Preliminary Environmental Assessment - Port Waratah Coal Services

EMGA MitchellMcLennanPWCSPlanning + Environment + AcouscsThe Terminal 4 ProjectPreliminary Environmental Assessment ReportPrepared for Port Waratah Coal Services Limited - November 2010www.emgamm.com

PreliminaryEnvironmentalAssessmentFinalReportTerminal4Project|PreparedforPortWaratahCoalServicesLimited|26November2010ApprovedbyPaulMitchellApprovedbyBrettMcLennanPositionDirectorPositionDirectorSignatureSignatureDate26November2010Date26 November2010This Report hasbeenprepared in accordance with the brief provided by the Clientandhasrelied upon the informationcollected at or under the times and conditions specified in the Report. All findings, conclusions or recommendationscontainedwithintheReportarebasedonlyontheaforementionedcircumstances.Furthermore,theReportisfortheuseoftheClientonlyandnoresponsibilitywillbetakenforitsusebyotherparties.DocumentControlVersionDatePreparedbyReviewedby105October2010BrettMcLennan,DuncanPeake,JodiKelehearPaulMitchell203November2010JodiKelehearBrettMcLennan319November2010BrettMcLennanPaulMitchell422November2010JodiKelehearBrettMcLennan526November2010JodiKelehearBrettMcLennanPlanning+Environment+AcousticsT+61(0)294939500|F+61(0)294939599GroundFloor|Suite01|20ChandosStreet|StLeonards|NewSouthWales|2065|Australiawww.emgamm.comi

“Thispagehasbeenintentionallyleftblank”ii

TableofContentsChapter1 Introduction 11.1 Projectoverview 11.2 Theproponent 11.3 Sitedescription 11.4 NeedfortheProject 21.5 PurposeandcontentofthisPreliminaryEnvironmentalAssessment 3Chapter2 Background 72.1 HistoryofKooragangIsland 72.2 HistoryoftheT4ProjectArea 72.3 HistoryoftheKooragangCoalTerminal 82.4 Existingmaritimeapprovals 82.5 Commercialframework 9Chapter3 Projectdescription 113.1 Introduction 113.2 Railloop 113.3 Stockyard 123.4 Conveyorsystem 123.5 Berths 123.6 Ancillaryfacilitiesandactivities 13Chapter4 Approvalrequirements 174.1 Introduction 174.2 NSWEnvironmentalPlanningandAssessmentAct1979 174.2.1 Approvalprocess174.2.2 OtherStateapprovals184.3 CommonwealthEnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999 194.4 Otherapprovals 204.4.1 ProtectionoftheEnvironmentOperationsAct1999204.4.2 RoadsAct1993214.4.3 WaterManagementAct2000214.4.4 CrownLandsAct1989214.4.5 EnvironmentProtection(SeaDumping)Act1981214.4.6 Otherapprovals21iii

TableofContents(Cont'd)Chapter5 Stakeholderengagement 235.1 Introduction 235.2 Objectives 235.3 Stakeholderengagementstrategy 235.3.1 Initialstakeholderidentification235.3.2 Stakeholderassessment245.3.3 Stakeholderengagement245.4 StakeholderEngagementTools 24Chapter6 Preliminaryenvironmentalassessment 256.1 Introduction 256.2 Soilsandfoundationconditions 266.2.1 Existingenvironment266.2.2 Proposedassessmentapproach266.3 Groundwater 266.3.1 Existingenvironment266.3.2 Proposedassessmentapproach276.4 Surfacewater 276.4.1 Existingenvironment276.4.2 Proposedassessmentapproach286.5 Ecology 286.5.1 Existingenvironment286.5.2 Proposedassessmentapproach316.6 Airqualityandodour 326.6.1 Existingenvironment326.6.2 Proposedassessmentapproach336.7 Noiseandvibration 336.7.1 Existingenvironment336.7.2 Proposedassessmentapproach346.8 Trafficandtransport 346.8.1 Existingenvironment346.8.2 Proposedassessmentapproach356.9 Infrastructure 356.9.1 Existingenvironment356.9.2 Proposedassessmentapproach366.10 Heritage 366.10.1Existingenvironment366.10.2Proposedassessmentapproach36iv

TableofContents(Cont'd)6.11 Visualamenity 376.11.1Existingenvironment376.11.2Proposedassessmentapproach376.12 Energyuse,greenhousegasandclimatechange 376.12.1Existingenvironment376.12.2Proposedassessmentapproach386.13 Hazards 386.13.1Existingenvironment386.13.2Proposedassessmentapproach386.14 Socioeconomic 386.14.1Existingenvironment386.14.2Proposedassessmentapproach39Chapter7 Conclusion 41ReferencesAcronymsTables4.1 Part3Aapprovalprocess 186.1 ThreatenedfaunaspeciesrecordedwithinoradjacenttotheT4Projectarea 31Figures1.1 Localityplan 41.2 TheT4Project 51.3 HunterValleyCoalChain 63.1 TheT4ProjectwithRailOption5 143.2 TheT4ProjectwithRailOption3 156.1 Vegetationcommunities 30v

“Thispagehasbeenintentionallyleftblank”vi

1 Introduction1.1 ProjectoverviewPortWaratahCoalServicesLimited(PWCS)ownsandoperatestheKooragangCoalTerminal(KCT)locatedat Kooragang Island and the Carrington Coal Terminal (CCT) located at Carrington, both in the Port ofNewcastle.Additionalcoalexportcapacityisrequiredattheporttoaccommodatethecontractedandprojected future coal exports from the Hunter Valley and broader New South Wales (NSW). This isunderpinnedbyrequirementsoftherecentlyendorsedCapacityFrameworkArrangements,whichformacritical part of the long term export plan for coal produced in the region, and are discussed further inSections1.4and2.5ofthisreport.TheCapacityFrameworkArrangementsprovidethatPWCSmustexpandtheCCTandKCTtotheextentthat it is capable of being expanded to cover any capacity shortfall. To fulfil its obligations, PWCS isundertakingtechnicalinvestigationstodeterminethepotentialtoexpandtheKCTtothewest,knownastheTerminal4Project(T4Project).Thelandbeinginvestigatediszonedforportdevelopmentpurposesandwasformerlyusedasalandfill.Theexpansionwouldincludearailloop,stockyard,conveyorsystem,shippingberths,coalloadinginfrastructureandfacilitiessharedwiththoseexistingattheKCT.ApprovalfortheT4ProjectisbeingsoughtunderPart3AoftheEnvironmentalPlanningandAssessmentAct1979(EP&AAct).1.2 TheproponentTheproponentoftheT4ProjectisPWCS,whichisanincorporatedjointventurebetweenanumberofcoal producers and other participants in the Hunter Valley coal industry, including exporters andimporters.PWCSwasformedin1976,atwhichtimeitacquiredtheCCT.ItacquiredtheKCTin1990.The KCT is now the world’s largest (in terms of throughput) and most efficient export coal handlingfacility.PWCSprovidescoalhandlingservicestocoalexporters,thatis,thereceival,assemblyandstockpilingofcoal,withsubsequentreclaimingofcoalandloadingofshipsforexport.ThroughtheCCTandKCT,PWCSservices coal mines throughout the Hunter Valley and broader NSW, known as the Hunter Valley CoalChain, and which is illustrated in Figure 1.3. It is the largest coal export chain in the world, currentlyconsistingofapproximately40coalminesownedby14coalproducers.1.3 SitedescriptionThe T4 Project is proposed to be located on Kooragang Island, which is situated approximately twokilometres(km)upstreamofthemouthoftheHunterRiver,intheNewcastleLocalGovernmentArea(seeFigure1.1).KooragangIslandisapproximately2,600hectares(ha)insize,predominatelycomprisingreclaimedland.It is bounded by the south and north arms of the Hunter River. Vehicle access to Kooragang Island isavailablebytheTourleStreetBridgeandtheStocktonBridge.Thesoutheasternpartoftheisland,wheretheT4Projectareaislocated,isoccupiedbyheavyandlightindustries,transportanddistributioninfrastructure,wasteemplacementfacilitiesandportfacilities.Thisincludes,butisnotlimitedto,theKCT,NewcastleCoalInfrastructureGroup(NCIG)coalterminal,BoralCement cement manufacturing and distribution facility, Orica Australia chemical manufacturing facility,1

IncitecPivotfertilisermanufacturingfacilityandtheCargillOilseedProcesser.TothenorthandwestoftheKooragangindustrialandportareaareestuarinewetlands,mangroves,saltmarshandpasturedandforested lands, subject to agricultural and conservation activities. This includes the Hunter EstuaryNationalParkwhichformspartofadesignatedRamsarsite.ThenearestresidentialareastoKooragangIslandareatFernBayandStocktontotheeastandsoutheast,andMayfieldandWarabrooktothesouthandsouthwest(seeFigure1.2).AhistoryofthedevelopmentofKooragangIslandisprovidedinChapter2.TheT4Projectareacomprisestheproposedlocationsofarailloop,stockyard,conveyorsystem,shippingberthsandancillaryfacilities.Itisgenerallyboundbyanexistingraillinetothenorthandwest,beyondwhichistheHunterEstuaryNationalParkandcrownlandproposedtobeincorporatedintothenationalpark.Industrialfacilities,includingtheKCTandNCIGcoalterminal,adjointheT4Projectareatotheeast,andthesoutharmoftheHunterRiveristothesouth.TheT4ProjectareaandindicativelocationsoftheproposedprojectcomponentsareillustratedinFigures1.2,3.1and3.2.The proposed location of the rail loop, stockyard, conveyor system and ancillary facilities is on anapproximate205haareaoflandimmediatelywestoftheKCTandNCIGcoalterminals.Thislandispartprivatelyowned land owned by PWCS and part public land. PWCS has a formal agreement withNewcastle Ports Corporation (NPC) for a long term lease of the public land, provided PWCS candemonstrate that it can successfully build and operate a coal terminal on the site. This land haspreviously been used for disposal of industrial waste and dredge material and comprises a completelymodifiedlandscape.Itisdominatedbygrassland,alongwithartificiallyconstructeddrainagedepressionsand ponds, which now support wetland communities and provide habitat for a range of native andmigratoryfaunaspecies.AdescriptionofpastlandusesisprovidedinSection2.2.The shipping berths are proposed to be located along the northern and southern banks of the HunterRiversoutharm,tothesouthoftheproposedlandbasedfacilitiesandCormorantRoad,andtothewestoftheexistingberths(seeFigures1.2,3.1and3.2).ThereiscurrentlyastripofremnantmangroveandsaltmarshvegetationonthenorthernbankoftheHunterRiversoutharm,inthelocationoftheproposedshippingberths.1.4 NeedfortheProjectTheneedfortheprojectisdrivenbytherequirementforadditionalcoalexportcapacityatthePortofNewcastle. From a revenue perspective, coal is NSW’s and Australia’s largest commodity export,exportingtomorethan30countries.Bituminouscoalaccountedforaround$12.9billionofNSWexportrevenuein20082009,whichisaroundathirdofthetotalNSWexportrevenueforthisperiod(AustralianBureauofStatistics,2010).ThegreatestportionofthisisshippedfromthePortofNewcastle.Inrecentyearstherehasbeenasubstantialincreaseinthedemandfor,andproductionof,HunterValleyandGunnedahbasincoal.WhilstPWCShasrespondedtotheincreaseddemandwithalmostcontinualupgrades and expansion since 1996, regional coal production and export demand has outstripped thecapacityoftheport’scoalexportfacilities,leadingtoreducedefficiencies,largeoffshorevesselqueuesand associated environmental, safety and economic costs and risks. The recently endorsed CapacityFrameworkArrangementsweredevelopedtounderpinthelongtermoperationoftheHunterValleyCoalChainandprovideasolutiontothegrowingcapacityconstraints.AspartofitsobligationsundertheCapacityFrameworkArrangements,PWCShasenteredintolongtermcontractswithcoalproducersandisresponsibleforensuringitsportfacilitieshavesufficientcapacitytohandle the contracted coal throughputs. Where a capacity shortfall is predicted which cannot beaccommodatedbyfurtherexpansionoftheexistingPWCScoalloadingterminals,theCapacityFramework2

ArrangementsincludealegalobligationforPWCStobuildanewterminal(T4).Constructionofanewterminalmustbefinalisedwithinfouryearsofthecapacityshortfallbeingformallyacknowledged.ThecurrentinstalledcapacityofbothKCTandCCTis113milliontonnesperannum(Mtpa);approvalsareinplacetoliftcapacityto145Mtpa.Evenwiththeadditionalcapacityandefficienciesprovidedbytheapproved upgrades and expansions, PWCS contracted allocations are forecast to exceed capacity inapproximately2015.Furtherincreasesincoalproductionareanticipated.Accordingly,undertheprovisionsoftheCapacityFrameworkArrangements,newcapacityisrequiredandPWCSmustbuildtheT4Project,eitheratthecurrentlyproposedlocationoratanalternativelocationwithinthePortofNewcastle.FurtherdiscussionofthedriversandprovisionsoftheCapacityFrameworkArrangementsisprovidedinSection2.5.1.5 PurposeandcontentofthisPreliminaryEnvironmentalAssessmentThepurposeofthisPreliminaryEnvironmentalAssessment(PEA)istoaccompanyaProjectApplicationbyPWCS for the proposed T4 Project, in accordance with section 75E of the EP&A Act. This document isintended to brief the NSW Department of Planning (DoP) and other relevant government agencies asreferred to by DoP, including the Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water,PopulationandCommunities(DSEWPC)andNewcastleCityCouncil(NCC)abouttheProjectApplication.Specifically,thisdocumentprovidesthebasisfordiscussionsatthePlanningFocusMeeting(PFM)andfortheprovisionofEnvironmentalAssessmentRequirements(EARs)bytheDirectorGeneralofPlanning.Thebodyofthisreportdescribes:thelocationandhistoryoftheT4Projectarea;theneedfortheT4Project;thedevelopmentproposalfortheT4Project;statutoryrequirementsforprojectdetermination;theproposedstakeholderengagementstrategy;aninitialassessmentofpotentialenvironmentalimpacts;andconclusionsidentifyingkeyareasforfocusintheEnvironmentalAssessment(EA).3

The Terminal 4 Project | Preliminary Environmental Assessment ReportAberdeenDavis CreekNew South Wales Castle RockULANNEWCASTLESYDNEYKayuga- MUSWELLBROOK RAILWAYMuswellbrookWards RiverNDenmanDungogStroudInsetJerrys PlainsNEW NEW ENGLAND ENGLAND HIGHWAY HIGHWAYRavensworthNORTH COAST RAILWAYBooral2WOLLEMINATIONALPARKBulgaWarkworthSingletonBranxtonClarence TownKaruahPACIFIC HIGHWAYThe T4 Project AreaBrokeMaitlandRaymond TerraceSoldiers PointAnna BayCessnockKurri KurriWilliamtownPuttyNew South WalesStocktonNEWCASTLEThe T4 Project AreaTorontoMorissetWyeeBudgewoiWyongIntegrated Design Solutions030418 Option 3-5 F1.1 Locality plan Rev E - 24 November 2010 ©KEYKurrajongRichmondWindsorNational parkState forestHighwayRailwayMain roadWater courseTown0 5 10 15 20 25kmWisemans FerryHornsbyParramattaSomersbyThe EntranceOurimbahGOSFORDTerrigalWoy WoyKilcareBrooklynPalm BeachMona ValeManlySYDNEYTASMAN SEAEMGA MitchellMcLennanFIGURE 1.1Locality plan

TRI TRI PER/CONVEYO PER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILREA RAIL RAILTRI TRI PER/CONVEYO PER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILTRI PER/CONVEYO PER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILREA REA RAIL RAILFRONT RAIL RAILSHU SHU TLE TLE TRAVELSHU TLE TLE TRAVEL TRAVELNelson Nelson Bay Bay Road RoadSTOCKTON BRIDGETOURLE STREETBRIDGEWallsend Wallsend Road RoadIndustrial Drive DriveMaitland RoadPacific Highway HighwayMain RoadPacific Pacific Highway HighwayNewcastle Road RoadNewcastle Street StreetJohn Renshaw Drive DriveKEY123Existing railwayProposed stockyardProposed rai (Rail option 3 shown)Proposed berths0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3kmThe Terminal 4 Project | Preliminary Environmental Assessment ReportNEMGA MitchellMcLennanHunter EstuaryNational Park12HUNTER RIVER - North Arm3HUNTER RIVER - South ArmNEWCASTLEHARBOURBERESFORDLENAGHANFLETCHERHEXHAMHexam SwampNature ReserveMARYLANDWALLSENDTOMAGOKooragang NatureReserveKOORAGANGISLANDFERN BAYKooragangWetlandsMAYFIELDWESTWARATAHMAYFIELDNORTHMAYFIELDPWCS Kooragang Coal Terminal(NCIG) coal export terminalMAYFIELDEASTPWCS CarringtonCoal TerminalWalshPointSTOCKTONLAMBTONFIGURE 1.2The T4 Project030418 Options 3-5 F2 Rev C- 24 November 2010 © Integrated Design Solutions

The Terminal 4 Project | Preliminary Environmental Assessment ReportNBOGGABRIWHITEHAVENGUNNEDAHGunnedahCurlewisTamworthWERRIS CREEKWerris CreekQuirindiNew South WalesMurrurundiWillowTreeArdglenParkvilleSconeBrisbane030418 Option 3-5 F1-3 Hunter Valley Coal Chain Rev B - 19 November 2010 © Integrated Design SolutionsGulgongULANUlanCoggan’s CreekWILPINJONGKEYShip loading facilityMine loading facilityPowerstation unloading facilitesTownEMGA MitchellMcLennanKerrabeeSandy HollowMOUNT ARTHURDRAYTONLIDDELLNEWDELLHUNTER VALLEYRAVENSWORTHMACQUARIE GENERATION UNLOADERASHTONWAMBO LOOPANVIL HILLMTCL 1BENGALLAMTCL 2AberdeenDARTBROOKMuswellbrookBULGA CessnockAUSTARSt. HelliersGrasstreeAntieneMOUNT OWENCAMBERWELLRIXS CREEKSingletonBLOOMFIELDNEWSTANMorissetSydneyTERALBADURALIEMaitland NCIG KOORAGANG ISLANDPWCSPWCSNEWCASTLEBroadmeadowERARING POWER STATIONUNLOADERVALES PT. UNLOADERGloucesterSTRATFORDTASMAN SEAFIGURE 1.3Hunter Valley Coal Chain

2 Background2.1 HistoryofKooragangIslandKooragangIslandwasoriginallyaseriesoflowlyingdeltaicislands,includingAsh,DempseyandMoschetoIslands,locatedintheHunterRiverestuary.PriortoEuropeansettlementtheseislandswereoccupiedbytheWorimiandAwabakalpeople.FollowingEuropeansettlementandupuntiltheearly1900s,landusewaspredominatelyagricultural.LandreclamationcommencedinpartsoftheHunterRiverestuaryinthe1880s,usingdredgespoilfromNewcastleHarbour,andtheareabegandevelopingastheindustrialcentreforNewcastleintheearlytomid1900s.Intheearly1950s,withthecommencementoftheKooragangIslandDevelopmentSchemeand the Newcastle Harbour Improvements Act 1953, the NSW Department of Public Works was givenownership of the islands and the responsibility to construct a ‘single land mass’ for industrialdevelopmentandportrelatedactivities.Extensivelandreclamationwassubsequentlyundertaken,usingdredgespoil,andtheislandswerejoinedtoformKooragangIsland.Developmentofheavyandlightindustries,transportanddistributioninfrastructure,wasteemplacementfacilities and port facilities has continued since this time withinthe southeastern portion of the island(seeFigure1.2).ThishasincludedestablishmentoftheKCTand,morerecently,NCIGhascommencedconstruction and operation of Newcastle’s third coal export terminal on land adjacent to the KCT.DredgingofthesoutharmoftheHunterRiverinassociationwiththedevelopmentandoperationofportfacilitieshasbeenongoing.ThelandtothenorthoftheKooragangindustrialandportareawasdedicatedasanaturereserve,theKooragangNatureReserve,in1983.ThisreservewassubsequentlyincorporatedintotheHunterEstuaryNational Park. It forms part of the broader ‘Hunter Estuary Wetlands’, which were designated as aRamsarsitein1984.2.2 HistoryoftheT4ProjectAreaMuch of the T4 Project area has been used for disposal of industrial waste and dredge material. Thesouthern and western parts of the T4 Project area comprise the former Kooragang Island WasteEmplacement Facility, which is still licensed as a Solid Waste Class 2 landfill. This waste emplacementfacility was operational from 1972 until 1999, during which time waste products from the former BHPSteelworkswereburiedacrossthesite.Thisincludedslag,sludges,coalwasheryfinesandcoarserejects,andarangeofindustrialandgeneralwaste,includingasbestos.UponclosureoftheBHPSteelworksin1999, ownership of the waste emplacement facility was transferred to the NSW Government and itsoperationceased.The other significant waste emplacement to occur within the T4 Project area has been the disposal ofwastefromanelectrolysismanganesedioxide(EMD)plantinpurposebuilttrenchesacrossitsnorthernextent.ThishasbeenundertakenbytheAustralianManganeseCompanyLimited(asubsidiaryofBHPBilliton), and then by Delta EMD Australia Pty Limited, since 1989. The EMD plant closed in 2008,although periodic waste disposal continued to occur up until late 2009 in association with the plantclosureactivities.TheDeltaEMDsiteislicensedasawasteemplacementarea.7

2.3 HistoryoftheKooragangCoalTerminalThe KCT, originally owned and operated by Kooragang Coal Loader Limited, commenced operation in1984,withaninitialthroughputcapacityof21Mtpa.ItwasacquiredbyPWCSin1990.TheKCTincludesrail receival infrastructure, stockpiling areas, coal stackers and reclaimers and a dedicated conveyorsystemwhichcarriesthecoaltoshiploadersforexporttomarket.PartofthelandonwhichtheKCTissituatedisleasedfromtheNSWGovernment.TheleaserequiresthattheKCTbeoperatedasa‘commonuserfacility’,whereinPWCSisrequiredtoprovideaccessonanondiscriminatorybasistoallproducerswhowishtoshipcoal.To meet the increasing demand for NSW coal, and associated growth of the coal industry, PWCS hasimplemented a continuous program of expansion and efficiency improvements. This has includedaddition of a second and third terminal to the KCT. Most recently, development consent (DA060189)was modified to allow the construction and operation of a fourth dump station, fourth shiploader andassociatedcoalhandlingandtransportinfrastructuretoprovidefor‘sprintcapacity’,referredtoasthe‘Stage4Project’.ConstructionoftheStage4Projecthasnowcommenced.TheKCTisanintegralcomponentoftheHunterValleyCoalChainandistheworld’slargest(intermsofthroughput)andmostefficientcoalhandlingfacility,withanapprovedthroughputcapacityof120Mtpa.Additionalcapacityisnowrequired,andtheT4Project,subjectofthisPEA,isproposedtoprovidethis.2.4 ExistingmaritimeapprovalsTheNSWMaritimehasStateapproval(DA13432003i)fortheextensionofshippingchannelswithintheport,toapointjusteastoftheTourleStreetBridge,andinclusiveofaswingbasinforturningofvessels.Theapprovedactivitiesincludedredging,excavation,treatmentanddisposalofsedimentsfromthesoutharm of the Hunter River, to provide deep water access to future berth sites, inclusive of the proposedberthsitesfortheT4Project.TheapprovedactivitiesaredetailedinaStrategicDredgingProgram,whichwasdevelopedbytheNSWMaritime, and comprises seven phases of works. Each phase is for a different part of the channel, asrequiredbythevariousprojectsandproponentsalongtheHunterRiversoutharm,includingexpansionofcoalexportfacilitiesbyNCIGandPWCS.Phases1and2arelocatedattheeasternextentoftheshippingchannelsextensionarea,commencingapproximatelyoppositetheexistingKCTberths,andPhase7isatthe western extent, near the Tourle Street Bridge. It is noted that the private sector proponentsproposingtocarryoutdredgingworksinthesoutharmoftheHunterRiverunderDA13432003imustseekapprovalsanddredginglicensesfromtheoverallconsentholderNSWMaritimeinadditiontotherequisitelicences,permitsandapprovalsfromotherauthorities.TheStrategicDredgingProgramwasdeemeda‘controlledaction’undertheEnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) by the Department of Environment and Heritage (nowDSEWPC),andaccordinglyisalsosubjecttoaCommonwealthapprovalundertheEPBCAct(Reference:2003/950),grantedtoNPCon30May2007.TheexistingCommonwealthapprovaldoesnotcoverPhases6and7oftheStrategicDredgingProgram,althoughthesewereincludedintheoriginalEPBCActreferraltoDSEWPC.Severalmodificationshavebeenmadetotheoriginalconsent.ApplicationsbyNPCtomodifyDA13432003iandtheCommonwealthapproval,torelocatetheproposedswingbasinapproximately400metres(m)downstream(east)ofthecurrentapprovedlocation,arecurrentlypending.8

TheStrategicDredgingProgramcommencedin2007,andisongoingforworksassociatedwithPhases1to4.Noprojectstodatehavetriggeredtheneedforshippingchannelstoextendtothewesternlimitoftheir approved extent and, as such, Phases 5, 6 and 7 have not yet commenced. These phases wouldlikelyrequireamodificationtotheexistingCommonwealthapproval,andarelikelytorequireanewEPBCActreferral.It is noted that any sea disposal of dredged material associated with the T4 Project would requireseparate permit(s) under the Commonwealth Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 and alicenceundertheNSWCrownLandsAct1989(seeSections4.4.4and4.4.5).2.5 CommercialframeworkAs outlined in Sections 1.1 and 1.4, PWCS is bound by the provisions of the Capacity FrameworkArrangements for the Port of Newcastle, as approved by the Australian Competition and ConsumerCommission(ACCC)in2009.TheCapacityFrameworkArrangementsweredevelopedfollowingextensivediscussions and negotiations between the NSW Government and the Hunter Valley coal industry, andformacriticalpartofthelongtermcoalexportplanfortheregion.Theytookeffecton1January2010andapplyuntil31December2024.TheCapacityFrameworkArrangementsareintendedtoprovideasolutiontotheuncertaintyandongoingcapacity constraints experienced in the Hunter Valley Coal Chain, by facilitating long term contracts tounderpin and align more efficient and timely investment and promote optimal operation of the coalchain. They also seek to reduce offshore vessel queues and associated demurrage costs andenvironmentalandsafetyrisks,andmaintainorimprovetheinternationalreputationandperformanceoftheHunterValleycoalindustry.KeycomponentsoftheCapacityFrameworkArrangementsincludethefollowing.TheallocationofportcapacitytoaccessseekersatthePWCSterminalsunderlongtermcontracts,inaccordancewithprescribednominationandallocationprocedures.Triggers and processes for determining whether and when expansions of the PWCS coal loadingterminals are required (including the construction of a new terminal where necessary). Thisincludes a requirement that PWCS must expand its existing coal loading terminals to provideadditionalcapacityif:- the aggregate PWCS contracted allocations exceed the aggregate PWCS available capacity(thatis,CapacityShortfall);and- theCapacityShortfallcannotbefulfilledthoughvoluntarycontractedallocationreductions.ArequirementthatiftheexistingPWCScoalloadingterminalsarenotcapableofbeingexpandedto provide the additional capacity to satisfy the Capacity Shortfall, then PWCS must build a newterminal(T4).AspartofitsobligationsundertheCapacityFrameworkArrangements,PWCShasenteredintolongterm‘shiporpay’contractswithcoalproducers,wherebythecoalproducersmustpayforcontractedcapacityatthePWCSterminalsregardlessofactualcapacityused.Inturn,tohonouritscontractualobligations,and manage the ongoing export demand for Hunter Valley and Gunnedah basin coal, PWCS has theresponsibility of ensuring its port facilities have sufficient capacity to handle the contracted coalthroughputs.9

As mentioned in Section 1.4, PWCS contracted allocations are forecast to exceed capacity inapproximately2015,withdemandexpectedtocontinuetoincreasebeyondthistime.Accordingly,undertheprovisionsoftheCapacityFrameworkArrangements,newcapacityisrequiredandtheT4Projecthasbeentriggered.ItshouldbenotedthatiftheT4Projectisunabletoprovidesufficientcapacitytohandlecontractedcoalthroughputsinthefuture,PWCSwillberequiredtodevelopanothercoalterminalinNewcastle.10

3 Projectdescription3.1 IntroductionPWCS proposes to extend the KCT to the west to provide additional coal throughput capacity, inaccordancewithitsobligationsundertheCapacityFrameworkArrangements.Theproposedextensionwould enable optimisation of synergies with the existing infrastructure, systems and workforce at theKCT. This would include some sharing of facilities and environmental management and monitoringsystems.A number of design options for the key project components are currently being investigated, withconsiderationtooperational,environmentalandeconomicfactors.ThefinaldesignwillbeinfluencedbythefindingsoftheEAandwillbepresentedandassessedaspartoftheEA.KeycomponentsoftheT4ProjectareoutlinedinthefollowingandthefootprintsunderconsiderationforeachofthesecomponentsareillustratedschematicallyonFigures1.2,3.1and3.2.3.2 RailloopSeveraloptionsforaraillooptoreceivecoalarebeingexamined.ThetwopreferredoptionsatthisstageareRailOptions5and3.RailOption5includestheprovisionofraillinestothewestandnorthoftheexistingraillinesservicingKooragangIsland(refertoFigure3.1).TrainswouldgenerallyfollowthesamealignmentastheexistingraillineservicingKCT.Whilethislandtothewestandnorthiszonedforportfacilities,itismostlyownedby the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) and is proposed to beincorporatedintotheHunterEstuaryNationalPark.RailOption3generallyfollowsthesamealignmentasNCIG’srailloop(bothexistingandapproved).RaillineswouldbeprovidedontheoutsideofNCIG’srailloop(refertoFigure3.2).LikeRailOption5,thisoptioninvolvestheconstructionofraillinesonDECCWownedland,tothewestofthejunctionoftheNCIGrailloop.Bothoptionsincludeaflyoveroverthemainbranchtoavoidbottleneckingfrominboundtrainswaitingfor outbound trains to exit Kooragang Island. Construction of the flyover would also necessitate theconstructionofatemporaryraillinearoundtheconstructionsite,ontheDECCWland.Thistemporaryrailline would facilitate uninterrupted rail access for all current Kooragang branch users throughout theconstructionphase.Toavoidtheneedforaflyover,therearealsooptionsfordivertingtheexistingdeparturetracksontheKooragangmainbranchonanewalignmentacrosstheeasternendoftheT4ProjectareaandaroundthesouthernsideoftheNCIGrailloop.ConstructionofraillinesacrosstheeasternendoftheT4ProjectareawouldrestrictaccessbetweenKCTandtheT4Projectareaandwouldreducethesizeandcapacityoftheproposedstockyard.Thefinalpreferredrailoptionwillbeinfluencedbytechnicalassessmentsandoutcomesofconsultationwithrelevantstakeholders,andwillbepresentedintheEA.11

3.3 StockyardThe stockyard, incorporating coal stockpiles, stacking, reclaiming and coal transport systems, e.g.conveyors and transfer stations, would be located immediately west of the existing KCT and NCIGstockyards(seeFigures3.1and3.2).Duringconstruction,cutandfillearthworkswouldbeundertakenacrosstheproposedstockyardarea.Currentestimatessuggestthatintheorderof4to5millioncubicmetresoffillcouldberequired,dependingonthefinaldesignofthestockyard.Thisfillisproposedtobesourced as dredge material from the Hunter River, potentially supplemented by fill trucked in fromelsewhere.A range of stockyard configurations and development programs are being investigated, withconsideration to various stockpile types, stockyard machines and stockyard capacities. Filling anddevelopmentofthestockyardmaybeundertakenacrossthewholesiteattheoutset,orbeundertakenprogressively.Thecurrentpreferredoption(Type3AStockyard)ispresentedinFigures3.1and3.2.Thefinal preferred option will be influenced by technical assessments and outcomes of consultation withrelevantstakeholders,andwillbepresentedintheEA.Thestockyardreclamationareawouldbedividedintotwomainareas,fillpondsforhydraulicplacementof dredged material, and settlement ponds for managing return water and settling out fines prior todischargeofreturnwaterbackintotheHunterRiver.Closure and capping of waste emplacement areas is proposed to be undertaken prior to or duringdevelopmentoftheT4Project.3.4 ConveyorsystemThe coal conveyor and feeder system is proposed to extend throughout the stockyard, to deliver coalfromrailreceivaltothestockpiles.Conveyorswouldalsoextendsouth,totheberthsalongtheHunterRiver,todelivercoaltotheshiploaders.ThiswouldinvolveaconveyorcrossingofCormorantRoadandtheHunterRiver.3.5 BerthsBerthing, wharf and shiploading facilities are proposed to be located along the northern and southernbanks of the Hunter River south arm, immediately south of the landbased facilities and west of theexistingberths(refertoFigures3.1and3.2).At this stage, up to five berths are proposed, to provide berthing for a variety of vessels ranging fromHandysize(35,000tonnes)toCapesize(150,000tonnes).Maximisingthepotentialthroughputoftheseberthswouldrequiretheinstallationofshiploadersonallwharves.Dredging for extension of the shipping channels and access to the berth sites would be carried out inaccordance with the existing NSW Maritime development consent (DA13432003i) and anyCommonwealth approvals. Accordingly, it does not form part of the current Project Application. Seadumping permits for dredge material unsuitable for use as engineering fill would be sourced underparallelprocesses,ifrequired.12

3.6 AncillaryfacilitiesandactivitiesAncillaryfacilitiesproposedtosupporttheT4Projectincludethefollowing:electricitysupplyandanew33kV/11kVsubstation;switchrooms;dustsuppressionandfirefightingsystems;washdownfacilities;waterandwastewatermanagementsystems;securityfences;ITanddatalinks;refuellingfacilities;amenities;administrationandworkshopbuildings;internalaccessroads;andexternalaccessroad(s).Accessroadalignmentsareyettobefinalised,butaccesstothestockyardandberthswouldmostlikelybefromCormorantRoad.TheancillaryrequirementsarereducedbytheproposedsharingofthefacilitiesattheexistingKCT.Construction of the T4 Project would potentially require relocation of some existing services such astransmissionlines,gaslines,waterlines,fibreopticcableandroads.ThismayincludepartofCormorantRoad,toaccommodatetheproposedrailloopunderRailOption3.13

TRI TRI PER/CONVEYO PER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILREA RAIL RAILTRIPPER/CONVEYO TRIPPER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILTRIPPER/CONVEYO TRIPPER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILREA REA RAIL RAILFRONT FRONT RAIL RAILSHU SHU TLE TLE TRAVEL TRAVELSHU SHU TLE TLE TRAVEL TRAVELHeron RoadSTOCKTON BRIDGEGreenleaf RoadPrivate access Road (Pacific National)Raven StreetEgret StreetPacific HighwayCormorant RoadIndustrial Drive148223KEYTOURLE STREET BRIDGETourle StreetT4 Project areaExisting railwayProposed stockyard type 3APotential pond locationsProposed conveyorProposed rail option 3T4 dumpstationProposed marine option 2Proposed swing basinApproved NCIG rail lineBoral CementCargill Oilseed ProcessorIncitec Pivot Fertilizer ManufacturingOricaOneSteelFormer BHP LandBHP Billiton emplacement areaPacific Highway6101112131415123457890 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1kmEMGA MitchellMcLennan665Hunter Estuary National Park9 1071314The Terminal 4 Project | Preliminary Environmental Assessment ReportNFern BayHUNTER RIVER - North ArmPWCS Kooragang Coal Terminal(NCIG) coal export terminal1112NEWCASTLE HARBOURFIGURE 3.1The T4 Project with Rail Option 5HUNTER RIVER - South Arm15MAYFIELDWESTMAYFIELDNORTHMAYFIELDMAYFIELDEASTPWCS Carrington Coal TerminalWALSH POINTSTOCKTON030418 Option 3-5 F1 Rev C- 24 November 2010 © Integrated Design Solutions

TRI TRI PER/CONVEYO PER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILREA RAIL RAILTRIPPER/CONVEYO TRIPPER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILTRIPPER/CONVEYO TRIPPER/CONVEYO RAIL RAILREA REA RAIL RAILFRONT FRONT RAIL RAILSHU SHU TLE TLE TRAVEL TRAVELSHU SHU TLE TLE TRAVEL TRAVELHeron RoadSTOCKTON BRIDGEGreenleaf RoadPrivate access Road (Pacific National)Raven StreetEgret StreetPacific HighwayCormorant RoadIndustrial Drive1822315KEYTOURLE STREET BRIDGETourle StreetT4 Project areaExisting railwayProposed stockyard type 3APotential pond locationsProposed conveyorProposed rail option 3T4 dumpstationProposed marine option 2Proposed swing basinApproved NCIG rail lineBoral CementCargill Oilseed ProcessorIncitec Pivot Fertilizer ManufacturingOricaOneSteelFormer BHP LandBHP Billiton emplacement areaPacific Highway6101112131415123457890 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1kmEMGA MitchellMcLennan4665Hunter Estuary National Park9 1071314The Terminal 4 Project | Preliminary Environmental Assessment ReportNFern BayHUNTER RIVER - North ArmPWCS Kooragang Coal Terminal(NCIG) coal export terminal1112NEWCASTLE HARBOURFIGURE 3.2The T4 Project with Rail Option 3HUNTER RIVER - South ArmMAYFIELDWESTMAYFIELDNORTHMAYFIELDMAYFIELDEASTPWCS Carrington Coal TerminalWALSH POINTSTOCKTON030418 Option 3-5 F2 Rev C - 24 November 2010 © Integrated Design Solutions

“Thispagehasbeenintentionallyleftblank”16

4 Approvalrequirements4.1 IntroductionTheT4ProjectwillbeassessedundertheprovisionsofPart3AoftheEP&AAct.A referral will be made under the Commonwealth EPBC Act. If an approval is required under thislegislation,theintentionwouldbethatCommonwealthmattersareassessedviathePart3Aprocess,inaccordancewithabilateralagreementbetweentheCommonwealthandtheState.ThischapterdescribestheapprovalprocessunderboththeEP&AActandEPBCAct.AnoverviewofotherapprovalsthatmayberequiredfortheT4Projectisalsoprovided.4.2 NSWEnvironmentalPlanningandAssessmentAct19794.2.1 ApprovalprocessThe EP&AActandtheEnvironmentalPlanningandAssessmentRegulation2000providetheframeworkfor environmental planning and assessment in NSW. Part 3A of the EP&A Act relates to majordevelopmentdeemedtobesignificanttotheState.Section75B(1)oftheActstatesthatPart3Aappliesto:“…thecarryingoutofdevelopmentthatisdeclaredunderthissectiontobeaprojecttowhichthisPartapplies:(a)(b)byaStateenvironmentalplanningpolicy,orbyorderoftheMinisterpublishedintheGazette.”State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Projects) 2005 (Major Projects SEPP) defines certaindevelopmentsthatfallunderPart3A,i.e.developmentdeemedtobesignificanttoNSW.Clause6oftheMajorProjectsSEPPstates:“(1)Developmentthat,intheopinionoftheMinister,isdevelopmentofakind:(a)thatisdescribedinSchedule1or2,or…isdeclaredtobeaprojecttowhichPart3AoftheActapplies.”PortsandwharffacilitiesareaformofdevelopmentdescribedinSchedule1oftheMajorProjectSEPP.Clause22ofSchedule1definesportsandwharffacilitiesas:“Development for the purpose of shipping berths or terminals or wharfside facilities (and relatedinfrastructure)thathascapitalinvestmentvalueofmorethan$30million.”TheT4Projectmeetsthisdefinitionasitisadevelopmentforthepurposeofshippingberthsandwharfsidefacilitiesthathasanestimatedcapitalvalueintheorderof$3,500million.UnderPart3A,theMinisterforPlanningistheconsentauthority.17

Assuch,theT4ProjectwillbeassessedundertheprovisionsofPart3AoftheEP&AAct.Thereareninemain steps in this process, starting with a declaration by the Minister that a development is a majorprojectandendingwiththeMinister’sdetermination.EachstepisdescribedinTable4.1below.Table4.1Part3AapprovalprocessStep1.Declaration2.ProjectApplication3.PlanningFocusMeeting4.EARs5.PreparedraftEA6.Publicexhibition7.Considerationofsubmissions8.Assessmentreport9.DeterminationActionsTheproponentmakesaformalrequesttotheMinisterforPlanningtodeclaretheprojectasamajorprojecttobeassessedunderPart3A.TheMinistermakesanassessmentwhethertodeclaretheproject.AProjectApplicationissubmittedtotheDoP,whichcanbeaccompaniedbyaPEA,toobtaintermsofreferenceknownasEARs.APFMiscommonlyheldwithgovernmentagenciestodiscusstheproposal.TheDirectorGeneraloftheDoPissuesEARsfortheproposeddevelopmentwhichmustbeaddressedinanEA.AdraftEAispreparedbytheproponentaddressingtheEARsissuedbytheDirectorGeneral.DuringpreparationofthedraftEA,theproponentconsultswithrelevantstakeholdersincludingthecouncil,governmentagenciesandthecommunity.Oncesubmitted,theDirectorGeneralassessestheadequacyofthedraftEAagainsttheEARs.Ifadequate,theEAisfinalisedandplacedonpublicexhibitionforaperiodofnotlessthan30days.Theproponentrespondstoallsubmissionsmadeduringthepublicexhibitionprocess.Ifchangesaremadetotheproposeddevelopmenttoaddressconcerns,theproponentgenerallypreparesapreferredprojectreport.TheDirectorGeneralprovidesanassessmentreporttotheMinisterwitharecommendationastowhethertheproposeddevelopmentshouldbeapprovedorrefused.TheMinisterapprovesandsetsassociatedconditionsorrefusestheapplication.4.2.2 OtherStateapprovalsThereareanumberofapprovals,authorisationsandlicencesunderotherlegislationthatapplytotheT4Project.ItisimportanttonotethatiftheprojectisapprovedunderPart3Atherearealsoanumberofapprovalsthatcannotberefused,althoughnecessaryconditionscanbeapplied.Section 75U of the EP&A Act lists the approvals under other legislation that do not apply to projectsapprovedunderPart3Aandtheseare:theconcurrenceunderPart3oftheCoastalProtectionAct1979oftheMinisteradministeringthatPartoftheAct;permitsundersection201,205or219oftheFisheriesManagementAct1994;anapprovalunderPart4,oranexcavationpermitundersection139,oftheHeritageAct1977;a permit under section 87 or a consent under section 90 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act1974;anauthorisationreferredtoinsection12oftheNativeVegetationAct2003(orunderanyActtoberepealedbythatAct)toclearnativevegetationorStateprotectedland;18

apermitunderPart3AoftheRiversandForeshoresImprovementAct1948;abushfiresafetyauthorityundersection100BoftheRuralFiresAct1997;awateruseapprovalundersection89,awatermanagementworkapprovalundersection90oranactivityapprovalundersection91oftheWaterManagementAct2000;andDivision 8 of Part 6 of the Heritage Act 1977 does not apply to prevent or interfere with thecarryingoutofanapprovedprojectunderPart3A.Section 75V of the EP&A Act lists the authorisations and licences under other legislation that must beobtainedbutcannotberefusediftheyarenecessaryforcarryingoutprojectsapprovedunderPart3A.OfrelevancetotheT4Projecttheseare:anenvironmentprotectionlicence(EPL)undertheProtectionoftheEnvironmentOperationsAct1997(POEOAct);aconsentundersection138oftheRoadsAct1993;andalicenceunderthePipelinesAct1967.4.3 CommonwealthEnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999The EPBC Act aims to protect matters deemed to be of national environmental significance (NES)including:worldheritageproperties;placeslistedontheNationalHeritageRegister;Ramsarwetlandsofinternationalsignificance;threatenedfloraandfaunaspeciesandecologicalcommunities;migratoryspecies;Commonwealthmarineareas;andnuclearactions(includinguraniummining).Ifanaction(orproject)will,orislikelyto,haveasignificantimpactonanyofthemattersofNES,itisdeemedtobeaControlledActionandrequiresapprovalfromtheCommonwealthEnvironmentMinisterortheMinister’sdelegate.TodeterminewhetheraproposedactionwillorislikelytobeaControlledAction,anactionmaybereferredtoDSEWPC.AsdiscussedinSection6.5,theT4ProjectmayhaveanimpactonthefollowingmattersofNES:Ramsarwetlands; threatened flora and fauna species and ecological communities; and migratory species. Areferral is currently being prepared for the T4 Project for DSEWPC’s consideration. This referral willconsiderandassesswhethertheT4Projectwill,orislikelyto,haveasignificantonthesemattersofNES.19

WhereanactionisdesignatedaControlledAction,theDSEWPCdecidesontheapproachtobeusedforassessingtherelevantimpactsfromanyofthefivedifferentpathways.Oneoftheassessmentpathwaysis by an accredited process whereby a State or territory manages the assessment on behalf of theCommonwealth(oftenreferredtoasabilateralagreement).On 17 June 2002, the Commonwealth accredited the NSW EA process under both the EP&A Act andThreatenedSpeciesConservationAct1995(TSCAct).IftheT4ProjectisdeemedtobeaControlledActionandapprovalisrequiredundertheEPBCAct,theCommonwealthmayelectthattheactionisassessedundertheNSWbilateralagreementcoordinatedbytheDoP.Ifabilateralagreementisused,acopyofDoP’sassessmentreportwouldbeforwardedtoDSEWPConcompletionoftheStateprocess.TheCommonwealthEnvironmentMinistermustthenmakeadecisionon whether to approve the taking of the action within 30 business days of receiving the assessmentreport.The approvals schedule for the T4 Project has been developed to enable integration of theCommonwealthapprovalsprocess,ifrequired,intotheStateprocessunderabilateralagreement.Thetiming of the EPBC Act referral and Commonwealth Minister’s decision is such that if it is found thatapproval is required under the EPBC Act, the EARs could be developed to incorporate Commonwealthassessmentrequirements.4.4 Otherapprovals4.4.1 ProtectionoftheEnvironmentOperationsAct1999TheT4ProjectwouldrequireanEPLundertheprovisionsofthePOEOAct.UnderSchedule1ofthePOEOAct,‘coalworks’requireanEPLiftheyhaveacapacitytohandlemorethan500tonnesperdayofcoalorthey have the capacity to store more than 5,000 tonnes of coal. The T4 Project would meet theserequirements.TheT4ProjectareacurrentlyhasthreeEPLsthatrelatetoexistingusesonthesite:EPL6437heldbyHunterDevelopmentCorporation;EPL7675heldbyPWCSsinceitspurchaseofthesitefromDeltaEMDAustraliaPtyLimitedinJuly2010;andEPL1552heldbyPWCS.EPLs6437and7675permitwastedisposalassociatedwiththeKooragangIslandWasteFacility.EPL1552permitscoalworksandshippinginbulkandisassociatedwiththeKCT.Should the T4 Project proceed, full or partial surrender, consolidation or transfer of the three existingEPLswouldberequired.The EA for the T4 Project will provide details on the above EPLs and the proposed process forsurrendering,consolidatingortransferringtheselicencesintoanEPLfortheT4Project.Aspreviouslystated,undertheprovisionsoftheEP&AAct,anEPLcannotberefusedifitisnecessaryforcarryingoutaprojectapprovedunderPart3A.20

4.4.2 RoadsAct1993Undersection138orPart9,Division3oftheRoadsAct1993,apersonmustnotundertakeanyworksthatimpactonaroad,includingconnectingaroad(whetherpublicorprivate)toaclassifiedroad,withoutapproval of the relevant authority, being either the Roads and Traffic Authority or local council,dependinguponclassificationoftheroad.AnapprovalundertheRoadsAct1993wouldberequiredfortheT4ProjectgiventhatitisexpectedtonecessitateanumberofworkstoCormorantRoad,potentiallyincluding:realignmentofpartoftheroad;provisionofnewaccesstotheroad;andprovisionofpotentialconveyororservicescorridorsacrosstheroad.Onceagain,undertheprovisionsoftheEP&AAct,anapprovalundersection138orPart9,Division3oftheRoadsAct1993cannotberefusedifitisnecessaryforcarryingoutaprojectapprovedunderPart3A.4.4.3 WaterManagementAct2000Itislikelythatactivityapprovalswouldberequiredundersection91oftheWaterManagementAct2000as part of the construction activities for the T4 Project, including controlled activity approval and anaquiferinterferenceapproval.Onceagain,undertheprovisionsoftheEP&AAct,approvalsundersection91oftheWaterManagementAct2000cannotberefusediftheyarenecessaryforcarryingoutaprojectapprovedunderPart3A.4.4.4 CrownLandsAct1989Dredgematerialunsuitableforuseasengineeringfillisproposedtobedisposedofatsea.Accordingly,alicence would be required from the NSW Land and Property Management Authority under the CrownLands Act 1989 to temporarily use certain Crown Land within the Coastal Waters of NSW for thedeposition of dredge spoil. Provided this licence is obtained, approval for this activity would not berequiredundertheCoastalProtectionAct1979.4.4.5 EnvironmentProtection(SeaDumping)Act1981TheNPCreceivedinprincipleapprovalforseadisposalofallmaterialinthesoutharmdredgingfootprintfrom the DSEWPC (then Department of Environment and Heritage) in December 2003. However,DSEWPChassinceadvisedthatseadumpingpermitsneedtobesoughtbytheorganisationresponsibleforthedredginganddisposaloperations.Accordingly,PWCSwouldberequiredtoseekCommonwealthapprovalundertheEnvironmentProtection(SeaDumping)Act1981fordisposalofdredgedmaterialatsea.4.4.6 OtherapprovalsAcomprehensivereviewofallrelevantlegislationandpolicieswillbeundertakenduringthepreparationoftheEA.AllapprovalsandlicencesrequiredfortheconstructionandoperationoftheT4ProjectwillbeidentifiedandreportedintheEA.Relevantapprovalsandlicenceswillalsobediscussedwithgovernmentagenciesduringthestakeholderengagementprocess(refertoChapter5).21

“Thispagehasbeenintentionallyleftblank”22

5 Stakeholderengagement5.1 IntroductionThe T4 Project has the potential to generate considerable interest from stakeholders, includinggovernmentagencies,thelocalcommunityandspecialinterestgroups.Inparticular,potentialecological,traffic, noise and dust impacts associated directly with the T4 Project, and related wider issues –expansion of coal mining, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change – all have the potential togeneratecommunityconcern.Toaddressthechallengesofidentifyingandengagingwiththerelevantstakeholdersandensuringissuesraised are effectively addressed as part of the project planning and assessment, a stakeholderengagementstrategyhasbeenpreparedspecificallyfortheT4Project.Engagementhascommencedinaccordancewiththisstrategyandissummarisedinthischapter.5.2 ObjectivesTheobjectivesofthestakeholderengagementstrategyincludethefollowing:to identify all relevant stakeholders who have an interest in the T4 Project and the ongoingoperations of PWCS, including community groups who may identify themselves as the ‘affectedcommunity’;toprovidestakeholderswithaccurateandtimelyinformationontheT4Project;toidentifyandunderstandtheaspectsoftheT4Projectwhichareofmostinteresttostakeholders;to seek feedback on the design of the T4 Project and the proposed approaches to minimisingimpactsonthelocalcommunity,andidentifyopportunitiestoaccommodatecommunityfeedbackintotheprojectdesign;andtoestablishrelationshipswiththecommunitywhichcanbeutilisedinthefuturetothebenefitofthecommunityandPWCS,suchaspartneringinlongtermcommunitydevelopmentprojects.5.3 StakeholderengagementstrategyThe key components of the stakeholder engagement strategy are initial stakeholder identification,stakeholderassessmentandstakeholderengagement.Eachofthesecomponentsisdescribedbelow.5.3.1 InitialstakeholderidentificationThe initial stakeholder identification process is complete. This task involved compiling a list of allstakeholders likely to be relevant to the T4 Project. It largely drew on PWCS existing information andunderstandingofthecommunityinwhichitoperates.The broad stakeholder groups identified include NCC, State and Commonwealth government agencies,the local community and nearest residential neighbours, special interest groups, Aboriginal groups,neighbouring industry, industry representative groups, employees of PWCS, State and Commonwealthmembersandministersandthemedia.23

ThestakeholderlistwillberegularlyreviewedandupdatedthroughouttheEAandthedevelopmentoftheT4Project.5.3.2 StakeholderassessmentFollowing the ‘initial stakeholder identification’, an assessment of the stakeholders was undertaken tofurtherunderstandtheextenttowhichthevariouspartieswerelikelytobeimpactedbyand/orhaveaninterestintheT4Project.Thepurposeofthisexercisewastoinformthedevelopmentofappropriatelytailoredstakeholderengagementstrategiesandschedule.5.3.3 StakeholderengagementTheinitialroundofstakeholderengagementhascommencedwithintroductionoftheprojectconcepttoanumberofstakeholders.Once sufficient detail has been prepared on potential development options for the T4 Project, it isproposedtoreengagewithallstakeholders.Thiswouldbetoprovideanupdateonprojectprogress,introducetheoptionsbeingconsidered,andseekfeedbackonthese.As the project progresses additional stakeholder engagement would be undertaken. This would be todiscuss the preferred option selected, expected environmental and community impacts, and plannedmitigation, and seek feedback on these. As part of this engagement, it would be possible to providefeedbackonhowtheresultsofpreviousengagementhavebeentakenintoaccountintheprojectdesign.StakeholderengagementisproposedtocontinuethroughouttheimplementationoftheT4Project.5.4 StakeholderEngagementToolsA range of formal and informal stakeholder engagement tools will be used according to the particularneedsofindividualstakeholders.Thesewillincludephonecalls,meetingsandbriefingsessions,publicdisplays, newsletters and factsheets. In addition, a T4 Project webpage will be developed to provideinformationabouttheT4Projectandaccesspointstoraiseconcernsorrequestfurtherinformation.Thewebpagewillberegularlyupdated.FormalconsultationwithgovernmentagencieswillincludeaPFM,heldafterlodgmentofthisPEA,aswellasmeetingsandbriefingstodiscussspecificaspectsoftheT4Project.24

6 Preliminaryenvironmentalassessment6.1 IntroductionThis chapter provides a preliminary assessment of the potential environmental and socioeconomicimpactsoftheT4Project.ThereisconsiderablebaselineenvironmentaldataavailablefortheT4Projectarea, Kooragang Island and the surrounding areas from past and ongoing studies. This includesmonitoring,modellingandassessmentundertakenforexistingandproposeddevelopmentsbyPWCSandother industrial facilities. In particular, the KCT and NCIG studies provide an understanding of theenvironmentalinteractionsofcoalterminaloperationsinthelocalarea.Thischapterhasbeenpreparedfollowingadesktopreviewoftheexistinginformation,asitevisitandananalysisoftheproposedT4Projectfootprintandactivities,tocharacterisetheexistingenvironmentandidentify potential environmental impacts and areas for further investigation in the EA. DetailedassessmentsofeachenvironmentalaspectareproposedaspartoftheEA,usingtheapproachessetoutinthischapter.Aspectsconsideredinthischapterare:soilsandfoundationconditions;groundwater;surfacewater;ecology;airqualityandodour;noiseandvibration;trafficandtransport;infrastructure;heritage;visual;energyuse,greenhousegasesandclimatechange;hazards;andsocioeconomic.25

6.2 Soilsandfoundationconditions6.2.1 ExistingenvironmentThere is considerable existing data on soil and geotechnical conditions within and adjacent to the T4Projectarea,sourcedfromhundredsoftestbores,monitoringwells,testpitsandconepenetrationtests.TheT4Projectareabroadlycomprisesfill(industrialwasteanddredgedfines),underlainbysoftalluvialsoils, comprising clays, silts and sands, which extend to the bedrock. Coal washery reject and naturalalluvialclayswithintheT4Projectareamayincludepotentialacidsulphatesoils(PASS).Arangeofcontaminantsarepresentatelevatedlevelsassociatedwithpastlandfilling(referSection2.2).The principal contaminants are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, benzo(a)pyrene, total petroleumhydrocarbons, phenols, asbestos, ammonia, cyanide, manganese and other metals (Douglas Partners,2010). Monitoring data indicates that contaminant migration has occurred beyond the wasteemplacement areas, however, the extent of contaminant migration has not been defined (DouglasPartners,2010).NoneofthelandfillsiteswithintheformerKooragangIslandWasteEmplacementFacilityhaveengineeredbaseorsideliningsystems,andallbutonedonothavealeachatecollectionsystem.ClosureandcappingplanshavebeenpreparedforformerlandfillsintheT4ProjectareaaspartoftheexistingEPLconditions.Theseplans,orrevisionsthereof,wouldbeimplementedpriortooraspartofthedevelopmentoftheT4Project,andwillbedescribedintheEA.6.2.2 ProposedassessmentapproachAsoilsandgeotechnicalassessmentwillbeundertakenaspartoftheEA.The keyareasproposedforinvestigationinclude:theriskandimplicationsofinterception,exposureand/ormobilisationofcontaminantsandPASS,forinstancefromtheproposeddrainageandearthworks;suitability of the foundation materials to accommodate the T4 Project, including potential forsettlingunderload;andinteraction of the T4 Project components with site capping, including implications for piling anddesignoffoundations.Thesoilsandgeotechnicalinvestigationwilluseexistinginformation,supplementedbyadditionalsoiltestpitsandboresacrosstheT4Projectareaandattheproposedfill extractionandberthlocationsintheHunterRiver.Managementandmitigationmeasureswillbedeveloped,includingsafeguardsandgroundpreparation requirements for construction over fill and weak natural soils. Due to the potentialinteractions and contaminant pathways, the soil/ geotechnical investigation is proposed to be closelylinkedtothegroundwaterinvestigation.6.3 Groundwater6.3.1 ExistingenvironmentGroundwaterwithintheT4Projectareaiscontainedwithintwoprincipalaquifers,anupperunconfinedaquifer within the fill strata, and a semiconfined aquifer within the underlying estuarine sediments(Douglas Partners, 2010). These aquifers are partially separated by a discontinuous clay aquitard,althoughthetwosystemsaregenerallyconsideredtobeconnected,withadownwardgradientfromfill26

toestuarinegroundwater(GHD,2009).Athirddeeperaquiferispotentiallypresentwherestiffestuarineclaylayersseparatethedeepersandlayers(DouglasPartners,2010).Groundwater flow within the fill strata is primarily subhorizontal, towards the closest surface drainagefeatures although, some downward leakage also occurs (Douglas Partners, 2010). Flow within theestuarineaquiferisprimarilytothesoutharmoftheHunterRiver,withsomeflowtothenorthaswell(DouglasPartners,2010).Groundwater monitoring is and will continue to be undertaken within and surrounding the T4 Projectarea.Resultstodateindicatethatgroundwaterhasbeencontaminatedbyhistoricuseoftheareaasanindustrial waste facility. Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons, benzo(a)pyrene, polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons, phenols, ammonia, cyanide, sulphate, manganese, lead and other metals haveexceededtherelevantwaterqualityguidelinelimitsonvariousoccasions(DouglasPartners,2010).6.3.2 ProposedassessmentapproachA groundwater assessment is proposed as part of the EA. This will draw on existing information andmonitoring data, supplemented by additional testing, where necessary. The existing hydrogeologicalmodelofthe siteaquifers willbe furtherdevelopedandgroundwatermodelling undertakentopredictpotentialcontaminantpathwaysandthepotentialimpactsoftheT4Projectongroundwaterflowsandthereceivingenvironments.Suitablemanagementandmonitoringstrategieswillbedeveloped.Thekeyareasproposedforinvestigationarethepotentialfor:exacerbation or migration of existing contamination and/ or new contamination, such as frommobilisation of soil contaminants into groundwater, additional loading and ‘squeezing’ of theground,connectionofgroundwateraquifersystemsfrompenetrationoftheclayaquitardand/ormigrationofpotentiallycontaminatedwaterthataccumulatesintheT4Projectarea;changesto groundwaterrechargeandflowregimes,suchasfromfillingandcappingofthesite,infiltrationofsalinewaterfromdredgematerialusedasfillandotherprojectrelatedalterationstothesurfacewaterregime;potentialimpactsongroundwaterdependentecosystems,includingadjacentwetlandsoutsideoftheT4Projectarea;andpotentialimpactsonanygroundwaterusersonKooragangIsland.6.4 Surfacewater6.4.1 ExistingenvironmentSurface hydrology within the T4 Project area has been completely modified by land reclamation,earthworks and artificial drainage structures, including floodgates, bridges, culverts, drains and levees.Theexistingsurfacedrainagenetworkcomprisesartificiallyconstructeddepressionsandpondswhichfillwithwaterinresponsetorainfall,andultimatelydraintotheHunterRiversoutharm.WaterqualitymonitoringhasbeenundertakenatpondswithinandsurroundingtheT4Projectareasince2000,inaccordancewithEPL6437.Themonitoringresultsindicatethatwaterqualityhasbeendegradedby past land uses including waste dumping, with the ponds periodically characterised by low levels ofcontaminants (Resource Strategies, 2006). The measured pH, electrical conductivity, phenols, freecyanide,leadandzinclevelshaveperiodicallyexceededtherelevantguidelinelimits(ResourceStrategies,27

2006).WaterqualitymonitoringdataisalsoavailablefortheHunterRiverupstreamanddownstreamoftheT4Projectarea.The existing surface water management system at the KCT includes direction of process water andstormwaterrunofffromoperationalareasofthesitetosettlingpondsforremovaloffinespriortoreuseonthesite.Thissystemisdesignedtocontainallsitewateruptoandincludingthe1in100yearstormevent.DischargesonlyoccurwhenthesestoragesexceedcapacityandtheyarereportabletoDECCW.TheKCTuseswaterfordustsuppression,firefighting,vehiclewashdown,vesselwatersupplies,liquidresistors, wharf activities, amenities and landscape irrigation. These demands are met by stormwatercapturedonsiteandrecycledprocesswater,augmentedbypotablewatersourcedfromHunterWater.6.4.2 ProposedassessmentapproachThekeyareasproposedforinvestigationinthesurfacewaterassessmentarethedrainageimplicationsfrom infilling of ponds within the T4 Project area and the potential for water quality impacts duringconstruction and operations, giving consideration to contamination and PASS present across the T4Project area. The surface water assessment will set out principles for water management duringconstructionandoperations,including optionsforreuseandrecyclingofwater.Giventhatthewatermanagementsystem will likely be integrated with that at KCT, it isproposed to revise the current KCTwaterbalancemodeltoincludetheT4Project,andconfirmthatwaterdemandscanbemet.Assessmentofthepotentialforfloodingimpactswillalsorequireconsideration.6.5 Ecology6.5.1 ExistingenvironmentTheecologyoftheT4Projectareaandsurroundshasbeeninvestigatedaspartofpreviousandongoingecologicalinvestigations.PreviousinvestigationshavebeenreviewedbyUmwelt(2010),inthecontextoftheT4Project,andkeyfindingsaresummarisedinthefollowing.iVegetationcommunitiesTheT4Projectareaisahighlymodifiedenvironmentandpredominatelycomprisesareasofbaregroundanddisturbedgrasslanddominatedbyintroducedspecies.Theartificialpondsarecurrentlymappedascomprising saltmarsh, freshwater wetland and Phragmites swamp communities. Saltmarsh and amangrovecomplexarepresentalongtheedgeoftheHunterRiver,attheproposedberthlocation.Anaerial photograph showing the locations of currently mapped vegetation communities within the T4ProjectareaispresentedasFigure6.1.ItisnotedthatwhilstpreviousecologicalinvestigationshavebeenundertakenwithintheT4Projectarea,thevegetationofthewholeoftheT4Projectareahasnotbeenrecentlymapped.TheT4ProjectareadoesnotincludeanyvegetationcommunitieslistedundertheEPBCAct.However,someofthesaltmarsh,freshwaterwetlandandPhragmitesswampcommunitiescurrentlymappedmaycorrespondtothefollowingendangeredecologicalcommunities(EECs)listedundertheTSCAct:CoastalSaltmarshintheNSWNorthCoast,SydneyBasinandSouthEastCornerBioregions;andFreshwaterWetlandsonCoastalFloodplainsoftheNSWNorthCoast,SydneyBasinandSouthEastCornerBioregions.28

ThemangrovecomplexisaffordedsomeprotectionundertheFisheriesManagementAct1994,butisnotlistedundertheTSCActortheEPBCAct.iiFaunahabitatsUmwelt (2010) identified that the T4 Project area contains three different fauna habitat types, beinggrassland,estuarineandwetlandhabitats.Thegrasslandhabitatsareonlyexpectedtoprovidehabitatforalowdiversityofnativefaunaspecies.However, they may provide habitat for the eastern grass owl (Tyto longimembris) which is listed asvulnerableundertheTSCAct,andhasbeenrecordedlocally.Further,dispersalofsomeaquaticspeciessuchasthegreenandgoldenbellfrogmayoccuracrosstheseareas.Aquatic habitats within the T4 Project area are expected to provide habitat for fauna species such asmigratory shorebirds and microbats (Umwelt, 2010). The T4 Project area is located withinthe ‘LowerHunter Estuary’, which supports a large variety of migratory and resident bird species during criticalstagesoftheirbreedingcycles,andprovidesarefugeforbirdspeciesduringinlanddrought.Whilerichinbirdlife,theestuaryshowsalowdiversityofnativeamphibian,reptileandmammalspecies.Muchofthenativefaunahasbeendisplacedbyhabitatdestructionandpredationbyintroducedspecies.WetlandhabitatswithintheT4ProjectareaincludeanareaknownastheDeepPondandfoursmallerpondsimmediatelywestofDeepPond(refertoFigure6.1).DeepPondprovideshabitatforarangeofwetlanddependentspecies,includingdeepdivingducks,migratorywadersandshorebirds.Theseincludea number of threatened species, such as the bluebilled duck (Oxyura australia) and freckled duck(Stictonettanaevosa).Thefoursmallpondsmentionedaboveprovidehabitatforthethreatenedgreenandgoldenbellfrog(Litoriaaurea).TherearenowetlandslistedunderStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicyNo.14–CoastalWetlands(SEPP14)locatedwithintheT4Projectareabutthreesuchwetlands(844,844aand823)arelocatedadjacenttotheT4Projectarea.iiiThreatenedfloraOnethreatenedfloraspecies,Zannichelliapalustris,hasbeenrecordedwithintheT4Projectarea.ThisspeciesislistedasendangeredundertheTSCAct.Areviewoftheconservationstatusofthisspecieshasbeen recommended, given that it is not considered to be endemic to the area (Umwelt, 2010). ThelikelihoodofidentifyinganyotherthreatenedfloraspecieswithintheT4Projectareaislow.ivThreatenedandmigratoryfaunaTheHunterEstuaryWetlandsRamsarsite,locatedadjacenttotheT4Projectarea,provideshabitatforatleast42ofthe66birdspecieslistedunderinternationalmigratoryspeciesconventions.SomeofthesespecieshavealsobeenrecordedwithintheT4Projectarea,attheDeepPond.The threatened fauna species which have been recorded within or in close proximity to the T4 ProjectareaarelistedinTable6.1,alongwiththeirconservationstatusandthelocationoftherecording(s).29

Heron RoadSTOCKTON BRIDGEGreenleaf RoadRaven StreetEgret StreetPacific HighwayIndustrial DriveTOURLE STREET BRIDGETourle StreetKEYT4 Project AreaRailway1 Boral Cement2 Cargill Oilseed Processor3 Incitec Pivot Fertilizer Maunfacturing4 Orica5 Proposed swing basin6 OneSteel7 Former BHP LandVegetation communitiesPacific HighwayGrasslandFreshwater wetlandCoastal saltmarshMangroves0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1kmEMGA MitchellMcLennanHunter Estuary National Park1 2567The Terminal 4 Project | Preliminary Environmental Assessment ReportNFern BayHUNTER RIVER - North ArmPWCS Kooragang Coal TerminalNCIG coal export terminal34NEWCASTLE HARBOURFIGURE 6.1Vegetation CommunitiesHUNTER RIVER - South ArmMAYFIELDWESTMAYFIELDNORTHMAYFIELDMAYFIELDEASTPWCS Carrington Coal TerminalWALSH POINTSTOCKTONPrivate access Road (Pacific National)Cormorant RoadDeep pond030418 Option 3-5 F6.1 Rev F - 24 November 2010 © Integrated Design Solutions

Table6.1ThreatenedfaunaspeciesrecordedwithinoradjacenttotheT4ProjectareaSpeciesname Conservationstatus LocationrecordedCommonname Scientificname TSCAct EPBCAct GreenandgoldenbellfrogLitoriaaurea E V NumerousrecordsovermultiplesurveyperiodsEasternosprey Pandionhaliaetus V MAR,MIG DeepPondEasterngrassowl Tytolongimembris V AdjacenttoT4ProjectareaAustralasianbittern Botauruspoiciloptilus E AdjacenttoT4ProjectareaBlacktailedgodwit Limosalimosa V MAR,MIG DeepPondandadjacenttoT4ProjectareaBluebilledduck Oxyuraaustralia V MIG DeepPondandadjacenttoT4ProjectareaFreckledduck Stictonettanaevosa V MIG DeepPondMagpiegoose Anseranassemipalmata V MAR DeepPondBlackneckedstork Ephippiorhynchus E DeepPondasiaticusRedbackedbutton Turnixmaculosa V NearDeepPondquailSpottedharrier Circusassimilis V MIG NearDeepPondGreyheadedflyingfox Pteropuspoliocephalus V V T4ProjectareaEasternbentwingbat Miniopterusschreibersii V AdjacenttoT4ProjectareaoceanensisEasternfreetailbat MormopterusV T4ProjectareanorfolkensisLittlebentwingbat Miniopterusaustralis V T4ProjectareaEasternfalsepipistrelle Falsistrellustasmaniensis V T4ProjectareaLargefootedmyotis Myotismacrotarsus V T4ProjectareaNotes:1.Source:Umwelt(2010)2.E–endangered;V–vulnerable;MAR–marine;MIGmigratory.6.5.2 ProposedassessmentapproachTo assess the potential impacts of the T4 Project on the ecological values of the T4 Project area andsurrounding environments, a detailed ecology assessment will be undertaken. The assessment willinclude,butnotnecessarilybelimitedto,thefollowingactivities.AdetailedreviewoftheecologicalinvestigationspreviouslyundertakenwithinandadjacenttotheT4Projectarea,includingfloracommunities,andfloraandfaunaspeciesrecorded.Additional field surveys of terrestrial and aquatic habitats to fill information gaps or targetparticularfloraorfaunaspecies.ResearchintothegreenandgoldenbellfrogconductedbytheUniversityofNewcastlethroughoutthe2010/2011spring–autumnperiod.Thisresearchhasalreadybeencommissioned.Itwillaimto contribute to an understanding of the green and golden bell frog population size and habitatutilisation on Kooragang Island. Knowledge gained from this research will assist in thedevelopmentofmanagementstrategiesforitslongtermconservation.31

An impact assessment and development of mitigation measures, including recommendations forcompensatoryhabitatrequirements.AkeyconsiderationwillbetheimpactofinfillingpondsintheT4Projectarea.Thiswillincludeimpactstothreatenedandmigratoryspecieswhichutilisetheseponds,includingthegreenandgoldenbellfrogandmigratorybirds,andtoanyEECswhichmayoccurwithintheseponds.Otherkeyconsiderationsrelatetothe clearing of mangrove vegetation to accommodate the berthing facilities and potential impacts tosurroundinghabitats,includingSEPP14wetlandsandtheHunterEstuaryWetlandsRamsarsite.6.6 Airqualityandodour6.6.1 ExistingenvironmentAirqualityatKooragangIslandandsurroundingareasisinfluencedbydustemissionsfromindustrialandnonindustrialsources,includingtheKCT.Industryintheareageneratesemissionsfromfuelcombustionandenergyuse,includingnitrogenoxides,sulphuroxidesandcarbondioxide.Thirdpartyemissionsfromshipsintheportarealsoasourceofemissions,particularlysulphurdioxide,whichisgeneratedbythecombustionofheavybunkeroils.ThereisanetworkofairmonitoringequipmentinandaroundtheKCT,operatedbyDECCW,PWCSandother industrial facilities, which provides data on existing air quality in the local area. Dust depositiongaugesmonitorthelevelsofdustdeposition,andhighvolumeairsamplersmonitorparticulatematterconcentrations.TherearealsotwoweathermonitoringstationsoperatedwithintwokilometresoftheT4Project area, located at the KCT and Mayfield West, respectively. This data, in conjunction with airdispersion modelling and assessment undertaken for existing and proposed industrial developmentsprovideagoodunderstandingofexistingairqualityanddispersioncharacteristicsinthelocalarea.Themonitoringdatafor2008indicatethatannualaveragetotalsuspendedparticulates(TSP)andPM 10 ,anddustdepositionlevelsarewellbelowtheDECCWassessmentcriteria.AirqualitypredictionsbyPAEHolmes(2006,2009)indicatethatthisisthecaseevenwhenconsideringpredictedfutureemissionsfromNCIG and KCT (Stage 4). Periodic exceedences of the maximum 24average PM 10 criterion of 50micrograms per cubic metre (g/m 3 ) have been recorded, such as on two days in 2008 at Fern Bay,possiblyduetoduststormsorbushfiresratherthanindustrialemissions.Basedonthedataavailable,PAEHolmes(2009)calculatedbackgrounddustconcentrationsatresidentialareasinthevicinityofKCTtobe:annualaverageTSPof45g/m 3 (DECCWcriterionis90g/m 3 );annualaveragePM 10 of21g/m 3 (DECCWcriterionis30g/m 3 );andannualaveragedustdepositionof2g/m 2 /month(DECCWcriterionis4g/m 2 /month).ThenearestresidentialareastotheT4ProjectareaareatMayfieldandWarabrook.Airdispersiontowardthese areas, and accordingly the potential for dust impacts, is potentially enhanced by winds from thewestnorthwestandnorthwest,whichonanannualbasis,arethemostcommonwindsinthearea(PAEHolmes,2009).OdoursaregeneratedbysomeindustrialfacilitiesonKooragangIsland,however,theexistingoperationsattheKCTdonotgenerateanysignificantodouremissions.32

Anarrayofdustcontrolsandsafeguardsarecurrentlyinplacetoensurethatairqualityofsurroundingareas is not adversely affected by KCT operations. This includes regular monitoring of air qualityundertakeninaccordancewithrelevantdevelopmentconsentandDECCWlicensingconditions.6.6.2 ProposedassessmentapproachAnairqualityassessmentwillassessthepotentialforconstructionandoperationalimpactsatsensitivereceivers.Itwillincludequantitativedispersionmodellingofdustemissionstopredictfuturedustlevelsin the surrounding area, taking into account existing meteorological and air monitoring data. Keyconsiderationswillincludethepotentialforcumulativeimpacts,includingtheriskofexceedingthe24hour maximum PM 10 criterion, and the implications of the T4 Project area location, to the west of theexistingKCTsite,whichmaynecessitateconsiderationofadditional,morewesterlyassessmentlocationstothoseadoptedforthepreviousKCTassessments,possiblyincludingWarabrook,SandgateandMayfieldWest.Theairqualityassessmentwillalsoconsidernondustemissions,suchasnitrogenoxides,sulphuroxidesandcarbondioxideassociatedwiththeT4Project,andthepotentialcumulativeeffectsofsulphurdioxideemissionsfromshipsassociatedwiththeT4Projectwhilebeingloaded.Giventherelativelymodestfuelconsumption anticipated, these are not expected to be significant, and the assessment of nondustemissions will be predominately in the context of the greenhouse gas, energy use and climate changeassessment,describedinSection6.12.2.ProjectrelatedairqualityimpactswillbeconfinedtotheT4Project.However,impactsassociatedwiththeexistingKCTwillbeconsideredaspartofcumulativeairqualityimpacts.Thecumulativeassessmentwill consider emissions from all sources in the area surrounding the T4 Project area, including otherindustryonKooragangIsland.NoodoursourceshavebeenidentifiedinassociationwiththeT4Project,otherthanpotentialtemporaryodours from dredging, or any onsite treatment of contaminated materials required to facilitateconstruction.Nevertheless,anodourassessmentwillbeconductedthatiscommensuratewiththelevelofrisk.6.7 Noiseandvibration6.7.1 ExistingenvironmentTheexistingacousticenvironmentofKooragangIslandandthesurroundingresidential,commercialandindustrialareasisinfluencedbynoisefromtransport,domestic,naturalandindustrialsources,includingfrom the existing KCT. Noise levels within these areas have been well characterised by monitoring,modellingandassessmentundertakenforexistingandproposedindustrialdevelopments.Thisincludesongoing noise monitoring undertaken by PWCS at the KCT, Fern Bay and Stockton, and continuousmeteorologicalmonitoringundertakenattheweatherstationsmentionedinSection6.6.1.RecentmonitoringbyHeggies(2010),undertakeninMay2010,indicatesthatKCTgeneratednoiselevelscomply with relevant noise criteria set out in approvals at nearby residential locations in Stockton andFernBayandatotherindustrialsiteswithinKooragangIsland.Theresultsindicatethat:noiselevelsgeneratedbyKCTatresidentiallocationsinStocktonandFernBayrangebetween41and42dBAL eq(15minute) ,whichare1to2dBAlowerthanthecriteriaof43dBA;and noise levels at industrial locations on Kooragang Island range between 59 and 70dBAL eq(15 minute) ,whichisbeloworatthecriteriaof70dBA.33

PWCSactivelymanagesandmonitorsnoiseattheKCTtominimisethepotentialforimpacts,complywithregulatoryandPWCSnoiselimits,andimprovenoiseperformance.Thisisdoneinaccordancewiththeconditions of consent, an approved Noise Management Plan, and a continuous noise improvementprogramwhichincludesacousticaldesign,procurement,constructionandcommissioningprocesses.6.7.2 ProposedassessmentapproachAn acoustic assessment of the T4 Project will be undertaken in accordance with the DECCW (2000)IndustrialNoisePolicy.Itwillassessthepotentialfornoiseandvibrationimpactsatsensitivereceivers,and develop mitigation measures to ameliorate the potential for adverse impacts. The assessment isproposedtoaddresspotentialconstructionandoperationalimpacts,andincludequantitativemodellingofnoiseemissions.Existingmeteorologicalandnoisemonitoringdatawillbeused,supplementedbyadditionalmonitoringwhere necessary. Key considerations will include the potential for cumulative noise impacts, and thegeographic location of the T4 Project area, west of the existing KCT site, which may necessitate theinclusion of other, more westerly assessment locations to those adopted for the previous KCT acousticassessments,suchasatWarabrook,SandgateandMayfieldWest.Noiseimpactsfromroadtrafficareexpectedtobeminimal,giventhatroadtrafficgeneratedbysimilarproposals on Kooragang Island was predicted to have negligible noise impact (e.g. Umwelt, 2009;Resource Strategies, 2006). However, this will be quantitatively assessed in accordance with DECCWrequirements.ThepotentialfornoiseassociatedwithrailandshippingfortheT4Projectwillalsobeassessedwhereitisdirectlyrelatedtotheprojectitself.ThiswillincludetheimpactofrailandshippingnoisegeneratedbyoperationswithintheT4Projectarea.SeparatestudieswillberequiredtoaddressincreasesinrailandshipmovementsoutsidetheT4Projectarea.6.8 Trafficandtransport6.8.1 ExistingenvironmentiRoadnetworkTheroadnetworksurroundingtheT4ProjectareaisshownonFigure1.2.Thekeyroadsinthevicinityareidentifiedinthefollowing.Industrial Drive (arterial road) and Tourle Street, which provide access to Kooragang Island fromNewcastleandthePacificHighway,viatheTourleStreetbridge.Fullerton Road, which provides access to Kooragang Island from Stockton, Fern Bay and NelsonsBay,viatheStocktonBridge.Cormorant Road and Teal Street, which together comprise the main arterial route throughKooragang Island, connecting the Tourle Street Bridge and the Stockton Bridge. This routecomprisesthemainarteriallinkbetweenNewcastle,theNewcastleAirportandNelsonsBay.ItisusedbythroughtrafficaswellasvehiclesaccessingindustrialfacilitiesonKooragangIsland.34

Local roads at the eastern end of Kooragang Island, including Egret Street, Raven Street, HeronRoadandGreenleafRoad,whichprovideaccesstovariousindustrialfacilities.PrivateaccessroadsandvehicletrackswithinandadjacenttotheT4Projectarea,whichservicethevariouslandparcelsandindustrialfacilitiesonKooragangIsland.TheroadnetworktoandfromKooragangIslandgenerallycompriseswideroadswithbroadshouldersandturningapronstoaccommodatelargevehicles,andexcellentsightdistances.Mostofthenetworkcatersforallvehicletypes.Similarly,StapletonTransportation&PlanningPtyLimited(STAP)(2009)identifiedthat the road network on Kooragang Island operates at a high level of service with significant sparecapacity.STAP(2009)reportedthatthekeyintersectionsinthevicinityoftheT4Projectarea,i.e.CormorantRoad/IndustrialDrive,CormorantRoad/TealStreetandCormorantRoad/EgretStreetalloperateatagoodorsatisfactory level of service during peak periods, with the exception of the illegal right turn from EgretStreettoCormorantRoadwhichissubjecttoconsiderabledelays.Countermeasureshavebeeninstalledtopreventrighthandturnsatthislocation.TrafficcountsbytheNSWRoadsandTrafficAuthorityandbySTAP(2005,2009)havefoundthattherehasbeennegligibleincreaseintrafficvolumesontheroadnetworksurroundingtheT4Projectareainrecentyears.Peaktrafficflowsgenerallyoccuronthelocalroadnetworkbetween6.00amand9.00aminthemorningandbetween3.00pmand5.00pmintheafternoon/evening(STAP,2009).iiRailnetworkThereisanexistingraillineonKooragangIsland,inclusiveofrailloopsandcoalreceivalfacilitiesattheKCTandtheNCIGcoalterminal(seeFigure1.2).AllcoaltransporttotheKCTandtheNCIGcoalterminalisbyrail.ThisraillinealsoservicesotherindustrialfacilitiesonKooragangIsland,includingBoralCementandotherfacilitiesonWalshPoint.6.8.2 ProposedassessmentapproachAdetailedtrafficandtransportassessmentoftheT4Projectwillbeundertaken.Keyconsiderationswillbethepotentialimpactsofconstructionandoperationaltrafficonperformanceofthelocalroadnetworkand parking availability. However, given the existing traffic conditions and the fact that the NCIG andPWCS Stage 4 construction workforce peaks will be completed well before the T4 Project commencesconstruction,additionaltrafficgeneratedbytheT4Projectisnotexpectedtobeamajorissue.TheotherkeyareasforassessmentwillbeimpactsofthepotentialrealignmentandconveyorcrossingofCormorantRoad,proposedroadaccesstotheT4Projectarea,driversafetyinthevicinityoftheT4Projectarea.6.9 Infrastructure6.9.1 ExistingenvironmentThereareexistingsurfaceandsubsurfaceservicesandeasementslocatedwithinandadjacenttotheT4Project area including water mains, fibre optic cables, Telstra cables, sewer main, gas mains, overheadhigh voltage powerlines, navigational aides and an Energy Australia wind turbine. TransportinfrastructureisdiscussedaboveinSection6.8.35

6.9.2 ProposedassessmentapproachTheEAwilldocumentanyserviceswhichwouldberelocatedaspartoftheT4Project,andtheoutcomesof consultation undertaken with service providers. The assessments of potential construction impactsundertakenfortheEAwillcoverrelocationofservices.6.10 Heritage6.10.1 ExistingenvironmentSearches of Commonwealth, State and local government heritage databases and a review of heritageinvestigationsundertakenatKooragangIslandbyResourceStrategies(2006),HLA(2005),Umwelt(2003),ProtechSteel(2001)andERMMitchellMcCotter(1996),identifiedthatnoitemsorplacesofindigenousornonindigenousheritagesignificancehavebeenrecordedwithintheT4Projectarea.OnlytwoAboriginalheritageplacesareregisteredonKooragangIsland.OneislocatedtothenorthoftheT4 Project area, and the other, which was recorded near the Tourle Street Bridge, has been destroyed(Resource Strategies, 2006). No traditional owners have raised any concerns regarding existingoperations at the T4 Project area, and consultation with local Aboriginal groups regarding otherdevelopmentsonKooragangIslandhasnotidentifiedanysignificantculturalheritagevaluesassociatedwiththeisland.The nonindigenous heritage items on Kooragang Island are the Tongues Tree Fig, 131 RadarIgloo andSchoolMaster’sHouse,locatedonthewesternpartofAshIsland,morethan2.5kmfromtheT4Projectarea,andaPalmonGreenleafRoad,atWalshPoint.ThesearealllocalheritageitemsontheNewcastleLEP.TheHunterEstuaryWetlands,partofwhicharelocatedintheHunterEstuaryNationalParktothenorthoftheT4Projectarea(seeFigure1.2)arearegisteredplaceontheRegisteroftheNationalEstate.ItisconsideredunlikelythatanypreviouslyunrecordeditemsofheritagesignificancewouldbepresentintheT4Projectarea,giventheresultsofpreviousassessmentsandgiventhattheareahasbeenheavilydisturbed, including by land filling and reclamation. This would likely have destroyed any evidence offormeroccupationofthearea.6.10.2 ProposedassessmentapproachThe T4 Project is not likely to impact known items or places of heritage significance, with the possibleexceptionoftheHunterEstuaryWetlands,giventhatnonearelocatedwithintheT4Projectarea.Thepotential for any impactson the wetlands will be investigated as part of the groundwater and ecologyinvestigations.Giventhehighlydisturbednatureofthesite,andthelowpotentialforanyheritagevaluestobeattachedtotheland,theheritageassessmentwilllargelyfocusonareviewofexistinginformation,consultationwithlocalAboriginalgroups,andassessmentofwhethertheheritagelistedPalmislikelytobeimpacted.Surveyswillbeundertakenonlandnotsubjecttopreviousassessmentsandundisturbedland.36

6.11 Visualamenity6.11.1 ExistingenvironmentiVisualsettingThevisualsettingoftheT4ProjectareaandsurroundsisdominatedbythelargescaleindustrialandportfacilitiesonKooragangIslandandalongthesouthernbankoftheHunterRiver,totheeastandsouthofthe T4 Project area. These include coal stockpiles, coal stackers/ reclaimers, conveyors, wharves,shiploaders,ships,bulkliquidstoragetanks,shedsandadministrationbuildings.Builtandnaturallandscapesarealsofeaturesofthelocalandregionalviewscapes,includingtothenorth,eastandsouthoftheT4Projectarea.Theseincludebodiesofwaterandvegetationwithintheriverine,estuarineandwetlandenvironmentsofHunterEstuaryNationalPark,theHunterRiverandcoastline,aswellascommercialandresidentialareasofNewcastle.Othervisiblefeaturesofthelocalsettingincluderoads,bridges,raillines,electricitytransmissionlinesandawindturbineonKooragangIsland.TheT4Projectareaitselfcomprisesflattohummockyterrain,shapedbypreviouslandfillactivities,withgrasslandsandartificialponds.iiLightingThelocalareaisgenerallywelllitbyfixedlightingatexistingindustrialandportfacilitieswhichoperate24hoursperday,vehiclelightsalongtheroadnetworkandlightingfromshipsutilisingtheport.iiiViewpointsTheT4ProjectareaisvisiblefromviewpointsalongtheHunterRiver,adjacentroads(theclosestofwhichis Cormorant Road) and at surrounding industrial facilities. More distant views are available from theelevated residential areas on the mainland, e.g. at Mayfield, Mayfield West, Warabrook and Sandgate.Interveninglandform,vegetationandbuildingsprovidesomescreeningofviews.6.11.2 ProposedassessmentapproachAvisualassessmentwillbecompletedaspartoftheEA.Thiswillidentifypotentiallysensitiveviewpoints,assesspotentialchangestoviewscapesanddevelopmitigationmeasures.Keyconsiderationswillbetheappearance of the proposed infrastructure and night lighting (albeit that these would be visuallyconsistentwiththeadjoiningcoalterminals);removaloffeatures,suchaspondsandastripofmangrovesatthewater’sedge;andthelocationoftheT4Projectareafurtherwestthantheexistingcoalterminals,constitutinganextensionoftheindustrialviewscapesandpotentiallyexposingittoreceiverswhodonotcurrentlyhaveviewsofthesefacilities.6.12 Energyuse,greenhousegasandclimatechange6.12.1 ExistingenvironmentEnergyefficiencyandgreenhousegas(GHG)reductioninitiativesarecurrentlyimplementedbyPWCSandwillcontinuetobedevelopedandimplementedforitsoperationsastechnologiesandpoliciesevolve.Aninvestigation of KCT energy usage and GHG emissions was undertaken by SEE Sustainability Consulting(SEE)(2007),andincludedquantitativecalculationsofScope1,2and3emissions.Scope1emissionsaredirect emissions from onsite activities. Scope 2 emissions are indirect emissions from the onsite37

consumptionofelectricity,steamorheatproducedbyanotherorganisation.Accordingly,Scope1and2emissionsareduetotheactualoperationofaproject.Scope3emissionsaretheindirectemissionsfromtransportandenduseofthecoal.TheSEE(2007)assessmentresultswereunchangedbythesubsequentStage4proposal(SEE,2009).SEE(2007, 2009) identified that consumption of purchased electricity, diesel and petrol were the keycontributors to onsite energy usage at the KCT and Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Scope 3 emissions areassociatedwithcoaltransportandcombustion,includingshippingandrailingofcoal.6.12.2 ProposedassessmentapproachAnenergyuse,greenhousegasandclimatechangeassessmentoftheT4Projectwillbeundertaken.ThiswillincludeenergyusageandScope1,2and3GHGemissioncalculations;ananalysisofthelikelyeffectsof the predicted emissions; and a review of existing PWCS energy efficiency and emissions reductionsmeasurestoidentifyanypotentialimprovements.TheestimatedScope1,2and3GHGemissionswillbecalculatedinthecontextoftheircontributiontoglobalemissionsandclimatechange.Broaderissuesoftheroleandefficiencyofcoalasanenergysourcewillalsobeexamined.TheassessmentwillalsoconsiderthepotentialforclimatechangetoaffecttheT4Project;thatis,fromsealevelriseandpotentiallyhigherintensitystormevents.6.13 Hazards6.13.1 ExistingenvironmentPotentialhazardsidentifiedinassociationwithexistingKCToperationsrelatetothepotentialforspillsorleaksofhazardousmaterialsandforfiresfromspontaneouscoalcombustion.PWCShasexistingsafetysystemsandproceduresinplacetoreduceandrespondtosuchincidents,includingafirefightingsystem.Storage and handling of potentially hazardous materials is in accordance with the relevant statutoryrequirements.6.13.2 ProposedassessmentapproachA preliminary hazard analysis (PHA) will be undertaken to identify and evaluate the potential hazardsassociated with the T4 Project, in accordance with the requirements of State Environmental PlanningPolicyNo.33–hazardousandoffensivedevelopment.ThekeyissuesexpectedtobecoveredinthePHArelate to the potential for spills, leaks or fires associated with storage, handling and use of potentiallyhazardous materials, i.e. diesel, petrol, hydrocarbons and gas cylinders; general construction andoperational activities such as conveyor operations and stockpiling; failure of structures and watermanagementsystems;roadmodifications;transportofoversizedequipment;andrailoperations.TheEAwillalsoincludeanassessmentofpotentialimpactsonmaritimesafety.6.14 Socioeconomic6.14.1 ExistingenvironmentThe existing PWCS operations contribute to the local and regional economies by providing direct andindirectemploymentandincome,withpotentialflowonbenefitstosociety.PWCSdirectlyemploys440fulltimepeopleandengagesafurther400contractors,mostofwhomarelocallybased.PWCSdonates38

close to $500,000 per annum to a range of local institutions including the Hunter Medical ResearchInstituteandNewcastleSurfLifeSavingClub.Inaddition,theKCTandCCTareintegralcomponentsoftheHunterValleyCoalChainandcontributetothesocialandeconomicbenefitsofthebroadercoalindustry.Theseincludeemploymentgenerationandfuelforlowcostelectricitygenerationandindustrieslikesteelmaking.ThecoalindustryisNSW’sandAustralia’slargestsourceofexportrevenueandthroughroyalties,employment,investmentandrevenuegeneration,isamajorcontributortothesocialandeconomicdevelopmentofregionalAustralia.ThermalcoalsuppliedfromtheHunterValleyCoalChainisusedtogenerateelectricityinanumberofcountriesaroundtheworld,includingcountriesinAsia,providingsignificanteconomicandsocialbenefitstothosecountries.WhilecommunityengagementundertakenbyPWCSaspartofitsongoingoperationsandforassessmentofpreviousproposals,hasidentifiedissuesregardingpotentialimpactsthroughnoiseanddust,ithasalsoidentified wide support for PWCS operations and the measures it incorporates into its operations toreduceimpactsonthelocalarea6.14.2 ProposedassessmentapproachAsocialimpactandeconomicassessmentoftheT4Projectwillbeundertaken.Thiswillseektoidentifyandaddressthesocial/communityimpactsoftheT4Project,quantifytheeconomiccontributionoftheT4Projecttothelocalandregionalcommunity,andqualitativelyassessthepotentialflowonbenefits.Inparticular, the T4 Project would create direct employment, revenue through taxes and royalties and isexpectedtobeasignificantcontributortosecurityofemploymentandrevenuethroughouttheHunterValleyCoalChainandthecommunitiesinwhichitoperates.The socioeconomic assessment will also include effects such as noise, air quality, ecology, greenhousegas and climate change, visual, traffic and transport and contamination. The results will be used tocommentonactualandperceivedimpactsonamenityandcommunityvaluesidentifiedinthecommunityconsultationprogram.ThecostsandbenefitswillbeweigheduptoassesswhethertheT4Projectwouldbeofnetbenefit.Thiswillbeundertakenthroughabenefitcostanalysis(BCA),whichwillcomparethequantification and valuation of the T4 Project’s incremental benefits and costs against a no projectscenario. TheBCA willincludeachoicemodelling studytoestimatemonetaryvaluesforthepotentialenvironmental,culturalandsocialimpactsorexternalitiesoftheT4Project.AsoutlinedinChapter5,communityengagementfortheT4Projecthascommencedinaccordancewithaprojectspecificengagementstrategy,andwillcontinuethroughouttheT4Project.At this stage, no significant social or community impacts such as population growth or impacts onhousing,communityservices,infrastructureorfacilitiesintheNewcastleregionareanticipatedasaresultoftheT4Project.However,demographicinformationwillbeanalysedtocharacterisethepopulation.39

“Thispagehasbeenintentionallyleftblank”40

7 ConclusionTheHunterValleyishometotheworld’slargestandmostcomplexcoalchain,responsibleforhandlingoneofAustralia’smostsignificantcommodityexports.Itincludes14coalproducers,40coalminesand80brandsofprimarilythermalcoal.Itcreatesmanythousandsofdirectandindirectjobs.The most important part of the Hunter Valley Coal Chain is the harbourbased terminal/vessel loadingoperations.In2010,PWCS,theworld’slargestcoalexportterminal,willloadsome97milliontonnesofcoalwithanestimatedvalueof$10billionontowellover1,000exportvessels.ThismakesPWCSacriticalmainstay of economic activity locally, statewide, nationally and internationally. Although PWCS hascommitted$1.6billiontocoalloadinginfrastructureinvestmentanddeliveryoverthepastdecade,itiscurrently at one of the most critical junctures in its history as it prepares to handle booming andunprecedenteddemandforcoalloadingservices.RecognisingthevitaleconomicimportanceoftheHunterValleyCoalChain,theNSWGovernmentandtheHunter Valley coal industry recently negotiated a long term operational framework – the CapacityFrameworkArrangements–toensurethatadequatecoalhandlinginfrastructureisdevelopedinthemostefficientandtimelymannertomeetthegrowingdemandsofinternationalcoalcustomersandincreasingcoalthroughput.ThearrangementsarealsointendedtominimisecostlyvesselqueuesoffNewcastle,aproblematicoccurrenceinrecentyearsduetobroadandhistoricflawsinthewaytheoverallCoalChainoperates.Thearrangementscameintoeffecton1January2010.A central part of the plan is an expectation that PWCS will build the T4 Project, a new coal loadingterminal adjacent to the KCT, to cater for future coal loading operations when existing terminaloperations have reached capacity. The long term viability of the entire coal chain and Australia’sreputation as an efficient and reliable coal exporter depends on the ability of PWCS to deliver the T4Project.Tofulfilitsobligations,PWCShasspentmuchof2010undertakingtechnicalinvestigationstodeterminethepotentialtodelivertheT4Project.UpongrantingPWCStherighttobuildtheT4Project,subjecttoenvironmental and planning approvals, the NSW Government recognised that the T4 Project area isgenerallyzonedforportdevelopmentpurposesandwasformerlyusedasalandfill.TheT4Projectwouldincludearailloop,stockyard,conveyorsystem,shippingberths,coalloadinginfrastructureandfacilitiessharedwiththoseexistingatKCT.The T4 Project requires approval under Part 3A of the NSW EP&A Act. A referral is being prepared todeterminewhethertheprojectalsorequiresapprovalundertheCommonwealthEPBCAct.Ifanapprovalisrequiredunderthislegislation,theintentionwouldbethatCommonwealthmattersbeassessedundertheNSWGovernment’scurrentPart3Aprocess,inaccordancewithabilateralagreementbetweentheCommonwealthandtheState.StakeholderswillbeconsultedthroughoutthepreparationoftheEAonthedesignoftheT4Projectandthemitigationsmeasuresproposedtoreduceimpactsonthelocalenvironmentandcommunity.Thiswillinclude identification of opportunities to accommodate community feedback into the project design.Preliminarystakeholderconsultationsarealreadywelladvanced,withPWCSmanagementarticulatingthebroadT4Projectintentiontothecommunity,local,StateandCommonwealthgovernmentagenciesandpoliticalofficesandthemedia.The T4 Project has the potential for positive and negative impacts. Potential positive impacts wouldinclude substantial capital investment into the local area, tax payments, increased employment (directand indirect) and the beneficial use of a landfill area. Potential negative impacts include impacts on41

groundwater, ecology, air quality, noise and vibration. An EA will be prepared to address all potentialpositiveandnegativeimpacts.TheresultsofthepreliminaryassessmentsinChapter6willbeusedtoguide the relative priorities for further assessment and mitigation strategies. Accordingly, the studyscopesproposedinChapter6havebeendevelopedcommensuratewiththelevelofassociatedpotentialrisk.The EA will be assessed by the NSW DoP, and if an approval is required under the EPBC Act, theCommonwealth DSEWPC. If approval is required under the EPBC Act, the DoP and DSEWPC wouldprovide an assessment report to the NSW Minister for Planning and Commonwealth Minister forSustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities respectively, recommending whethertheprojectshouldbeapprovedorrefused.ShouldtheT4Projectobtainapproval(s)andproceed,thebenefitstothelocalarea,theStateandAustraliawouldpotentiallybesignificant.42

ReferencesAustralian Bureau of Statistics (2010) 1338.1 NSW State and Regional Indicators, September 2010.Onlineresourceathttp://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1338.1,viewed2November2010.DECCW(2000)NSWIndustrialNoisePolicy.Douglas Partners (2010) Report on Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Assessment – Concept Stage:ProposedTerminal4KooragangIsland.PreparedforPortWaratahCoalServicesLimited&NewcastlePortCorporation.ERM Mitchell McCotter (1996) Kooragang Coal Terminal Stage 3 Expansion – Environmental ImpactStatement.PreparedforPortWaratahCoalServices.GHD(2009)HunterDevelopmentCorporation–ReportonKIWEF,RevisedFinalLandformandCappingStrategy.Heggies (2010) PWCS Kooragang Coal Terminal Stages 1, 2, 3A, 3 (Steps 14) Plant Operating NoiseResults,JuneQuarter2010.PreparedforPortWaratahCoalServices.HLA (2005) Expansion of the Cargill Oilseed Processing Facility Kooragang Island EnvironmentalAssessment.PreparedforCargillAustraliaLimited.PAE Holmes (then Holmes Air Sciences) (2006) Air Quality Impact Assessment: Newcastle Coal ExportTerminal.PAE Homes (2009) AirQualityImpactAssessment:KooragangCoalTerminal Stage4Project–FourthDumpStationandFourthShiploader,Appendix4ofUmwelt(2009).ProtechSteel(2001)ProposedColdMillFacilityKooragangIslandEIS.ResourceStrategies(2006)NewcastleCoalInfrastructureGroupCoalExportTerminalEnvironmentalAssessment.PreparedforNewcastleCoalInfrastructureGroup.SEE (2007) Scope 1,2 and 3 Greenhouse Gas and Energy assessment for Kooragang Coal TerminalProject.SEE(2009)GreenhouseGasEmissionsStudyforPortWaratahCoalServices:KooragangCoalTerminalStage4Project–FourthDumpStationandShiploaderProject,Appendix9ofUmwelt(2009).STAP(2005)TrafficAssessmentReport,ExpansionoftheOilseedProcessingFacility,KooragangIslandEnvironmentalAssessment. PreparedforCargillAustraliaLimited.STAP(2009)KooragangCoalTerminalStage4Project–TrafficImpactAssessment(Final),Appendix8ofUmwelt(2009).Umwelt(2003)AboriginalCulturalHeritageAssessment,ProposedExtensionofShippingChannels,PortofNewcastle.PreparedforNewSouthWalesWaterwaysAuthority.Umwelt (2009) Environmental Assessment Kooragang Coal Terminal Stage 4 Project: Fourth DumpStationandFourthShiploader.PreparedonbehalfofPortWaratahCoalServices.Umwelt (2010) Ecological Constraints Analysis – T4 Conceptual Studies. Prepared on behalf of PortWaratahCoalServices.

Acronymsμg/m 3 microgramspercubicmetreACCCAustralianCompetitionandConsumerCommissionBCAbenefitcostanalysisdBANoiseismeasuredinunitscalleddecibels(dB).Thereareseveralscalesfordescribingnoise,themostcommonbeingthe‘Aweighted’scale.Thisattemptstocloselyapproximatethefrequencyresponseofthehumanear.CCTCarringtonCoalTerminalDECCWDepartmentofEnvironment,ClimateChangeandWaterDoPDepartmentofPlanningDSEWPCDepartmentofSustainability,Environment,Water,PopulationandCommunitiesEendangeredEAEnvironmentalAssessmentEARsEnvironmentalAssessmentRequirementsEECendangeredecologicalcommunityEMDelectrolysismanganesedioxideEP&AActEnvironmentalPlanningandAssessmentAct1979EPBCActEnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999EPLEnvironmentProtectionLicenceGHGgreenhousegashahectaresKCTKooragangCoalTerminalkmkilometresL eq(15minute) TheAweightedsoundpressurelevelaveragedonanenergybasisovera15minuteperiod.mmetresMajorProjectsSEPPStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicy(MajorProjects)2005MARmarineMIGmigratoryMtpamilliontonnesperannumNCCNewcastleCityCouncilNCIGNewcastleCoalInfrastructureGroupNESnationalenvironmentalsignificanceNPCNewcastlePortsCorporationNSWNewSouthWalesPASSpotentialacidsulphatesoilsPEAPreliminaryEnvironmentalAssessmentPFMPlanningFocusMeetingPHApreliminaryhazardanalysisPM 10 particulatematterwithequivalentaerodynamicdiametersof10μmorlessPOEOActProtectionoftheEnvironmentOperationsAct1997PWCSPortWaratahCoalServicesLimitedSEESEESustainabilityConsultingSEPPStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicySEPP14StateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicyNo.14– CoastalWetlandsSTAPStapletonTransportation&PlanningPtyLimitedT4ProjectTheTerminal4ProjectTSCActThreatenedSpeciesConservationAct1995TSPtotalsuspendedparticulatesVvulnerable

EMGA MitchellMcLennanPlanning + Environment + AcouscsPWCSSYDNEYGround oor, Suite 01, 20 Chandos StreetSt Leonards, New South Wales, 2065T 02 9493 9500 F 02 9493 9599NEWCASTLELevel 1, 6 Bolton StreetNewcastle, New South Wales, 2300T 02 4927 0506 F 02 4926 1312www.emgamm.com