carmody's hill wind farm

P:\606X\60625779\500_DELIV\501_Report\Carmodys Hill Wind Farm DA - Supporting Assessment_20200408.docx Revision C – 08-Apr-2020 Prepared for – Georgetown Hills Renewable Energy Pty Ltd – ABN: 94 820 035 175

Carmody's Hill Wind Farm DA - Supporting Assessment

Georgetown Hills Renewable Energy Pty Ltd

08-Apr-2020

Doc No. R001

Carmody's Hill Wind Farm

Geology, Hydrology & Hydrogeology




AECOM


Geology, Hydrology & Hydrogeology

Client: Georgetown Hills Renewable Energy Pty Ltd

ABN: 94 820 035 175

Prepared by

AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

Level 28, 91 King William Street, Adelaide SA 5000, Australia

T +61 8 7223 5400 F +61 8 7223 5499 www.aecom.com

ABN 20 093 846 925

08-Apr-2020

Job No.: 60625779

AECOM in Australia and New Zealand is certified to ISO9001, ISO14001 AS/NZS4801 and OHSAS18001.

© AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM). All rights reserved.

AECOM has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the document. No other

party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any

third party who may rely upon or use this document. This document has been prepared based on the Client’s description of its requirements and

AECOM’s experience, having regard to assumptions that AECOM can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional

principles. AECOM may also have relied upon information provided by the Client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which

may not have been verified. Subject to the above conditions, this document may be transmitted, reproduced or disseminated only in its entirety.




AECOM

Quality Information

Document Carmody's Hill Wind Farm

Ref 60625779

Date 08-Apr-2020

Prepared by Bart Fens/Tony Polec

Reviewed by Kylie Schmidt

Revision History

Rev Revision Date Details

Authorised

Name/Position Signature

A 05-Feb-2020 Issue for client review Kylie Schmidt Project Manager

B 06-Mar-2020 Issued for DA Kylie Schmidt Project Manager

C 08-Apr-2020 Issued for DA Kylie Schmidt Project Manager




AECOM

Table of Contents

Executive Summary i 1.0 Project Description ii

1.1 Introduction ii 1.2 Project Overview ii

2.0 Project Siting/Locality Description iii 3.0 Introduction iv 4.0 Hydrology, Hydrogeology and Geology Review 1

4.1 Surface Features 1 4.2 Regional Hydrology 5 4.3 Regional Hydrogeology 7 4.4 Regional Geology 9 4.5 Earthquake records 12 4.6 Mining at the site 12

5.0 Potential Borrow Sources 13 6.0 Geotechnical Constraints & Opportunities 14

6.1 Turbine Foundations 14 6.2 Construction Materials 14

6.2.1 Aggregate 14 6.2.2 Water 14

6.3 Slope Stability 14 6.4 Excavatability 15 6.5 Erosion 15 6.6 Future Geotechnical Investigations 15

7.0 Conclusion 16 8.0 References 17 9.0 Limitations 18




i AECOM

Executive Summary

The following report highlights the key issues associated with the Carmody’s Hill wind farm project based on a desktop review and site visit. As the project progresses to design and documentation, there are a number of matters that will need to be addressed, such as the finalisation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan.

This report addresses:

- Desktop Geology, Geotechnical and Hydrogeological review

- Desktop Hydrology review

The scope of this report included a site visit that identified many turbine sites are located on areas with rocky outcrops or areas with very thin topsoil. Erosion was observed across the site, particularly in the lower valley areas where stormwater flows overland through the catchment to the Broughton River. This highlights the lower lying areas have a high potential for erosion and sedimentation through the ephemeral creek lines which will need to be considered in the stormwater management sections of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).




ii AECOM

1.0 Project Description

1.1 Introduction

Georgetown Hills Renewable Energy Pty Ltd (GHRE) propose to develop the Carmody’s Hill Wind Farm and Energy Storage project within the Mid North area of South Australia. The project is referred to as “Carmody’s Hill Wind Farm”.

The site of the proposed wind farm and energy storage facility is approximately 7 km east of Georgetown. The site comprises approximately 4,457 hectares of farmland which is used predominantly for sheep grazing and cereal cropping.

The preliminary layout includes 45 wind turbines and associated infrastructure, with a total maximum capacity of 270 MW. The preliminary layouts will be further developed in future design stages and considering various factors such as environmental and engineering and as such the locations of infrastructure may be subject to change.

1.2 Project Overview

The proposed wind farm and energy storage infrastructure will include:

• up to 45 wind turbine generators;

• wind turbine generators of up to 6.6MW;

• preliminary maximum tip height of wind turbine generators of 200 metres;

• preliminary maximum generating capacity 270MW;

• foundations, crane hard stand areas and a transformer housing at each turbine location;

• battery energy storage system (BESS);

• meteorological masts with a height up to 122.5 metres (currently installed at lower heights);

• underground electrical cable reticulation on site;

• electrical substation including step up transformer stepping up the voltage to 275kV;

• overhead transmission connection into the Davenport to Brinkworth 275kV transmission line;

• operations and maintenance building and temporary construction compound(s) incorporating a temporary concrete batching plant; and

• associated access roads.

The following temporary infrastructure is anticipated:

• quarries for road base and concrete aggregate;

• water sources for concrete and roadworks/earthworks;

• locations for placing spoil;

• lay down areas for equipment and components;

• site compounds; and

• temporary facilities for workers.




iii AECOM

2.0 Project Siting/Locality Description

GHRE propose to develop the Carmody’s Hill Wind Farm at a site located approximately 7 km east of Georgetown. The proposed development is located between the townships of Georgetown and Jamestown. The land is currently used for grazing and cropping, is privately owned and is situated in the Northern Areas Council of South Australia.

The site is located on a ridgeline west of the Bundaleer area and is situated between the Mount Lofty Ranges to the South and the Lower Flinders Ranges to the north.

Landforms of the area are defined by ridgelines that run north-south through the site creating a series of parallel ridges, wide open valleys and isolated topographic features. Surrounding the site of the proposed development, the landscape is dominated by grazing with open paddocks defined by fenced boundaries and occasional trees to fence lines and creek lines. The land use that occurs in the open valley floor between the local ridgelines is more diverse with areas of arable cropping and grazing.




iv AECOM

3.0 Introduction

This report has been prepared to provide a preliminary assessment of hydrology, hydrogeology and geology for the proposed wind farm located at Carmody’s Hill approximately 7 km east of Georgetown.

The purpose of the preliminary assessment is to provide a baseline assessment of features that may be impacted by the project or that may impact on the design of the project.

The scope of this desktop geology, hydrogeology and hydrology assessment comprised:

• Review of readily available documents, including:

- Geology maps;

- Topographic maps;

- Mineral Resource Potential maps;

- On-line government databases relating to geology, surface water and registered water bores;

- Selected maps and reports produced by the Department of Mines South Australia;

- Selected reports regarding the Broughton River hydrology;

• A site visit (drive-over) by a geotechnical engineer and civil engineers from AECOM’s Adelaide office on 21 January 2020.




1 AECOM

1 of 26

4.0 Hydrology, Hydrogeology and Geology Review

4.1 Surface Features

The site is located within the Northern Areas Council, between Main North Road and RM Williams Way, on the eastern side of Kapunda – Eudunda Road, approximately 7 km East of Georgetown and 10 km Southwest of Jamestown. The proposed wind turbine locations extend over an area approximately 5 km wide in the east-west direction, and about 13 km to 14 km in the north-south direction, although the overall project boundaries extend considerably further. The project site boundaries and preliminary turbine locations are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Site and turbine locations (source: GHRE)

The topography of the site is hilly, with numerous incised creek valleys typically draining towards the West into Yackamoorundie Creek and towards Bundaleer Creek in the East.

The elevation of the Broughton River near the site varies from about RL 230 m to 220 m AHD, whereas the ridge lines and hills within the project site typically have upper elevations in the range of about RL 480 m to 620 m AHD. The hills and ridge tops are generally rounded, though become steeper towards the valleys where creeks are incised in relatively steep sided channels.

Rock outcrops are visible throughout the site, ranging from rocky hill tops and ridges, to rocky creek beds. Orange-brown clays / clayey sandy silts typically overlay the rock, with the soil thickness varying up to about 2 m in some creek beds, though reducing to close to zero on the hill tops. Refer to Figure 2 for an example of rock outcrops observed on site.




2 AECOM

2 of 26

Figure 2 Photograph of rocky outcrops visible in the Northern section of the site

At the time of the site visit, vegetation typically comprised of low grass with occasional, scattered mature trees concentrated along creek beds. Numerous mature grass trees were encountered in patches on some slopes near the southern site boundary. Three meteorological evaluation towers (MET), numerous small farm dams, some windmills and old stone ruins were also present across the site.

Access tracks across the site appeared to have been constructed from local materials. The main tracks/roads had been sheeted with gravel that resembled local site won crushed/sorted rock. Trafficability was generally acceptable for light 4WD vehicles in dry conditions, although it is anticipated that the heavily eroded, clayey/sandy tracks may be slippery in wet weather conditions. A photograph of such a track section is presented in Figure 3.




3 AECOM

3 of 26

Figure 3 Photograph of erosion on access track

No evidence of significant landslides was observed from either the aerial photographs, or from the areas of the site observed during the site inspection, although considerable erosion was observed in the orange-brown clay / clayey silt creek banks. Refer to Figure 4 for a photograph of a creek bank that has been subjected to erosion. Sedimentation was observed in the northern watercourses, partially or completely blocking existing culverts. Figure 5 includes photographs of this issue at two separate culvert locations.




4 AECOM

4 of 26

Figure 4 Photograph of eroded creek banks in the central section of the site

Figure 5 Photographs of sedimentation issues at culvert crossings

No visual evidence of contamination was observed on site during the site visit.




5 AECOM

5 of 26

4.2 Regional Hydrology

Watercourses within the site area are predominantly fed by rainfall and are ephemeral, ceasing to flow in dry weather. These watercourses feed into creeks that eventually flow into the Broughton River. The Broughton River flows in a westerly direction through Yacka and Koolunga, approximately 20 km south of the site and ultimately draining to the Spencer Gulf. The Broughton River has a catchment of approximately 5650 km2. The majority of the catchment is used for livestock grazing, with some land used for dryland agriculture.

Teetuppennie Creek is located north of the site boundaries and flows in a westerly direction and ultimately contributes to the Broughton River via Yackamoorundie Creek and Rocky River. The catchment for Teetuppennie Creek includes the northern section of the site. Never Never Creek originates to the east of the site and flows south to contribute to Bundaleer Creek. Bundaleer Creek originates within the northern section of the site and flows in a southerly direction to contribute to the Broughton River. The catchments for Bundaleer Creek and Never Never Creek include the southern section of the site. Refer to Figure 6 for an overview of the Broughton catchment location and the main watercourses within the catchment area.




6 AECOM

6 of 26

Figure 6 Location and watercourses of the Broughton catchment (source: Department of Water, Land and

Biodiversity Conservation 2004)

Other watercourses within the site originate from the ridges on the eastern and western sides of the site and flow through naturally occurring valleys before contributing Teetuppennie Creek, Yackamoorundie Creek, Never Never Creek or Bundaleer Creek.

A number of small farm dams were observed during the site visit as well as on topographical maps, which will capture some runoff generated within the site.

A review of the information provided on both Location SA and WaterConnect websites indicated the following regarding site hydrology:

- The site is within the surface water catchment of the Broughton River that flows through to Yacka, Redhill and out to sea. There are numerous ephemeral creeks across the site that feed

Site location




7 AECOM

7 of 26

into Teetuppennie Creek, Yackamoorundie Creek, Never Never Creek or Bundaleer Creek.and into the Broughton River.

- While the site is not located in a prescribed water resources area, it is noted that the site is located north and outside the Clare Valley Prescribed Water Resources Area, which covers groundwater, water courses and surface water.

There are a total number of 5 active streamflow monitoring stations located along the Broughton River. There are no water quality monitoring stations located along the Broughton River (DEWNR, 2013).

The Broughton River is also subject to a River Catchment Management Plan dated December 2004, which included mapping of its subcatchments. The site is located within the Freshwater and Bundaleer subcatchment of the management plan. The River Catchment Management Plan noted that creeks on the site have poor native watercourse vegetation, or exotic trees. There is an existing erosion head in Never Never Creek located southeast of the site. A large proportion of Bundaleer Creek within the site area has not been included in the Management Plan survey. There are sections of established watercourse vegetation in Bundaleer Creek in the southern areas of the site. This vegetation will need to be protected to avoid damage.

Macro-invertebrate studies conducted to inform the River Catchment Management Plan below Bundaleer weir indicate that the watercourse was in healthy condition at the time. It is thought that this was likely due to the permanent baseflow and a range of in-stream vegetation. There is no more recent data available regarding the condition of the watercourse.

The Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) should consider sediment and erosion control and management, as well as bunding and containment of any fuels stored on site given the stormwater from the site flows to the Broughton River. These measures will manage water quality from the construction site and ongoing operation of the wind farm.

Reference should be made to the SA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) construction guidelines regarding sedimentation and erosion control measures.

4.3 Regional Hydrogeology

Reference to Location SA and WaterConnect websites indicated the following:

• There are numerous emphemeral creeks across the site that feed into the Broughton River influencing groundwater and base flows.

• The site is not located in a prescribed water resources area.

An irrigation bore and various stock and domestic bores are operational on the site as shown in Figure 7. Existing data indicates that the majority are of low yield of 0.1 to 0.63 L/S and with Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) ranging from 882 mg/L up to 4370 mg/L. The groundwater data report is included in Table 1.

• Standing water levels range from 1.1m to 43m with well depths of 3.6m to 64m.




8 AECOM

8 of 26

Figure 7 Groundwater Well Plan - extract from Waterconnect SA database

Table 1 Groundwater Data Report




9 AECOM

9 of 26

4.4 Regional Geology

An overlay of the site boundary has been made on the relevant portion of the SARIG geology database, shown in Figure 8. A summary of geological units covered by the proposed wind farm site is presented in Table 2.

Figure 8 Extract from SARIG geology database

Proposed Wind Farm within this area



P:\606X\60625779\500_DELIV\501_Report\Carmodys Hill Wind Farm DA - Supporting Assessment_20200408.docx Revision C – 08-Apr-2020

Prepared for – Georgetown Hills Renewable Energy Pty Ltd – ABN: 94 820 035 175

10 AECOM

10 of 26

Table 2 Geological Summary (Extracted from SARIG)

Map Unit

Stratigraphic Name

Stratigraphic Description Parent Name Age Minage

Q Unnamed GIS Unit -see description

Undifferentiated Quaternary rocks Unnamed GIS Unit -see description

PLEISTOCENE-HOLOCENE

Quaternary

Qa Unnamed GIS Unit -see description

Undifferentiated Quaternary alluvial/fluvial sediments Unnamed GIS Unit -see description

PLEISTOCENE-HOLOCENE

Quaternary

Q/Nds Saddleworth Formation

Mudstone; siltstone; shale, partly carbonaceous Bungarider Subgroup

NEOPROTEROZOIC Torrensian

Nli Mintaro Shale Siltstone, with very rare pebbles of sandstone, quartzite and limestone

Belair Subgroup NEOPROTEROZOIC Sturtian

Nli1 Unnamed GIS Unit – see description

Sandstone interbeds Mintaro Shale NEOPROTEROZOIC Sturtian

Nlil Leasingham Quartzite Member

Quartzite Mintaro Shale NEOPROTEROZOIC Sturtian

Nlk Kadlunga Slate Slate, grey, sericitic, graphitic Belair Subgroup NEOPROTEROZOIC Sturtian

Nlk1 Unnamed GIS Unit – see description

Unnamed GIS Unit – see description Unnamed GIS Unit – see description

NEOPROTEROZOIC Sturtian

Nya Appila Tillite Tillite; quartzite; siltstone. Massive, grey Yudnamutana Subgroup


Nyw Wilyerpa Formation

Siltstone, green. Lower third is fine grained, includes glacial dropstones; middle unit is medium to coarse sandstone; upper unit is siltstone with minor sandstone. Minor diamictite, sandy and pebbly dolomite.

Yudnamutana Subgroup


Nnt Tapley Hill Formation

Siltstone, grey to black, dolomitic and pyritic grading upwards to calcareous, thinly laminated, locally cross-bedded; dolomite, grey, flaggy to massive; limestone conglomerate, intraformational; greywacke

Nepouie Subgroup NEOPROTEROZOIC Sturtian




11 AECOM

11 of 26

In general, the proposed site is underlain by Quaternary and Sturtian aged sedimentary and metamorphic rocks within the Adelaide Geosyncline. The northern sites are dominated by Tapley Hill Formation and Appila Tillite along the ridges and the southern sites underlain by interbedded sedimentary units. Undifferentiated Quaternary rocks and sediments are present primarily in the lower lying areas.

A tectonic sketch extract from the Adelaide geology map sheet is presented in Figure 9 and a cross-section slightly to the south of the site is shown in Figure 10. The figures indicate a series of north-south oriented fault lines across the wider region. A parallel series of closely spaced anticlines and synclines are shown on the figures, oriented in a general north-south direction, parallel to the faults.

Figure 9 Tectonic sketch (extract from ‘Burra’ 1:250,000 geology sheet)

Figure 10 Geology section (extract from ‘Burra’ 1:250,000 geology sheet)




12 AECOM

12 of 26

4.5 Earthquake records

With reference to AS1170.4 2007 (reconfirmed 2018), the hazard factor for the proposed project site is 0.12 g for a 1 in 500 year annual probability of exceedance.

Geoscience Australia records that the nearest major historical earthquake occurred about 125 km to the west of Adelaide in September 1902. The project site is surrounded by minor to less than minor earthquakes (as shown in Figure 11).

Figure 11 Earthquake intensity (source: Geoscience Australia 2021)

4.6 Mining at the site

A search of the SARIG website in February 2020 showed there were no historical or current mining tenements on the site.




13 AECOM

13 of 26

5.0 Potential Borrow Sources

Potential borrow pits for unsealed track construction could be sited within the majority of the main geological units. Trials and laboratory testing would be required to more reliably assess the ease of processing and quality of the materials produced from various borrow sources.

The SARIG website showed smaller inactive quarries in the near vicinity, including the ‘Millard quarry’ approximately 7 km west of the site (adj Millar Rd, north of Georgetown – between Main North Rd and the site), the ‘Lehmanns quarry’ also anecdotally known as the ‘Koch quarry’ approximately 7 km east of Georgetown adjacent to the site (0.3 km east of the Lehmann Rd and Pattersons Rd intersection) and the Valley View No. 2 quarry (1km north of the site boundary).

The Clare quarry is located approximately 10km south of the site and supplies road building, crushed rock and bulk fill materials.

It is anticipated that concrete aggregate would be sourced off-site from established quarries with acceptable quality control/assurance.




14 AECOM

14 of 26

6.0 Geotechnical Constraints & Opportunities

6.1 Turbine Foundations

Rock is expected to be present either at the surface or at very shallow depth at all turbine locations, which should make anchored footings a viable option for many turbines. However, if the rock is highly fractured or deeply weathered, the anchors may need to be excessively deep and/or the associated overall rock mass may have a low stiffness which would result in excessive deflections of the base of turbine. In such areas gravity footings may be required/preferred.

Future geotechnical investigations will be required to assess the condition of the rock at each turbine location.

6.2 Construction Materials

6.2.1 Aggregate

Pavement subgrades are likely to include significant depths of fine-grained soils at some locations (particularly at lower, or reduced levels). Clayey sandy silt topsoils overlying rock were observed during the site visit. Relatively low Californian Bearing Ratio (CBR) values are likely for such soils. If very low CBR or high swell soils occur, subgrade improvement such as lime stabilisation may be required to reduce pavement thicknesses, particularly if the local supply of high-quality base and subbase is limited.

Potential borrow pit sites that are suitable for producing aggregate for unsealed road construction are potentially available on the project site. Should borrow pits be required, selecting areas where the rock is more closely fractured though still of high strength should result in reduced effort during excavation and crushing of the aggregate.

Due to the higher quality demands on concrete aggregate, it is expected that off-site sources of concrete will be used.

6.2.2 Water

Whilst a number of farm dams are present throughout the site, the majority appeared small and were located either on ephemeral creeks or hillsides. Many of the dams observed during the site visit had little or no water. The ability to utilise surface water for construction is therefore expected to be limited to the wetter months of the year.

A number of existing bores are present throughout the project area that are currently used for stock watering or other agricultural purposes. Existing data indicates that they are of low yield of 0.4 to 0.63 L/S and ranged from 882 mg/L TDS up to 4370 mg/L. It is noted that the existing bore observations noted above were generally from the 1950’s & 1970’s and should be checked on site if on site groundwater is to be considered.

Should the installation and development of new bores be required during construction, a South Australian Government permit (from the Department of Water and Natural Resources) will be required for each new bore.

The Morgan-Whyalla (water supply) pipeline passes south of the site and could be utilised as the primary or sole water supply for the project. Given anecdotal information suggesting low bore water levels for stock in the area being a potential project constraint, sourcing water from a permanent and reliable water source is an opportunity.

6.3 Slope Stability

No evidence of significant existing landslides was observed at the site during this study, however, slope stability assessment was beyond the scope of the current study.

If significant thicknesses of new cuts or fills are required for access road construction, the stability of such earthworks must be assessed.




15 AECOM

15 of 26

The stability of turbine footings in close proximity to steep slopes must also be assessed, particularly where the rock mass is highly fractured or has unfavourably orientated defects.

6.4 Excavatability

The majority of footing excavations for the turbines are expected to be in rock, which will require the use of rock excavation techniques, such as hydraulic rock breakers mounted on large excavators. The use of blasting should be avoided however, as it may loosen the rock mass and lower the stiffness of the rock below the footing level.

6.5 Erosion

Considerable erosion of the relatively thin soil cover was observed across the site, especially adjacent to creeks. The soil erosion had resulted in the accumulation of significant quantities of sediment in some creek beds.

Any new excavations that expose the soil profile must be provided with protection from erosion, and mitigation measures such as silt fences may be required down gradient of active earthworks areas to avoid fouling the natural creeks.

6.6 Future Geotechnical Investigations

A staged approach to future geotechnical investigations is recommended, with initial test pitting recommended at each turbine location to assess the near-surface rock strength, weathering, fracture spacing and the orientation of the main rock defects at each proposed turbine site. Similar investigations at key points along proposed access road tracks and at the proposed substation site should also be performed.

Following a review of the test pit results, seismic refraction surveys should be considered at a range of turbine locations, if the option of anchored footings is to be assessed. Seismic surveys should be performed at a selection of sites covering the range of more favourable to less favourable rock foundations conditions observed in the test pits to allow an initial assessment of the feasibility of anchored footings.

Diamond cored boreholes to about 20 m depth should then be drilled to better assess the viability of anchored footings at sites that are potentially unsuitable for anchored footings, and at selected sites that cover the different rock types where favourable conditions are predicted.




16 AECOM

16 of 26

7.0 Conclusion

The desktop review and site visit identified that the site is suitable for the development and operation of the Carmody’s Hill wind farm project. No issues were identified that would preclude this development.

As the project progresses to design and documentation, there are a number of matters that will need to be addressed, such as the finalisation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan. Future geotechnical investigation are required to characterise the site and provide inputs into the design.

Erosion was observed across the site, particularly in the lower valley areas where stormwater flows overland through the catchment to the Broughton River. This highlights the lower lying areas have a high potential for erosion and sedimentation through the ephemeral creek lines which will need to be considered in the stormwater management sections of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).




17 AECOM

17 of 26

8.0 References

• DEWNR, 2013, Non-prescribed Surface Water Resources Assessment – Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Region, Government of South Australia, through Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, Adelaide

• DWLBC, 2004, A River Management Plan for the Broughton Catchment, Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation

• Government of South Australia, Groundwater Data, Waterconnect, https://www.waterconnect.sa.gov.au/Systems/GD/Pages/Default.aspx

• Government of South Australia, South Australian Resources Gateway, SARIG, http://www.energymining.sa.gov.au/minerals/online_tools/free_data_delivery_and_publication_downloads/sarig

• Australian Government, Geoscience Australia, https://geoscience-au.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html

https://www.waterconnect.sa.gov.au/Systems/GD/Pages/Default.aspx

http://www.energymining.sa.gov.au/minerals/online_tools/free_data_delivery_and_publication_downloads/sarig

http://www.energymining.sa.gov.au/minerals/online_tools/free_data_delivery_and_publication_downloads/sarig

https://geoscience-au.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/5908193d3a834e35bb8fbff0e252c08b

https://geoscience-au.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/5908193d3a834e35bb8fbff0e252c08b




18 AECOM

18 of 26

9.0 Limitations

AECOM Australia Pty Limited (AECOM) has prepared this report in accordance with the usual care and thoroughness of the consulting profession for the use of GHRE and only those third parties who have been authorised in writing by AECOM to rely on the report.

It is based on generally accepted practices and standards at the time it was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. It is prepared in accordance with the scope of work and for the purpose outlined in the contract.

The methodology adopted and sources of information used by AECOM are outlined in this the Report.

Where this report indicates that information has been provided to AECOM by third parties, AECOM has made no independent verification of this information unless required as part of the agreed scope of work. AECOM assumes no liability for any inaccuracies in or omissions to that information.

This Report was prepared between January and February 2020. The information in this report is considered to be accurate at the date of issue and is in accordance with conditions at the site at the dates sampled. Opinions and recommendations presented herein apply to the site existing at the time of our investigation and cannot necessarily apply to site changes of which AECOM is not aware and has not had the opportunity to evaluate. This document and the information contained herein should only be regarded as validly representing the site conditions at the time of the investigation unless otherwise explicitly stated in a preceding section of this report. AECOM disclaims responsibility for any changes that may have occurred after this time.

This report should be read in full. No responsibility is accepted for use of any part of this report in any other context or for any other purpose or by third parties. This report does not purport to give legal advice. Legal advice can only be given by qualified legal practitioners.

This report contains information obtained by inspection, sampling or other means of investigation. This information is directly relevant only to the points in the ground where it was obtained at the time of the assessment.

Where conditions encountered at the site are subsequently found to differ significantly from those anticipated in this report, AECOM must be notified of any such findings and be provided with an opportunity to review the recommendations of this report.

Whilst to the best of our knowledge information contained in this report is accurate at the date of issue, subsurface conditions, including groundwater levels can change in a limited time.

Therefore this document and the information contained herein should only be regarded as valid at the time of the investigation unless otherwise explicitly stated in this report.

Except as required by law, no third party may use or rely on, this Report unless otherwise agreed by AECOM in writing. Where such agreement is provided, AECOM will provide a letter of reliance to the agreed third party in the form required by AECOM. To the extent permitted by law, AECOM expressly disclaims and excludes liability for any loss, damage, cost or expenses suffered by any third party relating to or resulting from the use of, or reliance on, any information contained in this Report. AECOM does not admit that any action, liability or claim may exist or be available to any third party. AECOM does not represent that this Report is suitable for use by any third party. Except as specifically stated in this section, AECOM does not authorise the use of this Report by any third party. It is the responsibility of third parties to independently make inquiries or seek advice in relation to their particular requirements and proposed use of the relevant property.

carmody's hill wind farm

Documents