Quarry Expansion Union Bridge Road, Paradise ML 93M/1984 · Land Use Quarry operations have occurred at the site since the 1960’s. The quarry is located on the southern side of

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Quarry Expansion

Union Bridge Road, Paradise

ML 93M/1984

Walters Contracting Pty Ltd

The Board of the Environment Protection Authority

December 2011

Environmental Assessment Report

Proponent Walters Contracting Pty Ltd

Proposal Quarry Expansion

Location Union Bridge, Paradise

Mining Lease 93M/1984

NELMS no. 8519

DA number DA 2011/105

File 112211

Document Class of Assessment

G:\EEO\EAS\P\Walters_UnionBridge\AssessmentReport\Walters_EAR.docx 2A

Assessment process milestones

18 February 2011 Notice of Intent submitted

18 March 2011 EER Guidelines issued

4 October 2011 Permit application submitted to Council

7 October 2011 Application received by Board

15 October 2011 Start of public consultation period

29 October 2011 End of public consultation period

14 November 2011 Supplementary information submitted to Board

Environmental Assessment Report – Walters – Union Bridge Quarry

II

Acronyms

Board Board of the Environment Protection Authority

Director Director, EPA

Division EPA Division, DPIPWE

EER Environmental Effects Report

DIER Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources

DPIPWE Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

EIA Environmental impact assessment

EMPC Act Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994

EPA Environment Protection Authority

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

Ha Hectares

LUPA Act Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993

mm millimetres

M3 Cubic metres

MRT Mineral Resources Tasmania, DIER

PC Phytophthora cinnamomi PCAB Policy and Conservation Assessment Branch, DPIPWE

RMPS Resource Management and Planning System

Quarry Code Quarry Code of Practice 1999

SD Sustainable development

TSPA Threatened Species Protection Act 1995

Walters Walters Contracting Pty Ltd


III


IV

Report summary This report provides the environmental assessment of the Director, Environment Protection Authority in relation to Walter Contracting Pty Ltd’s proposed expansion of the existing Union Bridge Quarry.

To date the pit has been developed as a single face. This has resulted in a visible operation which does not allow progressive rehabilitation.

It is proposed to increase production levels to a maximum of 20,000 cubic metres, with materials recovered by benching from the “top down” to allow progressive rehabilitation.

This report has been prepared based on information provided by the proponent in the Environmental Effects Report (EER) and EER Supplement. The advice of relevant Government Agencies and the public has also been sought and considered as part of this assessment.

On 4 November 2011, the Board requested that the applicant submit supplementary information to address public, government agency (including DPIPWE) and Council comments on the DPEMP. The DPEMP supplementary information was submitted by the applicant on 14 November 2011. Background to the proposal and details of the assessment process are presented in Section 1 of this report. Section 2 describes the context of this assessment. Details of the proposal are contained in Section 3. Section 4 reviews the need for the proposal and considers the project, site and design alternatives. Section 5 summarises the public and Agency consultation process and the key issues raised in that process. The detailed evaluation of key issues is contained in Section 6. Section 7 identifies other environmental issues and the report conclusions are contained in Section 8.

Appendix 1 contains a summary of issues raised in the consultation process. Appendix 2 contains proposed environmental permit conditions for the proposal. Attachment 2 of the permit conditions contains the table of commitments from the DPEMP.

Table of Contents

1 Approvals process ..................................................................................... 1 2 SD objectives and EIA principles .............................................................. 2

3 The proposal ............................................................................................. 3 4 Need for proposal and alternatives ........................................................... 5

5 Public and agency consultation ................................................................. 6 6 Evaluation of environmental issues ........................................................... 7

7 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 18 8 References .............................................................................................. 19 9 Summary of appendices .......................................................................... 19


V

1 Approvals process An application for a permit under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPA Act) in relation to the proposal was submitted to Kentish Council on 4 October 2011.

The proposal is defined as a ‘level 2 activity’ under Schedule 2 Subsection (6)(a)(ii) of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 (EMPC Act), being:

Materials Handling: Crushing, Grinding or Milling: processing (by crushing, grinding, milling or separating into different sizes by sieving, air elutriation or in any other manner) of rock, ores or minerals at a rate in excess of 1,000 cubic metres per year.

Section 25(1) of the EMPC Act required Council to refer the application to the Board of the Environment Protection Authority (the Board) for assessment under the Act. The application was received by the Board on 7 October 2011.

The assessment has been undertaken by the Director, Environment Protection Authority under delegation from the Board.

The Board required that additional information to support the proposal be provided in the form of an Environmental Effects Report (EER).

A draft of the EER was submitted to the EPA for comment prior to its formal submission. A final EER was submitted to Council with the permit application. The EER was released for public inspection for a 14-day period commencing on 15 October 2011. Advertisements were placed in The Saturday Advocate and on the EPA web site. The EER was also referred at this time to relevant government agencies for comment. No public submissions were received.

On 7 November 2011, the Board requested that the proponent prepare an EER Supplement (the Supplement) to address Government Agency and Council comments on the EER. The Supplement was submitted by the proponent on 14 November 2011.


1

2 SD objectives and EIA principles The proposal must be considered by the Director in the context of the sustainable development objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania (RMPS), and in the context of the objectives of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control System (EMPCS) established by the EMPC Act. The functions of the Board are to administer and enforce the provisions of the Act, and in particular to use its best endeavours to protect the environment of Tasmania, and to further the RMPS and EMPCS objectives.

The Director must undertake the assessment of the proposal in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Principles defined in Section 74 of the EMPC Act.


2

3 The proposal Walters Contracting Pty Ltd (Walters) currently operates the quarry under a Level 1 permit with a permitted production level of 2,222 cubic metres per annum.

To date the pit has been developed as a single face. This has resulted in a visible operation which does not allow progressive rehabilitation.

It is proposed to increase production levels to a maximum of 20,000 cubic metres, with materials recovered by benching from the “top down” to allow progressive rehabilitation.

The main characteristics of the proposal are summarised in Table 1. A detailed description of the proposal is provided in the EER.

Table 1: Summary of key proposal characteristics Activity

Extraction, crushing and screening of up to 20,000m3 per annum of crushed rock and gravel. It is expected that the average production will be 5-15,000 m3 per annum.

Location and planning context Off Union Bridge Road, approximately 3.5 kilometres south-west of Paradise (Figure 1). Location The lease is located on Crown Land; the lower part is State Forest (7 ha) and the upper part lies in the Mount Roland Regional Reserve (5 ha).

Land tenure

Land zoning The Site is covered by 2 zonings under the Kentish Planning Scheme 2005:

‘Natural Resources’ in the State Forest- resource development is an allowable use in the Natural Resources Zone; and

‘Environmental Protection’ in the Regional Reserve -mining is a permitted use in areas identified under the Regional Forest Agreement.93M/1984. Mining lease 12 hectares. Lease area MRT have advised that the current bond of $10,000 will be reviewed pending a decision on the current development application.

Bond

Existing site Quarry operations have occurred at the site since the 1960’s. Land Use The quarry is located on the southern side of the Gog Range at an elevation of approximately 300m.

Topography

Late Cambrian - early Ordovician Roland Conglomerate. Geology Gravelly duplex with an iron organic B horizon. The major hazards are sheet, rill and gully erosion.

Soils

There are no waterways on the mining lease, unnamed streams to the east and west flow south approximately 2 kilometres to the Mersey river.

Hydrology

Vegetation TASVEG communities: DSC - Eucalyptus amygdalina and E. obliqua damp forest; and FUM - extra urban miscellaneous areas.

Local region Climate • Annual rainfall of 1179mm – quite evenly spread throughout the year,

• Maximum mean monthly temperature is 21.5oC. Minimum is 2.5oC. • Evaporation exceeds rainfall from October to March. • Prevalent 9 am winds are gentle easterlies; stronger winds are mostly westerly and

north-westerly. Prevalent 3 pm winds are gentle northerlies stronger winds are mostly westerly.


3

Surrounding land and uses

Adjacent land is Crown Land with native forest. Further to the south, private land is used for grazing. A large limestone quarry is 4 km to the south-east. Mount Roland Regional Reserve overlaps the mining lease and extends to the north and west; the Gog Range Regional Reserve is approximately 1.5 km to the south-east. Nearest residences are approximately 1.2 kilometres to the south in an area zoned ‘Rural’ under the Meander Valley Planning Scheme 1995.

Geoconservation The quarry lies within the Central Highlands Cainozoic Glacial Area and Central Plateau Terrain. The Mole Creek Karst System is approximately 1 kilometre to the south and the Gog Range Residual Strike Ridge/Cuesta is approximately 1.5 kilometres to the east.

Proposed infrastructure Excavator, mobile crusher and screen. Major equipment

Inputs For dust suppression only. Water Diesel fuel for machinery. Energy

Wastes and emissions Stormwater only. Liquid Dust and exhaust fumes. Atmospheric General domestic waste. Solid From all machinery, materials handling and blasting. Noise From use of mobile equipment. Greenhouse

gases Commissioning and operations

0700 to 1900 hours Mondays to Fridays; 0800 to 1600 hours on Saturdays Operating hours Marketable timber harvesting; vegetation clearing; topsoil and overburden stockpiling; rock drilling and blasting (where required); material removal using dozer or excavator; transport to bench or quarry floor; rock crushing and screening on a campaign basis; stockpiling of crushed rock and gravel; and transport to sites in the general area. The gravel pit will be operated on a campaign basis as road maintenance needs require.

Operational Methodolgy

At the expected average production rates of approximately 10,000 m3 per annum; the pit is expected to have a life of approximately up to 20 years.

Expected Operational Life

Other key characteristics The site is accessed from Union Bridge Road via a forestry road maintained by Walters. Access


4

ML 93M/1984

Figure 1: Location (From Figure 1 of the EER)

4 Need for proposal and alternatives Walters wishes to increase production to provide additional gravel supplies which will be used for civil construction and road construction and maintenance in the area.

The EER states that road construction and maintenance materials are low value products and transport costs are a large part of the eventual cost. Therefore, strategically located gravel pits are required to economically maintain gravel roads.

The quarry is an existing operation and no alternatives were considered.


5

5 Public and agency consultation A summary of the government agency submissions is contained in Appendix 1 of this report. The proponent’s response to those issues is contained in the EER Supplement.

The EER was referred to a number of government agencies/bodies with an interest in the proposal. Responses were received from the following:

• Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT), DIER.

• Policy and Conservation Assessment Branch (PCAB), DPIPWE.

• Noise Specialist, EPA Division.

• Meander Valley Council.

The EER Supplement prepared by the proponent provides a response to each of the relevant environmental issues raised by the public and government agencies/bodies.


6

6 Evaluation of environmental issues The environmental issues considered relevant to the proposal are evaluated in the following tables.

Issue 1

Noise and Vibration from operations

Description of potential impacts

Noise and vibration may cause an environmental nuisance for sensitive uses, such as residences, in the vicinity.

Noise will be produced by general activity, crushing, screening and the use of mobile equipment plant. Noise and vibration will be caused by blasting, which will be required 2 or 3 times per year.

The nearest residence is 1.2 kilometres to the south-south-west. Management measures proposed in EER

Proposed operating hours are 0700 to 1900 hours, Mondays to Fridays and 0800 to 1600 hours on Saturdays.

Drilling and blasting will be carried out by a qualified contractor.

If required, blast specifications can be modified and crushing and screening plant can be operated behind bunds. Public and agency comment

No comment received. Evaluation and Conclusion

Advice from the noise specialist, EPA Division is that although the site is exposed and elevated, the nearest residence is beyond the 1,000 metre separation distance suggested in the Quarry Code of Practice (the Quarry Code) for sites where regular blasting is undertaken and it is considered unlikely that noise or vibration will be a significant impact of this proposal.

The proposed operating hours are in accordance with the Quarry Code and should be enforced in the permit. The EER states that occasional work may be required outside these hours to fulfil contracts; the proponent should be required to gain written approval from the Director to operate outside these hours (condition N1). The hours of blasting should be further restricted (condition B1).

Standard limits should be imposed for blasting impacts (condition B2) and each blast should be monitored to demonstrate compliance with these limits (condition B4).

The proponent should be required to comply with standard permit conditions:

N1: Operating hours

B1: Blasting times

B2: Blasting – noise and vibration

B3: Notification of blasting

B4: Blast monitoring


7

Issue 2

Dust from operations Description of potential impacts

Dust may be generated by material handling, stockpiles, vehicle movements, and from disturbed areas.

Nearest residences are 1.2 kilometres distant. Management measures proposed in EER

Vegetation will be retained to provide a visual screen around the quarry. Progressive rehabilitation of upper benches will be undertaken (Commitment 7).

Operate water sprays on crushing equipment when required. Maintain access roads and apply dust suppression measures (water sprays) as required (Commitment 9). Public and agency comment No comment received. Evaluation and Conclusion

The exposed position of the quarry and the proposed elevated location of crushing and screening equipment mean that dust has the potential to travel outside the boundary of the mining lease. However; the EER states that prevailing winds are away from residences and the natural vegetation bordering the quarry will help to prevent impacts from dust.

In the experience of the EPA Division dust emissions from quarries can be effectively managed by measures such as watering, The separation distance to residences is adequate to mitigate emissions. If necessary crushing and screening operations can be moved to the quarry floor. It is considered that the activity can be operated in such a manner that dust will not cause an environmental nuisance.

The proponent should be required to comply with the following standard conditions:

A1: Control of dust emissions.


8

Issue 3

Flora and fauna habitat Description of potential impacts

Loss of threatened flora through vegetation clearance and soil removal and the subsequent impacts on threatened fauna through loss of habitat and disturbance.

The area of the lease is some 12 ha of which approximately 3.2 ha has already been disturbed. A total of approximately 5-6 ha will be disturbed over the life of the quarry.

A flora and fauna survey was undertaken and the report included as Appendix D of the EER.

The vegetated area of the mining lease was identified as comprising Eucalyptus amygdalina/ E. obliqua damp forest (TASVEG community DSC) in very good condition.

No threatened species listed under either the Commonwealth Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) or the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSPA) were recorded during the survey. However; there is moderate potential habitat for the masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae) and the grey goshawk (Accipiter novaehollandiae).

The report recommended that the development avoid 2 mature, hollow bearing E. obliqua trees in the northern part of the lease to maintain potential hollows for the masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae).

The flora and fauna report stated that the area is in the known range of the Giant freshwater crayfish (Astacopsis gouldi) and sedimentation of waterways should be prevented (see Issue 4 below). Management measures proposed in EER

An exclusion zone will be maintained, by fencing, around two old growth trees (Fig 15 of the EER) (Commitment 3). Public and agency comment

PCAB advised that the protection of the two mature Eucalyptus obliqua with hollows is supported. If any potential Tasmanian Devil/Quolls dens are observed a 30 metre exclusion zone should be established around the dens and further advice sought from PCAB. Evaluation and Conclusion

In the Supplement the proponent clarified that if any Tasmanian Devil dens are identified, an exclusion fence to a radius of 30 metres will be constructed (Commitment 4).

Impacts of sedimentation on stormwater are discussed below. The mine plan includes the retention of two mature trees and this is also a commitment the proponent should be required to undertake the activity in accordance with the mine plan described in the EER (condition G1) and should comply with the commitments (condition G7).


G1: compliance with EMP.

G7: Commitments.


9

Issue 4

Stormwater Management Description of potential impacts

The proposal has the potential to impact on the quality of water through sedimentation, turbidity and spillages of hydrocarbons.

The storage and handling of hazardous substances is discussed as Issue 5 below.

There are no permanent or ephemeral waterways within the lease. There are two ephemeral streams to either side of the lease The EER states that the catchments of these streams are all forested and in good condition.

No water will be used on site other than for dust suppression. Management measures proposed in EER

Direct all runoff from the active pit area through the settling pond prior to release. (Commitment 8). No areas will be allowed to drain uncontrolled from the site. Public and agency comment Advice from PCAB is that the measures proposed to prevent sedimentation of waterways are supported. PCAB recommends that contamination or impact on the nearby waterways adjacent to the area be prevented. The proposal to develop sediment traps to ensure sediment does not enter the small streams adjacent to the mining lease is supported. Evaluation and Conclusion

Drainage from the quarry workings and access road near the quarry is currently directed into settling basins which discharge into depressions and through the State Forest.

The EER states there is little evidence of any transported sediment from the existing operations but that additional settling basin capacity is proposed as a safeguard.

The EER shows the proposed stormwater system including settling basins with the capacity to cope with the 1 in 20 rainfall event. A design for settling ponds is shown and is considered appropriate.


SW1: Perimeter drains

SW2: Stormwater

SW3: Design and maintenance of settling ponds


10

Issue 5

Hazardous Substances Description of potential impacts

Pollution of land and water through spilt hydrocarbons.

No dangerous goods or chemicals will be used on site (other than by a blasting contractor), other than oils, lubricants and fuels.

Management measures proposed in EER

All handling of oils etc will within a bunded area and spill clean up kit(s) will be available on site. Public and agency comment No comment received. Evaluation and Conclusion

Given the location of the site near to the Mole Creek karst system it is important that any spills of hazardous substances are quickly controlled and remediated.

In the Supplement the proponent clarified that all fuel etc will be handled in bunded areas (Commitment 8).


H1: Storage and handling of hazardous materials.

H2: Spill kits.


11

Issue 6

Traffic Impacts (noise and dust) Description of potential impacts

Noise and dust emissions from traffic movements have the potential to cause an environmental nuisance along transport routes.

Access is, and will continue to be, on a forestry road to Union Bridge Road then either south towards Mole Creek (90 to 95%) or north towards Sheffield.

A Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) was undertaken and included as Appendix F to the EER. Management measures proposed in EER

Maintain access roads in good condition. Liaise with Forestry Tasmania regarding road use and maintenance. Liaise with Council regarding road junction improvements (Commitment 6). Public and agency comment No comments received. Evaluation and Conclusion

The access road is a gravel road maintained by the proponent. There are no residences along this road. Union Bridge Road is a sealed road. The TIA estimated a daily traffic volume between 180 to 220 vehicles. It is expected that the proposal will result in peak daily two-way flow of some 50 vehicles. Operating hours are in accordance with the Quarry Code; providing material is not allowed to spill from trucks, traffic impacts are not considered to be a significant impact of this proposal. The proponent should be required to comply with the following standard conditions:

A2: Covering of vehicles


12

Issue 7

Geoconservation Description of potential impacts

Loss of, or damage to, significant geoconservation features.

The following geoconservation sites are mapped as being in the area: The Central Highlands Cainozoic Glacial Area; The Gog Range Residual Strike Ridge/Cuesta; Central Plateau Terrain and Mole Creek Karst.

The EER states that although the general district is covered by the Central Highlands Cainozoic Glacial Area, the quarry site is well north of the remnant Quaternary glacial till deposits in the Mersey River valley. At an elevation of approximately 320m ASL the site is too low and too far down valley for glacial erosion landforms. Detailed grid based mapping and sampling on the steep talus slopes around the southern and western sides of the prospect, at elevations ranging from 500-600m (200m higher than the quarry site) reveal no evidence of either glacial erosion landforms or glacial sedimentary deposits. Management measures proposed in EER

No measures proposed. Public and agency comment

PCAB advised that the proposal area is located within the catchment of the Mole Creek karst system and that mapping of the area indicates numerous enclosed karstic depressions (sinkholes) on low gradient slopes between the quarry and the Mersey River.

Whilst no specific management measures are required based on the information that was provided it is still recommended that particular attention be given to maintaining environmental flows and protecting the quality of water released from the quarry site.

PCAB concluded that based on the information provided the potential for this proposal to adversely affect karst, glacial features or other geoconservation values would appear to be low. Evaluation and Conclusion

Providing stormwater leaving the Land is appropriately managed it is considered that the proposal will not have significant impact on sites of geoconservation significance. No permit conditions proposed.


13

Issue 8

Waste Management. Description of potential impacts

Waste should be collected and disposed of appropriately to avoid causing environmental harm or nuisance.

No solid wastes will be generated, other than the normal domestic wastes, plus some maintenance materials,

A portable toilet will be installed and all toilet wastes will be disposed of at Council facilities.

Management measures proposed in EER

Dispose of all liquid and solid wastes at an appropriate facility. (Commitment 10). All waste oils etc (controlled waste) will be removed by a licensed contractor.

There will be no garbage disposal facilities on site and employees and contractors will be required to dispose of any wastes to the Council facilities elsewhere on a daily basis. Public and agency comment No comment received. Evaluation and Conclusion

Waste management is not considered likely to be a significant impact of this proposal.

The proponent should be required to comply with the following standard conditions: WM1: Waste Management Hierarchy.


14

Issue 9

Weed and Disease Management. Description of potential impacts

The spread of invasive weeds and diseases via the disturbance and the movement of soil, material and machinery and the importation of weeds and diseases to and from the site particularly in product.

Two ‘declared’ weeds listed under the Weed Management Act 1999 were identified on the property: the slender thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) with tens of plants scattered in small area near the entrance to the quarry and a single plant of Ragwort (Senecio jacobaea).

No signs of Phytophthora cinnamomi (PC) were observed during survey. The study area is considered to be of moderate to high susceptibility to PC. Management measures proposed in EER

• Ensure machinery (not trucks) is washed in accordance with the wash down guidelines. Implement the Weed and PC Management Plan (Commitment 5).

• The site manager will have an awareness of best practise for weed and PC management as well as basic training in identification.

• Topsoil will be stockpiled away from the quarry face, machines that move topsoil will be washed down before re-entering the quarry proper and the quarry will be drained to avoid pooling of water within the quarry work area.

• Periodic reconnaissance surveys for weeds and PC in development areas will be undertaken. Public and agency comment

PCAB advised that the site contains vegetation susceptible to PC and adherence to strict hygiene measures will be required.

The declared weeds identified should be eradicated from the site prior to commencement and a Weed and Disease Management Plan, in keeping with the Tasmanian Washdown Guidelines should be developed to prevent the transport of weeds or PC onto or off the site. Evaluation and Conclusion

In the Supplement the proponent clarified that:

• A Weed and Disease Management Plan will be developed within 6 months (Commitment 5). The plan will include the type and frequency of surveys for weeds and pathogens, management

• The sole existing weed infestation (thistles) will be treated/removed within 2 weeks (Commitment 5).

Given that the site is surrounded by natural vegetation, in good condition, that is susceptible to PC a Weed Management Plan should be developed within 3 months and that until this plan is approved and implemented; machinery entering the land should be washed down in accordance with the guidelines.


FF1: Washdown Guidelines.

FF2: Weed and Disease Management Plan.

.


15

Issue 10

Heritage Description of potential impacts

Loss of Aboriginal and/or European cultural heritage through disturbance.

An Aboriginal Heritage Survey was undertaken by an Aboriginal Heritage Officer and the report was included as Appendix E of the EER.

There are no Aboriginal sites in the area and no other heritage sites were identified in a desktop search and none have been identified in site surveys. No indicators of Aboriginal heritage were identified during the field survey.

The Tasmanian Heritage Council, National Estate and Parks and Wildlife data bases were searched for any sites of European heritage in the area. None were identified. Management measures proposed in EER

No measures proposed. Public and agency comment

Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania (DPIPWE) advised, at the scoping phase, that the probability of Aboriginal Heritage being present is low and no Aboriginal Heritage Survey was required. Evaluation and Conclusions

The quarry is considered unlikely to impact on aboriginal heritage. Any relics discovered should be managed in accordance with the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 (refer Information Schedule LO4). No permit conditions proposed.


16


17

Issue 11

Decommissioning and Rehabilitation. Description of potential impacts

Lack of appropriate rehabilitation may cause future degradation of the natural values of the site and may cause environmental harm or nuisance. Management measures proposed in EER

Salvage topsoils and subsoils and rehabilitate benches progressively and at quarry closure. (Commitment 11).

Progressive rehabilitation of upper benches (Commitment 7). Public and agency comment

No comment received Evaluation and Conclusion

The site has previously been operated in a manner that has led to a single working face of approximately 50 metres height. The proposal will result in an increased area of disturbance (approximately 2 hectares in addition to the 3.2 hectares already disturbed) and more elevated workings (366 metres compared to the current 342 metres).

In the long term the proposal will allow for progressive rehabilitation by allowing benches to be established. It is expected that the revegetation of upper benches can occur approximately 3 years after the commencement of the more intensive activity.

The EER states that it is intended that natural revegetation will occur from the adjoining vegetation but also included a range of measures that will be applied if natural colonisation is not sufficient.

The measures proposed are considered appropriate. The proponent should be required to comply with the following standard conditions:

DC1: Notification of cessation DC2: DRP Requirements DC3: Rehabilitation following cessation DC4:Stockpiling of surface soil DC6: Suspension of Activity The proponent should be required to comply with the following non-standard conditions: DC5: Progressive Rehabilitation

8 References John Miedecke & Partners Pty Ltd (September 2011) Walters Contracting – Union Bridge gravel Pit: Environmental Effects Report

John Miedecke & Partners Pty Ltd (November 2011) Walters Contracting – Union Bridge Quarry Expansion – Response to Comments on EER

DPIWE & DIER (1999) Quarry Code of Practice. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment and Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, Government of Tasmania.

Rudman T, Tucker D, French D (2004) Tasmanian Washdown Guidelines for Weed and Disease Control Edition 1. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Government of Tasmania.

9 Summary of appendices Appendix 1: Summary of issues raised by agency submissions

Appendix 2: Permit conditions - Environmental includes Attachment 2: Management commitments


19

Appendix 1. Summary of issues raised by government agency submissions

Agency Issue Comment

Mineral Resources Tasmania, DIER

• A minimum 10 metre setback from the mining lease boundary should be maintained, if practical. If, in this instance a 10 metre setback will be prohibitive to the quarrying operation, in that it effects the establishment of the upper bench, the minimum setback can be adjusted accordingly.

Policy Conservation and Assessment Branch, DPIPWE

Threatened Fauna

• The protection of the 2 old growth trees as proposed is supported; other mature, hollow bearing trees should be retained where practicable.

• If any potential Tasmanian Devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) dens are observed on site, a 30 metre exclusion zone should be established around the dens whilst further advice is sought from PCAB.

Geoconservation • The proposal area is located within the catchment of the Mole Creek karst system. The karst boundary is located less than 2 kilometres south of the quarry. The 1:25,000 topographic map of the area indicates numerous enclosed karstic depressions (sinkholes) on low gradient slopes between the quarry and the Mersey River.

• Department records contain no record of significant karst features in the vicinity of the quarry or downstream of it, but as the area in question has not been specially assessed for karst features the possibility that karst features are present cannot be ruled out. Therefore particular attention should be given to protecting the quality of water released from the site.

• Based on the information provided the potential for this proposal to adversely affect karst, glacial features or other geoconservation values would appear to be low.

• The quarry is located within the Central Highlands Cainozoic Glacial Area and also falls within the Central Plateau Terrain. The site does not appear to fall in the Gog Range Residual Strike Ridge/Cuesta.

• Based on the information provided the potential for this proposal to adversely affect these glacial features and other geoconservation values would appear to be low.

• Whilst no specific management measures are required based on the information that was provided it is still recommended that particular attention be given to maintaining environmental flows and protecting the quality of water released from the quarry site.


Appendix 1


Appendix 1

Stormwater • The measures proposed to prevent sedimentation of waterways to ensure sediment does not enter the small streams adjacent to the mining lease are supported.

• All construction activities, runoffs or spills should be adequately managed to prevent contamination or impact on the nearby waterways adjacent to the area.

Weeds and Disease

• The site contains vegetation susceptible to Phytophthora cinnamomi (PC) and adherence to strict hygiene measures will be required.

• Two declared weeds were identified – these weeds should be eradicated from the site prior to works on the quarry expansion commencing.

A Weed and Disease Management Plan, in keeping with the Tasmanian Washdown Guidelines should be developed to prevent the transport of weeds or PC onto or off the site. The plan should include: • A weed management section that covers all relevant aspects of the control and management of

declared weeds and weeds that are considered to have significant impacts on agriculture and natural values, including but not limited to:

- An overarching set of objectives and the context in which they are to be achieved. - Weed distributions should be clearly and accurately mapped. - Priorities should be developed for the management and control of weeds both (short term and long

term) - An assessment of the potential impact of those weeds including on immediate and adjacent areas

that are free of particular declared weeds. - Strategies for ongoing monitoring and control of weeds within the development and associated

work areas. - Identification of appropriate herbicides for control and how they are to be used.

• A hygiene section to ensure the development and associated work areas do not result in the introduction of new declared weed species into the area, translocation of weeds within the development footprint or the export of existing declared weeds out of the area, including but not limited to:

- Vehicle, machinery and equipment hygiene including the washdown protocols for vehicles entering or leaving the site.

- The location and management of washdown area and facilities including management of effluent. - Material hygiene (soils, gravel, plant material etc) ensuring that no materials contaminated with

weed propagules (seed, propagative material) are either imported or into the development footprint or exported out of those areas. This will require regular communication of the protocols established by the plans, training and easily accessed information.

Appendix 2. Permit Conditions - Environmental


Appendix 2

Documents

Quarry Expansion Union Bridge Road, Paradise ML 93M/1984 · Land Use Quarry operations have occurred at the site since the 1960’s. The quarry is located on the southern side of