenching adjacent to roadways which may result in temporary disruptions to
traffic flows. These works would be undertaken out of peak traffic times and would be conducted under controlled
traffic conditions minimising impacts to road users.
The RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments identifies that development related to chemical, petroleum
and coal products generate low employee density and low commercial vehicle generation rates (RTA, 2002).
Additional traffic generated by the proposed construction of the well surface locations is dependent on the
particular phase of construction being undertaken.
The construction works have the potential to impact on roadways and access ways through following:
•
Increase in vehicles;
•
The need for additional access ways; and
•
Requirements for manoeuvring within the proposed work areas.
The construction and drilling works proposed would be undertaken at each individual surface location with only
relevant equipment for that activity required to be transported and therefore impacting on traffic. Equipment and
machinery to be transported during construction would include a drill rig, mud pumps, generators, equipment,
casing and tubing for up to six wells, demountable buildings, water trucks to transport water from location to
location and personnel vehicles. This worst case assessment indicates that other drilling scenarios would reduce
the quantity of vehicle movements and some of the equipment required for the constriction works of the surface
well locations.
Water Trucks
In addition to vehicle movements on local roads, the Project may also result in increased vehicles in some
paddock areas and along property access roads for some period during the construction phase as a result of
water transfer movements.
Water movement data for three wells within the Menangle Park well field were used to approximate likely water
truck movements for the Northern Expansion.
Water movements within the first quarter of 2009 (including April, May and June) were approximately 5 truck
movements per week on average (including weekends), and 2 truck movements per week on average (including
weekends) within the second quarter of 2009 (July, August and September).
A conservative approach therefore would estimate 5 water truck movements per week for the purposes of this EA.
This is not expected to significantly impact on the locality given the temporary nature of the activities and current
land use within the Project Areas.
Heavy Vehicles
During construction activities machinery would be generally maintained on-site for the duration of the works
resulting in two major heavy vehicle movement cycles (one for the machinery to come in and one to take the
machinery out). Other loads and shift changes have also been considered in construction traffic and are likely to
be in the order of an additional ten light vehicle movements.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-9
AECOM
Given the indicative number of heavy vehicles operating on roads within the locality the increase in heavy vehicles
resultant from the proposed works is not considered to be a significant increase. The heavy vehicle movements
would be restricted to two main movement cycles as noted above. The increase in vehicles can be
accommodated within the existing capacity of the roads and it is not anticipated that significant adverse impacts
on traffic flows in the locality would result.
Impact on intersections
An assessment of the Camden Valley Way / St Andrews Rd intersection was undertaken as part of the
preliminary investigations for this EA (AECOM, 2009, unpublished report). The assessment concluded some
increase in vehicle volumes may be expected as a result of the construction phase of the Project, however, due to
the transient nature of this phase it is expected impacts on road capacity would be minimal in the long term.
It should be noted that the estimated number of vehicles expected to access and egress the Upper Canal access
road via this intersection (during construction and future operational periods) has changed since the 2009
assessment. Traffic impacts would be minimal, with significantly less traffic movements expected than the
previously predicted.
The AGL Traffic Management Sub Plan (TMSP) would provide safeguards to ensure LOS and adequate
intersection function is maintained.
19.3.2
Production
Traffic movements during the production phase of the Project would be associated with the general maintenance
and monitoring of the well surface locations, however, the well heads would have the capacity to be controlled
remotely, reducing the need for vehicle access. Should vehicles be required during the production phase for
monitoring and basic maintenance, it would primarily involve a single vehicle making multiple site visits in a single
trip as required and with permission from the landowner. The impact of this single vehicle would be negligible to
the overall distribution of traffic and therefore has not been further addressed.
During major maintenance or work over, vehicles including a work over rig and equipment vehicles would be
required during these works, however, they would be limited to single movements to and from the site, remaining
onsite during the proposed activity.
Continuous staffing would not be required at the individual well surface locations with the production monitored
remotely, therefore minimising the daily traffic required for the operation of the proposed well surface locations.
19.3.3
Post Development
Traffic increases during the post development phase would be would be based on site specific needs and
conditions and would include re-fracture stimulation operations.
Re-fracture stimulation and compression works would result in the greatest impacts during the post development
phase. Vehicles including a rig and equipment vehicles and light vehicles would be required during these works,
however, they would be limited to single movements to and from the site, remaining onsite during the proposed
activity. Additionally, the twinning of gas gathering lines would occur within the road reserve.
It is anticipated that at the time of these works the locality would have experienced an altered traffic regime due to
urban expansion and associated road upgrades. The road upgrades and network modification is expected to
result in improved traffic regulation and provide additional carriage ways for vehicle transport.
Given the above modifications to the existing traffic regime, the likely increase in traffic flow of the locality and the
minor infrequent and temporary nature of vehicle movements associated with this phase of development, it is
considered unlikely that the post development works would adversely affect traffic flows in the local area.
19.3.4
Closure of the well surface location would be undertaken at the end of the production life of the well, which is
approximately 15 years. Based on the program for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development, it is likely that residential development would be located in proximity to individual well surface
locations and as such an improved urban road network would exist in the area to accommodate the increase in
vehicle movements in the locality.
Traffic generation anticipated from the proposed closure and final rehabilitation of well surface locations is likely to
include light vehicles and trucks. The movements of these vehicles are likely to be site specific based on the
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-10
AECOM
required levels of works at each individual location. It is generally anticipated that two main daily movements
would occur, once to the site and once from the site, for the duration of works.
These vehicles are expected to utilise the upgraded road network of the proposed urban (residential, commercial
and industrial) development in the locality. It is not anticipated that the vehicles required for the closure of wells
and rehabilitation of the site would have adverse impacts on traffic in the locality. On this basis, the increase in
vehicle movements during this phase of development would be finite and temporary, ceasing upon completion of
the rehabilitation works.
19.3.5
Summary of Potential Impacts on Camden Valley Way
Public roads anticipated to be utilised for access include those listed in Section 19.1 including Raby Road, St
Andrews Road, Badgally Road, Narellan Road, Campbelltown Road, Denham Court Road and Camden Valley
Way. Private roads to be utilised for access are shown on the proposed plans (Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10).
The majority of these roads currently network with the Camden Valley Way. A traffic assessment has been
undertaken as part of the EA and has concluded that contribution to traffic within the existing road network
(including Camden Valley Way) would be negligible.
Access to the Upper Canal maintenance track may require use of the St Andrews Rd / Camden Valley Way
intersection. It should be noted that the RTA is planning on upgrading Camden Valley Way between Cowpasture
Road and Narellan Road, which includes the Camden Valley Way / St Andrews intersection. St Andrews Road is
to become a future collector road to the Catherine Field precinct, with the intersection upgraded to a four way
intersection with traffic lights. It is in the planning stage at the moment, with no confirmed commencement of
construction date. With the future upgrade, the whole operation of the intersection would be altered and the small
numbers predicted for the future operational stage of the project (light vehicles for maintenance work only) would
have a minimal impact.
19.4
The following mitigation measures would be implemented to minimise potential impacts on the traffic and
transport of the Northern Expansion. The existing AGL Traffic Management Sub Plan (TMSP) would manage
potential impacts that may arise as a result of the Northern Expansion. Other management methods specific to
the Northern Expansion would be added to the plan if required, and would comply with all road rules implemented
by the RTA.
19.4.1
Construction
The construction phase of the Project would result in potential impacts on traffic due to the influx of machinery and
vehicles to well surface locations and gas gathering lines. Mitigation measures for this phase include:
•
The existing TMSP would be revised/updated where necessary to reflect the Northern Expansion Project
and would be applied to works within the Surface Project Area including traffic management proposed for
well surface locations and/ or gathering line construction as appropriate;
•
Consultation would be undertaken with landowners likely to be affected by construction associated activities
(including the use of access roads) prior to any construction works occurring;
•
Construction traffic would avoid peak hour periods, where possible.
•
Unnecessary vehicle movements would be minimised where possible;
•
Appropriate notification of potential roadway disruptions would be displayed/ issued in advance to road users
and local residents;
•
Vehicle operators would be advised of designated access routes and roadways. These specific routes would
be used to access sites to minimise potential impacts on larger areas of the locality;
•
Transportation of equipment and machinery that are oversized loads would be undertaken outside standard
work hours, and would be timed to avoid peak traffic flows, wherever possible;
•
All works undertaken in proximity to roadways would be conducted under controlled traffic conditions; and
•
Consultation would be undertaken with the RTA to confirm the schedule of the proposed works and ensure
they do not overlap with RTA planned works (such as the future Badgally Road connection and upgrade of
the Camden Valley Way and associated intersections)..
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-11
19.4.2
AECOM
Production
It is unlikely that the production phase of the Project would have significant impacts on traffic, however,
maintenance or workover during production may be required and therefore potentially increase traffic in some
areas. In the event this was to occur, mitigation measures would be implemented those mentioned in
Section 19.4.1 as appropriate.
19.4.3
Post development
Mitigation measures for the post development phase include:
•
Transport routes for equipment and machinery would be reviewed, considering updated road alignments, to
strategise a route of minimal impact.
•
Monitoring and reporting as described in the TMSP in the existing EMS.
19.4.4
Mitigation measures for the closure and final rehabilitation include:
•
Vehicle movements would be minimised to reduce the potential to impact on traffic within the locality;
•
Vehicle movements would cease post-closure after the Project has been rehabilitated therefore negating any
continued impact on traffic; and
•
Transport routes for equipment and machinery would be reviewed, considering updated road alignments, to
strategise a route of minimal impact.
19.5
Conclusion
The Subsurface and Surface Project Areas comprise several major roads that service the vicinity, including the
F5, Camden Valley Way, Narellan Road and Raby Road. It is proposed that the proposed Northern Expansion
utilise the existing road network to access well surface locations and construct gas gathering lines.
The proposed works is likely to result in a minor increase in traffic volumes for short periods of time. Given the
generally minor and temporary nature of these impacts, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable
in terms of traffic and transport.
As urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development proceeds within the locality and new roads are
provided, requirements for, and location of access roads may vary. The Proponent would work with this to adapt
to the evolving nature of road development and access provision in the locality.
The traffic and transport impacts associated with the proposed development are negligible when considering:
•
The existing and future traffic situation;
•
The relatively minor increase in additional vehicles; and
•
The temporary and relatively short term duration of vehicle related activities.
•
The overall impact on traffic and transportation as a result of the Northern Expansion is unlikely to be
significant.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
19-12
20.0
AECOM
Social and Economic
The existing social and economic environment of the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas include parts of the
Camden and Campbelltown LGAs. The area has been identified as part of the SWGC and the demographics of
this area are therefore likely to experience significant growth and change as development of targeted areas
progress. The existing community and economic environment within and surrounding the Project Areas are
discussed in the following sections and consideration is given to the characteristics of the future socio-economic
environment of the area. The potential impacts of the proposed Northern Expansion upon both the existing and
future predicted social and economic profile of the area is discussed including the maximisation of potential
opportunities to contribute positively to the economic base of the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs and more
broadly, the State.
20.1
Community Profile
20.1.1
Camden LGA
Background
Located in the south west of Sydney, Camden LGA is bounded to the east by Campbelltown LGA, Liverpool LGA
to the north and Wollondilly LGA to the south and west. Camden LGA has a total land area of some 201 km2 and
comprises a mix of agricultural lands, country towns and new residential areas with associated commercial and
industrial developments. Camden is renowned for its significance in the origins of Australia’s wool industry and is
commonly referred to as the “Birthplace of the Wealth of the Nation” (Camden Council, 2008).
Demographics
Camden LGA has experienced rapid growth since 1981 with an annual growth rate of approximately 7.8%
(Camden Council, 2008). Due to the future development of release areas, it is expected that Camden LGA will
continue to experience significant growth.
ABS 2006 Census data for population characteristics of Camden are shown in Table 20-1 against the NSW
average. Camden has a relatively younger population of people in the community than the NSW average with a
higher percentage population of people under 54, and fewer mature and aged adults over 54. The median age is
significantly lower at 32 years of age compared to the NSW average of 37.
Table 20-1: Social summary for Camden LGA (2006 Census)
Characteristic
Camden
NSW Average
No. of persons
% of persons
No. of persons
% of persons
Infants (0-4)
4,234
8.5
420,434
6.4
Children (5-14)
8,453
17
878,483
13.4
Young Adults (15-24)
6,695
13.5
871,714
13.3
Adults (25-54)
21,687
43.7
2,753,218
42.0
Mature Adults (55-64)
4,355
8.8
719,551
11.0
Aged (65+)
4,223
8.5
905,778
13.8
Population (total)
49,645
Median age of persons
6,549,177
32
37
th
th
Camden LGA achieved a State Rank (2007-2008) of 8 for fastest growth in NSW, and 24 for the largest growth out of 152
LGAs in NSW (ABS, 2009).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-1
20.1.2
AECOM
Campbelltown LGA
Background
Campbelltown LGA is located in Sydney’s outer south west and is bounded by Liverpool LGA to the north,
Sutherland and Wollongong LGAs to the east, Wollondilly LGA to the south and Camden LGA to the west.
2
Campbelltown LGA has an area of some 311.5 km and comprises largely rural residential lands, with some
higher density residential and employment areas near the city centre (Campbelltown City Council, 2008).
Demographics
Overall, Campbelltown LGA experienced a slight increase in population between 1996 and 2001 however, many
of the smaller areas within the LGA experienced population decline during this period (Campbelltown City Council,
2008).
ABS 2006 Census data for the population characteristics of Campbelltown are shown in Table 20-2 against the
NSW average. Campbelltown is similar in age spread to Camden with a relatively younger population of people in
the community than the NSW average and a higher percentage of the population aged under 54. The median age
is also 32 years of age, notably lower than the NSW average of 37.
Table 20-2: Social summary for Campbelltown LGA (2006 Census)
Characteristic
Campbelltown
No. of persons
NSW Average
% of persons
No. of persons
% of persons
Infants (0-4)
10,657
7.4
420,434
6.4
Children (5-14)
23,363
16.3
878,483
13.4
Young Adults (15-24)
23,735
16.6
871,714
13.3
Adults (25-54)
60,240
42.1
2,753,218
42.0
Mature Adults (55-64)
14,471
10.1
719,551
11.0
Aged (65+)
10,609
7.4
905,778
13.8
Population (total)
143,076
6,549,177
32
37
Median age of persons
Campbelltown LGA achieved a State Rank (2007-2008) of 69th for fastest growth in NSW, and 31st for the largest
growth (ABS, 2009).
20.1.3
Population Growth in the South West
With the planning of precincts within and surrounding the Project Areas it is becoming increasingly important for
the CGP to consider population growth and future land use in the south west. The patterns of population change
within the relevant LGAs thus far are shown in Table 20-3 below.
Table 20-3: Population and Growth Change of LGAs within the Project Area (ABS, 2009)
Change
Year
LGA
200308
200708
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
%
%
Camden
47 500
48 790
49 287
50 335
50 950
52 260
53 394
1.8
2.2
Campbelltown
150 077
149 692
148 497
147 992
147 177
148 089
149 071
-0.1
0.7
0.9
1.1
Total NSW
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-2
AECOM
The Northern Expansion encounters land ear-marked for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development and as such is likely to experience a change from a rural to an urban environment. The future
population projections for the area have also been considered.
The NSW Statistical Local Area Population Projections 2001 – 2031 (first released in 2004 and updated in 2005)
issued by DIPNR (now DoP) outlines the projected future population of NSW as a whole as well as Sydney
Statistical Local Areas (SLA). The report has taken into consideration capacity identified in future urban
(residential, commercial and industrial) development areas in calculating these predictions. The population
projections for the areas relevant to the Northern Expansion are shown in Table 20-4.
Table 20-4: Population Projections of SLAs* within the Project Area 2001-2031
LGA
Population
2001
Average Annual
Growth (%)
2031
Average Total
Growth (%)
Camden
45450
134010
3.7
1.9
Campbelltown
150150
181440
0.6
0.2
* Statistical Local Area
The NSW State and Regional Population Projections, 2006-2036 (DoP, 2008) projects an approximate 40 %
population increase for the whole of Sydney, from 4,282,000 in 2006 to 5,982,000 by 2036.
20.2
Economic Profile
20.2.1
Employment
Employment data from the ABS 2006 census is provided in Table 20-5 below. Data shows that employment rates
are comparable across the two LGAs and the State with differences in unemployment levels that may be
attributed to the number of people within each LGA workforce.
Table 20-5: Employment data for Project Area LGAs from 2006 ABS census
Employment Status
Camden LGA
No. of persons
%
Campbelltown LGA
NSW
No. of persons
No. of persons
%
%
Full time
16572
64.4
42973
62.9
1879631
60.8
Part time
6698
26.0
16029
23.5
842714
27.2
Employed Away*
780
3.0
2121
3.1
103522
3.3
Employed Not stated
704
2.7
2134
3.1
83576
2.7
24754
96.1
63257
92.5
2909443
94.1
Employed (total)
Unemployed (total)
997
3.9
5093
7.5
183157
5.9
Persons employed but away from work
Note: Total Labour Force, Camden (25,751); Campbelltown (68,350); NSW (3,092,600).
Employment data across the LGAs and the State are comparable, with Camden exhibiting lower unemployment
rates than the state average and greater full time employment rates. Campbelltown exhibits higher unemployment
rates however still maintains other employment rates similar to the State.
Personal Income
Personal income data for Camden and Campbelltown is provided in Table 20-6 below demonstrating that income
in the Camden area is generally higher than that of the NSW average. Median individual, household, and family
income in the Camden LGA is higher than the State average as well as neighbouring Campbelltown.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-3
AECOM
Table 20-6: Personal Income data for Project Area LGAs from 2006 ABS census
Income
Camden
Campbelltown
NSW
Median individual income
($/weekly)
566
464
461
Median household income
($/weekly)
1353
1066
1036
Median family income
($/weekly)
1465
1156
1181
Economic Structure
The economic structure of the community within the Project Area is diverse with the highest employment being in
the manufacturing and retail trades with mining and the electricity, gas and water supply sectors being some 1%
of the workforce population (refer to Table 20-7).
Table 20-7: Employment distribution (%) based on ABS 2006 census
Sector
Camden
Campbelltown
NSW
Agriculture, forestry & fishing
1.34
0.28
2.70
Mining
0.41
0.15
0.70
Manufacturing
12.43
15.22
9.55
Electricity, gas, water & waste services
1.20
0.97
1.00
Construction
9.56
7.09
7.31
Wholesale trade
5.34
5.23
4.70
Retail trade
12.06
11.64
11.13
Accommodation & food services
4.68
5.63
6.55
Transport, postal & warehousing
7.43
8.38
5.00
Information media & telecommunications
1.26
1.77
2.37
Financial & insurance services
3.89
4.55
4.98
Rental, hiring & real estate services
2.00
1.59
1.74
Professional, scientific & technical services
4.71
4.60
7.33
Administrative & support services
2.46
3.31
3.11
Public administration & safety
6.28
6.21
6.01
Education & training
8.46
6.58
7.55
Health care & social assistance
8.73
9.10
10.46
Arts & recreation services
1.18
1.11
1.36
Other services
4.28
3.74
3.78
Not stated
2.29
2.85
2.65
Total
100
100
100
Significant differences across the employment sectors occur in Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing with Camden
LGA considerably higher than Campbelltown, however both LGAs exhibit less employment in these sectors than
the NSW average.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-4
20.2.2
AECOM
The Gas Industry
Industry Sector
Most natural gas is delivered to industrial, commercial and residential consumers through a supply chain involving
four major sectors: production, transmission, distribution and retailing. The CGP is part of the upstream gas
production industry which includes the exploration for and extraction of raw natural gas from the coal seam. The
raw gas is then processed into pipeline quality gas for the domestic market.
The Gas Market
Natural gas consumption in Australia has been continually increasing since the mid–1960s with Australian gas
consumption in 2005-06 being some 1,184.6 PJ.
According to statistics provided by ABARE (2009), natural gas constituted around 22% of energy consumed in
NSW in the 2007-2008 period. Most of NSW’s supply is currently provided from the Cooper Basin in South
Australia via the Moomba to Sydney pipeline. In 2000, the Eastern Gas Pipeline was completed, which runs up
the New South Wales east coast from the landfall of the Bass Strait fields at Longford (Victoria), and provides an
alternative source of gas primarily to the Sydney industrial market.
Energy produced from coal seam gas generates 55% less greenhouse emissions than conventional coal
electricity generation. The CGP is already a substantial indigenous gas supply to the NSW energy market. As
NSW currently relies heavily on imported gas from Bass Strait in Victoria and Moomba in South Australia, the
opportunity exists for the CGP to provide greater security of gas supply in times of interstate disruption.
Projected Demand for Natural Gas
Gas is being increasingly relied upon as a fuel source for power generation during peak demand periods.
Additionally, with natural gas seen as the cleanest and most environmentally acceptable of the fossil fuels, and
the recent push for more environmentally friendly forms of energy, the demand for natural gas is expected to
increase substantially into the future.
Growth in domestic use of natural gas is projected to remain strong (growing at 4.0 % per annum in the medium
term to 2010–11 and thereafter at 2.5 % per annum) to reach 1,740 PJ in 2019–20 (Roarty, 2008). ABARE (2008,
as cited by APIA, 2009) predicts that consumption of natural gas in Australia will increase to approximately
2000PJ per year by 2029/30, at an average annual growth rate of 2.5%. Based upon these predictions, and if
production of natural gas is unable to meet consumption demand, it is anticipated that there will be a shortfall of
natural gas within the next few years with subsequent pressures on suppliers and prices.
Royalties
The majority of mineral assets within NSW, including petroleum and gas, are owned by the Crown, or in other
words the people of NSW, and therefore, royalties are payable to the Crown to transfer the rights to extract a
mineral resource. The price paid for mineral royalties had progressively increased up to 2007-08 with the royalty
revenue experiencing $573 million paid as a result of substantially higher coal and mineral prices. Of this,
approximately 90% was from coal and 10% from other minerals. Royalty revenue increased significantly in 200405 following the introduction of an ‘ad valorem’ royalty regime for coal. (http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/minerals).
Royalty rates are governed through the PO Act, specifically clause 85 which states:
“The royalty is payable at the rate for the time being prescribed by the regulations (being not more
than 10 per cent of the value at the well-head of the petroleum) unless the holder of the title, in his
or her application for the title, nominated a higher rate, in which case royalty is payable at that
higher rate.”
The Petroleum (Onshore) Regulation 2002 Part 7 – Royalty, Clause 22 defines the prescribed annual rate of
royalty for the purposes of section 85 (2) of the PO Act, as follows:
•
for the first 5 years of commercial production—nil,
•
for the 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th years of commercial production—6%, 7%, 8% and 9%, respectively, of the value
at the well-head of the petroleum,
•
for the 10th and subsequent years of commercial production—10% of the value at the well-head of the
petroleum
•
Royalties would be payable to the State with respect to the Northern Expansion in accordance with the
provisions of the PO Act and Regulation.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-5
20.2.3
AECOM
The CGP
The CGP currently employs 37 full time staff and would employ contractors as needed to complete the
construction phase of the Northern Expansion. Once construction is complete, the Northern Expansion would
continue to utilise the existing 37 full time staff.
Contractors would be ideally employed from the local area and would provide social and economic benefits to the
local community. Direct and indirect flow on effects have been discussed in Section 20.3.
20.3
Potential Impacts
20.3.1
Social
The Northern Expansion will provide a social benefit through the provision of gas to an already constrained NSW
gas market. The extraction of gas as part of the CGP maintains the current supply and ensures security of supply
to future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development in the local area and in the State. Natural gas
(including CSM) produces around 55% of greenhouse gas emission per gigajoule of energy relative to coal,
making it the cleanest fossil fuel. A competitively priced gas supply from the Northern Expansion would further
reduce reliance on more greenhouse intensive fuels, which is in accordance with the principles of the Building
Sustainability Index (BASIX) for new developments.
The proposed future development of urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development areas would alter
the existing social characteristics of the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs through the introduction of a new
population. The assessment of potential social impacts as a result of the proposed Northern Expansion has taken
this future development into account based on information currently in the public arena and available from Council
and landowners.
The potential social impacts of the Project relate largely to impacts on general amenity such as visual, noise and
traffic impacts as well as hazard and risk and land use impacts. These potential impacts would be largely related
to the construction phase and are discussed in detail in Chapters 8, 10, 13, 17 and 19 of the EA. A range of
mitigation measures have been recommended and would be implemented as part of the Project to ensure that
potential social impacts are minimised.
Based upon AGL’s current timetable, it is likely that the infrastructure proposed as part of the Northern Expansion
would be in place well in advance of the development of identified release areas within the Project Area.
Therefore, the activities with the greatest potential for social and amenity impacts (i.e. those related to the
construction phase of the Project) would be undertaken prior to the introduction of these new communities to the
area. The timing of the construction phase of the Project prior to the development of the SWGC development
areas would also minimise social and amenity impacts upon the existing community through the avoidance of
significant cumulative impacts, particularly in terms of traffic and noise. Once the Northern Expansion moves into
the production phase, the potential for social impacts would be greatly reduced and the amenity impacts of the
final well head infrastructure and associated gathering lines are considered to be minimal. As discussed in
Chapter 8 of the EA, the long term land use impacts of the Project are not considered to be significant, as the
presence of well head infrastructure would not result in the sterilisation of significant areas of land for future
development. The existing stages of the CGP demonstrate that this infrastructure can co-exist with urban
(residential, commercial and industrial) development with minimal residual impact, subject to appropriate
separation distances and management measures.
The Project would result in certain visual impacts dependent on the viewshed of well sites to receptors (refer
Chapter 17). Visual impacts would be most significant during the construction phase due to the scale of
equipment and the proposed construction footprint required for the construction of the well surface locations.
However, construction works would be temporary and relatively short term in nature and would not be expected to
be significant.
The construction of gas gathering lines would be temporary and by their nature, mobile meaning that no one area
would be impacted for an extended period of time, reducing the overall impact. Upon completion of the
construction of the gas gathering system, visual impacts would be negligible as the infrastructure would be
located underground and the surface land returned as close as possible to its original condition or better.
Therefore potential visual impacts related to the gas gathering system and pipeline are expected to be minimal.
During the production and operation phase, an enclosure would surround the well head infrastructure using
fencing and materials that would integrate with the surrounding landscape. Landscape planting would be
undertaken as required around the well surface locations in order to soften the potential visual impact and provide
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-6
AECOM
screening of the development (refer to Chapter 21). Longer term visual impacts related to the final well head
infrastructure are discussed in Chapter 4 of the EA and subject to recommended mitigation measures such as
appropriate landscape screening, the impacts are not considered to be significant.
Hazard and risk impacts associated with the well head infrastructure are generally related to flammable events
which could occur due to a loss of containment of gas and followed by an ignition event. There are a range of
technical safety features built into the design of the well heads to ensure that potential impacts associated with the
Project in terms of hazard and risk are minimised (discussed in Chapter 10). In addition, separation distances
between sensitive land uses and proposed infrastructure would be imposed to ensure that potential risks are
maintained at an acceptable level. With the application of these separation distances and the mitigation
measures identified in Chapter 10, the potential impacts of the Project on both human health and the environment
are expected to be minimal.
20.3.2
Economic
The potential economic impacts of the Project are largely related to the broader impacts of provision of an
additional natural gas supply into the existing market, and the more localised impacts in terms of employment
generation as a result of the construction and operational phases of the Project.
Regional Economy
As discussed previously in this EA, the proposed Northern Expansion of the CGP would allow for the further
development of a significant gas resource in the Sydney Basin.
Based upon the future projected energy demand and increasing interest in pursuing more environmentally
acceptable forms of energy, the importance of securing a cost-effective energy supply, with lower greenhouse
emissions is considered vital to the social and economic growth of the Project Area and the State.
Gas typically costs more per gigajoule than coal but it is a more efficient fuel, so a competitively priced gas supply
from the Northern Expansion of the CGP would further reduce NSW reliance on more greenhouse gas intensive
fuels. By further developing NSW gas reserves, local communities and industry will have access to competitively
priced gas and the opportunity to create more jobs in NSW due to lower input costs.
The proposed Northern Expansion would provide the next step in ensuring that supply to Sydney and NSW is
maintained in the future to underpin the growing economy.
The potential broader economic impacts of the Project are perhaps best described by considering the impacts
should the Northern Expansion not proceed. Should this be the case, the opportunity to further develop a
convenient and competitive natural gas supply within the Sydney Basin would be lost, and there would be no flow
of resulting economic and social benefits to the NSW community. The likely future shortfall in the gas supply to
the growing NSW market may in turn lead to an increase in the use of less efficient alternative fossil fuel sources
and increased gas prices for NSW consumers in an already constrained NSW gas market. The economic benefits
and impacts of the CGP are being realised in existing stages of the Project and are broadly described below.
Local Economy
Impacts during the Construction Phase
The construction phase of the development would have a positive economic impact on the Macarthur region and
the local area through the direct flow of construction expenditure to contractors and suppliers. Implementation of
the Project would generate substantial investment within the local economy, along with direct contract
employment related to the drilling of wells, the installation of gas gathering lines and general construction works
for the well surface locations. Indirect employment would also be generated through demand for goods and
services by staff and contractors associated with the Northern Expansion, with further details provided below.
Where possible, construction equipment, goods and services and technology is sourced from local or regional
suppliers, benefiting both local and regional economies. Approximately 45% of the CGP suppliers are local to the
Macarthur Region.
It is generally accepted that the total impacts of economic activity are larger than the direct impacts of that activity.
This is the result of the “multiplier” or flow-on effect, whereby every direct addition to economic activity within a
defined regional economy has an additional stimulatory effect on overall levels of demand. Every direct increase
in demand within one sector of the economy in turn stimulates additional indirect demand (via productiongenerated effects as businesses required goods and services in order to meet that increased demand) and also
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-7
AECOM
induced effects (via the household expenditure of those individuals employed in business involved in both the
direct and the indirect demand increases).
The CGP is providing a significant addition to economic activity in the region, and is an important source of
employment, as well as demand for local goods and services. This activity is consistent with the existing
economic environment, and is a local source of value-adding which contributes jobs and demand for goods and
services, both directly and indirectly, to an area which has a demonstrated need for economic stimuli to match the
population growth which is occurring and which will continue to occur into the future.
Impacts during the Operational Phase
The estimated capital investment for the Northern Expansion is in the order of $100 Million.
The project employs about 70 full-time employees and contractors in the Macarthur region and half of AGL’s
suppliers are locally based businesses.
20.4
Safeguards in relation to potential social impacts are detailed in previous chapters related to noise, air quality,
traffic, hazard and risk and visual impacts. These chapters conclude that, provided that the recommended
safeguards are implemented, the social (amenity) impacts of the Project are considered to be acceptable,
particularly when considered in the context of the significant economic benefits of the Project to the local area and
the State.
Given that the overall economic impacts of the Project are considered to be positive, no specific environmental
safeguards are considered necessary. Management measures would be undertaken to ensure the overall social
and economic environment of the communities within and surrounding the Northern Expansion is maintained,
including ongoing awareness of the CGP through the CCC and other consultation when required.
20.5
Conclusion
The Northern Expansion is not anticipated to result in significant negative impacts to the socio economics of the
local communities, Macarthur Region or NSW. The Project is likely to have a positive impact on regional and
State economy due to the provision of an indigenous gas supply, while the Camden and Campbelltown LGAs also
may experience positive impacts associated with demand for local goods and services during both the
construction and operation phases of the Project.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
20-8
21.0
AECOM
Rehabilitation
This chapter describes the rehabilitation program proposed for initial rehabilitation of construction footprints at the
well surface locations and along the gas gathering lines, as well as rehabilitation following decommissioning of
Project components.
21.1
Overview
Rehabilitation would be limited to the Surface Project Area as there would be no surface disturbance within the
Subsurface Project Area. The overall objective of undertaking rehabilitation at each of the well surface locations
and gas gathering lines, is to return the land to original land use condition or better. Rehabilitation of well surface
locations would also minimise the residual impacts of the Project on land use within the Surface Project Area
including the proposed development areas identified as part of the SWGC and those earmarked for future
development by Council. Rehabilitation would be undertaken in the following stages:
•
•
Initial rehabilitation of:
-
Construction footprint at well surface locations; and
-
Construction footprint of gas gathering system.
Decommissioning and final rehabilitation:
-
Operational footprints of well surface locations; and
-
Gas gathering system.
This section describes the existing land use conditions and discusses the rehabilitation techniques and
environmental safeguards to be implemented to ensure that the final landform is representative of previous
existing land use and condition or better, as well as ensuring it is compatible with future land use.
21.2
The landform of the Surface Project Area is characterised by low lying, gently undulating plains and rolling low
hills and rises. The region currently comprises largely of semi-rural and rural residential development and
agricultural lands, predominately used for grazing, scattered between isolated areas of remnant vegetation.
The proposed well surface locations have a predominantly north east to north western aspect with views across
the extensive Nepean and Georges River floodplains. Landform is gently undulating with steeper sections to the
south of the Surface Project Area reaching elevations of up to 196 m AHD at Badgelly Hill.
Several modifications to the landscape have occurred since European settlement including the formation of large
dams, roadways, substations, mining sites, waste disposal/recycling facilities and residential areas. Much of the
Project Area has been cleared of vegetation for grazing and farming purposes with a noted remnant vegetation
corridor in the vicinity of sand mining and intensive agriculture activities have altered the landscape creating some
depressions, exposed areas and gully systems.
As previously discussed, several areas within the Subsurface and Surface Project Area have been identified as
future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development release areas as part of the Metropolitan
Strategy (refer Chapter 8). Some 9,400 new dwellings are expected to be constructed within the Surface Project
Area as part of the SWGC, in a range of housing forms including single dwellings on individual lots, attached
housing and multi-unit housing, together with land uses required to support the future residential population
(Camden Council DCP 2006). Incorporated within the plans for future urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development areas, environmental protection and bushland corridors will be established along
creeklines to facilitate the conservation of endangered ecological communities.
21.3
Rehabilitation Works
21.3.1
Initial Rehabilitation
The initial stage of rehabilitation works would be undertaken following the construction period. Rehabilitation
would be undertaken on a site by site basis, with the nature of rehabilitation dependent on the existing land use at
each site. This technique has been proven through the existing CGP and the implementation of site specific
Landscape Management Plans contained within the EMS. AGL currently submit specific site layout and
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
21-1
AECOM
rehabilitation plans to the Department for approval before commencing works. The proposed works and site
rehabilitation are therefore undertaken to the satisfaction of the DoP.
The well surface location construction footprint would be up to approximately 100m x 100m, comprising a level
well pad area and drill pit measuring up to 25m x 25m. The drill pit would have an excavated depth of
approximately 2m to 3m.
Once the well completion and initial work over has been undertaken, the surface location footprint surrounding the
well would be reduced to approximately 45m x 45m and the surplus construction areas would be rehabilitated.
Typically, only the immediate well head infrastructure and equipment required for well commissioning would
remain at the well surface location.
Initial rehabilitation works of the well surface construction footprint would involve the following activities:
•
Installation of appropriate sediment and erosion control measures to minimise erosion and sedimentation;
•
Backfilling excavated areas such as drill pits when no longer required as part of operation;
•
Rehabilitation, contouring, and revegetating disturbed areas surrounding well surface locations using
stockpiled soil to match the surrounding land;
•
Broadcasting of seedstock and/or planting of seedlings across re-contoured areas; and
•
Regular maintenance and monitoring to identify the presence of weeds, erosion and scour, and failure
during the rehabilitation process.
Gas gathering lines would be installed throughout the Surface Project Area to connect each well site to the
existing CGP network. The main trunkline of the gas gathering system utilises existing drainage lines within the
Upper Canal access corridor, and other gas gathering lines would be constructed along roads, access tracks and
fence lines where possible to avoid disturbance to existing land uses and vegetation.
The pipeline and gas gathering lines would be progressively rehabilitated following construction with rehabilitation
works generally including the following:
•
Progressive backfilling of pipeline trench following lowering, welding and testing of pipe;
•
Waste and other materials such as pipe off-cuts, pipe caps and timber skids would be removed from the site;
•
Re-contouring undertaken to match the surrounding land and original condition;
•
Broadcasting of seedstock and/or planting of seedlings across re-contoured areas;
•
Respread of stockpiled topsoil and mulched vegetation evenly across the corridor area to assist in soil
retention and structure, weed control and to mitigate visual impacts; and
•
In accordance with agreement with the landowner, regular maintenance and monitoring would be carried out
upon completion of the rehabilitation works to identify the presence of weeds, erosion and scour, and failure
of revegetation during the rehabilitation process.
It should be noted that rehabilitation would also be undertaken in consultation with landowner requirements on a
site specific basis. For rehabilitation works within the Upper Canal corridor, site specific requirements for
additional sediment and erosion control measures during and following rehabilitation may be required due to the
open and exposed nature of the majority of the gas gathering system. These may include terracing and surface
water diversion berms, silt and sediment fences, re-seeding and replanting, and stockpiling on adjacent
properties.
21.3.2
Given that areas within the Surface Project Area have been identified as future urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development areas and as the closure and final rehabilitation phase can be expected to be
approximately15 years after completion of construction, it is likely changes in the surrounding land use from semirural to urban (would have occurred in the vicinity in many of the well surface locations.
Wells are expected to operate for approximately15 years, therefore the closure and final rehabilitation of well
surface locations would typically not occur until this time, subject to Project staging and the tie-in with existing
wells within the CGP. The operational footprint would be decommissioned and rehabilitated once a well surface
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
21-2
AECOM
location has reached the end of its life. Rehabilitation would be undertaken in consultation with the land owner,
and in consideration of the surrounding land use. Rehabilitation would generally include the following activities:
•
Removing infrastructure and equipment from well surface locations;
•
Filling in excavated areas and trenches;
•
Sealing and cementing wells;
•
Lightly ripping disturbed areas; and
•
Rehabilitation, contouring, and revegetating disturbed areas. Revegetating would include broadcast of seed
and ongoing maintenance and monitoring activities.
The preferred method of rehabilitation for the gas gathering system would be to purge with air or water in order to
remove remaining gas, seal and then leave in situ to prevent any further soil disturbances. This method would be
subject to consultation with the land owner. Should removal of the gas gathering system be required, the
excavated trench would be backfilled and rehabilitated, including contouring and revegetating.
21.3.3
Completion Criteria
The success of rehabilitation at the initial and final stages would be assessed using completion criteria.
Completion criteria would be site specific for each well surface location and may include:
•
Species cover and abundance;
•
Presence of weeds;
•
Presence of rock and soil inversion; and
•
Presence of erosion.
The LRMSP would be updated to include completion criteria and would be specified in each site’s LRMP.
21.4
Potential Impacts
Potential impacts during the initial stages of rehabilitation works include:
•
Erosion and sedimentation from exposed areas within the construction footprint, such as access roads, drill
pad and drill pit;
•
Erosion and sedimentation from stockpiles of soil being stored for use in rehabilitation works.
Potential impacts during closure and final rehabilitation include:
•
Erosion and sedimentation from exposed surfaces during rehabilitation works, such as access roads, well
surface locations and gas gathering lines, resulting in potential impacts to water quality of receiving waters;
and
•
Erosion and sedimentation from stockpiles of soil being stored for use in rehabilitation works.
Rehabilitation activities have the potential to impact the environment primarily through sedimentation and erosion.
Exposed areas within construction and operational footprints, access tracks, pipeline corridor and other disturbed
areas could potentially result in sedimentation and erosion that may impact nearby watercourses and habitats if
inappropriately managed. Additionally, stockpiling of vegetation, mulch and topsoil may also result in
sedimentation and erosion with similar potential impacts if appropriate control measures are not implemented.
The rehabilitation would be undertaken generally in accordance with the techniques and activities described
above, as well as in accordance with the approved Landscape and Rehabilitation Management Sub Plan
(LRMSP) as part of the EMS which represents AGLs current best practice. Environmental safeguards would be
implemented to ensure rehabilitation does not result in significant environmental impacts.
21.5
During each stage of rehabilitation, mitigation measures and environmental safeguards would be implemented to
minimise potential impacts.
Existing management measures for initial and final rehabilitation are included in AGLs existing LRMSP contained
within the approved EMS for the CGP. This plan would be updated where necessary to include the potential
impacts of the Northern Expansion.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
21-3
AECOM
Rehabilitation works would be undertaken with maximum regard to environmental protection including training
operators in the principles of least possible disturbance and rehabilitation, vegetation, subsoil and topsoil
management, weed control, erosion and sedimentation management and revegetation.
General mitigation measures and environmental safeguards that would be implemented include:
•
Revegetation to be undertaken as soon as practical after works are complete;
•
Installation of erosion and sedimentation control measures such as silt fencing surrounding exposed areas
or soil stockpiles;
•
Erosion and sedimentation controls would be checked and cleaned weekly to ensure effective operation;
•
Where available, soil stockpiled for use in the initial rehabilitation stage of works would be utilised to fill
excavated areas such as drill pits. Topsoil is to be separated from subsoil and replaced in an appropriate
order;
•
The ground surface would be contoured to match surrounding land to avoid directing runoff away from
natural drainage lines;
•
Where the surrounding land use is agricultural, consultation would be held with the landowner to determine
crop cover required;
•
Where seeding and replanting is to be carried out, native endemic species equivalent to those already found
on the site are to be used where possible;
•
Stock proof fencing would be installed surrounding rehabilitated areas until sufficient surface/ ground cover
is established;
•
Regular maintenance and monitoring is to be carried out at each site on completion of the initial
rehabilitation process. Maintenance and monitoring would be undertaken for the duration of rehabilitation
works in order to identify the presence of weeds, subsequent erosion and changes in the drainage patterns;
•
Reseeding to be undertaken if the site has not shown good germination within two months of sowing.
•
Site specific landscape and rehabilitation management plans would be prepared for each well surface
location (these would consider the existing vegetation, surrounding environment and sensitive receivers)
These mitigation measures and safeguards would be incorporated into the Proponent’s existing EMS which would
be implemented at each well surface location. This would guide both the rehabilitation of the surplus construction
area, and the closure and final rehabilitation stages of work for all proposed works of the Surface Project Area.
21.6
Conclusion
Both the initial rehabilitation of surplus construction areas and the closure and final rehabilitation would result in
the land being returned to a land use consistent with the previous existing land use of the site or better. While
minor and temporary impacts may occur during rehabilitation activities, and the transient and temporary nature of
the proposed activities, there is considered to be no significant net residual impacts associated with the
rehabilitation of the Project.
Rehabilitation activities would occur in two discrete phases; namely initial rehabilitation and the closure and final
rehabilitation. Whilst the Project represents a temporary and transient use of land, the assessment identified
minor potential impacts associated with each of the rehabilitation stages. The development and implementation of
appropriate environmental management measures and the LRMSP would ensure the minimisation of impacts
associated with rehabilitation activities.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
21-4
22.0
AECOM
Waste
This chapter addresses the legislative requirements and classification of waste management in NSW, and details
waste generation anticipated from the Northern Expansion as a component of the broader CGP. Mitigation
measures and proposed waste management procedures are detailed to manage waste generation and minimise
potential generation of waste.
As the waste generated from the Northern Expansion will be similar to those for previous stages of the CGP, the
approach to waste management will be similar. As a result, this has formed the basis for the assessment and
management of waste within the Surface Project Area.
22.1
Overview
The NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy 2007 (Waste Strategy) sets out principles
promoting the adoption of measures which avoid unnecessary resource consumption, and encourage resource
recovery, including reuse, reprocessing, recycling and energy recovery. Four key areas are identified where
outcomes must be achieved in order to avoid and manage waste. These include:
•
Preventing and avoiding waste;
•
Increasing use of recovery and use of secondary materials;
•
Reducing toxicity in products and materials; and
•
Reducing litter and illegal dumping.
Waste management measures proposed for the Northern Expansion would encourage efficient resource use
alternatives, re-use and recycling. Waste that cannot be re-used or recycled would be disposed of in an
appropriate manner.
The DECCW Waste Classification Guidelines (DECC, 2008) describe a number of pre-classified wastes and
provide specific direction on the classification of wastes, based on chemical composition and associated
environmental impacts. Waste streams require different management, transportation and disposal depending on
their classification. The six waste categories are:
•
Special waste (e.g. Clinical and related, asbestos and tyres);
•
Liquid waste;
•
Hazardous waste (e.g. waste with pH ≤ 2, coal tar, lead paint waste, etc);
•
Restricted solid waste;
•
General solid waste (putrescibles) (e.g. household wastes, manure, food wastes, etc); and
•
General solid waste (non-putrescible) (e.g. glass, plastic, rubber, garden waste, etc).
Potential wastes generated from the construction and operation of well surface locations and gas gathering lines
are described in the following sections.
Waste generated by the Northern Expansion would be limited to the Surface Project Area due to the location of
surface infrastructure and associated construction and operation works associated with subsurface drilling being
positioned at the well surface location within the Surface Project Area. Therefore consideration of waste impacts
is focused solely within the Surface Project Area.
22.2
Potential Impacts
The Northern Expansion involves a number of activities that would result in the generation of waste materials.
Waste generation within the Surface Project Area would predominantly occur during the construction phase from
works including:
•
Civil works associated with the construction and preparation of well surface locations, drill pads and gas
gathering lines;
•
Drilling activities;
•
Fracture stimulation and workover;
•
Initial rehabilitation of surplus construction areas; and
•
Sanitary waste from contractors and personnel on site.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
22-1
AECOM
Surplus materials expected to be generated during these activities includes:
•
Excavated topsoil resources removed from access roads (where minor upgrade is required), drill pits and
construction footprint areas;
•
Excess construction materials such as materials used in the construction of silt fencing and wire fencing;
•
Excavated rock and rubble;
•
Cleared vegetation; and
•
Produced water during drilling, fracturing stimulation and production operations of wells.
Potential waste materials generated from the construction and operation / decommissioning of the well field area
and the gas gathering lines have been classified according to the Waste Classification Guidelines as shown in
Table 22-1 and Table 22-2 respectively. Not all waste described in Table 22-1 and Table 22-2 are likely to occur,
however they have the potential to occur and have hence been included for the purpose of this assessment.
Table 22-1: Classification of Potential Wastes Generated from the Project during Construction
Classification
Type
Well Field Area
Liquid waste
Formation waters, drill cuttings
and fracture stimulation
materials including slurries,
muds (e.g. Bentonite) and
approved water based
products or synthetic lubricants
Well construction and
production
Underbore
Produced water
Well production
Human waste including pump
out waste and sewage.
Temporary work sites
Fuels, engine coolant and
hydrocarbon residuals
during construction
Hazardous waste
Any other generated wastes
that meet the criteria for
dangerous goods under the
Australian Code for the
Transport of Dangerous Goods
by Road and Rail.
General solid
waste (putrescible)
General waste including food
waste from personnel and non
recyclables
Temporary work sites and
maintenance areas
Temporary work sites and
maintenance areas
General solid
waste (nonputrescible)
Cleared exotic vegetation and
surplus vegetation cuttings,
timber skids
Construction of well pads
and gathering line routes
Construction of pipeline
route, weed control
operations, pipe stringing
Drained oil filters, empty oil
containers and oil absorbent
materials that do not contain
free liquids, plastics (e.g.
packaging, pipe caps), asphalt
wastes, concrete wastes, cured
resins, paints, glues
maintenance areas
maintenance areas
Excess virgin soil materials
from excavation / grading
activities, sand bags
Preparation and
construction of well site
locations
Preparation and
construction of pipeline
route
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
22-2
Classification
AECOM
Type
Well Field Area
Recyclables including glass,
PET bottles, aluminium, scrap
metal (e.g. pipe cuttings), rope
spacers, paper and cardboard
Preparation and
construction of well site
locations and at temporary
work sites
Preparation and
construction of pipeline
route and at temporary
work sites
Table 22-2: Classification of Potential Wastes Generated from the Project during Operation and
Decommissioning
Classification
Type
Well Field Area
Special waste
Waste tyres
Vehicle maintenance
Liquid waste
Formation waters, drill cuttings
and fracture simulation
materials including slurries,
muds (e.g. Bentonite) and
approved water based
products or synthetic lubricants
Potential re-fracing of wells
during workovers
Produced water (saline with
trace dissolved metals)
Well operation
Human waste including pump
out waste and sewage.
Fuels, engine coolant and
hydrocarbon residuals
Maintenance well
workovers during operation
Lead-acid or nickel-cadmium
batteries
Maintenance of vehicles
Cleaning agents, water
treatment chemicals, spent
pipeline x-ray film, fusion
bonded epoxy powder or other
plastic material.
Maintenance activities
General solid
waste (putrescible)
General waste including food
waste from personnel and non
recyclables
Operation personnel
General solid
waste (nonputrescible)
Cleared exotic vegetation and
surplus vegetation cuttings,
timber skids
Hazardous waste
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Potentially during cathodic
protection, coating integrity
surveys and pigging
operations
Maintenance clearance
and weed control
Drained oil filters, empty oil
containers and oil absorbent
materials that do not contain
free liquids, plastics (e.g.
packaging, pipe caps), asphalt
wastes, concrete wastes,
cured resins, paints, glues
Well site location
maintenance and well
decommissioning
Recyclables including glass,
PET bottles, aluminium, scrap
metal (e.g. pipe cuttings), rope
spacers, paper and cardboard
Operational activities and
personnel and
decommissioning
22-3
Classification
AECOM
Type
Well Field Area
Crushed rock removed from
temporary hardstand areas
and access roads (if required)
During decommissioning
stage
stage
Aboveground infrastructure
free of liquids
stage
stage
Wastes generated during the production and post development phases of the Northern Expansion are expected
to be minimal.
22.3
During all phases of the Northern Expansion, management measures would be implemented in order to ensure
that waste generation is minimised and that waste suitable for reuse or recycling is handled appropriately. Wastes
requiring disposal would be removed from the site and disposed of at a licensed waste facility. The current Waste
Management Sub Plan as part of the overall EMS would be referred to for all waste minimisation and mitigation
measures. Further recommendations in this EA would be incorporated into the updated EMS.
The following environmental safeguards would be implemented to ensure that waste generated during the life of
the Project is minimised:
•
Waste generated would be reused or recycled where possible;
•
Excavated topsoil removed during the construction phase would be stockpiled and appropriately maintained
onsite for reuse during initial rehabilitation of surplus construction area;
•
Soils excavated from trenches and drill pits would be temporarily stockpiled for reuse during backfill or well
surface location initial rehabilitation. Initial rehabilitation refers to rehabilitation works prior to commissioning;
•
Excess construction wastes which are not suitable for reuse or recycling would be disposed of at a licensed
waste facility;
•
Any vegetation cleared from construction areas may be mulched and stockpiled onsite and maintained
appropriately for reuse during initial rehabilitation. Excess mulched organic material would be removed from
the site and disposed of at a licensed waste facility as appropriate;
•
Produced water would either be stored in tanks or pits for reuse or taken offsite for disposal at a licensed
waste facility;
•
Appropriate spill, incident management and response procedures would be developed and implemented
through the EMS and ERP and would include measures to avoid spillages of chemicals, liquids and other
wastes;
•
Domestic waste such as glass jars, aluminium cans, paper and compostable matter would be placed in a
dedicated container for removal and recycling off site;
•
All waste to be disposed offsite would be classified, transported and disposed of in accordance with the
Waste Classification Guidelines (DECC, 2008); and
•
Portable toilet facilities would be installed in construction areas during the construction period and
maintained by a waste contractor.
Prior to the commencement of works, personnel would be informed of waste management and disposal
procedures to be undertaken on site.
22.4
Conclusion
The Northern Expansion would result in the generation of waste from all phases of the Project, however, it is
expected that the majority of waste generated would be during the initial construction phase, and would thus be
temporary in nature. While the generation of waste requiring offsite disposal would be unavoidable, where
possible, wastes would be reused and recycled in accordance with the principles of the Waste Strategy and the
AGL Waste Management Sub Plan in order to minimise residual impacts associated with the generation of waste.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
22-4
AECOM
The implementation of environmental safeguards and management identified in Chapter 22 would minimise
impacts associated with the generation and management of waste resulting from the Project, therefore residual
impacts are considered to be temporary and manageable.
This EA has identified the potential for the generation of waste during all phases of the proposed Northern
Expansion. Waste generated requiring offsite disposal is not expected to be substantial, as much of the waste
including excess topsoil, mulched vegetation and produced water would be reused for various activities
associated with operation and rehabilitation.
The generation of waste from the Northern Expansion is therefore considered to be manageable and does not
represent a significant constraint to the Project.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
22-5
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
22-6
23.0
AECOM
Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts can result from a number of different elements within a project, as well as from other projects
with interacting impacts in the same locality. The cumulative impact of a project is a combination of each
elemental impact of the project. Cumulative impacts on the environment can be considered on a project basis,
taking into account each element on a locality or regional basis as well as taking into account the interacting
impacts of other projects in the immediate locality and the region.
23.1
Cumulative Impact of the Project
The cumulative impacts of the proposal have been considered in relation to each identified environmental issue in
Sections 8 to 23 of this EA. Cumulative impacts of the proposal, particularly with respect to hazards and risks,
noise and vibration, flora and fauna and heritage have been considered in each of the technical studies
undertaken in respect of this proposal.
The potential impacts for each of the environmental factors were considered to be minimal provided the
prescribed mitigation measures and safeguards are implemented. It should also be noted that the well surface
locations are a temporary and transient land use which will be completely removed after approximately 15 years
in the closure and final rehabilitation stage. As a result, no significant cumulative impact is expected.
23.2
Cumulative Impact with Other Projects
The cumulative impacts of the proposal must take into account other major projects planned in the local area.
These include:
•
Namely Turner Road and East Leppington urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development as
part of the SWGC, but inclusive of Leppington, Catherine Fields and Catherine Fields North Development
Areas;
•
The South West Rail Link as part of the SWGC;
•
Modification of Jacks Gully Waste Facility; and
•
Appin-West Cliff Mining Complex.
The Proponent has undertaken extensive consultation with landholders in the area during the early project design
phase to ensure that well surface locations and other infrastructure would be sited to accommodate the respective
primary land uses. The result of this consultation has been the relocation, removal or redesign of the proposal
was submitted for approval (refer Chapter 3 and Chapter 6).
The use of alternative designs and technologies such as SIS technology and the co-location of wells resulted in
the Proponent significantly reducing the number of well surface locations from up to 20 to 12 and thus also
reducing the overall footprint of the Project. This amended Project design has been the result of extensive
consultation with surrounding landowners and identifying early constraints.
Additionally, the environmental envelope assessment approach allows the well surface locations to move within a
200 metre radius in and 25 metres either side of gathering lines and access roads. This demonstrates that there is
flexibility and an ability to deal with future issues as they arise.
As previously noted, portions of the Surface Project Area have been earmarked for future urban (residential,
commercial and industrial) development, which would result in urban development being located in close
proximity to the well surface locations in some instances. A Master Plan has been developed for the Turner Road
Development Area, with new dwellings expected to be provided in a range of housing forms, together with land
uses such as business development required to support the residential population. Master Plans are yet to be
released for the East Leppington Development Area which some 4,000 lots are proposed to be released.
The construction of wells and associated infrastructure within areas of future urban development land release is
expected to be completed prior to the commencement of development and subsequent occupation of these areas.
This would therefore minimise potential cumulative impacts resulting from disruptions to amenity associated with
traffic, air quality and noise impacts generated during construction.
With regard to operational activities, based upon observation of existing well fields and AGL’s previous
experience, operational activities are confined to the reduced well head location, and are therefore are expected
to have minimal impacts. The operational activities associated with well surface locations are therefore not likely
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
23-1
AECOM
to result in cumulative impacts with the urban development land release areas and other known projects in the
area.
23.3
Conclusion
The cumulative impacts of the proposal have been considered with respect to impacts associated with the
proposed development, as well as with impacts associated with other projects in the region. The cumulative
impact assessment concluded that the Project is temporary nature of the proposed activities and that would be no
significant net residual impacts associated with the proposed development’s interaction with other known projects
in the area.
The design and assessment approach to the Project allows the extraction of a strategically valuable and important
energy resource in an already constrained market, while still allowing future urban (residential, commercial and
industrial) development of the land.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
23-2
24.0
24.1
Introduction
AECOM
Environmental Commitments are those environmental management measures formally established to mitigate
and manage the potential environmental impacts of the Project. These commitments would be incorporated into
the Proponent’s EMS and EMS Sub Plans (refer to Section 4.6). The Proponent currently has management plans
relating to the following components of the CGP:
•
Well Surface Location Construction, Drilling, Completion and Production Operations;
•
Gas Gathering System Construction; and
•
Field Operations.
It is expected that the objectives and goals contained in this existing management system would be applied to
work within the proposed Northern Expansion and where necessary, the plan would be updated to incorporate
any relevant specific measures.
The EMS details the management measures to be implemented to minimise environmental impacts associated
with the physical works undertaken to construct, establish and operate the various elements of the existing CGP.
AGL would update the existing EMS to reflect the activities and the environmental management measures
recommended as part of this EA. The EMS would be provided for the benefit of the operating staff, contractors
and regulators.
Prior to commencing operations on site, the selected contractor together with the Proponent would review the
EMS and EMS Sub Plans and supporting documentation to familiarise themselves with the manner in which
construction would be managed and controlled.
The EMS would also contain details of environmental monitoring to be carried out and procedures for reporting
the environmental performance of the Project.
The EMS includes a framework which identifies several Sub Plans and other environmental management
documentation:
•
Noise Management Sub Plan;
•
Flora and Fauna Management Sub Plan;
•
Soil and Water Management Sub Plan (SWMSP);
•
Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Sub Plan;
•
European Heritage Management Sub Plan;
•
Rehabilitation and Landscape Management Sub Plan;
•
Air Quality Management Sub Plan;
•
Waste Management Sub Plan;
•
Traffic Management Sub Plan;
•
Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Materials Sub Plan;
•
Emergency Response Plan;
•
Site Layout Plans and Site Rehabilitation Plans; and
•
Compliance Register.
These Sub Plans would continue to be implemented for the Northern Expansion and would:
•
Identify the potential environmental impacts of operations associated with the Project;
•
Confirm the environmental controls to be implemented;
•
Specify any conditions of approval;
•
Indicate how the conditions are to be met; and
•
Specify a monitoring program.
Environmental incidents would be controlled by the standards and procedures presented in the CGP Emergency
Response Plan (ERP). This document has been prepared in respect of the existing CGP and would need to be
updated to incorporate any new information relating to the proposed Northern Expansion if required.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-1
AECOM
AGL is committed to responsible management and believes that:
•
Potential adverse environmental effects can be effectively managed; and
•
Potential OH&S incidents are preventable to all practical extent.
All planning, construction and operation activities would be conducted in accordance with the Health , Safety and
Environmental Policy which outlines the Proponent's commitment to sound management of environmental issues
and OH&S performance for the Project.
AGL’s objectives with regard to OH&S are:
•
To provide a safe and healthy work environment for employees and contractors;
•
To conduct operations with due regard to the safety of the public;
•
To foster a positive attitude to health and safety at all levels of operations consistent with the philosophy that
these are issues of paramount importance in all business decisions;
•
To maintain appropriate standards of quality in all aspects of the Project operations; and
•
To empower employees and contractors to actively assume responsibility and accountability for safety and
health.
24.2
Environmental Objectives
The Proponent’s environmental objectives (Table 24-1) for the Project are aimed at ensuring appropriate
management of the environment. Mitigation measures identified for the Northern Expansion have been
summarised in Table 24-2. The commitments outlined in Table 24-3 of the EA have been designed to meet these
environmental objectives for each of the project components specific to the Northern Expansion.
Table 24-1: Northern Expansion Environmental Objectives and Goals
Issue
Landuse
Objective
1
To minimise adverse impacts
associated with the construction
on existing and future land uses.
To avoid significant disturbances
to land use or damage to existing
infrastructure
Goal
1.1
To ensure that rural productivity is adequately
protected in the area
1.2
To ensure that the objectives of the
Metropolitan Strategy are not compromised
1.3
To avoid unacceptable disturbances to
landowner assets and infrastructure.
1.4
To ensure that complaints from landowners
are resolved promptly and not left outstanding
or unresolved.
1.5
To notify the landowner at least one week
prior to construction commencing.
1.6
To ensure that all construction activity is
constrained to the subject site and access
roads.
1.7
Water
Resources
2
To minimise the potential
negative impacts associated with
construction and installation
phases on surface water
resources.
To ensure the water quality of the
Upper Canal is maintained
2.1
To maintain current surface drainage patterns.
To maintain surface water quality.
2.2
To avoid runoff into the Upper Canal.
2.3
2.4
To ensure that windrows and soil stockpiles
have been broken at appropriate places to
allow natural surface water flow.
2.5
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
To ensure that no landowner issues are
outstanding or remain unresolved as a result
of operations.
To minimise the amount of water used during
construction activities through effective
management and recycling.
24-2
Issue
Flora
(vegetation)
Fauna
Objective
3
4
(wildlife)
Noise
AECOM
5
Goal
To minimise the loss of remnant
native vegetation.
3.1
To avoid development in areas of remnant
vegetation, where practicable.
To prevent the introduction and
dispersal of noxious weeds,
pathogens and pest species.
3.2
To minimise disturbances to native vegetation
(including grasses and herbs).
3.3
To carry out rehabilitation activities to promote
vegetation regrowth in all disturbed work
areas to a standard consistent with the
surrounding area.
3.4
To provide sufficient offset where potential
impacts are unavoidable
3.5
To appropriately control the introduction and
spread of weeds, pathogens and pest
species.
4.1
To minimise habitat disturbance to an
acceptable level.
4.2
To ensure fauna is adequately protected from
physical harm.
4.3
To ensure that the drill pit is checked daily for
trapped fauna and that fauna escape methods
are provided.
5.1
To minimise noise pollution during the
construction and operational phases.
To minimise adverse impacts on
fauna.
To comply with the construction
standards for noise control.
5.2
To minimise the noise impacts
associated with construction.
To limit construction
To minimise the noise impacts
generated from operations.
between:
activities to daylight hours
• 7:00am and 6:00pm weekdays
• 8:00am and 1:00pm on Saturday.
• No work on Sundays or public holidays*
*Except in the case of drilling of wells, which
would require 24 hour activities, seven days a
week, and where authorised by regulatory
agencies for safety/emergency reasons.
5.3
5.4
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Where 24 hour drilling is permitted, sound
mitigation measures are to be implemented
where required and sound monitoring is to be
conducted where required to ensure the noise
is within DECCW guidelines.
To ensure that any complaints from the
landholder or neighbours are appropriately
addressed and that no complaints are left
unresolved.
24-3
Issue
Air Quality
AECOM
Objective
6
Goal
To adequately protect air quality
6.1
To minimise potential emissions
that may cause public concern
To control the quality and quantity of vehicle
exhaust emissions.
6.2
To control the emissions of greenhouse
gases.
6.3
To control the quantity of dust generated by
earthworks and traffic movements.
6.4
To ensure that dust is minimised through the
use of regular suppression methods.
6.5
To ensure that uncontrolled emissions are
reported and acted upon immediately.
Heritage
(Cultural and
Historic)
7
To protect and preserve cultural
and historic heritage.
7.1
To adequately protect cultural and historic
heritage sites and values.
Visual
Amenity
8
To minimise impacts to the visual
characteristics of the area.
8.1
To ensure that visual impacts are maintained
at an acceptable level.
Soils and
Geology
9
To minimise and where possible
prevent soil disturbance and
contamination caused by
construction and operation
9.1
To limit soil erosion to an acceptable standard.
9.2
To prevent soil contamination.
9.3
To appropriately control soil compaction.
9.4
To appropriately manage construction
activities in waterlogged and inundated soils.
9.5
To prevent mixing of topsoil and subsoil.
9.6
To ensure that soil exposure times between
clearing and restoration are kept to a minimum
9.7
To ensure there are no long-term erosion
impacts on any of the well sites within the
Surface Project Area as a result of proposed
works.
10.1
To minimise waste creation and maximise
reuse and recycling.
10.2
To avoid land or water contamination.
10.3
To minimise health risks.
10.4
To avoid disturbances to visual amenity.
10.5
To clean up and remove domestic waste from
the site.
11.1
To adequately protect public safety.
11.2
To adequately reduce the likelihood of fire and
ensure no fires occur as a result of Project
related activities.
11.3
To encourage load consolidation to reduce the
number of heavy vehicle movements.
12.1
To limit the impacts of an emergency through
regular training and review of emergency
response plans and procedures.
Waste
Public Risk
Emergency
response
10
11
12
To minimise waste creation and
associated impacts.
To minimise the risk to public
health and safety.
To quickly and effectively
minimise adverse impacts
associated with an emergency
situation.
To ensure that adverse impacts
associated with an emergency
situation are minimised quickly
and effectively.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-4
AECOM
Table 24-2 below summarises the mitigation measures for the Project.
Table 24-2: Summary of Mitigation Measures
Issue
Mitigation Measures
Land Use
•
Ongoing consultation with the relevant authorities managing the release of land for
urban development within the Surface Project Area to ensure that project activities
and management of infrastructure is effectively integrated with future development in
the area.
•
Allowance for a single change in the level of wells to accommodate future
development which may require re-levelling such as road construction associated
with future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development;
•
Where possible, subject to detailed programming, AGL would seek to stage the
development such that the construction period (where the most significant potential
impacts are likely to occur) would be complete prior to development of the
surrounding land for urban purposes to minimise impacts upon future residents in the
area.
•
Initial rehabilitation including screening and revegetation of the construction footprint
of well surface locations and the gas gathering system.
•
Design of the well head surface facilities to fit with the future land use and provide
adequate security as appropriate.
•
Use of a flexible ‘environmental envelope’ approach which allows well surface
infrastructure to move within a 200 metre radius and 25 metres either side of the
assigned route of gathering lines and access roads, in order to adapt to changing
conditions on the ground and deal with future issues as they arise.
Surface Water
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
General
•
Soil and Water Management Plans (SWMPs), the Emergency Response Plan, and
Flood Management Plan (where necessary) would be implemented or updated in the
existing EMS to minimise impact on water quality throughout all phases of the
development.
•
The SWMPs would include detail on the construction of silt fences and other erosion
control measures that would be implemented to minimise surface erosion, sediment
loading of surface water and subsequent impacts to surface water quality.
•
A water management system, including water gathering lines where necessary,
would be employed to enable collection, management and appropriate reuse of water
produced as a result of the drilling, fracture stimulation and production operations
including the storage of saline production water in storage tanks. Where feasible, a
central water collection point would be considered.
•
Infrastructure would be inspected and audited following a flood event to ensure that
all elements are operating effectively, and necessary rehabilitation works are carried
out immediately.
•
Gas wells would be located at a minimum distance of 20 m from creeks.
•
Appropriate crossing locations would be selected on dry creek beds for the
installation of gathering lines and the area rehabilitated suitably following any
earthworks.
•
Under-boring would be used for the installation of gas gathering lines where
permanent water flows occur.
•
Rehabilitation of areas where earthworks have taken place to a surface profile similar
to the original profile, particularly where gathering lines have been installed by either
trenching or under-boring. Rehabilitation works would be in accordance with AGL’s
established and proven RLMSP as detailed in the existing EMS.
24-5
Issue
AECOM
Mitigation Measures
The Upper Canal
Hazard and Risk
•
Gathering lines would be located and installed adjacent to the roadway that is
present alongside the Upper Canal within the existing easement.
•
Gathering lines would be laid progressively in sections typically in the order of 100 m
in order to reduce the potential for stormwater runoff and sediment to enter the Upper
Canal from a stockpile or exposed trench.
•
Personnel involved in maintenance works (if required) for the gas gathering lines
within the Upper Canal corridor would undergo a formal induction and would be
required to obtain a permit from SCA prior to commencing any works in the vicinity of
the Upper Canal.
•
Sediment and water containment controls such as silt fences and bunding would be
utilised where appropriate to prevent the transport of sediment laden runoff in the
vicinity of the Upper Canal. This would include the installation of silt fences around
stockpiles or areas where earthworks are taking place. The use of sediment controls
in relation to the Upper Canal would be included in the SWMSP to be updated as
part of the overall EMS for the Project.
•
Emergency spill kits would be maintained at well surface locations, where
appropriate, for use in the unlikely event a spill should occur;
•
Ongoing maintenance of wells and infrastructure would include regular maintenance
checks of equipment. In conducting regular maintenance checks, the likelihood of
leakage from equipment and failure of silt fences is reduced, thereby reducing
potential impact to water quality within the Upper Canal.
•
The preparation of an Emergency Response/Contingency Plan in consultation with
the SCA.
•
Rehabilitation of areas where earthworks have taken place to a surface profile similar
to the original profile, thereby maintaining effective surface water diversions and
drainage paths in the vicinity of the Upper Canal. Rehabilitation works would be in
accordance with AGL’s established and proven RLMSP as detailed in the existing
EMS, and in consultation with the SCA.
General
•
Hazard and risk mitigation would include those specified in Table 10-2 and Table 103 with regard to CSM Well Overpressure Control Mechanisms and Leak and Fire
Protection, respectively.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
Ensure appropriate security of access to wells through the use of locks and fencing.
•
Bollards or other physical protection would be installed in high risk areas would be
installed to protect the installation against damage from vehicles or other moving
machinery.
•
General inspection and maintenance of wells would form part of the ongoing
operation of wells in order to maintain the integrity of the equipment and systems.
Measures include:
-
Visual inspections of each well (at least three-weekly);
-
Regular leak testing (soap testing at least 6-monthly or more often depending
on the location of the well in relation to urban development); and
-
Regular (at least yearly) testing of pressure safety valves, as per regulatory
requirement.
24-6
Issue
AECOM
Mitigation Measures
Gathering Network
Ecology
•
PE pipe is to be buried in accordance with the requirements of AS/NZS 3723-1989
(typically at a depth of between 0.75 and 1 metre).
•
Signage would be installed as per Australian Standards requirements to ensure
public knowledge of the location of the line after construction.
•
Where possible, the well head and associated infrastructure would be constructed in
existing cleared and disturbed areas of the well surface location. Well heads would
be sited to minimise the removal of any trees.
•
Stands of CPW and MSW would be avoided where possible.
•
Stands of Bursaria spinosa in the well surface location would be avoided where
possible.
•
Sediment and erosion controls would be in place around the construction footprint.
•
Vehicles and heavy equipment movements would avoid drainage lines and damp
areas.
•
Vehicles and heavy equipment movements and parking would be restricted to
designated access and storage/parking areas.
•
Large logs present within a well surface location would be retained where possible.
•
Native trees within disturbed and cleared areas would be retained (where possible).
Gathering Network
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
The gathering lines would be constructed within existing cleared areas and
easements wherever possible.
•
Clearing would be avoided within areas mapped as supporting CPW.
•
Sediment and erosion controls would be used around the construction footprint to
reduce impacts to adjoining native vegetation.
•
Removal of large trees would be avoided.
•
In areas of likely CPLS habitat, pre-clearing fauna surveys would be undertaken to
target CPLS. Any identified CPLS would be relocated into nearby areas that would
not be disturbed.
•
Fauna disturbed during construction activities would be similarly relocated.
•
Temporary exclusion fencing would be used during the construction phase to define
the development footprint and limits of clearing (if required).
•
Earthworks within 2 m of drip line of tree canopies would be avoided wherever
possible to minimise impacts to tree roots.
•
Impacts to patches of native trees and shrubs would be avoided where possible.
•
Vehicles and heavy equipment movements and parking would be restricted to
designated access and storage/parking areas.
•
Damage to low tree limbs as a result of truck or heavy equipment movements would
be assessed and managed by a qualified Arborist.
24-7
Issue
Mitigation Measures
Groundwater
Noise
AECOM
•
Gas production wells would be constructed using pressure rated steel casing, triple
cased and grouted to the depth of the target coal seam, in accordance with the
requirements of the Department of Industry and Investment.
•
Decommissioned and abandoned wells would be backfilled with cement to avoid
inter-mingling of aquifers once production has ceased, and casing cut and removed
1m below ground level.
•
Water produced during methane extraction would be collected in either lined drill pits
or storage tanks.
•
Stored water would be either reused for subsequent well development or would be
disposed of to an appropriately licensed offsite facility.
•
The integrity of drill pits and storage tanks would be monitored regularly to minimise
the likelihood of leakage into the underlying soil and shallow aquifers.
•
Water levels within lined pits or storage tanks would be monitored to ensure overflow
does not occur
•
The SWMSP would be updated and implemented accordingly to include appropriate
mitigation and contingency measures for groundwater.
General
•
Construction and operation would use best management practice and best available
technology (where required/appropriate).
•
Where a proposed mitigation strategy is not likely to achieve the desired noise
reduction and has the potential to leave a residual noise impact, other management
measures may be implemented including:
-
Communication with potentially affected residents regarding the nature and
duration of the works, as well as relevant contact details;
-
Regular inspection and maintenance of equipment to ensure it is in good
working order, including the condition of mufflers and enclosures;
-
Consideration given to scheduling noisy work during periods when people are
least likely to be affected, particularly with relevance to schools and residential
locations; and
-
Implementation of an effective complaints handling system.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
The use of temporary or permanent barriers (where required) to attenuate noise and
acoustically shield residences from drilling during construction of the gas wells.
These barriers could include measures such as shipping containers, fencing, or earth
mounds.
•
Use of equipment to achieve a noise reduction of approximately 3 dBA. This could be
achieved by taking advantage of the directionality of sources and facing the noisy
side away from nearby residences. The actual method by which this reduction would
be achieved would depend greatly on the specific drill rig and associated equipment.
•
If required for some areas with greater affectation, additional measures such as fullenclosure of well heads or reducing the number of well heads at each location would
be considered.
•
For under-boring operations within the vicinity of the Upper Canal (if required), a set
of in-situ vibration validation tests would be undertaken involving the actual
equipment to be used in order to generate a set of Project Specific Vibration versus
Distance Curves for the area.
24-8
Issue
Mitigation Measures
Vibration
General
•
Air Quality and
Odour
AECOM
The following recommended vibration thresholds would be adopted for the purposes
of the Project:
-
Operator warning level – 2.4 mm/s
-
Operator halt level – 3 mm/s
•
Should the operator warning level be exceeded, construction works would proceed
with caution at a reduced force or load.
•
Should the operator halt level be exceeded, construction activities would cease and
alternative construction techniques would be implemented. The operator halt level
would be determined in consultation with the SCA and guided by the Noise and
Vibration Assessment for this EA.
Construction
•
Earthworks, vegetation clearing and soil disturbance would be minimised at all sites
to the extent that is possible.
•
Disturbed surfaces would be remediated as soon as practical after disturbance with
minimal lag time between clearing and remediation.
•
Construction activities would be monitored to identify excessive dust generation. Dust
control measures (such as the use of water carts) would be implemented in the event
of excessive dust generation.
•
Stockpiles and unsealed surfaces would be sprayed with water to minimise
excessive dust generation (if necessary).
•
During high wind conditions, activities likely to generate dust would be minimised or
ceased wherever possible.
•
Machinery and equipment would be serviced, in good working order and would be
fitted as required with appropriate exhaust emission control devices.
•
Unnecessary traffic movements would be eliminated or minimised.
•
Traffic movement would be managed via traffic control techniques, such as reduced
speed limits.
•
Access to each of the well surface locations would be designed and constructed in a
manner that minimises significant disturbance to existing vegetation and surrounding
land uses.
•
Welding procedures would be undertaken in accordance with relevant Australian
Standards and guidelines.
•
Surrounding residents would be notified prior to the start of construction activities and
contact details would be provided to enable feedback during construction as well as
reporting and further information.
Production
•
An immediate tie-in of the gas gathering system to the existing CGP network which
flows to RPGP to limit the amount of venting CSM emissions.
•
Regular monitoring of dust generating activities, largely through routine inspections
(daily/weekly).
•
Traffic control techniques (as per the TMSP, part of the EMS) for the management of
vehicle movements throughout the production phase.
•
Gas well surface locations would be monitored remotely and inspected regularly for
gas leaks and emissions.
Post Development
•
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Activities would be designed and monitored as part of the EMS for the Project to
ensure emissions are in accordance with relevant guidelines and requirements.
24-9
Issue
AECOM
Mitigation Measures
GHG
•
During high wind conditions, activities likely to generate dust would be minimised or
ceased wherever possible.
•
Machinery and equipment would be serviced, in good working order and would be
fitted with appropriate emission control devices.
Construction
•
Conserve fuel and use low emission fuels where possible
•
Minimise any gas losses and keep equipment in good operating order to maintain
efficiency
•
Incorporating and considering GHG in the CEMP to ensure potential greenhouse gas
impacts during construction are minimised
Production
•
An immediate tie-in of the gas gathering system to the existing CGP network (which
flows to RPGP) to limit the amount of venting CSM emissions.
•
Traffic control techniques for the management of vehicle movements would be
implemented throughout the production phase. Planning for vehicle movements on
site would consider the most efficient way to limit vehicle kilometres travelled.
•
Gas well surface locations would be monitored remotely from the RPGP using
SCADA technology and inspected regularly for gas leaks and emissions.
•
Opportunities would be sought to replace the use of electricity with energy provided
by combustion of CSM gas onsite, where this is feasible and safe.
Post Development
•
Activities would be designed and monitored as part of the EMS for the Project to
ensure emissions are minimised, in accordance with AGL’s Greenhouse Gas Policy.
Aboriginal Cultural
Heritage
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
Machinery and equipment would be serviced and kept in good working order
throughout the rehabilitation stage.
•
Regular maintenance of equipment would be conducted to ensure operation in an
efficient manner and monitoring of service records would be kept
•
Open campsites to be fenced and avoided or cultural material should be collected
and reinstated in the same location following the completion of works.
•
Further archaeological work, in the form of salvage, would be carried out at site CGOCS-06 and CG-OCS-09 if avoidance is not possible.
•
Isolated artefact occurrences would be flagged for avoidance. If avoidance is not
possible then cultural material would be collected and reinstated in the same location
following the completion of works.
•
Impacts to areas of moderate archaeological sensitivity associated with sites CGOCS-06 and CG-OCS-09 would be avoided wherever possible.
•
Areas of moderate archaeological sensitivity would be avoided wherever possible.
Should avoidance not be possible, these areas would be managed in accordance
with the existing EMS for the CGP.
•
Registered Aboriginal archaeological sites would be flagged for avoidance.
•
Registered Aboriginal archaeological sites located within the Main Spine Line
envelope would be avoided where possible.
•
Access along the main spine line would utilise the existing Upper Canal vehicle
access road / track
24-10
Issue
Mitigation Measures
European Heritage
General
AECOM
•
Project personnel would be made aware of the ‘stop work provision’ should relics be
unearthed during any phase of the Project work.
•
Impacts to components associated with the Upper Canal would be avoided through
the use of operating distances as recommended by the vibration assessment.
Gathering Network
Visual
•
Gathering lines would cross the Canal in tunnelled locations if it is deemed necessary
to cross the Canal at some other point it would be under-bored.
•
The gathering line corridor would follow already disturbed routes such as existing
tracks wherever possible.
General
•
The existing LRMSP would updated in respect of the Northern Expansion to identify
appropriate landscaping to be implemented at well surface locations along with a
program of long-term maintenance for landscape works.
•
Earthworks, vegetation clearing and soil disturbance would be limited to the
construction and operational footprint as appropriate.
•
Existing vegetation would be maintained wherever possible.
•
Dust control measures would be implemented during construction and operation.
•
Screening in the form of appropriate fencing and landscaping would be implemented
at well surface locations as necessary and in accordance with the LRMSP for the
Project.
•
Environmentally friendly colour schemes would be utilised for each well surface
location in order to minimise visual impacts with respect to the existing surrounding
environment.
•
Initial rehabilitation of the well surface location is to be consistent with the established
character of surrounding land.
•
With regard to the future urban (residential, commercial and industrial) land release
areas, where well surface locations are expected to be near residential development,
material used for fencing or the enclosure would be chosen to integrate with the
surrounding urban form.
•
For well surface locations where residents may be exposed to extended periods of
uninterrupted views during construction, green mesh or other appropriate fencing is
to be erected around the construction compound.
Gathering Network
•
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
Construction activities for the gathering lines would be rehabilitated to be consistent
with the established character of the land.
24-11
Issue
Mitigation Measures
Geology and Soils
Construction
AECOM
•
The existing SWMSP would be updated accordingly with respect to the earthworks
and construction activities associated with the CGP.
•
The SWMSP would be developed at the site planning stage in consultation with the
construction managers. Prior to commencing earthworks, necessary erosion and
sediment control measures would be installed. These would then be inspected on a
daily basis during construction to ensure that they remain functional.
•
Contaminated lands with the potential to be impacted by the Project would be
identified and a Contaminated Lands Management Plan (CLMP) created (if required).
•
Erosion and sediment control measures shall be implemented where necessary to
prevent erosion and water contamination and shall be in place prior to the
commencement of works with the potential to cause erosion. Measures would
include, but are not limited to, surface drains and berms and sediment traps such as
silt fences and straw bales.
•
Erosion control berms and drains shall be designed and constructed so as to ensure
that runoff water does not result in off-site effects of erosion or sedimentation.
•
Areas designated for ground disturbance, including well surface locations, and minor
vegetation clearing would be clearly marked on site plans and on the ground surface
and would be minimised wherever possible.
•
Works (including stockpiling of gas gathering line sections) shall be confined to
identified areas within the gas gathering system route, designated parking and lay
down area and access routes.
•
The period between clearing, trenching and rehabilitation would be minimised.
•
Soil stockpiles would be located away from drainage lines and shall be designed to
minimise runoff. Soil stockpile sites would be enclosed within a bunded area to
reduce the likelihood of sediment entering drainage lines. Stockpiles would be
located at safe distances from the Upper Canal and would be determined in
consultation with the SCA and adjoining landholders.
•
Graded soil and cleared vegetation shall not be stockpiled where it has the potential
to disrupt surface water flow.
•
Erosion and sedimentation controls would be checked and cleaned weekly to ensure
effective operation.
•
Refuelling of vehicles and machinery would be undertaken by suitably trained
personnel within a levelled area with a spill kit present, preferably on a hardstand
area, to minimise contamination from spills.
•
Fuels, chemicals and liquids would be stored in a bunded area to minimise the
potential for spills to escape off site.
•
A spill kit would be taken on site for all construction activities.
Production and Post Development
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
Where erosion does occur, the area shall be stabilised as soon as practicable and
measures taken to rehabilitate the site.
•
Refuelling of machinery would be undertaken by suitably qualified personnel within a
levelled area, preferably on a hardstand area with a spill kit present, to minimise
contamination from spills.
•
A spill kit would be located in all production vehicles.
24-12
Issue
AECOM
Mitigation Measures
Traffic and
Transportation
•
Rehabilitation of disturbed areas would be undertaken as soon as practical with the
restoration of site to natural contours wherever possible.
•
Stockpiled top soil and seed stock shall be respread across the work areas from
which it was removed.
•
Compacted areas shall be deep ripped or scarified for relief as required.
•
Routine inspections of well surface locations would be undertaken to ensure
rehabilitation and regeneration activities are successful and to identify areas of
subsequent erosion.
Construction and Production
•
The existing Traffic Management Sub Plan would be revised/updated where
necessary to reflect the Northern Expansion Project and would be applied to works
within the Surface Project Area including traffic management proposed for well
surface locations and/ or gathering line construction as appropriate.
•
Construction traffic would avoid peak hours, where possible.
•
Unnecessary vehicle movements would be minimised where possible.
•
Appropriate notification of potential roadway disruptions would be displayed/ issued
in advance to road users and local residents.
•
Vehicle operators would be advised of designated access routes and roadways.
These specific routes would be used to access sites to minimise potential impacts on
larger areas of the locality.
•
Transportation of equipment and machinery that are oversized loads would be
undertaken outside standard work hours, and would be timed to avoid peak traffic
flows, wherever possible.
•
All works undertaken in proximity to roadways would be conducted under controlled
traffic conditions.
•
Consultation would be undertaken with the RTA to confirm the schedule of the
proposed works and ensure they do not overlap with RTA planned works (such as
the future Badgally Road connection and upgrade of the Camden Valley Way and
associated intersections)..
Post Development
•
Transport routes for equipment and machinery would be reviewed, considering
updated road alignments, to strategise a route of minimal impact.
•
Monitoring and reporting as described in the Traffic Management Sub Plan in the
existing EMS.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
•
Vehicle movements would be minimised to reduce the potential to impact on traffic
within the locality.
•
Vehicle movements would cease post-closure after the project has been rehabilitated
therefore negating any continued impact on traffic.
•
Transport routes for equipment and machinery would be reviewed, considering
updated road alignments, to strategise a route of minimal impact.
24-13
Issue
Mitigation Measures
Social and
Economic
General
Rehabilitation
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
AECOM
•
Safeguards imposed in respect of land use, hazard and risk, air quality, noise, traffic
and visual impact are sufficient to mitigate potential social impacts effectively.
•
Given that the overall economic impacts of the project are considered to be positive,
no specific environmental safeguards are considered necessary. Management
measures would be undertaken to ensure the overall social and economic
environment of the communities within and surrounding the Northern Expansion is
maintained, including ongoing awareness of the CGP through the CCC and other
consultation when required
General
•
Revegetation to be undertaken as soon as practical after works are complete.
•
Installation of erosion and sedimentation control measures such as silt fencing
surrounding exposed areas or soil stockpiles.
•
Erosion and sedimentation controls would be checked and cleaned weekly to ensure
effective operation.
•
Where available, soil stockpiled for use in the initial rehabilitation stage of works
would be utilised to fill excavated areas such as drill pits. Topsoil is to be separated
from subsoil and replaced in an appropriate order.
•
The ground surface would be contoured to match surrounding land to avoid directing
runoff away from natural drainage lines.
•
Where the surrounding land use is agricultural, consultation would be held with the
landowner to determine crop cover required.
•
Where seeding and replanting is to be carried out, native endemic species equivalent
to those already found on the site are to be used where possible.
•
Stock proof fencing would be installed surrounding rehabilitated areas until sufficient
surface/ ground cover is established.
•
Regular maintenance and monitoring is to be carried out at each site on completion
of the initial rehabilitation process. Maintenance and monitoring would be undertaken
for the duration of rehabilitation works in order to identify the presence of weeds,
subsequent erosion and changes in the drainage patterns.
•
Reseeding to be undertaken if the site has not shown good germination within two
months of sowing.
•
These mitigation measures and safeguards would be incorporated into the
Proponent’s LRMSP as part of the existing EMS which would be implemented at
each well surface location and gas gathering line route as required.
24-14
Issue
Mitigation Measures
Waste
General
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
AECOM
•
Waste generated would be reused or recycled where possible.
•
Excavated topsoil removed during the construction phase would be stockpiled and
appropriately maintained onsite for reuse during initial rehabilitation of surplus
construction area.
•
Soils excavated from trenches and drill pits would be temporarily stockpiled for reuse
during backfill or well surface location initial rehabilitation. Initial rehabilitation refers
to rehabilitation works prior to commissioning.
•
Excess construction wastes which are not suitable for reuse or recycling would be
disposed of at a licensed waste facility.
•
Any vegetation cleared from construction areas may be mulched and stockpiled
onsite and maintained appropriately for reuse during initial rehabilitation. Excess
mulched organic material would be removed from the site and disposed of at a
licensed waste facility as appropriate.
•
Produced water would either be stored in tanks or pits for reuse or taken offsite for
disposal at a licensed waste facility.
•
Appropriate spill, incident management and response procedures would be
developed and implemented through the EMS and ERP and would include measures
to avoid spillages of chemicals, liquids and other wastes.
•
Domestic waste such as glass jars, aluminium cans, paper and compostable matter
would be placed in a dedicated container for removal and recycling off site.
•
All waste to be disposed offsite would be classified, transported and disposed of in
accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines (DECC, 2008).
•
Portable toilet facilities would be installed in construction areas during the
construction period and maintained by a waste contractor.
24-15
24.3
AECOM
Statement of Commitments
In accordance with the EARs issued under Part 3A of the EP&A Act, the following Statement of Commitments
(SoC) has been developed for the Northern Expansion. The SoC states the Proponent’s environmental
commitments and details the environmental management and monitoring of the proposed Project. The Proponent
is committed to ensuring the preparation and implementation of the environmental management and monitoring
plans, further investigations and studies and environmental mitigation measures detailed in the SoC for the
proposed Project.
The SoC, prepared in respect of the Northern Expansion, has been compiled on an issues basis and is informed
by the environmental risk analysis and impact assessment undertaken as part of this EA.
Table 24-3: Statement of Commitments – CGP Northern Expansion Area
Issue
Commitment
General
General
1.
The Proponent shall implement all practicable measures to prevent or minimise
harm to the environment that may result from the construction, operation or
rehabilitation of the Project.
2.
Surface infrastructure associated with the Project would be located within the
Surface Project Area only with activities within the Subsurface Project Area limited
to subsurface drilling of lateral well paths.
3.
The location of supporting infrastructure within the Surface Project Area would be
selected generally in line with the following:
-
If required, increasing the capacity of the existing gas gathering system
would be carried out along established gas gathering routes.
-
If required, re-fracture stimulation of wells would occur at existing well head
locations, subject to environmental considerations at the time.
Surface Water
4.
The Proponent shall prepare and update and implement the Soil and Water
Management Sub Plan (SWMSP) for the project to the satisfaction of the DirectorGeneral. The plan shall be submitted to the Director-General prior to construction
commencing.
Ecology
5.
The Proponent shall take all practicable measures to minimise potential flora and
fauna impacts of the proposed Project.
6.
The Proponent shall take all practicable measures to limit the potential spread of
noxious weeds.
7.
The Proponent shall take all practicable measures to minimise potential impacts
on the CPW community within the Project Area.
8.
The Proponent shall conduct construction activities, except for drilling of wells for
the Project only between the following hours:
7.00 am to 6.00 pm Monday to Friday; and
8.00 am to 1.00 pm Saturdays 9.
The Proponent shall implement all practicable measures to undertake the
development in a way that minimises the noise generated.
Noise
Air Quality
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
10. The Proponent shall implement all practicable measures to minimise dust and
other emissions generated by the construction and operation of the project to the
satisfaction of the Director-General.
24-16
AECOM
Issue
Commitment
Heritage
11. The Proponent shall revise the existing Cultural Heritage Management Plan for the
CGP to reflect the findings of the studies relevant to The Northern Expansion. The
revision of the plan shall include consultation with the DECCW and relevant
Aboriginal communities, and would be prepared to the satisfaction of the DirectorGeneral. The plan shall be submitted to the Director General prior to commencing
construction of those works, and shall include:
12. A description of the measures that would be implemented for the salvage,
relocation or mapping of the archaeological relics as identified in the Aboriginal
Heritage Assessment included as Appendix I to this EA.
13. In accordance with Section 146 of the Heritage Act, the Proponent would notify the
Heritage Council of NSW if any historical archaeological 'relics' (within the
meaning of the Heritage Act) are disturbed by the proposed works
Safety and Risk
Management
14. All works subject of the Northern Expansion Project application would be subject
to the Proponent’s Emergency Response Plan and Safety Management System.
The plan/ system shall be submitted to the Director-General, prior to the
commissioning of the Project.
General
15. The location of wells within the Surface Project Area would be selected generally
in line with the following:
-
Well surface infrastructure would be located to avoid areas of native
vegetation wherever possible;
-
Supporting gathering lines would be located in existing disturbed areas
wherever possible; and
-
Access roads would be located in existing disturbed areas wherever
possible.
16. The Proponent shall provide Camden Council and Campbelltown City Council with
the Geographical Positioning System (GPS) co-ordinates and digital survey data
for gas well surface locations and gas gathering systems within its Local
Government Area, in a format suitable to Council, within three months of the
commissioning of the gas wells.
17. The Proponent shall provide Camden Council and Campbelltown City Council with
the well head configurations of each gas well within three months of the gas well
being commissioned.
Surface Water
18. The Proponent shall prepare and implement a Flood Management Plan for wells
located within the 1 in 100 year flood level to the satisfaction of the DirectorGeneral. The plan shall be submitted to the Director-General prior to
commissioning of those wells, and shall include measures to minimise and
mitigate flooding impacts associated with the project.
Ecology
19. The Proponent shall revise and implement the existing Landscape and
Rehabilitation Management Plan for the CGP detailing landscaping to be
undertaken at well surface locations, including a maintenance program for these
landscaping works. Landscaping shall be undertaken using appropriate native
species. Well surface infrastructure shall avoid areas of native vegetation
wherever possible.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-17
AECOM
Issue
Commitment
Noise 20. The Proponent shall utilise a combination of design measures at well construction
sites as required (refer to Section 8.5 for identified mitigation measures at each
site) to ensure that noise impacts during the construction period are minimised.
The Proponent shall implement the following measures during the construction
period to further manage potential noise impacts:
-
Update the Construction Noise Management Plan (CNMP) for the CGP to
incorporate the Northern Expansion considering the following issues:
-
Identification of noise goals;
-
Identification of residential receivers;
-
Length of construction;
-
Hours of construction;
-
Best practice, construction equipment and noise mitigation;
-
Noise monitoring;
-
Community notification; and
-
Complaints handling.
21. The Proponent shall undertake a program of noise monitoring once wells are
operational in order to validate design of operating well surface locations. A
combination of the mitigation measures and design options would be applied on a
site by site basis, as determined by the results of noise monitoring, to ensure that
operational noise is maintained at an acceptable level.
Gathering Network
Vibration
22. The Proponent shall monitor vibration of works within the vicinity of the Upper
Canal as to ensure its structural integrity is not compromised.
23. The Proponent shall comply with acceptable vibration levels as agreed through
prior consultation with the SCA.
General
24. The Proponent shall comply with the following in the construction of the gas
gathering system pipeline:
-
The route of gas gathering and water transport systems and access roads
follow previously or currently disturbed areas wherever possible;
-
Signs stating the presence of a buried gas pipeline shall be erected
periodically along the length of the trench once the pipeline has been laid;
and
-
Trenches are to be restored and reseeded with local grass seeds or a seed
blend agreed to by the landowner on completion of the work.
25. The Proponent shall construct the gas gathering system so as not to impede lateral
water flows;
26. The Proponent shall ensure that no crown or camber remains along the gas
gathering systems, following construction;
27. The pipeline shall be designed, constructed and operated in accordance with the
Australian Standard for the installation and maintenance of Plastic Pipe Systems
for Gas AS 3723-1989 (or its latest version); and trenches are not left open
overnight, unless adequately covered.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-18
Issue
AECOM
Commitment
28.
The Proponent shall update the existing Environmental Management System
(EMS) to provide environmental management practices and procedures to be
followed during the operation of the Project. The EMS shall include, but not
necessarily be limited to:
-
identification of statutory and other obligations that the Proponent is required
to fulfil in relation to operation of the Project;
-
a description of the roles and responsibilities for all key personnel involved in
environmental management of the Project;
-
the environmental policies and principles to be applied to the operation of the
Project; and
-
describe in general terms how the environmental performance of the Project
would be monitored and managed.
29.
The Proponent shall commission and pay the full costs of an Independent
Environmental Audit of the construction of the gas gathering system, construction
of the access roads and drilling and fracture stimulation of gas wells within the
CGP.
-
be conducted by a suitably qualified, experienced, and independent
person(s) whose appointment has been approved by the Director-General;
and
-
be consistent with ISO 19011:2002 – Guidelines for Quality and/or
Environmental Management Systems Auditing, or updated versions of these
guidelines/manuals.
The audit shall:
(i)
assess the environmental performance of the construction of the
Project, and its effects on the surrounding environment;
(ii)
assess whether the development is complying with the relevant
standards, performance measures, and statutory requirements;
(iii)
consider the Proponent’s EMS Sub Plans; and
(iv) recommend measures or actions to improve the environmental
performance of the construction of the Project, and/or its environmental
management and monitoring systems (if required).
Within one month of completion of the audit, the Proponent must submit a copy of
the audit report to the Director-General, the NSW Heritage Office and DII. The
Director-General may require the Proponent to address certain matters identified
in the report and any comments received from the NSW Heritage Office and DII.
Any action required to be undertaken shall be completed within such period as
the Director-General may agree.
24.4
Training and Induction
Construction and operations personnel would be required to attend an induction prior to the commencement of
activities for each new gas field. The induction would ensure that all personnel are fully aware of their OH&S and
environmental responsibilities and gain the necessary knowledge and skills to fulfil their responsibilities.
Inductions and/ or training required for specific sites would be conducted for personnel prior to the start of work at
that site. Induction would address general environmental and OH&S management issues including:
•
Equipment hazards, controls and residual risk;
•
Drilling OH&S hazards, controls and residual risk;
•
Management of sensitive areas;
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-19
•
Erosion control;
•
Water quality;
•
Air quality;
•
Cultural heritage management;
•
Weed, pathogen and pest species control;
•
Fauna and flora preservation;
•
Bushfire Management;
•
Traffic and access;
•
Noise;
•
Chemical storage and handling;
•
Emergency and spill response;
•
Waste management; and
•
Protecting the amenity of landholders.
AECOM
In addition and where required, job specific training would be conducted, and would also be conducted prior to the
commencement of the activities below:
•
Clearing and grading;
•
Installation of gas gathering lines;
•
Drilling/ Fracture stimulation;
•
Testing and commissioning; and
•
Clean up and rehabilitation.
It would be the responsibility of all Contractors to prepare and implement an induction and job specific training
program appropriate to their methods of work. Approval from the Proponent would be required prior to
implementation.
24.5
Inspection, Monitoring and Auditing
Inspection, monitoring and auditing would be undertaken to assess and record whether activities are in
compliance with regulatory requirements and the objectives outlined in the EMS.
In addition to the conditions of the Minister's approval and the Proponent's SoCs, all Project components would be
carried out in accordance with:
•
Conditions specified by the Minister for Mineral Resources pursuant to PPL1, PPL 2, PPL4, PPL5 and new
PPL to be acquired;
•
The Department of Primary Industries (Mineral Resources) (now Department of Industry and Investment)
Schedule of Onshore Petroleum Exploration and Production Requirements 1992; and
•
Conditions specified pursuant to the POEO Act.
24.6
Outline of Environmental Reporting
Environmental reporting is a significant tool for environmental management as it can facilitate the collection of
information on environmental impacts and issues and assist in identifying possible solutions in order to minimise
these impacts. Environmental reporting also brings benefits to the performance and efficiency of an operation.
During the construction and operational stages of this Project, environmental reporting is considered a vital
component and reporting information would include the following:
•
Non-compliance reports;
•
Remedial actions undertaken resulting from the reporting of an incident;
•
Checklists to address operational compliance;
•
Details of any stakeholder consultation and meetings;
•
Outcomes of any auditing that is carried out; and
•
The findings of any monitoring that is conducted.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-20
AECOM
The Proponent would ensure that all reporting undertaken in relation to environment and OH&S issues would be
in compliance with the relevant licence conditions and regulatory requirements.
24.7
Outline of Environmental Auditing
Environmental compliance auditing would be undertaken to assist in identifying the environmental impacts
associated with the construction and operational phases of the Project. Inspection of construction and operational
activities would be undertaken on a regular basis by a suitably qualified person. On-going monitoring of these
activities is essential to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and conditions of approval. Auditing,
together with the implementation of inspection and monitoring programs would provide for the assessment of
compliance of the Project during construction and operation with regulatory requirements and the environmental
objectives identified in Section 24.2. The Proponent would ensure that records are kept of all auditing that is
conducted. Based on results of the audits, the Proponent would ensure modifications and corrective actions are
undertaken to rectify any identified environmental impacts or concerns of the project.
24.8
Emergency Response Plan
The existing ERP would be updated as required and implemented prior to the commencement of construction and
operational activities associated with the Project. The ERP would describe the procedures and reporting
requirements to be carried out in the event of a situation that requires urgent action in order to prevent harm to
personnel, property and the work area.
The ERP would be updated in consultation with the relevant emergency authorities where necessary and would
include the following information:
•
Contact details for all emergency services in the area;
•
The contact details (including before and after hours) of all relevant AGL, contractor and government
department personnel;
•
First aid procedures;
•
Fire fighting procedures;
•
Gas gathering system control procedures (including shut-in procedures);
•
Details of the procedures to be carried out in an emergency situation by the responsible persons,
•
Details of the environmental emergency procedures for general and specific emergency situations that may
arise; and
•
Reporting requirements for all incidents that are considered dangerous or potentially dangerous or where
damage has been caused.
The Proponent would ensure and that personnel are well informed through training on the required procedures in
the event of an emergency and that the ERP is readily accessible for personnel.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-21
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
24-22
25.0
Residual Risk
25.1
Approach
AECOM
The Residual Environmental Risk Analysis for the proposed Northern Expansion of the CGP is based on a
process adapted from Australian Standard AS 4360:2004 Risk Management, as well as environmental risk tools
developed by other organisations. The process is qualitative and is based on the Residual Risk Matrix shown in
Table 25-1.
Residual Environmental Risk is assessed on the basis of the significance of environmental effects of the proposed
Project and the ability to confidently manage those effects to minimise harm to the environment.
The significance of environmental effects is given a numerical value between 1 and 5 based on the receiving
environment, the level of understanding of the type and extent of impacts and community response to the
environmental consequences of the Project. This enables both the actual and perceived impacts to be
considered. The manageability of environmental effects is similarly given a numerical value between 1 and 5
based on the complexity of mitigation measures, the known level of performance of the safeguards proposed and
the opportunity for adaptive management. The numerical value allocated for each issue is based upon the
following considerations:
Significance of Effects
5.
Extreme
Undisturbed receiving environment; type or extent of impacts unknown; substantial
community concern.
4.
High
Sensitive receiving environment; type or extent of impacts not well understood; high
level of community concern.
3.
Moderate
Residual receiving environment; type and extent of impacts understood; community
interest.
2.
Minor
Disturbed receiving environment; type and extent of impacts well understood; some
local community interest.
1.
Low
Degraded receiving environment; type and extent of impacts fully understood;
uncontroversial project.
Manageability of Effects
5.
Complex
Complicated array of mitigation measures required; safeguards or technology are
unproven; adaptive management inappropriate.
4.
Substantial
Significant mix of mitigation measures required; limited evidence of effectiveness of
safeguards; adaptive management feasible.
3.
Straightforward
Straightforward range of mitigation measures required; past performance of
safeguards is understood; adaptive management easily applied.
2.
Standard
Simple suite of mitigation measures required; substantial track record of effectiveness
of safeguards; adaptive management unlikely to be required.
1.
Minimal
Little or no mitigation measures required; safeguards are standard practice; adaptive
management not required,
The numbers are added together to provide a result which provides a ranking of potential residual effects of the
Project when the safeguards identified in this EA are implemented.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
25-1
AECOM
Table 25-1: Residual Risk Matrix
Significance
Manageability of Effects
of
5
4
3
2
1
Effects
Complex
Substantial
Straightforward
Standard
Minimal
1
6
(Medium)
5
(Low/Medium)
4
(Low/Medium)
3
(Low)
2
(Low)
7
(High/Medium)
6
(Medium)
5
(Low/Medium)
4
(Low/Medium)
3
(Low)
8
(High/Medium)
7
(High/Medium)
6
(Medium)
5
(Low/Medium)
4
(Low/Medium)
9
(High)
8
(High/Medium)
7
(High/Medium)
6
(Medium)
5
(Low/Medium)
10
(High)
9
(High)
8
(High/Medium)
7
(High/Medium)
6
Low
2
Minor
3
Moderate
4
High
5
Extreme
25.2
(Medium)
Analysis
The analysis of residual environmental risk for issues related to the proposed Project is shown in Table 25-2. This
analysis indicates the environmental risk profile for the proposed Project based on the assessment of
environmental effects, the identification of appropriate safeguards, and the SoC included in this EA.
Table 25-2: Risk Profile
Issue
Significance
Manageability
Residual Risk
Land Use
3
2
5 (Low/Medium)
Surface Water
2
2
4 (Low/Medium)
Hazard and Risk
2
2
4 (Low/Medium)
Ecology
1
2
3 (Low)
Groundwater
2
2
4 (Low/Medium)
Noise and Vibration
2
2
4 (Low/Medium)
Air Quality
1
2
3(Low)
Heritage
2
2
4 (Low/Medium)
Visual Impacts
1
2
3 (Low)
Soils and Geology
1
2
3 (Low)
Traffic
1
2
3 (Low)
Social and Economic
2
1
3 (Low)
Rehabilitation
1
2
3 (Low)
Waste
1
1
2 (Low)
The above residual risk analysis indicates that the proposed Project presents an overall low/medium risk in
relation to each of the identified environmental issues provided that the recommended mitigation measures are
implemented.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
25-2
26.0
AECOM
Schedule 2 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 sets out the matters which an
environmental impact statement must consider and includes a requirement for consideration of the justification for
the Project having regard to biophysical, economic and social considerations, including the principles of ESD. This
requirement is reiterated in respect of the proposed Project in the EARs issued by the Director General.
This chapter provides a justification for the Project in line with the requirements of the EP&A Regulation and the
Director General’s EARs for the Project.
26.1
Introduction
The proposed Northern Expansion of the CGP, which involves the construction, operation and rehabilitation of
well surface locations and associated subsurface drilling of lateral in-seam well paths, associated gas gathering
lines and access roads, is considered to be a viable Project providing and essential energy resource to NSW. The
expansion would provide numerous benefits, including environmental benefits associated with the provision of an
alternative and cleaner fuel by comparison to many of the other existing fossil fuels such as coal.
The Project would therefore have resultant benefits for the local and wider community and the environment, as
well as for present and future generations.
Consultation with land owners has enabled the identification of well surface locations and utility corridors that do
not physically conflict with current master plans for future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development. Environmental compatibility with future land uses has been facilitated through the use of an
environmental envelope for well surface locations and an environmental corridor for gas gathering lines and
access roads. This approach enables some adjustment of facilities to suit final land use designs without
compromising the rigour of environmental assessment or the effectiveness of mitigation measures.
The design of the Northern Expansion and the assessment of potential impacts presented in this EA show that the
Project is able to be constructed, operated and decommissioned in a manner which is compatible with both
existing and proposed land uses.
26.2
Justification
The Director-General’s EARs issued for this Project require justification for the Project to be provided, having
regard to biophysical, economic and social considerations together with the principles of ESD. The environmental
impact assessment of the Project undertaken in this EA, has addressed the relevant biophysical, economic and
social considerations, summarised below.
26.2.1
Biophysical
Potential biophysical impacts associated with the proposed Project have been assessed in Section 9, 10, 12, 13,
14 and 18 of this EA. The assessment of the biophysical environment has included individual assessments of:
•
Ecology (Flora and Fauna);
•
Water management (surface and groundwater);
•
Noise;
•
Air quality; and
•
Geology and soils;
The Project has utilised locational guidelines and an environmental envelope assessment approach which
enables the Project to be undertaken with minimal impacts on the biophysical environment. Environmental
constraints such as endangered or vulnerable species are able to be avoided where possible through this
approach.
The preferred drilling technique of SIS wells enables the Proponent to access gas reserves up to 2 500 m from
the surface location, reducing the number of surface locations required and reducing the overall environmental
disturbance. Appropriate rehabilitation ensures the vegetation is returned to its natural aesthetic condition at each
location.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
26-1
AECOM
The assessment of each of these elements concluded that the implementation of a range of environmental
safeguards and measures recommended throughout this EA would mitigate potential impacts, and that the Project
would not have a significant adverse impact on the biophysical environment.
As required by the Director-General’s EARs for the Project, environmental mitigation, management and
monitoring requirements have been compiled and summarised in the Statement of Commitments, which is
provided as Chapter 24 of this EA.
The Project is justified taking into account potential residual biophysical impacts on the environment.
26.2.2
Economic
The economic impacts of the Project are assessed in Chapter 20, and are largely related to the indirect benefits
of the Project for the local, regional and State economy in terms of the provision of a valuable, indigenous energy
resource to supply the growing NSW economy.
Projections by ABARE predict natural gas, including CSM, to be the fastest growing fuel in the country. A 2.6%
per year increase until 2030 is expected for natural gas consumption, where up to half of all natural gas
consumed is expected to be provided by CSM (ABARE, 2007).
With the majority of CSM resources located in the eastern states (NSW and Queensland), driven by local
demand, it is expected that natural gas will supply about 40-50% of all energy within NSW by 2020. It is
imperative that NSW reserves are utilised to meet this growing demand, with NSW being the largest consumer of
energy in Australia. The amount of CSM gas reserves in NSW is thought to be largely underestimated and could
prove to be a more viable energy supply over other fossil fuels.
AGL has developed the application of CSM technology locally, based on the history of existing local operations.
The Northern Expansion presents a viable application to use this technology resulting in an increase in gas
production in NSW to meet the projected increase in demand for this resource. Furthermore, the development of
this local resource locally reduces the need to transport gas from elsewhere (including interstate), improving
efficiency and potentially reducing the overall cost of gas for consumers and the environment. The Northern
Expansion, combined with the existing gas fields, would ensure a continued supply of gas to the region.
The Project would utilise the existing 37 staff for the majority of the operational requirements of the CGP
expansion. The anticipated employment increase for CGP as a direct result of the operational stage of the Project
is expected to create new positions and the development of the Project would help to secure these positions into
the future as well as securing future contract positions.
The importance of securing an indigenous, cost-effective energy supply, with lower greenhouse emissions is
considered vital to the social and economic growth of both the Subsurface and Surface Project Areas and the
State. The CGP represents a significant investment in the region and provides the local community with the
impetus to plan for future business and service opportunities in the area. Given the economic benefits, the Project
is justified taking into account potential economic impacts.
26.2.3
Socio-cultural
The potential social impacts of the Project have been assessed in Chapter 20 of this EA, and include
consideration of:
•
Hazards and risk;
•
Aboriginal and European heritage;
•
Land use (commercial, residential, industrial);
•
Traffic and transportation infrastructure;
•
Landscape and visual amenity;
•
Social community and economic environments;
•
Noise;
•
Air quality; and
•
Cumulative impacts of the development.
In determining the proposed well surface locations within the Northern Expansion area, AGL has taken into
consideration available information regarding the future development in these areas, in particular the LEPs,
master plans and any draft plans prepared for the Turner Road, East Leppington, Camden Lakeside, El Caballo
Blanco and Gledswood land release areas (refer to Chapter 5).
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
26-2
AECOM
The use of SIS wells, accessing reserves up to 2 500 m from well surface locations, also reduces impacts and
conflict on current and future land use. Rehabilitation techniques also minimise impacts on landscape and visual
amenity, returning locations to their previous condition, if not better. Existing operations and previous works
utilising these techniques have successfully demonstrated the ability of the CGP to co-exist with future land
release areas and maintain the existing visual amenity.
Heritage values of the Surface Project Area are maintained through the environmental envelope approach as well
as appropriate drilling techniques. This is to ensure impact upon heritage items such as the Upper Canal is
minimal. Consultation with local land owners and community groups has been undertaken in addition to desktop
and field studies in order to identify items of cultural significance (Chapter 15 and 16) and have been considered
in the siting of wells within the envelope.
The assessments undertaken conclude that, provided that the recommended mitigation measures are
implemented throughout phases of the proposed development, significant conflict with socio-cultural elements
would be avoided.
There is justification for the Project, justified taking into account potential socio-cultural impacts.
26.3
Ecological Sustainability
Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) is a concept firmly entrenched in New South Wales environmental
legislation and government policy. The four guiding principles of ESD and their relation to the proposed Project
are outlined in the following sections. The principles are as follows:
•
The precautionary principle – namely, that if there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental
damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent
environmental degradation.
•
Inter-generational equity – namely, that the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and
productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations.
•
Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity – namely, that conservation of biological
diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration.
•
Improved valuation and pricing of environmental resources - namely, that environmental factors should
be included in the valuation of assets and services, such as polluter pays, full life cycle costing, and utilising
incentive structures/market mechanisms to meet environmental goals.
The EPBC Act also identifies a fifth principle for consideration in environmental impact, namely:
‘Decision making processes should effectively integrate both long term and short term economic,
environmental, social and equitable considerations.’
These five principles are interrelated and need to be considered both individually and collectively as part of
determining whether or not a Project would be consistent with the principles of ESD in Australia.
26.3.1
The Precautionary Principle
The Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (IGAE) provides a definition of the precautionary principle,
which requires that where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific
certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In the
application of the precautionary principle, public and private decisions should be guided by:
a)
careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment, and
a)
an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.
The IGAE states that the precautionary principle is to be a guiding principle for informed policy making and
program implementation by all levels of government in Australia. In this manner, it is to guide both the public and
private sector in its decision making and assessment of different options, particularly when decisions are being
made in the face of uncertainty. In doing so, it requires avoidance of serious or irreversible damage to the
environment, whenever practicable.
The Project has taken on board the precautionary principle by carrying out detailed environmental investigations
in order to gain as much knowledge about the environmental characteristics of a locality and the processes and
interactions of various components of the environment as reasonably as possible. This knowledge has been used
to determine the potential environmental impacts of the Project and recommend specific environmental
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
26-3
AECOM
management practices and safeguards for the proposed works to ensure significant environmental impacts do not
occur and residual impacts are minimised. Environmental monitoring would be undertaken in respect of the
Subsurface and Surface Project Areas to assess the adequacy of the precautions and safeguards used to
minimise environmental impacts. This approach is consistent with the precautionary principle.
26.3.2
Inter-Generational Equity
The principle of inter-generational equity defined by the IGAE is a concept that requires the present generation to
ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment are maintained or enhanced for the benefit of
future generations. The most significant aspect of this concept is that future generations should not inherit a
degraded environment.
The various components of the Project have been designed to minimise environmental impacts and to ensure that
the proposed works do not further degrade the environment. Mitigation strategies have been developed as part of
the Project in accordance with current best management practice for CSM well drilling programs and recognising
the requirement to achieve, where possible, a neutral or beneficial effect on the environment.
The proposed works of the Northern Expansion would not result in the sterilisation of land or other resources and
would return the land to as close as possible to its original state or better upon closure of the wells. Upon
implementation of environmental safeguards and mitigation measures, the Project would result in the provision of
a valuable indigenous NSW gas resource without causing significant or irreversible environmental harm.
26.3.3
Biological Diversity and Ecological Integrity
This principle requires the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity to be a fundamental
consideration of all development projects.
Detailed assessments in relation to the Surface Project Area, concluded that the Project can be conducted without
significant impact on the biological diversity and ecological integrity of the locality. An ecological assessment was
undertaken to consider the impacts of the works proposed as part of the Project Application. The assessment
found that the Northern Expansion would have no significant impact upon threatened species, populations or
ecological communities or their habitats given sufficient mitigation measures are met.
Further detailed ecological investigations would be undertaken prior to the commencement of works in the
Surface Project Area to ensure that the impacts of these works on biological diversity and ecological integrity are
similarly managed and minimised. Monitoring would be undertaken to ensure that environmental control
measures are operating effectively.
Provided best practice planning and impact mitigation measures are implemented as recommended in this EA,
the proposed Northern Expansion is not expected to present a significant risk to the biodiversity of the
surrounding environment.
26.3.4
Improved Valuation and Pricing of Environmental Resources
The IGAE and POEO Act require improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms to be included in policy
making and program implementation. In the context of environmental assessment and management, this would
translate to environmental factors being considered in the valuation of assets and services.
Integration of environmental and economic goals is a key principle of ESD, which can be measured undertaking a
cost-benefit analysis, that is, by measuring the costs of proceeding with a Project against the benefits arising from
the Project.
It is difficult to assign a monetary value to the environment of the locality given the lack of precedent in the
valuation of environmental resources not considered for commercial use. As a monetary value could not be
placed against the greatest number of environmental attributes, the approach taken was to manage
environmental impact by identifying site specific safeguard measures to mitigate against adverse environmental
effects, and to include the cost of these measures in the overall Project cost. This enables the value and price of
the environmental resource to be more accurately reflected.
The Project design and approach to valuation and pricing of environmental resources allows the extraction of a
strategically valuable and important energy resource in an already constrained market, while still allowing future
urban (residential, commercial and industrial) development of the land.
26.3.5
Decision Making Process
The proposed Northern Expansion of the CGP requires approval under Part 3A of the EP&A Act 1979.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
26-4
AECOM
An assessment of the short, medium and long term impacts of the proposed activities, taking into account the
principles of ESD, is described in this EA. The SoC provided in Chapter 24, forms the environmental mitigation,
management and monitoring requirements for the proposed works.
The Project Approval process prescribed under Part 3A of the EP&A Act and subsequent environmental
management frameworks ensure that decision making and monitoring of the Project would be undertaken in an
integrated manner, having regard to relevant issues associated with the Project within its context.
26.4
Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect
The Greenhouse Effect involves certain gases, known as greenhouse gases, capturing heat radiated from the
earth and re-radiating heat back to the earth. The thermal balance that is known to control earth’s climate is
maintained by this mechanism, and is influenced by the steadily increasing concentrations of certain greenhouse
gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), with other greenhouse gases including methane, ozone (O3), NOx and
Chloro-fluorocarbons (CFCs).
Natural gas is widely considered to be the cleanest and most environmentally acceptable fossil fuel, producing
only 55% of the greenhouse gas emissions when burned (including carbon dioxide and sulphur compounds)
compared to the burning of coal. For each megajoule of energy produced from burning coal, 50% more carbon
dioxide is generated than if that energy had been produced from burning natural gas at the same efficiency (EPA,
1998, as cited by CGPJV, 2005), making it a considerable lower emission-intensive fossil fuel.
Gas typically costs more per gigajoule than coal, but it is a more efficient fuel and a competitively priced gas
supply would assist in reducing local reliance on more emissions-intensive fuels.
AGL is a committed member of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which is the world's first voluntary and
legally binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction, registry and trading program.
The CCX is the largest such exchange in the world and traded in excess of 10.5 million tonnes of abatement in
2006. CCX commenced greenhouse gas emissions allowance trading in 2003 and a legally binding rules-based
greenhouse gas emissions allowance trading system, as well as the world's only global system for emissions
trading based on all six greenhouse gases. CCX members are leaders in greenhouse gas management and
represent all sectors of the global economy, as well as public sector innovators. CCX Members committed to
reduce their greenhouse emissions by a minimum of 6% by 2010, depending on membership Phase.
AGL joined the CCX in 2007 and was the first from the Energy sector in Australia to become a member. AGL
continues to undertake greenhouse gas abatement related projects and has also committed to an internal
Greenhouse Gas Policy. The Policy supports government initiatives for greenhouse abatement and outlines
sustainability commitments to reduce GHG emissions and improve GHG efficiency.
The proposed Northern Expansion of the CGP would provide for increased production of natural gas to supply the
growing NSW market, meeting future projected demand and reducing the need for consumers to use alternative
and perhaps less environmentally acceptable fossil fuel sources such as energy produced through the burning of
coal. In addition, with a recent push towards more greenhouse gas acceptable fuels which is expected to further
increase in importance into the future, natural gas is seen to represent a natural transition from the use of fossil
fuels to cleaner sources of energy.
The proposed Project considers certain impacts in terms of climate change and the greenhouse effect in terms of
the use of diesel and other fuels for the powering of vehicles and equipment used for the drilling and operation of
the wells. However, the total volume of greenhouse gases produced as a result of these activities is expected to
be negligible given the scale of the Project and the temporary nature of construction activities required for the
Project.
Further, indirect impacts in terms of greenhouse and climate change could be considered in terms of the capturing
of a fossil fuel which would in turn be burnt by consumers with resultant production of greenhouse gases.
However, as stated above, of the range of fossil fuels available, natural gas is considered to be the cleanest,
producing the least amount of greenhouse gases per unit of energy produced.
A greenhouse gas assessment was undertaken as part of this EA (Chapter 14), of which the impacts on climate
change were considered. The overall impact in terms of climate change and greenhouse are expected to be
minimal and generally positive when considered in the context of the wider energy market.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
26-5
26.5
AECOM
Consequences of Not Proceeding
The importance of securing a cost-effective indigenous energy supply, with lower greenhouse emissions is
considered vital to the social and economic growth of the local and metropolitan area and the State. Should the
Project not proceed, a cost-effective indigenous source of energy would be lost.
Growth in domestic use of gas is projected to remain strong (growing at 4.0 % per annum in the medium term to
2010–11 and thereafter at 2.5 % per annum) to reach 1,740 PJ nationally in 2019–20 (Roarty, 2008). The
development of new gas supplies to the growing Sydney market is important to guarantee supply. This Project
will provide the next step both in ensuring that supply to the Sydney market is maintained in the future and in
helping to protect the environment.
It is therefore incumbent upon the Government to ensure that current Australian supplies of gas are supplemented
from additional sources sooner rather than later. A gas distribution network runs through the CGP, consequently,
the Proponent is well placed to assist in bringing additional gas to the market from the Northern Expansion of the
CGP.
The expansion of the CGP would also assist in the achievement of several State and Regional energy objectives
and initiatives which are formulated to provide safe, efficient and secure energy supplies into the future.
Should the Project not proceed, the most obvious effects in a State, regional and local context would be:
•
The loss of an opportunity to develop a convenient and competitive natural gas supply within the Sydney
Basin;
•
The loss of resulting economic and social benefits to the New South Wales community (as discussed in
Chapter 20); and
•
The likely future shortfall in the gas supply to the growing New South Wales market may in turn lead to an
increase in the use of less efficient alternative fossil fuel sources that would increase greenhouse gas
emissions.
It would also be a lost opportunity to contribute positively to Government initiatives such as the development of
CSM resources, the National Greenhouse Strategy, the Commonwealth Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, the
NSW Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme, petroleum production in NSW and the deregulation of energy
markets in Australia.
26.6
Conclusion
Undertaking the Project in the manner proposed is justified taking into consideration its compatibility with existing
and future land uses as well as potential biophysical, economic and socio-cultural impacts. Additionally, the
Project accords with the principles of ESD and the objects of the EP&A Act as demonstrated in Table 5-1.
Consideration of the Project against a wide range of criteria demonstrates that the Project is environmentally
sustainable and justified.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
26-6
27.0
Conclusion
27.1
The Project
AECOM
The Project comprises the Northern Expansion of the CGP, involving the construction and operation of gas wells
and associated infrastructure such as gas gathering lines and access roads within the Surface Project Area.
Subsurface drilling of lateral well paths would also be undertaken within the boundaries of the Subsurface Project
Area. The primary purpose of the Project is to increase gas production from the CGP to meet projected future
demand which is expected to increase significantly. The Project would also provide for an indigenous gas supply
for the Sydney market, reducing the need for transportation of gas from interstate to meet demand and
encouraging the use of a cleaner energy source than that provided by coal.
In order to facilitate the Northern Expansion, AGL is seeking Project Approval for works within the identified
Surface Project Area and consisting of 12 new well surface locations. The Project is identified as a ‘Major
Development’ under SEPP 2005, therefore the Minister for Planning is the approval authority.
27.2
Justification for the Project
The Project has been subject to environmental assessment in accordance with Part 3A of the EP&A Act and the
requirements issued by the Director-General. The EA undertaken concludes that whilst the Project would have
some residual impacts, the mitigation measures identified would effectively reduce these to an acceptable level of
environmental risk and enable the Project to operate without detriment to the existing or future land uses. The
Project stands to provide significant public benefit in terms of the provision of a vital source of energy to meet
projected future demand as well as allowing for the future urban (residential, commercial and industrial)
development of the area. These benefits are considered to outweigh the residual environmental impacts
identified in this EA.
Undertaking the Project in the manner proposed is justified taking into consideration potential biophysical,
economic and socio-cultural impacts.
27.3
Sustainability of the Project
The Project is sustainable in terms of:
•
Efficiencies in meeting Project objectives;
•
The acceptability of risks;
•
Protection of ecological integrity and biodiversity;
•
Social equity considerations; and
•
A precautionary approach to analysis, management and monitoring of impacts and risks to the environment.
27.4
Conclusion
Potential environmental impacts resulting from the Project have been identified and measures and safeguards
have been incorporated throughout the EA to manage these. The Project would be constructed and operated to
meet existing environmental standards and the environmental performance of the Project would be monitored to
ensure achievement of these standards.
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
27-1
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
27-2
28.0
AECOM
References
ABARE, 2010. Energy in Australia 2010, Prepared for Australian Government Department of Resources, Energy
and Tourism, Canberra, April 2010.
ABARE, 2009. Energy in Australia 2009, Prepared for Australian Government Department of Resources, Energy
and Tourism, Canberra, April 2009.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2006 Census data for Camden and Campbelltown
APP Corporation, 2008. El Caballo Blanco & Gledswood Local Environmental Study prepared for Camden
Council, October 2008.
Australian Energy Regulator (AER), 2007. State of the Energy Market 2007, Chapter 8: Gas Exploration,
Production, Wholesaling And Trade.
Australian Pipeline Industry Association, 2009. Natural Gas Report. August 2009.
Syed, A., Wilson, R., Sandu, S., Cuevas-Cubria, C. and Clarke, A. 2007, Australian Energy: National and State
Projections to 2029-30, ABARE Research Report 07.24, Prepared for the Australian Government Department of
Resources, Energy and Tourism, Canberra, December.
Camden Council, 2006. Flood Risk Management Policy. April 2006. Accessed:
http://www.camden.nsw.gov.au/page/flood_information.html On: 5 November 2009
DIPNR (now DoP), 2004. Locational Guidelines: Development in the Vicinity of Operating Coal Seam Methane
Wells, DIPNR, May 2004
Department of Mineral Resources, 1980. A Guide to the Sydney Basin, edited by Chris Hubert,
Department of Mineral Resources, Geological Survey of NSW, Bulletin no. 26.
Department of Planning, 2008. NSW State and Regional Population Projections, 2006-2036, 2008 Release.
October 2008. Department of Planning, Sydney.
Department of Planning, 2005. NSW Statistical Local Area Population Projections 2001 – 2031, 2005 Release.
December 2006. Department of Planning, Sydney.
Department of Planning, 2005. City of Cities: a Plan for Sydney’s Future, Department of Planning, Sydney
Department of Planning, 2005. Managing Sydney’s Growth Centres, Department of Planning, Sydney.
DPI, 2005. Coal seam methane in NSW, Available online at:
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/minerals/geological/overview/regional/sedimentary-basins/methanensw
Greater Western Sydney Economic Development Board, 2006. 2006 Regional Economic Profile. Accessed:
http://www.gws.org.au/imagesDB/webPages/(1)GWSEconomicStudy2006-Final.pdf On: 25 October 2009
Roads and Traffic Authority, 2002. Guide to Traffic Generating Developments
Roads and Traffic Authority, 2009. Community Update October 2009 - Camden Valley Way Upgrade,
RTA/Pub.09.399, October 2009
Sydney Catchment Authority, 2007. Submission to Inquiry into the NSW Southern Coalfields. Appendix 5: The
Design of a Hydrological and Hydrogeological Monitoring Program to Assess the Impact of Longwall Mining in
SCA Catchments, July 2005
Sydney Gas Operations, 2003. Environmental Impact Statement: Camden Gas Project Stage II. 19 June 2003.
AECOM
S60666_EA_FNL_100830
28-2
Plates
AECOM
Plate 1 - Typical Open Wellhead Design
Plate 2 - Typical Closed Wellhead Design
OPEN AND CLOSURE WELL SURFACE DESIGNS
Camden Gas Project Northern Expansion
PLATES