final assessment report - major projects

FINAL ASSESSMENT REPORT:

STATE SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT Mandalong Southern Extension Project (SSD 5144)

Section 89E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

July 2015

Cover photos: Morans Creek riparian vegetation proposed for conservation in Centennial’s Land Management Strategy. © Crown copyright 2015 Published July 2015 NSW Department of Planning and Environment www.planning.nsw.gov.au Disclaimer: While every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that this document is correct at the time of publication, the State of New South Wales, its agents and employees, disclaim any and all liability to any person in respect of anything or the consequences of anything done or omitted to be done in reliance upon the whole or any part of this document.

Mandalong Southern Extension Project Final Assessment Report

NSW Government 3 Department of Planning & Environment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Final Assessment Report (FAR) for the Mandalong Southern Extension Project (MSEP) has been produced by the Department of Planning and Environment for consideration by the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC). This FAR focuses on the residual matters identified in the PAC’s Review Report of April 2015, responses to that report by the applicant Centennial Mandalong Pty Limited (Centennial) and by the Department and ongoing discussions between Centennial and the Department with the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) around biodiversity offsets. The PAC’s Review Report made 16 recommendations, concerning: • whether the Department’s recommended subsidence performance measures are sufficiently

robust, and are supported by a system whereby predictions are regularly updated to ensure that performance measures are not exceeded;

• appropriate monitoring and management of non-conventional subsidence effects; • additional proposals for inclusion in Extraction Plans, including triggers to warn of increasing

risk of exceedance of performance measures, action plans to respond to increased risk of exceedance to ensure the measures are not exceeded, and an assessment of remediation measures that may be required;

• amendments to the groundwater monitoring program; • detailed assessment of the impact of the proposed site water discharges; • flooding and tunnel erosion management;

construction noise and construction traffic mitigation and management; • updating the project’s Economic Analysis to reflect the current economic climate, including a

comprehensive sensitivity analysis to address a range of scenarios; and • distribution of the proposed community fund. The Department has reassessed the likely economic benefits of the project. It is considered that Centennial would provide: • $265 million of capital expenditure (all within NSW); • $379 million in wages expenditure over the life of the project; and • $341 million in coal royalties to the State over the life of the project.

The project would result in the workforce at the mine increasing from 315 to 420 workers. Centennial’s most recent economic analysis of the project conservatively estimates at least another 280 (ie indirect) job positions would result, which would be a significant additional economic benefit to NSW for the project’s 25 year life. The Department has further considered how the subsidence impacts of the project on natural features and the built environment can be best managed, and if any improvements can be made to the framing of conditions, to ensure that an adaptive management approach is implemented and subsidence levels and environmental risks are iteratively monitored and assessed over the life of the project to ensure environmental systems and the built environment are protected by best practice methods. The Department also notes the discussion and general agreement between Centennial and OEH with regard to biodiversity offsets. The Department has used its best efforts to find additional ways and means to either eliminate altogether, reduce, mitigate or offset the residual impacts of the project. Most of the PAC’s 16 recommendations have been either directly or partially implemented in revised recommended conditions of consent. The Department is satisfied that its recommended conditions, which incorporate a number of changes as recommended by the PAC, are based on contemporary policy and reflect current best-practice, are equitable and enforceable. The Department remains satisfied that the project is, on balance, in the public interest, and recommends that it be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent.



1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background The Department’s Final Assessment Report (FAR) for the MSEP has been produced for the consideration of the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC), which must determine the project under existing delegations from the Minister for Planning. The FAR provides an addendum to the Department’s Preliminary Assessment Report (PAR, November 2014) for the Mandalong Southern Extension Project (MSEP). The PAR remains part of the Department’s overall assessment of the project and part of the Secretary’s environmental assessment report for the project. The FAR has been prepared to consider the recommendations made in the PAC’s review of the project, and additional information received from Centennial Mandalong Pty Limited (Centennial) and the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH). Other than for a brief description of the project, this report does not repeat any of the information or analysis contained in the PAR or the PAC’s Merit Review Report, unless directly relevant to the assessment of residual matters. The PAC’s report is provided in Appendix A and the Department’s PAR is provided in Appendix B . Centennial is seeking approval to extend its Mandalong Coal Mine. The project would extend the current underground mining domain, to allow the mine to continue to operate for another 25 years (see Figure 1 ). The proposal involves: • continuing the currently approved mining operations in Areas 1 and 2, and extending the mining

domains southwards, to extract from an additional 40 longwall panels; • continued operation of surface facilities at the Mandalong Mine Access Site (MMAS), including

construction of four additional gas flares and gas engines; • extraction up to 6 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) of run-of-mine (ROM) coal from a total

mineable resource of 126 million tonnes; • constructing a new surface facility, (the Mandalong Southern Services Site (MSSS)); • delivering of up to 6 Mtpa of ROM coal from the mine to the Cooranbong Entry Site (CES) and

delivery of up to 6 Mtpa of coal to the boundary of Centennial’s associated consent DA 35-2-2004, via existing underground conveyor systems;

• transferring mine-water inflows to and from the CES; and • final rehabilitation of the MMAS and MSSS. The proposed major components of the proposal are compared to the existing operations in Table 1 . Table 1: Comparison of existing and proposed operations at Mandalong Mine

Aspect Approved Operations Proposed Southern Extension

Mine Life • Approved to operate until 2019. • Approval sought for 25 years of operations from the grant of a mining lease over the Southern Extension Area.

ROM Coal Production Rate

• Up to 6 Mtpa. • No change.

Mining Area and Method

• Area 1 – longwall mining. • Area 2 – bord-and-pillar mining.

• No change to Areas 1 and 2. • Southern Extension Area – longwall mining.

Surface Infrastructure

• MMAS provides access to, and services for, the current underground workings.

• Approval in place to construct additional gas flares and gas engines at the MMAS.

• The CES handles and despatches coal, and receives mine-water inflows and discharges.

• The CES also contains mine ventilation infrastructure.

• No substantial change to the MMAS, except for an additional licenced discharge point on the existing Macrophyte Dam.

• Expansion of the Borehole Dam at the CES to provide an additional 1.5 megalitres (ML) capacity.

• Proposed new site (MSSS), to ventilate and otherwise service the Southern Extension Area.

Coal Delivery

• Underground conveyor system delivers up to 4 Mtpa of coal from underground workings to the CES.

• Overland conveyor system delivers up to 4 Mtpa of coal to Eraring Power Station.

• Surface delivery (ie haulage on

• Increase in coal transported to the CES by haulage on private roads to up to 6 Mtpa. Note: Transport of coal to Eraring Power Station and Newstan Colliery, and return of coal middlings from Newstan Colliery to the CES, are not covered by this proposal.



private roads) of up to 4 Mtpa of coal from the CES to Newstan Colliery.

• Return of up to 0.5 Mtpa of coal middlings from Newstan Colliery to CES by private road haulage.

Mine-water Management

• The mine is approved to dewater up to 1,825 ML/year (or 5 ML/day) from the underground workings.

• Inflows are initially stored in the former Cooranbong Colliery workings.

• This water is delivered to the Borehole Dam at the CES for flocculent treatment and then discharged under license.

• The MMAS and CES have separate clean and dirty water systems in place.

• Gradual increase in mine dewatering to a maximum of 2,154 ML/year (or 5.9 ML/day).

• Continued use of Cooranbong underground workings to store inflows.

• MMAS – an additional emergency licensed discharge point.

• CES - inflows transferred to and from underground workings to the Borehole Dam only.

• Proposed MSSS – separate clean and dirty water management systems and an emergency licensed discharge point would be established.

Subsidence Management

• Subsidence impacts are managed under approved Subsidence Management Plans (SMPs), which incorporate individual Property Subsidence Management Plans for privately-owned properties.

• Preparation of Extraction Plans for second workings to replace SMPs, also to include Property Subsidence Management Plans for privately-owned properties.

Hours of Operation

• Mining and coal delivery occur 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.

• No change.

Employment • 305 full-time employees at the mine.

• Increase to 420 full-time employees. • 35 temporary construction workers during

MSSS construction. • Additional 50 temporary contractors during

longwall moves. Capital Investment Value

• Existing infrastructure. • $265 million.

2. CONSIDERATION OF PAC REVIEW

2.1 Overview of PAC Review Findings The PAC review report’s main finding was that:

“the project would have a number of project specific impacts, but that these can be managed to an acceptable level through stringent and robust conditions along with careful management of operations on site. The Commission has made a number of recommendations in this regard, particularly relating to the need for best practice management of subsidence, water, noise and traffic management. With these measures, and requirements for best practice management in place, the Commission is satisfied that the project can be approved, subject to conditions”.

In producing its review report, the PAC drew on a wide range of information, including technical reports in Centennial’s environmental impact statement (EIS), and: • a public hearing it conducted in Lake Macquarie LGA on 12 February 2015, at which 22

community members made presentations; • written submissions to the PAC; • a site inspection by the PAC and a meeting with Centennial’s representatives; • the Department’s PAR; • the PAC’s own enquiries, including those with various government agencies; • submissions received during the exhibition of the development application; and • Centennial’s Response to Submissions (RTS) and other supplementary information provided by it

in response to questions from the PAC and the Department.



Figure 1: Approved and proposed mining areas

The Review Report made 16 recommendations addressing: • Subsidence:

- monitoring of non-conventional subsidence impacts should be prescribed in the conditions of consent;



- subsidence performance criteria must be scientifically measurable and legally enforceable, and supported by an effective management system which allows for adaptive mine planning; and

- potential repairs to residences which would be undermined should be appropriately managed and remediated;

• Water Impacts: - further assessment of proposed discharges of mine-water to Muddy Lake to ensure that the

lake’s water quality is not further impacted, or that conditions ensure compliance with the site’s existing Environmental Protection Licence (EPL) discharge limits, with any additional discharged water treated to ensure there is no additional impact at receiving waterbodies;

• Noise impacts: - alternative noise mitigation and management measures should be considered for residents

near the MSSS, and for ‘exceptional cases’ during the construction period; • Socio-economic analysis:

- update and peer review the EIS’s economic analysis to reflect the current economic climate, including a sensitivity analysis under a range of economic scenarios; and

• Traffic impacts: - consider the safety and amenity of Mandalong residents during the construction period,

which may involve: o further consultation with residents; o a shared pathway on Mandalong Road; and o ensuring scheduled deliveries and construction vehicle movements do not conflict with

school bus runs.

The Department has given detailed and careful consideration to each of the PAC’s recommendations. Most are readily implemented. For instance, the recommendation for an extraction schedule figure to be included in the consent, and the inclusion of monitoring for non-conventional subsidence effects are straightforward. Overall, the Department fully accepts 12 of the PAC’s 16 recommendations, and partially agrees with or disagrees with the remaining 4 recommendations. The PAC’s recommendations are set out in full in Table 2 . The 12 recommendations which have been fully supported by the Department are identified by light green shading. A summary of the Department’s consideration and action is provided, but these 12 recommendations are not further addressed in this report. The only recommendations which are considered in detail are four recommendations where the Department has some concerns over aspects of their implementation. This report therefore focuses on these residual recommendations, shown in light orange shading in Table 2 and considered in detail in Sections 2.2 to 2.5 below. At the time the PAC undertook its merit review, the details of Centennial’s proposed biodiversity offsets to compensate for vegetation clearing to construct the MSSS had not been finalised. On the issue of biodiversity offsets, the PAC accepted the Department’s approach to the draft conditions, which required an appropriate offset strategy to be developed in consultation with OEH. The PAC also commented that it supported Centennial’s alternative approach to this issue, which offers a non-traditional offset in the form of a Land Management Strategy (LMS). OEH initially did not agree with Centennial’s approach. This residual issue is discussed further in this report, at Section 2.6. In preparing its FAR, the Department has also carefully considered: • Centennial’s response to the PAC review report (see Appendix C ); • further information sought and obtained from the Mine Subsidence Board; • a further submission from the Mandalong Community Association (MCA); and • Centennial’s revised LMS and OEH’s response to the revised strategy. The Department’s consideration of all PAC recommendations is provided below. Table 2: PAC recommendations and summary of the Department’s responses

PAC Recommendation Department’s Consideration and Action

Subsidence • That the Applicant provides a predicted

timeline of longwall extraction, including a plan showing the progression of longwalls over the 25 year project life for inclusion in the consent.

A figure showing Centennial’s proposed longwall extraction schedule has been included in Appendix 2 of the recommended conditions of consent. This figure should be seen as ‘presently proposed’ or ‘indicative’, rather than ‘firm’ or ‘determinative’.



• That appropriate monitoring of non-conventional subsidence effects should be included as a requirement in any consent and that the relevant Extraction Plan is required to contain appropriate measures to control the risks from non-conventional subsidence so as to ensure that the environmental performance criteria are not exceeded.

The PAC was satisfied that it was “unlikely that any non-conventional subsidence effects would occur in the Southern Extension Area”. Nonetheless, it proposed monitoring “to control the risks from non-conventional subsidence”. Not all non-conventional subsidence can be reliably predicted (for example subsidence movements associated with known or unknown faults, joints or dykes). However, the proposed Extraction Plan condition has been revised to require the subsidence monitoring program to include non-conventional subsidence movements. Subsidence monitoring and associated Trigger Action Response Plans are directed towards avoiding any breach of performance measures.

• That advice is sought from the MSB about the likely extent of repairs required, prior to determination.

The Mine Subsidence Board (MSB) provided a submission to the Department on 4 May 2015. It has inspected the six potentially affected properties where moderate levels of subsidence are predicted; finding that only one of the six would be likely to require minor repairs. The Department is confident that the proposed subsidence performance measures would ensure that subsidence impacts at residences are limited to within SSR criteria, and allow for replacement should unforeseen impacts occur. No additional conditions are recommended to address this issue. MSB’s advice is discussed further in Section 2.2

• That confirmation is sought from Transgrid that an appropriate level of consultation with the Applicant has occurred and that the proposed draft conditions are suitable.

The Department provided relevant information to Transgrid, and asked it to comment on the recommended conditions. Transgrid confirmed that Centennial has consulted with it concerning the project. The relocation of transmission line T25/26 does not form part of this application, and would require assessment and approval under a separate development application.

• That a rigorous set of performance measures is included in any consent. Rigorous in this context means able to be measured or assessed in a scientifically and legally sound manner and be capable of enforcement. These performance measures must be supported by: (i) a requirement that the Extraction

Plan for each longwall contains revised subsidence predictions based on experience from previous mining on the site and that these revised predictions will not allow the performance criteria to be exceeded; and

(ii) a requirement that the Extraction Plan for each longwall contains:

(a) appropriate triggers to warn of the development of an increasing risk of exceedance of the performance criteria (e.g. the subsidence predictions themselves and/or other relevant subsidence-related measurements);

(b) specific action plans to respond to increased risk of exceedance that will ensure the criteria are not exceeded (e.g. cessation of mining, narrowing the longwall, altering seam height, etc) and;

(c) an assessment of remediation measures that may be required if exceedance does occur and the capacity to implement the measures.

The consent contains performance measures linked to the significance of features and the likelihood of severity of impacts. These are well established performance measures. The performance measures would be closely linked to performance indicators developed as part of each Extraction Plan. The PAC’s recommendations are discussed in detail in Section 2.2.



Water Resources • That, prior to determination, the

groundwater monitoring program is amended to incorporate the recommendations outlined in Section 6 of the report entitled Groundwater Quality Response to Submission Support (Australian Groundwater and Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd, September 2014).

The recommendations aim to increase the effectiveness of the groundwater monitoring regime and reduce the risk of human error during sampling. The recommendations include ensuring bore casings remain above ground level, and that bores are capped to prevent water ingress during high rainfall events. The condition requiring each Extraction Plan to include a groundwater monitoring program has been strengthened to reflect the recommendations.

• That the haul and access road are designed in a way that does not result in adverse flooding impacts for adjoining properties.

An additional condition has been included to reflect this recommendation, requiring the road design to consider flooding impacts at adjoining properties.

• That, prior to determination, the Applicant is required to undertake a detailed assessment of the impact of the proposed site discharge at LPD001 both in terms of water quality and quantity on the receiving waters of Muddy Creek as part of the current project. Alternatively, in the absence of such an assessment, any consent should be conditioned to comply with the existing EPL and should require that any additional discharge, over and above the existing approved discharge, be treated to ensure nil additional impact.

The management of mine-water discharged from the CES via LDP 001 is not part of this project. Centennial has assessed these impacts under its Northern Coal Logistics Project (NCLP, currently under separate assessment by the Department). The current discharge limit of 5 ML/day gives Centennial sufficient licenced discharge capacity for a significant period of time. This issue is further addressed in Section 2.3.

• That the proposed draft condition relating to the Water Management Plan expressly includes mitigation measures to address tunnel erosion.

Avoidance, management and mitigation of tunnel erosion impacts would be addressed in individual Property Subsidence Management Plans required under each Extraction Plan. Centennial has also made commitments to address and mitigate tunnel erosion impacts at private properties. The Extraction Plan conditions have been revised to specify the requirement for tunnel erosion assessment and mitigation to be addressed in each individual Property Subsidence Management Plan.

Biodiversity • That an additional condition of consent

be included in Schedule 3 that requires the MSSS access road be designed such that it does not impact on any existing Biconvex Paperbark trees particularly in the location of the proposed Morans Creek crossing.

The Department has included an additional condition that expressly requires the design and construction of the access road to avoid impacting any Biconvex Paperbark trees.

Noise • That alternative noise mitigation and

management measures are considered for exceptional cases during construction.

The Department and the PAC both consider that the Interim Construction Noise Guideline (ICNG) provides the most appropriate framework for management of the MSEP’s construction noise impacts. The Department’s recommended conditions already require construction noise impacts to be managed under the ICNG. The Department recognises that alternative noise mitigation measures have been successfully applied at other mining projects, and that there is scope to implement additional measures for the project to further manage impacts. These measures are beyond the scope of the ICNG. In accordance with the PAC’s findings, Centennial has updated its Statement of Commitments (SoC) to include consideration of alternative construction noise mitigation measures such as double glazing at affected residences, temporary relocation of residents and consideration of residents with existing medical conditions in exceptional circumstances. Centennial would consult with residents and any additional measures would be determined on a case-by-case basis.



Implementing any alternative measures would follow a revision to the noise predictions when the design of the MSSS access road is finalised. The SoC is incorporated into the recommended development consent, and must be adhered to.

Socio-Economic • That the Applicant’s Economic Analysis

is updated, prior to determination, to reflect the current economic climate, including a comprehensive sensitivity analysis to address a range of scenarios.

• That a peer review of the updated economic assessment is provided prior to determination.

Centennial has updated its economic analysis. The revised analysis (see Appendix C ) includes a cost benefit analysis (CBA) and has addressed a range of economic scenarios. As in the original economic assessment, the results show that the project would result in a significant overall net benefit and a wide range of economic benefits to local, regional and state economies. The Department accepts the findings of the updated assessment. The updated assessment was not peer reviewed in the traditional sense. Instead, Centennial has based its updated assessment on the findings of the peer reviews undertaken by the Centre for International Economics for the Department in respect of Centennial’s three Western Coalfield projects, which recommended that projects are subject to CBA and appropriate assessment under a range of economic scenarios. The Department also notes that both it and the PAC were satisfied that the project would be likely to result in a net benefit, based on the conclusions of the original assessment.

• That the staging of the $500,000 community fund should be reviewed and amended to reflect that the impacts on the Mandalong community that would occur early in the construction period. This may involve the provision of funds early in the project life for community infrastructure, such as the development of a formed, shared pathway adjacent to Mandalong Road within the town of Mandalong for general purpose use including horse riding, cycling and pedestrians.

The Department accepts that the primary impacts of the proposal on the broader Mandalong community are in the early years of the project, particularly the 2.5 year construction period for the MSSS. Centennial’s commitment is to provide a recently-established community funding trust (the Lake Macquarie Foundation) with funding of $50,000 pa for each of the first 10 years of the project. This commitment is considered to be generous, and well beyond what Centennial could potentially be required to pay by way of a planning agreement with LMCC. Centennial also makes further, substantial funding payments directly to local community groups each year. This issue is further addressed in Section 2.4.

Traffic • That consideration is given to the

amenity and safety of local residents along Mandalong Road, particularly during construction. This may involve: (i) the Applicant consulting

further with local residents about potential mitigation and management measures;

(ii) providing a shared pathway adjacent to Mandalong Road for general purpose use including horseriding, cycling and pedestrians; and

(iii) ensuring scheduled deliveries and construction vehicle movements occur outside of school bus run periods.

Centennial has committed to protecting the amenity and safety of other road users during the construction period. This is reflected in the Department’s initial draft conditions of consent, which require a Construction Traffic Management Plan to be developed in consultation with the local community. Centennial has further committed to consultation with residents during the construction period with regard to amenity and safety matters, including involving them in the preparation of the Construction Traffic Management Plan. This would include communicating its construction schedule to potentially affected residents. This issue is further addressed in Section 2.5.

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage • That clarification is sought about the

number of Aboriginal sites located within the Southern Extension Area to ensure that there are no additional impacts on items of Aboriginal heritage.

There are 150 Aboriginal cultural heritage sites within the project area. This number includes the 113 sites identified as requiring to be assessed in the EIS, as well as a further 37 sites which were determined not to require assessment but were registered anyway within the OEH Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System. The recommended conditions apply to all Aboriginal cultural heritage sites and items within the project area. The management and mitigation regimes in the proposed Heritage Management Plans would provide appropriate protection to all



sites and include contingency actions to manage unforeseen impacts. No additional conditions of approval are required to further manage Aboriginal cultural heritage impacts.

2.2 Subsidence PAC Recommendations That a rigorous set of performance measures is included in any consent. Rigorous in this context means able to be measured or assessed in a scientifically and legally sound manner and be capable of enforcement. These performance measures must be supported by: (i) a requirement that the Extraction Plan for each longwall contains revised subsidence

predictions based on experience from previous mining on the site and that these revised predictions will not allow the performance criteria to be exceeded; and

(ii) a requirement that the Extraction Plan for each longwall contains: (a) appropriate triggers to warn of the development of an increasing risk of exceedance of

the performance criteria (e.g. the subsidence predictions themselves and/or other relevant subsidence-related measurements);

(b) specific action plans to respond to increased risk of exceedance that will ensure the criteria are not exceeded (e.g. cessation of mining, narrowing the longwall, altering seam height, etc.); and

(c) an assessment of remediation measures that may be required if exceedance does occur and the capacity to implement the measures.

The PAC identified that this recommendation was based in the perceived need to provide for a robust ‘adaptive management’ framework over the 25-year life of the project. In this respect, the PAC quoted the views of the Land and Environment Court regarding adaptive management, relevantly as follows:

“Adaptive management is not a “suck it and see”, trial and error approach to management, but is an iterative approach involving explicit testing of the achievement of defined goals. Through feedback to the management process, the management procedures are changed in steps until monitoring shows that the desired outcome is obtained. The monitoring program has to be designed so that there is statistical confidence in the outcome. In adaptive management the goal to be achieved is set, so there is no uncertainty as to the outcome and the conditions requiring adaptive management do not lack certainty, but rather they establish a regime which would permit changes, within defined parameters, to the way the outcome is achieved.”1

The PAC also considered that conditions containing performance measures “need to have clear outcomes that must be met that are measurable and enforceable, assisted by an adaptive management system that monitors and modifies operations in advance, based on predetermined triggers to achieve the outcomes.” The Department notes that a recommendation in similar terms appeared in the PAC’s previous merit review report for the Wallarah 2 Coal Project (W2CP), which remains under assessment due to unforeseen problems for the applicant in obtaining consent from the NSW Aboriginal Land Council. The PAC also noted that W2CP had stalled, and considered that the MSEP “presents a sensible and necessary opportunity to adopt the same recommendations to improve the conditions”. However, there are substantial differences between W2CP and MSEP. Most particularly, Mandalong is an existing underground coal mine which has been conducting longwall operations and producing coal since 2005, whereas W2CP is a ‘greenfield’ coal mine proposal. Centennial has been mining longwalls of 125 – 160 m in width at Mandalong for 10 years and proposes to continue to mine longwalls of similar widths (160 – 200 m). W2CP on the other hand has no history of longwall production and proposes to extract longwalls at a broad range of widths (125 – 255 m). The result of these differences is that there is a much better body of existing subsidence data at Mandalong on which to base subsidence predictions for the MSEP. Consequently, the risks associated with mine design not satisfactorily achieving the proposed performance measures are substantially reduced. In this respect, the Department also notes the PAC’s satisfaction that “Centennial’s subsidence predictions provide a sound basis for assessing the potential subsidence-related impacts of the project”. Clearly, these factors lessen the need for a risk-averse adaptive management framework. 1 See: Newcastle and Hunter Valley Speleological Society Inc. v Upper Hunter Shire Council and Stoneco Pty Limited [2010]



Secondly, in its Wallarah 2 merit review, the PAC pointed to a single example of the Department’s draft subsidence impact performance measures which it considered to be not sufficiently strict and unenforceable. This draft measure was based on limiting the intensity of impacts on particular watercourses to a percentage of the stream length to be undermined. No such similar performance measure exists in the recommended conditions for MSEP. Subsidence effects, impacts and environmental consequences have been extensively assessed in the Newcastle Coalfield over the last 30 years, which has provided a substantial body of data and information on geological conditions and the way subsidence develops in response to mining. This database has been used in developing the MSEP mine plan, and the project’s subsidence prediction model, which, as the Department noted in its assessment, has been modified by Centennial’s experience at Mandalong to provide a robust prediction methodology for the project. The range of subsidence performance measures in the recommended conditions of consent are well-established (and accepted widely by the community and government, including the PAC in previous assessments) for underground coal mining projects in NSW. The Department considers the recommended performance measures represent current best practice for underground mining projects. The performance measures are drafted so that individual impact limits apply to groups of similar and related features. The performance measures are targeted toward management regimes based not only the significance and sensitivity of the feature being protected, but also the risk profile, likelihood and severity of potential impacts occurring at the particular feature. The terms used in the proposed performance measures are generally subject to definitions found elsewhere in the consent. The performance measures are not intended to act in isolation, rather, they operate to provide an umbrella framework under which a range of other considerations and assessments would be undertaken to avoid and minimise subsidence impacts either prior to, during and following the extraction of each longwall panel. In particular, these assessments relate to Extraction Plans. Nonetheless, the Department agrees with the general intent of the PAC’s recommendation. It agrees that performance measures should be rigorous, scientifically sound, legally sound and therefore be capable of enforcement. It also agrees with the position that all underground mining consents (particularly those that authorise longwall mining) need to support a robust adaptive management framework. However, generally speaking, the Department considers that its subsidence impact performance measures meet the standard sought by the PAC, and that its Extraction Plan process supports a robust adaptive management framework. The Department considers that the intent of paragraph (i) of the recommendation is achieved by the Department’s standard condition that:

“Each Extraction Plan must …. provide revised predictions of the potential subsidence effects, subsidence impacts and environmental consequences of the proposed second workings, incorporating any relevant information obtained since the commencement date of this consent;”

The Extraction Plan process provides a detailed assessment process which supports the achievement of the performance measures. This process addresses the issues raised by the PAC’s recommendation. For example, each Extraction Plan requires a new and detailed assessment of impacts, ensuring the most up-to-date data is available as to the likelihood of impacts and to inform decisions regarding suitable management strategies. The preparation of an Extraction Plan for each group of longwall panels allows an iterative assessment of impacts to all built and natural features to be focussed at the local level, ensuring that impacts are regularly re-assessed and impact management regimes further refined during the life of the project in response to the results of subsidence monitoring and recorded impacts. As a management plan entirely subsidiary to the requirements and other provisions of a development consent, Extraction Plans are assessed by the Department, in close consultation with other affected agencies. This is the case with all other such management plans. The Department would be pleased to provide the PAC with examples of current Extraction Plans (otherwise available on company websites), if it would like to further consider them. The form of the recommended consent is such that subsidence predictions, whether revised or otherwise, cannot be used to allow the performance measures to be exceeded.



In regard to paragraph (ii) of the recommendation, the Department notes that it has standard conditions regarding subsidence monitoring, contingency planning and adaptive management. These are also considered to be generally sound. However, the Department agrees with the PAC that these can and should be strengthened. The Department proposes the following recommended condition of approval:

“Each Extraction Plan must …. (n) include a Subsidence Monitoring Program, which has been prepared in consultation with DRE;

to: • provide data to assist with the management of the risks associated with subsidence; • validate the subsidence predictions; • analyse the relationship between the predicted and resulting subsidence effects and

predicted and resulting impacts under the plan and any ensuing environmental consequences; and

• inform the adaptive management and contingency planning processes in paragraphs (o) and (p) below;

(o) Trigger Action Response Plans (TARPs) addressing all features in Tables 8 and 9, which contain: • appropriate triggers to warn of increased risk of exceedance of any performance

measure; and • specific actions to respond to high risk of exceedance of any performance measure

to ensure that the measure is not exceeded; • an assessment of remediation measures that may be required if exceedances occur

and the capacity to implement the measures; (p) include a Contingency Plan that expressly provides for:

• adaptive management (including modifying mining height, longwall width or any other element of the mine plan) where monitoring indicates that there has been an exceedance of any performance measure in Tables 8 and 9, or where any such exceedance appears likely; and

• an assessment of remediation measures that may be required if exceedances occur and the capacity to implement the measures;” (additional text in bold)

In terms of ensuring that the performance measures have full legal enforceability, the Department proposes an additional condition which it has also recommended for the more-recent Springvale Extension Project, which specifically requires Centennial to undertake the assessment and management of development-related risks to ensure that performance measures are not exceeded. The recommended condition is as follows:

“The Applicant must assess and manage development-related risks to ensure that there are no exceedances of the performance measures in Table 8. Any exceedance of these performance measures constitutes a breach of this consent and may be subject to penalty or offence provisions under the EP&A Act or EP&A Regulation, notwithstanding actions taken pursuant to [the offsets condition] below. Where any exceedance of these performance measures has occurred, the Applicant must, at the earliest opportunity: (a) take all reasonable and feasible steps to ensure that the exceedance ceases and does not recur; (b) consider all reasonable and feasible options for remediation and submit a report to the Department

describing those options and any preferred remediation measures or other course of action; and (c) implement remediation measures as directed by the Secretary, to the satisfaction of the Secretary.”

The PAC also asked the Department to seek comment from MSB on the likely repairs to residences which were predicted to experience ‘moderate’ subsidence levels. The EIS identified 114 residences which would be undermined during the life of the project. However only six residences were identified as having a potential risk of being impacted by moderate subsidence movements, either due to the steep terrain on which the residence is located, or as the materials that the residences were constructed from being more susceptible to ground movements. MSB undertook its own site inspections of the six potentially affected residences. It found that only one of the six would have the potential to be affected by subsidence where minor remedial repairs may need to be undertaken, given that the materials the residence is constructed from have limited resistance to ground movements. MSB concluded its investigation by commenting that all six potentially-affected residences would be likely to remain safe and serviceable throughout the life of the project. It also stated that it would be Centennial’s responsibility to undertake repairs at residences to remediate any subsidence impacts that do exceed the MSB’s Safe, Serviceable and Repairable (SSR) criteria. The Department considers the performance measures for these residences, and the requirement to prepare individual Property Subsidence Management Plans would provide a robust framework within which impacts would be appropriately managed.



2.3 Mine-water Discharges PAC Recommendations

That prior to determination, the Applicant is required to undertake a detailed assessment of the impact of the proposed site discharge at LPD001 both in terms of water quality and quantity on the receiving waters of Muddy Creek as part of the current project. Alternatively, in the absence of such an assessment, any consent should be conditioned to comply with the existing EPL and should require that any additional discharge, over and above the existing approved discharge, be treated to ensure nil additional impact.

The PAC recognised that the MSEP application does not seek approval for the transfer of water from the CES’s Borehole Dam to LDP001 and the subsequent discharge of up to a maximum of 8 ML/day (average of 7.1 ML/day) over the life of the project to Muddy Lake, and thence to Lake Macquarie. Instead, Centennial’s separate Northern Coal Logistics Project (NCLP) seeks approval for this transfer and discharge. However, the PAC was critical of this arrangement, considering it “not appropriate for the [MSEP] to be approved pending determination of a separate application [for the NCLP] when it relies upon that application to operate.” The Department does not agree with the PAC’s position of this matter, for a number of reasons. Firstly, as the PAC points out, the site’s existing EPL permits discharges of up to 5 ML/day. However, the average discharge over the 3 calendar years to December 2012 from LDP001 was 1.59 ML/day, or 572.5 ML/year. Discharges only occasionally spike over 2 ML/day, usually due to significant rainfall events. Annual discharges in the 3 financial years to 30 June 2015 were even less, at 1.04 ML/day (378.3 ML/year), 1.24 ML/day (450.8 ML/year) and 1.29 ML/day (470.7 ML/year). The EIS predicts that the MSEP’s average groundwater inflows will not reach 3 ML/day until 2018. Centennial’s modelling is that daily discharges from LDP001 will not begin to regularly exceed 5 ML/day until early 2021. Consequently, the PAC’s recommendation that (in the absence of further detailed assessment) the “consent should be conditioned to comply with the existing EPL and should require that any additional discharge, over and above the existing approved discharge, be treated to ensure nil additional impact” is unlikely to have any operative effect for about the next 6 years. Secondly, for the same reasons, the MSEP would not ‘rely on’ the NCLP application for it to operate. It would be many years before the existing limit of 5 ML/day is exceeded. Thirdly, the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has previously attached a Pollution Reduction Program (PRP) to Mandalong’s EPL. This required Centennial to undertake a 2-year study of metals in the mine’s wastewater discharges in accordance with the ANZECC water quality guidelines. This same requirement has been applied to all coal mines operated by Centennial (and other companies) in the Lake Macquarie area. This PRP may lead to a licence review by the EPA amending the site’s EPL to control discharges of metals. The PAC’s position suggests that water quality impacts associated with the existing licensed discharge of 5 ML/day are acceptable, and that only additional discharges require to be treated. This position may not be endorsed by the EPA in its review of the current EPL, particularly in regard to various metals. Fourthly, it is within Centennial’s rights to characterise the NCLP and MSEP projects in the way that it has. There is no necessity that future proposed discharges from LDP001 are assessed in detail under the MSEP application, or before it can be determined. Considering the possible refusal of NCLP as the ‘worst case’, Centennial’s resulting inability to operate the later years of the MSEP project due to excessive water make could be easily rectified by a future modification to the MSEP consent or by a revised NCLP application. Fifthly, even though proposed discharges from LDP001 do not form part of the MSEP, Centennial has nonetheless already provided a substantive assessment of impacts associated with discharges in its EIS. A more detailed assessment is included in the EIS for the NCLP assessment. The Department therefore believes that additional assessment of mine-water discharge impacts prior to determination of the MSEP is unwarranted. Finally, as indicated above, the site’s EPL is subject to review by the EPA. The Department considers that there is some risk in setting particular discharge limits (whether volumetric or contaminant) in the



consent, since section 89K of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EP& A Act) requires that a later EPL remains ‘substantially consistent with’ the development consent. The Department proposes instead that the consent merely contain its standard condition that “except as may be expressly provided by an EPL, the Applicant shall comply with section 120 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997”. On this basis, it would become the EPA’s responsibility to set appropriate volumetric and contaminant limits for mine-water discharges from LDP001 and Mandalong’s other licensed discharge points. This responsibility falls within EPA’s ‘core business’. This is particularly the case since the EPA earlier advised the Department that it was not in a position to provide recommended conditions of approval for water discharges. The Department therefore considers that, when the EPA is in such a position, it should impose appropriate conditions via its EPL. The conditions of consent would not limit the EPA’s options in obtaining strategic and appropriate outcomes for managing salinity and metals in Mandalong’s discharges to Muddy Lake. The Department has applied a similar line of reasoning in its assessment of the NCLP project, which is approaching completion and determination. The Department’s recommended conditions of consent recognise the current EPL’s discharge limits and allow those limits to change over time. Therefore, it is clear that these operations would remain subject to the existing conditions of consent in the event that the application for NCLP is not approved. The current EPL discharge limit of 5 ML/day provides sufficient capacity for Centennial to manage its mine-water discharges in the short-to-medium term, regardless of whether or not the NCLP is approved at an early date. The Department’s recommended conditions of consent contemplate that longer term options to manage minewater discharges would either be satisfied under the conditions of consent for the NCLP, or if this is not available, under the existing conditions of consent. The current recommended conditions of consent require the mine’s water balance to be updated on a regular basis. Centennial would continue to undertake regular monitoring of impacts to downstream water quality and quantity, which would continue regardless of the consent under which this action is required. In addition, Centennial’s existing Water Management Plan (WMP), which details all CES water management systems, would continue to have effect whilever existing consent DA 97/800 remains live. Recommended conditions require this existing consent to be surrendered by 30 April 2017, or as otherwise agreed with the Secretary. 2.4 Socio-economic Impacts PAC Recommendations

That the staging of the $500,000 community fund should be reviewed and amended to reflect that the impacts on the Mandalong community that would occur early in the construction period. This may involve the provision of funds early in the project life for community infrastructure, such as the development of a formed, shared pathway adjacent to Mandalong Road within the town of Mandalong for general purpose use including horse riding, cycling and pedestrians.

Centennial has made commitments to provide substantial funding to a recently established community funding organisation, the Lake Macquarie Foundation. The commitment included in Centennial’s SoC for the MSEP is to provide the Foundation with funding of $50,000 pa for the first 10 years of the project. The Department considers that this commitment is generous, and well beyond what Centennial could potentially be required to pay by way of a planning agreement with LMCC. LMCC also supports Centennial’s commitment to provide funds to the Foundation. The Foundation has been established to provide funding to local community programs. The fund is currently set up to operate as an investment pool, the dividends from which would be distributed to community groups based on submissions received. The allocation of funds would be assessed on their merits by the Foundation’s board. While this funding model necessarily requires the accumulation of a significant pool of capital and annual payouts based only on investment earnings (which are low in a low-interest rate climate), it has the merit of providing long-term dividends to the community, throughout (and beyond) the life of the MSEP. However, the Department also agrees with the PAC that it is important to recognise the temporary nature of the impacts to the local Mandalong community during the construction stage. In this respect, it is important to note that Centennial also makes further, substantial, direct funding payments to local community groups in the immediate area of the Mandalong mine each year. Over the past 3 financial



years, Centennial has provided a total of $304,000 to a total of 56 different community groups in the Western Lake Macquarie area. These contributions are in and around the area affected by Centennial’s Mandalong and Myuna Collieries (and, previously, Newstan, until it was placed on care and maintenance in late 2013). They do not reflect any requirement found in the relevant development consents. The need for and value of constructing a shared pathway beside Mandalong Road for pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders is discussed under section 2.5. In short, Centennial, LMCC and the Department do not see any substantial need for this proposal. No change to the previous draft conditions is proposed. 2.5 Construction Traffic Impacts PAC Recommendations That consideration is given to the amenity and safety of local residents along Mandalong Road, particularly during construction. This may involve:

(a) the Applicant consulting further with local residents about potential mitigation and management measures;

(b) providing a shared pathway adjacent to Mandalong Road for general purpose use including horseriding, cycling and pedestrians; and

(c) ensuring scheduled deliveries and construction vehicle movements occur outside of school bus run periods.

The PAC’s recommendation results from concerns raised in submissions from the MCA and other members of the community that the construction traffic impacts would affect the safety and amenity of other users of Mandalong Road, including cyclists, horseriders and pedestrians. The PAC was not firm or definitive regarding outcomes on these matters, but rather requested that ‘further consideration should be given’ to them. Both Centennial and the Department have done so. Centennial’s response to this recommendation was to the effect that the EIS’s Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) had concluded that the road network around the MSSS is of a suitable standard to cater for the increase in traffic volumes expected over the 30 months required for MSSS construction, and that the project would not adversely impact on either the safety or efficiency of the road network. Centennial would continue to consult with local residents during the construction period and would consider construction vehicle movements during school bus hours as part of the traffic management strategies in its Construction Management Plan. The Department’s view, as expressed in the PAR, is that a significant increase in heavy vehicle traffic would occur during the 30 month construction period, which would need to be closely managed. The construction period is expected to generate up to 79 vehicle trips per hour during peaks. However, these peaks are short-term in nature, rather than continuing throughout the construction period. The TIA clearly shows that the construction traffic would peak during the initial stage of construction of the road, when plant and equipment to construct the road require to be delivered to the site. Centennial has reiterated that its construction traffic impacts would be likely to peak within the first 6 months of its 30 month construction timeframe, when the construction site is being established, and during the initial stages of construction of the intersection and access road. The number of vehicles, including heavy vehicles, would reduce after this initial period, returning to near normal levels as the construction schedule progresses to completion. The overall peak of an additional 79 vehicle movements per hour is by no means a large number, and should be readily capable of being managed over these short time periods. In support of this position, it is important to recognise that even the maximum peak hour traffic movements would not change the level of service of Mandalong Road. The road would continue to operate well within its capacity. LMCC remains of the view that the project would not adversely impact on the safety or efficiency of its local road network. The Department’s draft conditions proposed that a Construction Traffic Management Plan should be developed by Centennial in consultation with LMCC, and that it should include strategies to manage potential traffic conflicts during the construction period. After further consideration, the Department remains of the view that the impacts are moderate in scale, reasonably short-term in duration, and are readily capable of being managed through a Construction Traffic Management Plan.



The safety of other road users would be considered during construction, and Centennial would be subject to Council’s road construction requirements, which would include setting up a construction safety zone for 400 m on each side of the proposed intersection. Centennial has already stated that it would undertake a number of measures to ensure safety is maintained for other road users during the construction period, including setting up construction works warning signage, and using traffic marshals to control traffic as necessary. Some elements of the local community (particularly the MCA) have suggested that Centennial should fund the construction of a shared pathway beside Mandalong Road to allow pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders to undertake these activities separate from the roadway. The PAC requested further consideration of this issue. The MCA has supported the PAC’s request, calling for the pathway to be built before construction of the MSSS commences. In its PAR the Department noted the request from elements of the community for a pathway but did not consider that the level of impact (or the level of need or anticipated usage) warranted its construction. Discussions with LMCC have since indicated that a shared pathway would require significant works to construct, including vegetation clearing and drainage works. Following further review of the TIA, and consultation with LMCC and Centennial, the Department remains of the view that the project’s impacts do not warrant any additional roadworks along Mandalong Road, including the development of a separated pathway. The cost would also be significant, and the Department is mindful of Centennial’s voluntary commitment of a total of $500,000 of community funding. The draft condition requiring a Construction Traffic Management Plan condition required Centennial to detail the measures it would implement to avoid conflicts between construction vehicles and the school bus. The Department has revised the recommended condition to clearly require Centennial to avoid heavy vehicle construction traffic movements on Mandalong Road during school bus hours. This is anticipated to produce a direct benefit to community amenity and a reduction in road safety risks. 2.6 Biodiversity Offsets The PAC review supported the provision of a biodiversity offset to compensate for the proposed clearing of 15.6 ha of native vegetation associated with the construction of the MSSS. The report also considered that the approach recommended in the Department’s PAR was appropriate. Since the PAC’s review report was published, Centennial and OEH have been actively negotiating a biodiversity offset package which would provide suitable compensation for this vegetation clearing and at the same time would allow current agricultural land-uses to continue in the Mandalong Valley. Centennial’s preference remains to implement a non-traditional biodiversity offset strategy in the form of a Land Management Strategy (LMS), as earlier outlined in the PAC review report. The Department and OEH have accepted this approach. The LMS mainly involves the conservation of defined areas within three of Centennial’s landholdings near the MMAS (see Figure 2 ). The Department’s draft conditions required an offset to be finalised and implemented, in consultation with OEH. OEH raised two key concerns with Centennial’s initial LMS proposal, that: • continued grazing is incompatible with the proposed conservation of the land parcels; and • the quantum of vegetation on the LMS lots did not meet offsetting requirements in terms of

biodiversity credits. To address OEH’s concerns, Centennial has broadened the quantum of the LMS to include an additional land parcel on the northern side of Mandalong Road, adjoining Deaves Road (see Figure 2 ). It has also defined certain areas within the land parcels which it would set aside for conservation purposes, and where stock would be excluded. OEH accepts the concept of this non-traditional approach to offsets in this instance, and the Department’s recommended conditions require the detail within the LMS to be further defined in consultation with OEH, within a reasonable timeframe. Overall, the Department is satisfied that the conceptual framework for the LMS provides for suitable measures to be undertaken to compensate for the relatively small amount of non-threatened native vegetation that would be cleared for the project. The Department’s recommended conditions require the LMS to be finalised and implemented in consultation with OEH, and include requirements for: • defined conservation areas within the three parcels of land identified by Centennial; • defined areas where habitat restoration would be undertaken; • repair and restoration of riparian habitat and values along Morans Creek; and



• a range of compensatory measures, research funding, nest boxes and threatened species habitat enhancement.

Figure 2: Centennial’s proposed Land Management Strategy

The Department notes Centennial’s preference to secure the LMS lands under a restrictive covenant on each land title, under section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919. The Department notes that this mechanism, whilst not its first preference, has been successfully applied to secure offset lands for the Duralie Coal Mine, in the Gloucester Coalfield, and the Department does not object to the use of this mechanism in this instance. The Department has accordingly recommended that the LMS lands are secured in perpetuity under a suitable mechanism.



3. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 5 of the EP&A Act sets out the objects of the Act, which must be considered by any decision-maker (such as a consent authority) making decisions under the Act. The objects of the Act were considered in section 4.5 of the PAR. The Department considers that the development can be undertaken in a manner that is generally consistent with the objects of the Act. Section 79C(1) of the Act outlines the matters that a consent authority must take into consideration when determining development applications. These matters can be summarised as: • the provisions of environmental planning instruments (including draft instruments), development

control plans, planning agreements, the EP&A Regulations and any coastal zone management plan;

• the impacts of the development; • the suitability of the site; • any submissions; and • the public interest. The Department has considered all of these matters in its assessment of the development. In summary, the Department considers that: • the development can be undertaken in a manner that is consistent with the aims, objectives and

provisions of the applicable environmental planning instruments, other applicable planning documents and the EP&A Regulations (see particularly section 6 of the PAR);

• the site is suitable for the development, as it contains a very significant coal resource immediately adjacent to an existing mining operation, and is a permissible development on the land. The Department has carefully considered the potential impacts of the development on the site and surrounds in its assessment and is satisfied that the impacts on the environment and the local community can be adequately minimised, managed, or at least compensated for, to an acceptable standard; and

• whilst there is some opposition to the development from the local community, the development is in the wider public interest, particularly as it would: - assist to supply a continued demand for coal for basic energy generation purposes; - generate significant economic benefits for the local region and for NSW; and - facilitate employment for 420 people at the mine.

Sections 5A to 5D of the EP&A Act detail matters to be considered by the consent authority with regard to threatened species (including species, populations and ecological communities) and their habitats. The Department has given consideration to the requirements and other provisions of sections 5A to 5D. In particular, section 5A requires the consent authority to take into consideration: • the factors listed in 5A(2) (the 7 part test); and • any assessment guidelines issued and in force under the Threatened Species and Conservation

Act 1995 (TSC Act) or Fisheries Management Act 1994. The Department considered the 7 part tests presented in the EIS and also the Threatened Species Assessment Guidelines (DECC 2007) in its PAR, in deciding whether there is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations, ecological communities, or their habitats. This consideration informed the Department’s assessment of biodiversity impacts in section 6.3 of the PAR. The Department remains of the opinion that the project would be unlikely to result in a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats. In its PAR, the Department considered the provisions of relevant environmental planning instruments (EPIs), including the State Environmental Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007 (the Mining SEPP). Part 3 of the Mining SEPP lists a number of matters that a consent authority must consider before determining an application for consent for development for the purposes of mining, including: • significance of the resource; • compatibility with other land uses; • natural resource management and environmental management; • resource recovery; • transport; and • rehabilitation.



These matters were fully canvassed in the PAR (see particularly section 6), including the significance of the coal resource (see section 6.9). However, the provision of the Mining SEPP which requires the significance of the resource to be the consent authority’s ‘principal consideration’ under Part 3 of the SEPP (although not under section 79C of the Act) is currently under review. The Government has proposed that clause 12AA of the Mining SEPP is repealed. The Department has considered the proposed changes to clause 12AA to be a ‘draft environmental planning instrument’. The Department is satisfied that the proposed repeal of clause 12AA would have no bearing on the outcomes of the Department’s assessment of the project or the conclusions reached regarding its net overall benefits. In its PAR, the Department considered the MSEP coal resource to be ‘very significant’ for the following reasons: • its proximity to the Central Coast power stations; • its scale and coal quality; • its proximity to existing mine, rail and conveyor infrastructure, which provide for substantial

efficiencies in coal recovery, transport and delivery to key domestic customers (ie Eraring and Vales Point Power Stations), and to the Port of Newcastle for Export.

These matters remain material to the assessment of the economic significance of the project, despite the proposed repeal of clause 12AA. The Department remains satisfied that the project is able to be managed in a manner that is generally consistent with the aims, objectives, and provisions of the Mining SEPP, whether or not clause 12AA is repealed.

4. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS

Appropriate revisions have been made to the draft conditions of consent where relevant, to reflect the PAC’s recommendations (see Appendix D) . The Department has also consulted with Council, OEH, EPA, NOW and DPI in regard to the recommended conditions (see Appendix E ). Centennial has also advised the Department that it has no objections to the revised conditions as recommended.

5. CONCLUSION

In April 2015, the PAC completed its merit review of the MSEP and concluded that the project has merit and is able to be approved, subject to clarifying and strengthening a number of the Department’s recommended conditions. The Department has largely accepted the PAC’s recommendations. The Department has carefully considered the PAC’s recommendations in detail, and has amended its recommended conditions where relevant, in accordance with the PAC’s recommendations. This includes additional conditions to require: • monitoring of non-conventional subsidence movements; • the inclusion of Trigger Action Response Plans in each Extraction Plan, to warn of an increasing

risk of subsidence impacts and to guide the implementation of adaptive management; • specific reference to management of tunnel erosion impacts; and • ensuring construction heavy vehicle movements avoid the school bus hours. With these amendments, the Department considers that its recommended conditions provide a comprehensive, strict, and precautionary approach to ensuring that the project can comply with relevant criteria and standards, and ensure that the predicted residual impacts can be effectively minimised, mitigated and/or compensated for. The Department believes that these conditions reflect current best practice for the regulation of underground mining projects in NSW, and would therefore protect the amenity of the local community and promote the orderly development of the region’s important natural resources. The Department also recognises that the project would provide major economic and social benefits for the region and NSW as a whole. These benefits include: • generating direct employment for up to 420 mine workers (up from 305 workers), and up to 50

additional workers during the construction of the MSSS;

final assessment report - major projects

Documents