Nyngan Solar Farm Submissions Report Final v1

Submissions Report

NYNGAN SOLAR FARM

DECEMBER 2010

Picture height 2.75,

Width 3.25cm

Picture height 2.75,

Width 3.25cm

Picture height 4.5 width 6.5cm

OR USE ONE PICTURE THAT FITS CLOSE TO THE TOTAL DIMENSIONS OF THIS TABLE!

1/216 carp st (po box 470) bega nsw 2550 australia t 61 2 6492 8333 f 61 2 6494 7773

www.nghenvironmental.com.au e [email protected]

unit 9/65 tennant st (po box 1037) fyshwick act 2609 australia

t 61 2 6280 5053 f 61 2 6280 9387

18/21 mary stsurry hills nsw 2010 australia

t 61 2 8202 8333 f 61 2 6494 7773

po box 8323perth bc 68849 australia

t 61 8 9759 1985 f 61 2 6494 7773

102/63‐65 johnston st (po box 5464)wagga wagga nsw 2650 australia t 61 2 6971 9696 f 61 2 6971 9693

suite 6/234 naturaliste tce (po box 1037)dunsborough wa 6281 australia

t 61 8 9759 1985 f 61 2 6494 7773

Document Verification

Project Title: Nyngan Solar Farm Submissions Report

Project Number: 1585

Project File Name: Nyngan Solar Farm Submissions Report 031210 .docxRevision Date Prepared by (name) Checked by (name) Approved by (name)

Draft V1 6/12/10 Amy Webb Brooke Marshall

Brooke Marshall Brooke Marshall

Final V1 8/12/10 Amy Webb Brooke Marshall

Brooke Marshall Brooke Marshall

nghenvironmental prints all documents on environmentally sustainable paper including paper made from 100% bagasse (a bi‐product of sugar production) or recycled paper.

Submissions Report Nyngan Solar Farm

1585 Final V1 i

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................1

1.2 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT ...................................................................................................................2

2 THE PROPOSAL ........................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL .............................................................................................................3

2.1.1 Photovoltaic array .................................................................................................................................. 3

2.1.2 Connection to the existing Nyngan substation ...................................................................................... 3

2.1.3 Access tracks .......................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1.4 Buildings ................................................................................................................................................ 4

2.1.5 Project timing and staging ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.6 Operational management...................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.7 Decommissioning ................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 PROJECT BENEFITS ...............................................................................................................................8

3 CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS ............................................................................................. 9

3.1 EXHIBITION PERIOD AND LOCATION ....................................................................................................9

3.2 RESPONSES RECEIVED ..........................................................................................................................9

4 PROPONENT’S RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY SUBMISSIONS ........................................................ 10

5 PROPONENT’S RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT AGENCY SUBMISSIONS ........................................ 11

5.1 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, CLIMATE CHANGE AND WATER..................................................11

5.2 NSW OFFICE OF WATER .....................................................................................................................13

6 MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSAL: SUMMARY ....................................................................... 15

6.1 DELETED SOCS ....................................................................................................................................15

6.2 NEW SOCS ..........................................................................................................................................15

6.3 MODIFIED SOCS .................................................................................................................................15

7 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................ 16


1585 Final V1 ii

Appendix A: Revised Statements of Commitment

Appendix B: Additional investigations

B.1 Flora Addendum

B.2 Archaeology and Aboriginal Heritage Addendum


1585 Final V1 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The Nyngan Solar Farm is proposed in the Central West on cleared farmland off East Nyngan Road,

Nyngan (the proposal site). The proposal encompasses the construction and operation of a solar

photovoltaic array over an area of approximately 200 hectares of a 450 hectare site, with associated

electrical infrastructure, maintenance facilities, access tracks and minor upgrades to adjacent roads.

The proposal is a Part 3A Major Project under the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

and therefore the consent authority is the Minister for Planning. The proposal is also consistent with the

criteria of Critical Infrastructure as it is a power generator with the capacity to generate in excess of

30MW.

The proponent for the Nyngan Solar Farm proposal is Infigen Suntech Australia Pty Ltd (Infigen Suntech).

Infigen Suntech is a joint venture formed between Infigen Energy Limited (Infigen Energy) and Suntech

Power Australia Pty Ltd (Suntech) to deliver utility scale photovoltaic solar projects in Australia. Infigen

Energy is a specialist renewable energy business that develops, owns and operates renewable energy

generation facilities across Australia, the United States and Germany. Suntech is the world’s largest

producer of silicon solar modules, with offices in 13 countries.

An Environmental Assessment (EA), prepared by nghenvironmental, was submitted to the NSW

Department of Planning and placed on public exhibition from the 4th of November to the 6th of

December 2010. During this period1, submissions were sought from the local community, government

agencies, interested parties and other stakeholders.

Key issues were formalised in the Director General’s Requirements for the preparation of the

Environmental Assessment. Investigation of these issues formed the major part of the Environmental

Assessment. These issues were investigated via specialist reports and by desktop assessment.

Specialist investigations were carried out in the key areas of:

Biodiversity impacts Visual impacts

Aboriginal archaeological impacts Flooding impacts

Noise impacts

These investigations were appended to the EA in full and are summarised in the body of the EA.

Additionally, since the submission of the EA to the Department of Planning:

Flora investigations were undertaken, specific to threatened species impacts, to validate

the assumptions made in the Biodiversity Assessment

Further Archaeological investigation was carried out in the eastern section of the site,

which had not previously been surveyed.


1585 Final V1 2

These investigations are appended to this Submissions Report and are summarised under the relevant

agency response headings in this report.

1.2 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

This Submissions Report has been prepared by Infigen Suntech and nghenvironmental. It:

Considers and responds to the issues raised in the public and agency submissions for the

Nyngan Solar Farm

Includes the results of the additional studies undertaken to assess the impact of the

proposal

Describes any changes to the proposal, including a revised set of Statements of

Commitments


1585 Final V1 3

2 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL

The proposal remains as described in the Environmental Assessment (nghenvironmental 2010). That is:

Infigen Suntech proposes to construct a 100 megawatt (MW) capacity solar farm on cleared farmland off

East Nyngan Road, Nyngan (the proposal site). The solar panel array would occupy approximately 200

hectares on a site 450 hectares in size. The solar farm would have an expected operating life of up to 50

years. The decommissioning phase would remove all above ground infrastructure from the site.

The key infrastructure elements for the project would include:

A PV array incorporating rows of panels and a series of central inverters and kiosk transformers

Cabling between the PV array and central inverters (underground or frame secured)

Cable connection to the existing 132kV Nyngan substation (underground)

Internal access tracks and upgrades to existing roads

Site office, operations and maintenance buildings incorporating a control room and switching

equipment

Temporary construction facilities such as a site compound and equipment laydown area

2.1.1 Photovoltaic array

The PV array being considered consists of Suntech poly‐crystalline solar panels mounted on a fixed steel

support frame. The maximum height of the array would be 3.5 metres.

The proposed Suntech panels are efficient modules suitable for utility scale solar power generation. Each

panel would be approximately 2 metres long x 1 metre wide. The PV panels would be arranged in rows,

with sufficient spacing between rows to allow maintenance activities such as weed control or panel

washing as required.

The PV panel mounting structures would be supported by steel posts driven into the ground.

2.1.2 Connection to the existing Nyngan substation

The cable connection between the solar farm and existing substation would be via an underground

transmission line.

2.1.3 Access tracks

On site access tracks required for construction and operation would be gravel formations up to 8 metres

in width and may be reduced to 5 metres after the construction phase. Tracks would be maintained for

the lifetime of the solar farm.


1585 Final V1 4

2.1.4 Buildings

Temporary construction buildings would be installed within a fenced facilities area. Additionally, the

following permanent buildings may be constructed at the site: a site office, an operations and

maintenance building incorporating a control room with monitoring and workshop facilities.

2.1.5 Project timing and staging

The construction timeline for the project would be dependent on the timing of approval, funding

arrangements and the supply of key components. However, it is likely that the 10 month construction

period would commence in September 2012. Construction works would be confined to standard

construction hours (Monday‐Friday 7am‐6pm, Saturday 8am‐1pm).

2.1.6 Operational management

A site manager would be employed to manage the facility. Security staff or services would also be

engaged. The PV array and other equipment would be inspected and maintained on an ‘as needs’ basis. A

supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system would monitor the operational solar farm and

identify any electrical faults.

Periodic weed control would be undertaken as required. Groundcover vegetation around the panel rows

would be either slashed or grazed by sheep. Regular washing of the solar panels is not expected to be

required. If required, water would be sourced from the Bogan Shire Council or commercial water

suppliers to remove dust or bird excrement. Detergent would not be used.

2.1.7 Decommissioning

The life span of the PV infrastructure is 30 to 50 years. At the end of the project all above‐ground

infrastructure would be removed.


1585 Final V1 5

Figure 2‐1 Location of the proposal

Prepared by:

°

Site boundary

Development envelope

TOPOGRAPHIC CONTEXT: NYNGAN SOLAR FARM SITEPrepared for:

@ A3Reference: 1337‐17

Coordinate system: GDA 94

1:40000

www.nghenvironmental.com.au

0 0.5 10.25 Kilometers

Notes:

1.0 Layers prepared by nghenvironmental


1585 Final V1 6

Figure 2‐2: Nyngan Solar Farm layout, View 1: Panel modules, buildings and roads

Existing substation

[_ Public road access

Site boundary

Existing track (proposed construction access)

Laydown area

Temporary laydown area

Proposed roads

Modules and inverters

Site office


°

0 250 500125 Metres

@ A4 Reference: 1337 ‐ 1

1:27000

Coordinate System: GDA94 Zone 55



1585 Final V1 7

Figure 2‐3: Nyngan Solar Farm layout, View 2: Cabling layout

Site boundary


Boundary fence

Existing substation

[_ Public road access

Lot boundaries

Cable trench circuit 1




Transformers

Site office

°

0 250 500125 Metres

@ A4 Reference: 1337 ‐ 2

1:27000




1585 Final V1 8

2.2 PROJECT BENEFITS

The Nyngan Solar Farm would be clean, renewable and sustainable and would emit zero greenhouse

gases (Infigen Energy 2010b). The 100MW solar farm would generate approximately 200GWh of

electricity per year, enough renewable energy to power up to 20,000 homes and would be the equivalent

of removing approximately 30,000 cars from Australian roads each year (Infigen Energy 2010b).

Building a solar farm of this scale in Nyngan would be a major boost to the Australian solar energy

industry. It would provide local employment opportunities both throughout the construction phase and

once the site becomes operational, and would also help to develop local and regional capabilities in solar

photovoltaic plant construction.

The solar farm would contribute to Australia’s Renewable Energy Target (RET) of sourcing 20% of

electricity from renewable sources by 2020.

The Nyngan Solar Farm would:

Provide reliable energy in a market where demand will soon exceed supply

Reduce green house gas emissions that contribute to climate change

Assist in meeting Federal and State policy objectives to enhance the contribution made by

renewable energy sources to meeting demand

Contribute to the development of the utility scale renewable energy industry in NSW

Assist in the experience and learning required in Australia industry to further proliferate utility

scale solar in Australia

Provide a local and regional economic stimulus through jobs and training


1585 Final V1 9

3 CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS

3.1 EXHIBITION PERIOD AND LOCATION

The Nyngan Solar Farm Environmental Assessment was on public exhibition from Thursday 4th of

November to Monday 6th of December 2010 at:

Department of Planning, Information Centre, 23‐33 Bridge Street, Sydney

Nature Conservation Council of NSW, Level 2/5 Wilson Street Newtown NSW 2042

Bogan Shire Council, 81 Cobar Street, Nyngan

Local residents were notified of the exhibition period through newspaper advertisements placed in the

local papers by the Department of Planning. A media release was issued by Infigen Suntech.

3.2 RESPONSES RECEIVED

The Department of Planning received a total of two submissions; both were from government agencies.

No submissions were received from individual members of the public or representative groups.

Table 3‐1 Responses received

Category Number of submissions

Individual members of the public 0

Interest groups 0

Government agency submissions 2

Total 2


1585 Final V1 10

4 PROPONENT’S RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY SUBMISSIONS

Not applicable. No community submissions were received in relation to the Nyngan Solar Farm proposal.


1585 Final V1 11

5 PROPONENT’S RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT AGENCY SUBMISSIONS

5.1 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, CLIMATE CHANGE AND WATER

Issue Response

Additional studies: Flora Additional flora investigations were conducted (included in Appendix B) in fulfilment of SoC 1 of the EA. As a result of these investigations, the original SoC has been deleted.

See also flora and fauna survey issue below.

Additional studies: Archaeology and

Aboriginal heritage

Additional Archaeology and Aboriginal heritage investigation was conduected (included in Appendix B) in fulfilment of SoC 31 of the EA. As a result of this investigation, the original SoC has been deleted.

Flora and fauna surveys DECCW proposed to amend SOC 1 so as to read:

“A supplementary flora and fauna survey during spring is required to identify us threatened flora and fauna species inhabit the area encompassed by the site and to properly assess the impact of the proposal on threatened species. This will include targeted surveys for the Red Darling‐pea and Slender Darling‐pea”.

Supplementary flora surveys were conducted during early November (spring) specifically targeting the Red‐darling pea and Slender‐darling pea. These species were not detected on the site. An addendum to the original Biodiversity Assessment (Appendix B) concluded that impacts to threatened species are unlikely. Flora surveys were also conducted to confirm vegetation types and condition.

A follow up fauna survey was not considered to be warranted as the fauna survey results and assessments documented in the original Biodiversity Assessment (BA) were not affected by seasonality. Statements of Commitment (SOC) that ensure biodiversity values are maintained or improved are included in the Environmental Assessment, developed from the mitigation measures detailed in the BA.

One additional SoC is proposed, as a precautionary measure, to provide additional assurance that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on hollow dependant threatened fauna species:


1585 Final V1 12

Issue Response

EXISTING SOC 5:

If the removal of any hollow bearing trees is required, this activity would be preceded by a pre‐clearance check by a qualified ecologist including anabat survey and stag watching.

The approach of pre‐clearance surveys has been adopted as a precautionary measure as it is considered unlikely that threatened species occur within the hollow onsite. This approach enables the detection of hollow usage by threatened species that may move onto the site between the project approval and works commencing and is designed to minimise harm to resident fauna. An additional SoC is now proposed however, to address the unlikely situation that a tree to be removed provides important habitat for a threatened species, and provide guidance in this case:

NEW SOC

If pre‐clearance surveys identify hollow‐bearing trees that are significant to the viability of local threatened species populations (for example a threatened microbat roost tree) these trees would be retained and infrastructure would be redesigned to accommodate them.

Offset plan DECCW sought to amend SOC 2 regarding offsetting so as to include:

A requirement for the offset plan to be submitted for approval prior to the commencement of works

A statement that the plan would offset the impact of the development for the period that the impact occurs in

accordance with DECCW’s ‘Principles for the Use of Biodiversity Offsets in NSW’

It is proposed to adopt DECCWs amendments and modify SOC 2 as set out below:

SOC 2 MODIFICATION

An Offset Plan will be prepared by an ecologist consistent with ‘maintain or improve’ principles for biodiversity

outcomes, as set out in the Biodiversity Assessment and submitted for approval prior to the commencement of

works. The plan would be developed in consultation with the landowner and would offset the impact of the

development for the period that the impact occurs in accordance with DECCW’s ‘Principles for the Use of

Biodiversity Offsets in NSW’


1585 Final V1 13

5.2 NSW OFFICE OF WATER

Issue Response

Groundwater interception or use requires licensing

Section 6.1.1 states that “No groundwater extraction at the proposal site is planned as part of the proposal”. The

installation of the solar array and infrastructure would not affect the net amount of water reaching the surface of the

ground during rain or flooding events nor its ability to infiltrate and replenish groundwater systems. In the event water is

required for panel washing, it would be sourced through commercial supplies. Therefore, it is not considered that a license

is required.

No new SOC is considered warranted.

Water Management Plan NOW incorrectly notes that a “water management plan” would be included in the CEMP and OEMP.

The CEMP and OEMP would incorporate surface water quality management of construction impacts, including road

construction works. SOC 48 of the EA includes provision for monitoring of surface water quality following heavy rainfall

events in the Erosion and Sediment Control sub‐plan of the CEMP, which addresses NOW’s concerns regarding surface

water quality monitoring.

No new or modified SOC is considered warranted.

Preparation of a flood management plan

NOW incorrectly notes that a flood management plan would be included in the CEMP and OEMP.

The Nyngan area is prone to flooding and therefore a flood consultant was engaged to undertaken an assessment of

potential flood impacts. This has been provided as Appendix H in the EA. The flood study included:

A review of available flood levels from the Nyngan April 1990 Flood Investigation (DWR 1990)

Interpretation of the reported flood levels in order to determine potential flood levels for the Nyngan site

Creation of flood inundation extent contours

A further flood study or flood management plan is not considered warranted.

No new or modified SOC is considered warranted.


1585 Final V1 14

Issue Response

Provision of CEMP and OEMP to NOW for review prior to project commencement

NOW indicates it requires the CEMP and OEMP to be provided to NOW for review prior to project commencement.

SOC 49 of the EA states “The site CEMP and OEMP could be provided to the New South Wales Office of Water for review of

soil and water management measures for construction and operation, if required”.

It is now recommended that SOC 49 is modified as follows:

SOC MODIFICATION

The site CEMP and OEMP would be provided to the New South Wales Office of Water for review of soil and water

management measures for construction and operation, prior to project commencement.


1585 Final V1 15

6 MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSAL: SUMMARY

As a result of the submissions from Government agencies, a number of changes have been made to the

Statement of Commitments as follows:

6.1 DELETED SOCS

The surveys referred to in these SoCs have now been undertaken. They are documented in Appendix B.

SOC 1 DELETED

A supplementary flora survey during spring (early November) would be required to confirm if threatened flora

species including Slender Darling‐pea and Red Darling‐pea inhabit the higher quality derived grass and

shrubland on the site.

SOC 31 DELETED

An additional field survey would be undertaken in the eastern area of the site to confirm the archaeological

status of that area. The additional field survey would be undertaken in consultation with Registered Aboriginal

Parties.

6.2 NEW SOCS

The following additional SoCs now accompany the proposal:

SOC NEW

If pre‐clearance surveys identify hollow‐bearing trees that are significant to the viability of local threatened

species populations (for example a threatened microbat roost tree) these trees would be retained and

infrastructure would be redesigned to accommodate them.

6.3 MODIFIED SOCS

The following SoCs have had points removed, added or clarified. The number refers to the numbering in

the publically exhibited EA. The revised SoCs are now presented in Appendix A (renumbered).

SOC 2 MODIFICATION

An Offset Plan will be prepared by an ecologist consistent with ‘maintain or improve’ principles for

biodiversity outcomes, as set out in the Biodiversity Assessment and submitted for approval prior to the

commencement of works. The plan would be developed in consultation with the landowner and would

offset the impact of the development for the period that the impact occurs in accordance with DECCW’s

‘Principles for the Use of Biodiversity Offsets in NSW’

SOC 49 MODIFICATION

The site CEMP and OEMP would be provided to the New South Wales Office of Water for review of soil

and water management measures for construction and operation, prior to project commencement.


1585 Final V1 16

7 CONCLUSION

This Submissions Report responds to the comments and issues raised in submissions from the community

and Government agencies following the public exhibition of the Nyngan Solar Farm EA. Specialist advice

has been sought from the consultants involved in the original assessment in preparing these responses.

The Submissions Report fulfils the requirements of Section 75H of the Environmental Planning and

Assessment Act 1979.

In response to the submissions and on the basis of additional investigations:

2 Statements of Commitment have been deleted

1 new Statement of Commitment has been created

2 Statements of Commitment have been modified

In consideration of the assessment of the impacts from the project contained in the EA and the proposed

mitigation measures committed to in the revised Statement of Commitments (included as Appendix A of

this report and supported by additional studies included in Appendix B of this report), it is believed that

all relevant issues and concerns have been addressed and that the project should now proceed for

approval by the Minister.


1585 Final V1 A‐I

APPENDIX A REVISED STATEMENTS OF COMMITMENT The following tables constitute the revised Statements of Commitment to which the proponent commits, pending project approval, to manage the environmental

impacts of the project. Bold entries are new or modified SoCs. Superseded SoCs have been deleted from this list. SoC numbering has been revised.

Biodiversity

SoC Impact Objective Mitigation tasks Project phase Auditing

1 Infrastructure related

biodiversity impacts

Minimise biodiversity

impacts

An Offset Plan will be prepared by an ecologist consistent with ‘maintain or improve’ principles

for biodiversity outcomes, as set out in the Biodiversity Assessment and submitted for

approval prior to the commencement of works. The plan would be developed in consultation

with the landowner and would offset the impact of the development for the period that the

impact occurs in accordance with DECCW’s ‘Principles for the Use of Biodiversity Offsets in

NSW’.

Pre‐construction CEMP




impacts

The PV array, site access tracks and other infrastructure should be microsited to avoid

constraints identified within the Biodiversity Assessment constraints mapping. These include:

Stands of Woodland across the site

Hollow bearing trees

Isolated trees, where possible

Areas of Myall Woodland EEC would be avoided. If infrastructure was to be placed within these

areas it would be microsited to avoid and retain Myall individuals particularly in areas of

regeneration.

The denser patches of Coolibah‐Black Box Woodland EEC in the central section of the site would

be avoided and retained. Infrastructure would be microsited to avoid the need for clearing in

this community. No development that would reduce the functionality of these areas as fauna

movement corridors should be undertaken.

Design phase CEMP

3 Infrastructure related Minimise biodiversity Biologically sensitive areas (listed above and displayed on the constraints map, Figure 6‐13 of the

EA) would be clearly identified throughout construction and protected from the direct and

Design phase CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐II


biodiversity impacts impacts indirect impacts of the Proposal. Contractors and staff will be made aware of the significance

and sensitivity of these areas.




impacts

If the removal of any hollow bearing trees was required this activity would be proceeded by a

pre clearance check by a qualified ecologist including anabat survey and stag watching.

Design phase CEMP




impacts

If pre‐clearance surveys identify hollow‐bearing trees that are significant to the viability of

local threatened species populations (for example a threatened microbat roost tree) these

trees would be retained and infrastructure would be redesigned to accommodate them.

Pre‐construction

Construction

CEMP




impacts

Works will avoid impacts to mature eucalypts wherever possible. Tree protection standards

should comply with Australian standard AS4970‐2009 Protection of trees on development sites

(Standards Australia, 2009). Wherever practicable, excavations and vehicle/machinery

movements will occur outside the canopy dripline of large eucalypts.

Design phase CEMP

7 Construction impacts Minimise biodiversity

impacts

Where practical, timber from cleared trees should be relocated into areas of adjacent woodland

to provide foraging habitat for Brown Tree creepers, Grey‐crowned Babblers and Bush Stone‐

curlews, rather than removed or burnt.

Construction CEMP


impacts

Existing farm tracks should be used wherever possible to minimise the number of new roads. Construction CEMP


impacts

Perimeter fences should not contain barbed wire, particularly the top strands. If a cyclone mesh

fence is to be used efforts should be made to increase the visibility to fast flying parrots.

Construction CEMP


impacts

Works should be planned to avoid sensitive times for threatened species Late July to early

December for Gray‐crowned Babblers (Counsilman 1979), June to December for Brown

Treecreepers (Schodde and Tidemann, 2007), May to December for Pink cockatoos and

September to December for Superb Parrots.

Construction CEMP

11 Construction impacts Minimise biodiversity Activity would be minimised in the area adjacent to the Brown Treecreeper roost/nest site (refer

to Figure 6‐12 of the EA) at all times. No works would take place within 100m of the Brown

Construction CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐III


impacts Treecreeper roost/nest site (refer to Figure 6‐12 of the EA).


impacts

Where cement is included in cable trench backfill, at least 20 centimetres of cement‐free topsoil

will be replaced as the top layer in the backfill.

Construction CEMP


impacts

Where practicable, whole sods will be removed with an excavator where these areas are well‐

vegetated with dense root systems. Sods will be stored in moist, shaded conditions and replaced

following the works. Sod storage time will be minimised and sods will be replaced in a manner

that maximises the chances of re‐establishment.

Construction CEMP


impacts

Excavated topsoil, subsoil will be stored separately and replaced in a manner that replicates the

original profile as closely as possible.

Construction CEMP


impacts

Where practicable, grass surfaces and shrubs will be retained or restored on infrequently used

vehicle routes.

Construction CEMP


impacts

Site stabilisation, rehabilitation and revegetation will be undertaken without delay. Construction CEMP


impacts

Works will avoid impacts to mature eucalypts wherever possible. Tree protection standards

should comply with Australian standard AS4970‐2009 Protection of trees on development sites

(Standards Australia, 2009). Wherever practicable, excavations and vehicle/machinery

movements will occur outside the canopy dripline of large eucalypts.

Construction CEMP


impacts

As a general rule, disturbed areas will be used preferentially for vehicle and machinery access,

materials laydown, stockpiling of cleared vegetation and the deposition and retrieval of spoil

whenever practicable.

Construction CEMP

19 Operational impacts Minimise biodiversity

impacts

Efforts should be made to minimise disturbance to the existing groundcover during construction.

Construction and maintenance vehicles should not access the site when soils are very wet to

minimise soil compaction and disturbance.

Operation OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐IV



impacts

Works will be avoided during, and immediately following heavy rainfall events to protect soils

and vegetation at the site.

Construction CEMP


impacts

A weed management plan would be developed for the site including but not limited to the

following outcomes;

The control of noxious weeds recorded on the site

Preventative measures for the spread or introduction of weeds

Monitoring of control and preventative measures and ongoing adaptive management

Construction CEMP


impacts

Laydown sites for excavated spoil, equipment and construction materials will be weed‐free or

treated for weeds wherever practicable. Sediment control materials should be weed free such as

certified weed free hay bales or geotextiles. Imported materials such as sand and gravel will be

sourced from sites which do not show evidence of noxious weeds or Phytophthora infection.

Construction CEMP


impacts

If dams are removed during site development works, alternative watering points should be

established to compensate for their loss and maintain similar habitat resources for native fauna.

Construction CEMP


impacts

If used, and where practicable, power poles and overhead powerlines will be bird‐safe using

flags or marker balls, large wire size and wire and conductor spacing.

Construction CEMP


impacts

Log habitat removed during the construction phase will be reinstated following the works. Construction CEMP


impacts

Trenches should be left open for the least time practical and would be inspected for trapped

fauna prior to back filling. Any trench sections left open overnight would be inspected early in

the morning and any trapped fauna removed. The use of ramps or ladders to facilitate trapped

fauna escape is recommended if trenches are to be left open overnight.

Construction CEMP

27 Operational impacts Minimise biodiversity A groundcover management plan would be developed that would include regular monitoring of Operation OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐V


impacts vegetation cover and composition and allow for adaptive management. This would include:

Advice from an agronomist in relation to preferred species/varieties, establishment

methods of alternative pastures and best practice management.

Where information is lacking, trials may be required onsite.

The establishment of shade tolerant perennial groundcover across the cropping and exotic

dominated grazing paddocks prior to the installation of the PV arrays.


impacts

If localised erosion is detected, effective treatments would be applied without delay, such as

hardening with mulch, reseeding and covering with an open weave jute matting, gypsum

application to improve structure and infiltration, protection with geotextile fabric or localised

flow dispersal and diversion structures.

Operation OEMP


impacts

The space between the PV array rows should be maintained and kept clear to enable access by

vehicles for ongoing weed control, and pasture renovation if required.

Operation OEMP


impacts

Monitoring of fauna site habitat usage pre and post construction is recommended

but not considered essential. Operation OEMP

Indigenous Heritage


31 Impact on local Aboriginal

community

Minimise impact Ongoing consultation would be undertaken with Registered Aboriginal Parties All CEMP

OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐VI

Visual Amenity


32 Deterioration of visual amenity

during construction

Mitigate impacts Measures to reduce visual impacts during construction, including but not limited to the

following:

Dust reduction throughout the construction process

Prompt restoration of any earthworks required for the construction

Clearing of existing vegetation would be kept to a minimum

Construction CEMP


by solar panels and associated

infrastructure

Mitigate impacts Measures include but are not limited to the following:

Colour of above ground infrastructure to be sympathetic to the landscape character

Underground cabling to be utilised if practical

The design and location of ancillary works are to incorporate measures which would

reduce the visual impact

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP


at surrounding residences

Mitigate impacts Visual screen planting is to be undertaken in the form of boundary planting around

the solar farm, foreground planting at affected viewpoints and residential tree

planting

Tree planting would be undertaken in consultation with relevant landowners to

achieve screening for homesteads with a high visual impact to strategically block

parts of the development

Species typical of the area (mallee scrub) would be selected to enhance the existing

landscape character

Post construction OEMP

35 Creation of a visual attraction Maximise visual

opportunities

A designated viewing area may be provided where visitors would be able to safely view the solar

farm and surrounding landscape.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐VII

Noise


36 Noise impacts to sensitive

receivers

Compliance Construction would be undertaken during standard working hours of:

Monday – Friday: 7am to 6pm

Saturday: 8am to 1pm

Sunday and public holidays: No work

All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Compliance Construction staff would be made aware of noise sensitive receivers and would be made aware

of noise reduction options.

All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Compliance Periods of respite would be provided in the case of unavoidable maximum noise level events. All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Compliance Reasonable and feasible measures to reduce noise would be implemented and could include

reducing the throttle setting and turning off equipment when not being used.

All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Compliance Equipment and plant would be maintained to reduce noise emissions. All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Compliance Mobile plant clustering near residences would be avoided. All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Compliance A 24 hour toll‐free contact phone number for enquiries during the works would be provided. All CEMP

OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐VIII



receivers

Compliance A documented complaints process would be implemented and would include an escalation

procedure so that if a complainant is not satisfied there is a clear path to follow.

All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Compliance Where complaints occur safeguards would be reviewed to determine if further safeguards are

required or possible.

All CEMP

OEMP


receivers

Consultation Consultation with neighbours within 1 kilometre of the site would occur prior to construction

commencing and would focus on identifying particular times of inconvenience.


Hydrology and Water Quality


46 Deterioration of water quality

(Surface Water)

Minimise risk Infrastructure placement, including tracks, substations, control buildings, stockpiles, and site

compounds and turnaround areas, would not be sited within 40 metres of a major drainage line

or water course.

Detailed design CEMP


(Surface Water)

Achieve neutral or

beneficial water quality

impact

The proponent would prepare an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) as a sub plan of the

Construction Environmental Management Plan. This plan would include the following provisions:

Sediment traps would be installed wherever there is potential for sediment to collect

and enter waterways

Stockpiles generated as a result of construction activities would be bunded with silt

fencing, (mulch bunds or similar) to reduce the potential for runoff from these areas

On the steeper slopes check banks would be installed across the trenchline, as

appropriate, following closure of the trench. These would discharge runoff to areas of

stable vegetation

Construction CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐IX


Stabilisation and site remediation would be undertaken as soon as practicable

throughout and post construction

Soil and water management practices would be developed as set out in Soils and

Construction Vol. 1 (Landcom 2004)

Monitoring of surface water quality would be undertaken following heavy rainfall

events


(Surface Water)

Achieve neutral or


impact

The site CEMP and OEMP would be provided to the New South Wales Office of Water for

review of soil and water management measures for construction and operation, prior to

project commencement.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP

49 Flooding Minimise impact Low‐lying areas of the site would be avoided for stockpiling and storage of plant, equipment and

infrastructure.

Construction CEMP

50 Flooding Minimise impact Disturbed areas of the site would be rehabilitated as soon as possible as works progress. Construction CEMP

51 Water supply Minimise risk Undertake liaison with representatives of Bogan Shire Council regarding the potential supply of

construction water.

Construction CEMP


(Surface Water)

Minimise risk All vehicles onsite would follow established trails and minimise onsite movements. Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP


(Surface and Ground Water)

Minimise risk Maintenance or re‐fuelling of machinery would be carried out on hard‐stand in accordance with

industry standards for fuel transfer.

Construction CEMP



Minimise risk Carry out dust suppression as required through either watering or chemical means

(environmentally friendly polymer based additives to water).

Construction

Decommissioning

CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐X



(Surface Water)

Achieve neutral or


impact

A Site Restoration Plan (SRP) would be prepared as part of the Construction Environmental

Management Plan. This would set out protocols for rehabilitation of disturbed areas as soon as

possible after soil disturbance. It would include:

Site preparation

Stabilisation

Revegetation

Monitoring

Construction

Decommissioning

CEMP



Minimise risk A Spill Response Plan would be prepared as part of the CEMP and OEMP including:

Identify persons responsible for implementing the plan if a spill of a dangerous or

hazardous chemical/waste would occur

Identify all chemicals required for the proposal, including physio‐chemical properties,

risks posed to water quality objectives and appropriate methods of storage of these

chemicals

Locate Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for all chemical inventories at on site and

readily available

Comply with manufacturers recommendations in relation to application and disposal

where chemicals are used

Report any spill that occurs to the Construction Manager regardless of the size of the

spill

Establish clearly defined works and refuelling areas

Spill protocols in this plan would dictate when the EPA would be notified

Chemical / fuel storage areas would be identified, and be bunded to prevent loss of

any pollutants

Hydrocarbon spill kits would be stored at the site. A number of site staff are to be

trained in the use of the spill kits

Notification to the NSW DECCW EPA in the event of any spill that had the potential to

Construction

Operation

Decommissioning

CEMP

OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XI


pollute waters



Minimise risk Monitor bunded infrastructure to ensure that volume of oil could be fully contained in the event

of leak.

Operation OEMP



Minimise risk Maintain septic systems, if installed, to meet appropriate Australian standards. Construction

Operation

Decommissioning

CEMP

OEMP

59 Flooding Minimise impact Kiosk transformers and central inverters would be raised by 0.5 metre subject to final

engineering designs to prevent impacts in the event of a 1:250 year flood.

Construction CEMP

Traffic and Access


60 Safety and asset protection Minimise risk The proponent would develop and implement a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) in consultation

with roads authorities to facilitate appropriate management of potential traffic impacts. The

TMP would include provisions for:

Scheduling of deliveries and managing timing of transport

Limiting the number of trips per day

Undertaking community consultation before and during all haulage activities

Designing and implementing temporary modifications to intersections, roadside

furniture, stock grids and gates

Managing the haulage process, including the erection of warning and/or advisory

speed signage prior to isolated curves, crests, narrow bridges and change of road

Construction CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XII


conditions

Designation of a speed limit would be placed on all of the roads that would be used

primarily by construction traffic

Preparation of a Transport Code of Conduct to be made available to all contractors

and staff

Identification of a procedure to monitor the traffic impacts during construction and

work methods modified (where required) to reduce the impacts

Provide a contact phone number to enable any issues or concerns to be rapidly

identified and addressed through appropriate procedures

Reinstatement of pre‐existing conditions after temporary modifications to the roads

and pavement along the route

61 Community safety and

convenience

Minimise impact The proponent would use a licensed haulage contractor with experience in transporting similar

loads, responsible for obtaining all required approvals and permits from the RTA and Councils

and for complying with conditions specified in those approvals.

Construction CEMP

62 Safety and asset protection Minimise impact The proponent would prepare road dilapidation reports covering pavement and drainage

structures in consultation with roads authorities for the route prior to the commencement of

construction and after construction is complete.

Construction CEMP

63 Safety and asset protection Minimise impact The proponent would repair any damage resulting from the construction traffic (except that

resulting from normal wear and tear) as required during and after completion of construction at

the proponent’s cost or, alternately, negotiate an alternative for road damage with the relevant

roads authority.

Construction CEMP

64 Noise impacts Minimise impact Route specific mitigation measures, which will be investigated and detailed further in the

Traffic Management Plan, include potential for utilising access routes diverted around the town

via Cemetery Road or Tottenham Road in the event of several complaints occurring regarding

additional traffic noise as a result of vehicle deliveries.

Construction CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XIII


65 Noise impacts Minimise impact The Community Consultation Plan would include consultation with potential affected residents

on Hoskins Street, Pangee Street and other local roads as a result of additional traffic noise.

Construction CEMP

66 Air quality Minimise impact Water carts would be used on unsealed roads in the event that dust becomes a problem as a

result of construction vehicle movements.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP

67 Soils Minimise impact Erosion and sediment controls would be implemented at unsealed roads frequently used for

vehicle access e.g. East Nyngan Road.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP

Soils and Landforms


68 Erosion Minimise impact Progressive Erosion and Sediment Control Plans would be prepared for the site, including

controls at drainage lines and slopes.

Construction CEMP

69 Erosion Minimise risk Erosion and sediment control plans would include measures from controlling erosion at unsealed

roads where impacts could occur from excessive vehicle use.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP

70 Erosion Minimise impact Cable trenches would be dug beneath or beside internal access roads to minimise disturbance. Construction CEMP

71 Soil quality Minimise risks Subsoil would be separated from topsoil for rehabilitation purposes. Topsoil from excavation

would be stockpiled and replaced. On steep slopes, topsoil would be stabilised. Any excess

subsoil would be removed from the site and disposed of at an appropriate fill storage site.

Construction CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XIV


72 Soil quality Minimise impact Avoid compaction of soil resulting from vehicle access and laying of materials particularly during

saturated soil conditions, and remediate as necessary.

Construction CEMP

73 Soil loss or stability of landform

loss

Minimise risks Concrete wash would be deposited in an excavated area, below the level of the topsoil, or in an

approved landfill site. Where possible, waste water and solids would be reused onsite.

Construction CEMP


loss

Minimise risks Access routes and tracks would be confined to already disturbed areas, where possible. All

contractors would be advised to keep to established tracks.

Construction CEMP

75 Soil quality Minimise risks A spill response plan would be developed for all phases of the project. This would include trigger

points of when to notify the DECCW.

Construction

Decommissioning

Operation

CEMP

OEMP


loss Minimise impact

If runoff below panels result in localised erosion, the affected soils at the site should be treated

and protected without delay. Operation OEMP


loss Minimise risk

The proponent would routinely monitor soil condition and vegetation cover below the array and

liaise with the landowner regarding stock and vegetation management issues as required. Operation OEMP

78 Soil quality Minimise risk Site restoration plan would be implemented to include deep rooted species to prevent dryland

salinity.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP

79 Soil quality Minimise risks The substation augmentation would include provision of a bunded container to a capacity of

110% and regularly inspected and maintained to ensure leaks are not present.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XV

Historic Heritage


80 Disturbance to a potential

heritage item or relic

Minimise disturbance In the event of an item of heritage significance being uncovered at the proposal site after works

commence, the NSW Heritage Branch (Department of Planning) should be contacted prior to

further work being undertaken at the site.

Construction

Decommissioning

CEMP

Air Quality and Climate


81 Air quality Minimise risks Dust levels at stockpile sites would be visually monitored. Dust suppression would be

implemented if required (through either watering or chemical means ‐ environmentally friendly

polymer based additives to water). Stockpiles would be stabilised (covered or seeded).

Construction CEMP

82 Air quality Minimise risks Water carts would be used on unsealed access roads regularly during all phases of the project to

prevent dust impacts. This safeguard would be applied to access roads in use only.

All CEMP

OEMP

83 Air quality Minimise risks Should a complaint relating to dust by a resident be received, it would be managed in

accordance with a complaints handling process. Response to the compliant could include dust

monitoring, assessment of dust gauges and identification of any additional mitigation measures,

where required.

Construction CEMP

Waste Management and Resource Use


84 Waste generation Minimise waste and

maximise recycling of

materials

The proponent would prepare a Waste Management Plan to be included within the Construction

Environmental Management Plan. It would include but not be limited to the following:

The scope for reuse and recycling would be evaluated

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XVI


Provision for recycling would be made onsite

Wastes would be disposed of at appropriate facilities

Toilet facilities would be provided for onsite workers and sullage from the

contractor’s pump out toilet facilities would be disposed at the local sewage

treatment plants or other suitable facility agreed to by Council

Excavated material would be used in road base construction where possible. Surplus

material would be disposed of in appropriate locations on site (on agreement with

the landowner), finished with topsoil, and revegetated

85 Waste generation Maximise recycling of

materials

PV modules would be recycled, where possible. Decommissioning

Socioeconomic and Community


86 Impact on current land use Minimise impact Develop, implement and monitor the effects of a Site Restoration Plan. The plan would aim to

stabilise disturbed areas. The Plan would consider:

Appropriate stabilisation techniques across the precincts

Suitable species for re‐seeding (native, locally occurring species would be given

preference in areas dominated by native cover)

Monitoring for weed and erosion issues

Construction

Decommissioning

CEMP

87 Impact on current land use Minimise disruption Liaison would be undertaken with neighbouring landowners to provide information about the

timing and routes to be used during construction and decommissioning. This could be in the

form of advertising and provision of a contact point for further inquiries. The aim would be to

reduce the risk of interference with agricultural activities on affected roads and road verges.

Construction CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XVII


88 Affect on local community Maximise positive

impact of proposal

Liaise with local industry representatives to maximise the use of local contractors and

manufacturing facilities in the construction and decommissioning phases of the project.

Construction CEMP


impact of proposal

Liaise with the local visitor information centres to ensure that construction and decommissioning

timing and haulage routes are known well in advance of works and to the extent practical

coordinated with local events, such as the Nyngan Ag Expo.

Construction CEMP


impact of proposal

Make available employment opportunities and training for the ongoing operation of the solar

farm to local residents where reasonable.

Operation OEMP

Mineral Resources and Land Use Impacts


91 Conflict with mineral

exploration

Minimise conflict Consultation with St. Barbara Limited (mineral lease holder) would occur prior to

commencement of construction.


92 Impact on current land use Minimise impacts A Site Restoration Plan would be developed to ensure stabilisation of disturbed areas as quickly

as possible. The Plan would consider:

Appropriate stabilisation techniques across the precincts

Suitable species for re‐seeding (native, locally occurring species would be given

preference) in areas dominated by native cover

Monitoring for weed and erosion issues

Construction

Decommissioning

CEMP

93 Impact on current land use Minimise disruption Liaison would be undertaken with neighbouring landowners and landowners adjoining access

roads, to provide information about the timing and routes to be used during construction and

decommissioning. This could be in the form of advertising and provision of a contact point for

further inquiries. The aim would be to reduce the risk of interference with agricultural activities

Construction CEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XVIII


on affected roads and road verges.

94 Impact on current land use Minimise impact Consideration would be given to the grazing of sheep beneath the panels. Operation OEMP

Health and Safety


95 Radiation exposure from EMFs Minimise exposure Adhere to standard industry approaches and policies with respect to EMF through maintenance

of adequate easements around transmission lines.

Operation OEMP

96 Radiation exposure from EMFs Minimise exposure The substation upgrade and transmission lines would be located as far as practical from

residences, farm sheds, and yards in order to reduce the potential for both chronic and acute

exposure.

Operation OEMP

Fire and Bushfire Issues and Impacts


97 Bushfire risk Minimise risk The proponent would prepare a Bushfire Management Plan as part of the Construction

Environmental Management Plan and Operation Environmental Management Plan. The Rural

Fire Service and NSW Fire Brigade would be consulted in regard to its adequacy to manage

bushfire risks during construction, operation and decommissioning. The plan would as a

minimum include:

Hot‐work procedures, asset protection zones, safety, communication, site access and

response protocols in the event of a fire originating in the solar farm infrastructure,

or in the event of an external wildfire threatening the solar farm or nearby persons or

property

Fire response planning would address any potential for dangerous gas emissions from

Construction

Operation

Decommissioning

CEMP

OEMP


1585 Final V1 A‐XIX


the solar farm during a fire event to affect firefighters and neighbouring residents

Flammable materials and ignition sources brought onto the site, such as

hydrocarbons, would be handled and stored as per manufacturer’s instructions

During the construction phase, appropriate fire fighting equipment would be held

onsite when the fire danger is very high to extreme, and a minimum of one person on

site would be trained in its use. The equipment and level of training would be

determined in consultation with the local RFS

Asset protection zones (APZs), based on the RFS Planning for Bushfire Protection,

would be maintained around the site buildings and in the transmission line corridor.

Workplace health and safety protocols would be developed to minimise the risk of

fire for workers during construction and during maintenance in the control room and

amenities

Fire extinguishers would be stored onsite in each of the site buildings

98 Bushfire risk Minimise risk If sowing of pasture grasses in the PV array area is required, low growing species should be

selected.

Construction

Operation

CEMP

OEMP

99 Bushfire risk Minimise risk Pasture would be maintained at a low height (<100mm) below the PV array using sheep grazing

or slashing. Operation OEMP

100 Bushfire risk Minimise risk Appropriate firefighting equipment would be maintained on the site during the operation of the

solar farm, including protective clothing. Staff would be trained in its use. Operation OEMP

101 Bushfire risk Minimise risk A formal response procedure would be developed for operation staff at the solar farm, including

notification of neighbouring and downwind landholders if required. Operation OEMP

102 Bushfire risk Minimise risk

The transformers would be bunded to a capacity of 110% and regularly inspected and

maintained to ensure leaks do not present a fire hazard, and to ensure the bunded area is clear

(including removing any rainwater).

Operation OEMP


1585 Final V1 B‐I

APPENDIX B ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATIONS


1585 Final V1 B‐II

B.1 FLORA ADDENDUM

Biodiversity Assessment

Addendum

NYNGAN SOLAR FARM

DECEMBER 2010

Nyngan Solar Farm Biodiversity Assessment Addendum

1/216 carp st (po box470) bega nsw 2550 australia t 61 2 6492 8333 f 61 2 6494 7773

web: www.nghenvironmental.com.au email: [email protected]

206/410 elizabeth st

surry hills nsw 2010 australia

t 61 2 8202 8333 f 61 2 9211 1374

102/63-65 johnston st (po box 5464)

wagga wagga nsw 2650 australia

t 61 2 6971 9696 f 61 2 6971 9693

unit 9/65 tennant st (po box 1037)

fyshwick act 2609 australia

t 61 2 6280 5053 f 61 2 6280 9387

suite 6/234 naturaliste tce

dunsborough wa 6281 australia

t 61 8 9759 1985 f 61 2 6494 7773

Document Verification

Job title: Nyngan Solar Farm Biodiversity Assessment

Addendum

Project File

Name

\\10.0.11.1\Active\Projects\2010\Infigen Energy\Nyngan BA Targeted Survey -

1550\Report\Draft\Nyngan BA addendum v1.0.docx

Revision Date Prepared by Checked by Approved by

V1.0 01/12/10 Dave

Maynard

Brooke

Marshall

Brooke

Marshall

nghenvironmental prints all documents on sugar cane paper made from 100% bagasse (a by-product of sugar production).


Nyngan BA addendum v1.0.docx

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1

2 METHODS ............................................................................................................... 2

3 RESULTS ............................................................................................................... 4

3.1 TARGETED SURVEYS ...................................................................................................................... 4

3.2 ADDITIONAL AREAS SURVEYED ..................................................................................................... 5

3.3 VEGETATION CONDITION AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY ............................................................... 6

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 9

5 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 11

APPENDIX A REVISED FLORA SPECIES LISTS ............................................................. A-1

Tables

Table 1-1 Threatened flora species with potential to occur on site ............................................................. 1

Table 3-1 Additional survey sites and corresponding vegetation types and condition ................................ 6

Figures

Figure 2-1 Locations of targeted threatened species searches and additional survey points at the Nyngan

Solar Farm site ............................................................................................................................................ 3

Figure 3-1 Broughton Pea (Swainsona procumbens) in flower at the subject site ....................................... 4

Figure 3-2 Grazed Myall regeneration in the eastern paddock at the proposal site. ................................... 5

Figure 3-3 An area dominated by *Lepidium spp. In the northern area of the central section of the site ... 7

Figure 3-4 Good condition native pasture in the north of the eastern paddock. ......................................... 7

Figure 3-5 Area of high fdiversity grassland in the north of the eastern paddock ....................................... 8



1

1 INTRODUCTION

A Biodiversity Assessment was completed in October 2010 as part of an environmental assessment for

the proposed Nyngan Solar Farm located in central western New South Wales (nghenvironmental

2010). The Department of Planning issued Director Generals Requirements on 01 September 2010

indicating that the EA must specifically consider threatened flora species and Endangered Ecological

Communities that have potential to occur on the site. The seasonal timing of the fieldwork for the

Biodiversity Assessment (winter 2010) was not suitable for the detection of the following two

threatened species with potential to occur on the site:

Table 1-1 Threatened flora species with potential to occur on site

Species Status

Red Darling-pea (Swainsona plagiotropis) Vulnerable (TSC, EPBC)

Slender Darling-pea (Swainsona murrayana) Vulnerable (TSC, EPBC)

To determine if these threatened species were at risk from the proposed development, the following

recommendation was made within the original Biodiversity Assessment:

“Supplementary surveys, prior to finalisation of infrastructure layout, are required to confirm the

assumptions of this assessment as follows:

o A supplementary flora survey during spring (early November) would be required to

confirm if threatened flora species including Slender Darling-pea and Red Darling-pea

inhabit the higher quality derived grass and shrubland on the site. This survey would

be undertaken prior to finalisation of infrastructure layout and prior to project

determination. The probability of these species occurring is considered low and the

surveys would be undertaken to verify the assumptions made in the Assessment of

Significance.”

This supplementary survey report addresses this recommendation and presents:

The methods and results of targeted searches for identified subject species, and other State-

and Commonwealth-listed threatened species potentially present at the subject site

Updated information regarding seasonal variation in species composition and vegetation

condition and distribution at the site

Further recommendations required to manage biodiversity impacts of the proposal



2

2 METHODS

The supplementary survey was undertaken by two botanists (Dave Maynard and Kelly Simpson) on 3rd

November, 2010.

The targeted searches involved searches on foot through all areas of suitable habitat within the

development envelope. Areas of marginal habitat were also included as a precautionary measure and

searched from a slow moving vehicle. Searches were conducted in pairs, employing linear transects

spaced 10m apart. A total of 19 person hours was spent on the targeted search transects and vehicle-

based surveys covering approximately 144 hectares. A search at the location of a known record of the

Red Darling-pea approximately 35 kilometres north-west of the site was also undertaken to confirm

flowering time.

During targeted searches, particular attention was paid to native species composition and diversity to

confirm condition assumptions made during the original survey for the Biodiversity Assessment. Other

areas not inspected during the original survey which were later included within the development

envelope were surveyed to ascertain vegetation types and conditions. The locations of these surveys

are indicated on (Figure 2-1).


Nyngan BA addendum v1.0.docx 3

Figure 2-1 Locations of targeted threatened species searches and additional survey points at the Nyngan Solar Farm site



4

3 RESULTS

3.1 TARGETED SURVEYS

None of the threatened species targeted during the survey were recorded at the subject site however,

the more common Broughton Pea (Swainsona procumbens) was detected on the site in numerous

locations in full flower and fruit (Figure 3-1). A search was conducted at a known location for the Red

Darling-pea (Swainsona plagiotropis) to confirm flowering times but it was not located. However, two

individuals of Swainsona campylantha were detected during the search.

Climatic conditions had been favourable prior to the survey with good rains in the preceding weeks

and numerous native wild flowers were in flower at the site, including species of Swainsona. This

suggests that it is likely that if the threatened species targeted at the site were present they would

have been detectable.

Figure 3-1 Broughton Pea (Swainsona procumbens) in flower at the subject site

During the targeted surveys two small areas of Myall regeneration were identified in the eastern

paddock that was not detected during the original survey (Figure 3-2). These areas are within the

development envelope and are likely to be impacted by the proposal. Individuals within these areas

exhibited evidence of being grazed relatively heavily by stock. Given the small size of the patches, the

levels of disturbance and the occurrence of more extensive areas of Myall Woodland within the site

boundary (including regeneration) the clearing of these small patches is not considered to alter the

assumptions made in the original Biodiversity Assessment. Extensive areas of Myall Woodland were



5

also detected in the locality and at the regional scale when travelling to the location of the known

record of the Red Darling-pea.

The declared noxious weed, Mexican Poppy (*Argemone ochroleuca subsp. ochroleuca) was detected

on a disturbed embankment adjacent to the dam in the south of the central areas of Black Box

Woodland. This is listed as a Class 5 noxious weed within the Bogan local control area and the

requirements in the Noxious Weeds Act 1993 for a notifiable weed must be complied with.

Figure 3-2 Grazed Myall regeneration in the eastern paddock at the proposal site.

3.2 ADDITIONAL AREAS SURVEYED

Due to refinements to the site boundary and development envelope (DE) following the original surveys

in July 2010, several areas within the revised DE had not been completely surveyed. These areas were

included in the current survey (Figure 2-1). Vegetation types and condition are summarized in Table

3-1. Generally these areas were found to be similar in composition and condition to adjacent areas

included in the original survey. Site 3 (south of the piggery) was located in a paddock that showed

evidence of past tilling. At the time of the survey this area had been colonised predominately by native

Sclerolaena and Atriplex species and exotic grasses however, given current land management practices

it is likely that it will be tilled in the future and planted with exotic pasture species. Due to the high

levels of disturbance, the area is not considered to be representative of a derived grassland or

shrubland and is not considered to comprise Black Box Woodland EEC.



6

Vegetation condition was rated according to the following four-point scale, focusing on floristic

integrity in the groundcover and shrub layers:

Exotic Groundlayer dominated by exotics, native shrubs and trees sparse or absent

Poor Understorey dominated by one or two native grass or shrub species, <5 native forbs

Moderate Understorey dominated by native grasses or shrubs, 5-11 native forb species present

Good Understorey dominated by native grasses or shrubs with a diversity of forbs (at least 12

native forb species).

These classes are considered most relevant for vegetation types with a naturally diverse grassy

groundcover and shrub layer, such as the woodland and natural grassland observed on the site.

An updated species list with additional species recorded during the survey is included as Appendix A.

Table 3-1 Additional survey sites and corresponding vegetation types and condition

Site Community and location Dominant species Condition Significance

1 Black Box Woodland/Myall Woodland derived grass/shrubland

- alluvial clays

MGA 521426 6505455

Chloris truncata, Austrodanthonia spp., Austrostipa spp., Rhodanthe corymbiflora

Moderate-good

Moderate

2 Derived grass/shrubland

- alluvial clays

MGA 520497 6505756

Chloris truncata, Enteropogon acicularis, Sclerolaena tricuspis, Sclerolaena birchii

Poor-moderate

Low-moderate

3 Native shrubland

- disturbed area previously tilled

MGA 519453 6504841

Sclerolaena diacantha, Sclerolaena tricuspis, Atriplex sp., *Hordeum leporinum

Poor Low

4 Exotic pasture

- alluvial clays, dry area

MGA 519706 6505846

*Hordeum leporinum, *Trifolium spp., Sclerolaena spp.

Exotic Low

3.3 VEGETATION CONDITION AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY

Favourable rains in the weeks preceding the survey had lead to vigorous vegetation growth across the

site. In general, the condition classes assigned in the original Biodiversity Assessment were confirmed

during the recent survey. Areas of the western paddocks were heavily infested with exotic annual

grasses but these were interspersed with predominately native vegetation. Areas to the north of the

Black box Woodland remnants in the centre of the site were dominated by exotic forbs such as

*Lepidium spp. (Figure 3-3).

Species diversity had increased dramatically in the northern section of the eastern paddock (Figure 3-4

& Figure 3-5). In general, the area north of the existing transmission line within the DE was dominated

by native grasses with a high diversity of native forb species. Additional species recorded are included

in the revised species list provided in Appendix A. It is difficult to determine from which vegetation

community the native pasture in this area is derived. Scattered Myall occurs in the southern section

and remnant Black Box Woodland occurs to the north of the site. The bulk of the pasture is likely to be

derived from Myall Woodland and many of the species recorded are common to this community.



7

Native grassland derived from this community does not form part of the Myall Woodland EEC as

defined by the Scientific Committees determination for this community (DECCW 2010). However,

being in good condition and given the general lack of vegetation in this condition on the site, it is still

considered to be of high value. It is possible that the species diversity in this area may persist under

the proposed solar array but no information regarding its ability to persist in shaded conditions was

able to be referenced.

Figure 3-3 An area dominated by *Lepidium spp. In the northern area of the central section of the

site

Figure 3-4 Good condition native pasture in the north of the eastern paddock.


Nyngan BA addendum v1.0.docx 8

Figure 3‐5 Area of high diversity grassland in the north of the eastern paddock

Site boundary

Vegetation (type, condition)

Black Box Woodland (EEC TSC), Moderate to good

Black Box Woodland (EEC TSC),Moderate

Black Box Woodland (EEC TSC), Poor to moderate

Derived grassland (BBW) (EEC TSC), Poor to moderate

Myall Woodland (EEC TSC), Moderate

Myall Woodland (EEC TSC), Poor to moderate

Native pasture, Poor to moderate

Exotic pasture or crop

Native pasture, good

°

0 0.5 10.25 Kilometers

@ A4 Reference: 1550‐1

1:27000





9

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Nyngan Solar Farm Biodiversity Assessment concluded that the impacts to flora values at the

subject site resulting from the proposal would not be significant in light of the general low condition of

the native vegetation within the development envelope, the low habitat values and the local

abundance of similar vegetation in the locality. The findings of the supplementary survey support

these conclusions. An area of good condition native pasture in the north-east of the site was detected

during the supplementary survey however, it is not considered to comprise a threatened entity.

The declared noxious weed, Mexican Poppy (*Argemone ochroleuca subsp. ochroleuca) was detected

on a disturbed embankment adjacent to the dam in the south of the central areas of Black Box

Woodland. This is listed as a Class 5 noxious weed within the Bogan Local Control Area and the

requirements in the Noxious Weeds Act 1993 for a notifiable weed must be complied with.

None of the threatened subject species were recorded at the subject site and, on the basis of observed

condition and low integrity of the majority of the potential habitat at the site, their occurrence is

considered unlikely. The timing of the survey was considered suitable for detecting these species and

targeted searches would likely have detected these species if present.

Although there are no legislative requirements associated with the area of high diversity grassland in

the north-east of the site, this area is considered to have value in that higher diversity grassland is

poorly represented on the site. Ideally, this area would be avoided by the proposal however, if this is

not possible it is recommended that further consultation with a qualified agronomist be undertaken to

investigate appropriate management techniques for maintaining the biodiversity values of this area

under the photovoltaic array. An additional Statement of Commitment (SoC) and the rewording of

draft SoC 27 in the Environmental Assessment are required to achieve this outcome and are presented

below.

SoC Impact Objective Mitigation tasks Project

phase

Auditing

New Construction

impacts

Minimise

biodiversity

impacts

The area of good condition high diversity native

grassland in the north of the eastern paddock would

preferentially be avoided by the proposal. If avoidance

is not possible appropriate management procedures

would be included in the ground cover management

plan to maintain biodiversity values in this area.

Construction CEMP



10

SoC Impact Objective Mitigation tasks Project

phase

Auditing

27

modified

Operational

impacts

Minimise

biodiversity

impacts

A groundcover management plan would be developed

that would include regular monitoring of vegetation

cover and composition and allow for adaptive

management. The aim would be to establish shade

tolerant perennial groundcover across the cropping

and exotic dominated grazing paddocks under the

panel array and maintain biodiversity values in better

quality areas.This would include:

Advice from an agronomist in relation to

preferred species/varieties, establishment

methods of alternative pastures and best

practice management.

Advice from an agronomist in relation to

maintaining biodiversity values in the high

diversity grassland area in the north of the

eastern paddock (if it is unable to be

avoided by the proposal).

Where information is lacking, trials may be

required onsite.

Operation OEMP



11

5 REFERENCES

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) (2010) Threatened species,

populations and ecological communities of NSW, Department of Environment and Climate

Change NSW accessed at http://www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/index.aspx.

Harden, G.J. (ed.), (1990-2002) Flora of New South Wales. Volumes 1-4, Royal Botanic Gardens

Sydney, University of New South Wales Press, Kensington, New South Wales.

nghenvironmental (2010) Biodiversity Assessment - Nyngan Solar Farm, prepared for Infigen Suntech,

October 2010


Nyngan BA addendum v1.0.docx A-1

Appendix A REVISED FLORA SPECIES LISTS



The survey area was stratified into 5 relatively homogeneous survey zones based on Proposal

elements, vegetation structure and topography:

WP Native pasture and Chenopod shrubland (western area): sites 2, 6

CA Cropped areas/Improved pasture (central area and far south east): site 7, 9

BBW Black Box woodland (central area and scattered in western area): sites 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11

MW Myall woodland and grassland (eastern area): sites 12, 13, 14

SS Disturbed and planted area (around existing sub station): site 3

Cover/abundance assessments are based on visual estimates of foliage cover (after Carnahan 1997),

scored using a modified Braun-Blanquet 6-point scale:

1 1 to a few individuals present, less than 5% cover

2 many individuals present, but still less than 5% cover

3 5 - <20% cover

4 20 - <50% cover

5 50 - <75% cover

6 75 - 100% cover.

Where the cover/abundance of a particular species varies markedly over the random meander survey

area, a range of values is provided. In these cases, abundance is based on a standard 20 metre x 20

metre quadrat scale.

Species of conservation significance are bolded. Introduced species are denoted by an asterisk.

Noxious weeds declared for the Bogan Shire Council control area under the Noxious Weeds Act 1993

are indicated with a ‘Δ’ symbol. Where uncertainty exists due to the unavailability of mature

reproductive material, the taxon is preceded by a question mark, or plants are identified to genus level

only. Botanical nomenclature follows G.J. Harden (ed) (1990-2002) Flora of New South Wales, UNSW

Press, except where recent changes have occurred.

Additions from the recent November 2010 survey are highlighted



Scientific name Common name Family

Abundance

WP CA BBW MW SS

TREES

Acacia harpophylla Brigalow Fabaceae 0-1

Acacia pendula Weeping Myall Fabaceae 0-2 0-2

Apophyllum anomalum Warrior Bush Capparaceae 0-1

Callitris glaucophylla White Cypress Cupressaceae 0-1

Capparis lasiantha Nepine Capparaceae 0-1 0-1

Casuarina cristata Belah Casuarinaceae 0-1

Eremophila ?mitchellii Budda Myoporaceae 0-1 0-2

Eucalyptus campaspe Silver Gimlet Myrtaceae 0-1

Eucalyptus largiflorens Black Box Myrtaceae 0-3 2-4 0-1

Eucalyptus sideroxylon Mugga Ironbark Myrtaceae 0-1

Eucalyptus populnea subsp. bimbil

Bimble Box Myrtaceae 0-1 0-2 0-1

Eucalyptus urna Merrit Myrtaceae 0-1

Flindersia maculosa Leopardwood Rutaceae 0-1 0-1

Geijera parviflora Wilga Rutaceae 0-2 2 0-1 0-1

Schinus areira Pepper Tree Anacardiaceae 0-1

SHRUBS, SUB-SHRUBS

Abutilon oxycarpum Flannel weed Malvaceae 0-1

Amyema quandang Mistletoe Loranthaceae 0-1

Atriplex semibaccata Creeping Saltbush Chenopodiaceae 0-2 0-2 0-2 0-2

Capparis mitchellii Wild Orange Capparaceae 0-1

Dodonaea viscosa Sticky Hop-bush Sapindaceae 0-1

Eremophila maculata Spotted Fuchsia-bush Myoporaceae 0-3

Δ*Lycium ferocissimum African Boxthorn Solanaceae 0-1 0-1 0-2

Maireana aphylla Cotton Bush Chenopodiaceae 0-1

Maireana appressa Chenopodiaceae 0-1 0-1

Maireana brevifolia Small-leaf Bluebush Chenopodiaceae 0-2 0-2

Maireana ?decalvans Black Cotton Bush Chenopodiaceae 0-1

Myoporum montanum Western Boobialla Myoporaceae 0-1

Rhagodia spinescens Spiny Saltbush Chenopodiaceae 0-1 0-1

Salsola tragus subsp. tragus Chenopodiaceae 0-2

Sclerolaena birchii Galvanised Burr Chenopodiaceae 2 2 2

Sclerolaena bicornis Goathead Burr Chenopodiaceae 1-2 1-2 0-2




Abundance

WP CA BBW MW SS

Sclerolaena diacantha Grey Copperburr Chenopodiaceae 2 2 1 2

Sclerolaena tricuspis Giant Redburr Chenopodiaceae 2 2 2 2

Senna artemisioides Fabaceae 0-1

Solanum esuriale Quena Solanaceae 0-1

Solanum ferrocissimum Spiny Potato Bush Solanaceae 0-1

*Solanum nigrum Black-berry Nightshade

Solanaceae 0-1

Δ*Xanthium spinosum Bathurst Burr Asteraceae 0-1 0-1

FORBS

*Anagallis arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel Myrsinaceae 0-1

Δ*Argemone ochroleuca subsp. ochroleuca

Mexican Poppy Papaveraceae 0-2

Brachyscome ciliaris var. subintegrifolia

Variable Daisy Asteraceae 0-2 1 0-2

Brachyscome dentata Asteraceae 0-1

Crassula sieberiana Australian Stonecrop Crassulaceae 0-2

Bulbine bulbosa Bulbine Lily Asphodelaceae 0-2

Calotis hispidula Bogan Flea Asteraceae 0-1 0-1 0-1

Calotis scabiosifolia var. scabiosifolia

Rough Burr-daisy Asteraceae 1 0-1

*Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd’s Purse Brassicaceae 0-2

*Carthamus lanatus Saffron Thistle Asteraceae 0-1

Chamaesyce drummondii Caustic Weed Chenopodiaceae 0-2

Chenopodium curvispicatum Chenopodiaceae 0-2

*Chenopodium murale Nettle-leaf Goosefoot

Chenopodiaceae 0-1 0-1 0-1

Cotula australis Carrot Weed Asteraceae 0-2

Daucus glochidiatus Native Carrot Apiaceae 1

Dichondra repens Kidney Weed Convolvulaceae 0-2

*Echium plantagineum Paterson’s Curse Boraginaceae 0-2 1-5 0-3

Einadia nutans subsp. nutans

Climbing Saltbush Chenopodiaceae 0-1 0-1 0-1

Einadia polygonoides Chenopodiaceae 0-1 0-1

*Erodium cicutarium Common Storksbill Geraniaceae 0-1 0-1 1 0-1

Erodium crinitum Blue Storksbill Geraniaceae 0-1

Eryngium paludosum Long Eryngium Apiaceae 0-1




Abundance

WP CA BBW MW SS

Goodenia fascicularis Mallee Goodenia Goodeniaceae 0-1

Harmsiodoxa blennodioides Brassicaceae 0-1 0-1

*Hypochaeris radicata Cat’s Ear, Flatweed Asteraceae 0-1

?Leiocarpa tomentosa Woolly Plover-daisy Asteraceae 0-1

*Lepidium africanum Peppercress Brassicaceae 0-2 0-4

*Lepidium bonariense Peppercress Brassicaceae 0-3

Leptorhyncus squamatus Scaly Buttons Asteraceae 0-1

*Malva parviflora Small-flowered Mallow

Malvaceae 0-2 0-4

*Malvastrum americanum Spiked Malvastrum Malvaceae 0-2

*Marrubium vulgare Horehound Lamiaceae 0-1 0-1

*Medicago ?arabica Spotted Burr-medic Fabaceae 2 0-2 1 1-2

Mimulus gracilis Slender Monkey-flower

Scrophulariaceae 0-1

Minuria integerrima Smooth Minuria Asteraceae 0-1

Oxalis ?perennans Oxalis Oxalidaceae 0-1 0-1 0-1

Plantago cunninghamii Plantaginaceae 0-1

Ptilotus sessilifolius Amaranthaceae 1

*Rapistrum rugosum Turnip Weed Brassicaceae 0-1 0-1

Rhodanthe corymbiflora Small White Sunray Asteraceae 2

Rhodanthe moschata Asteraceae 1

?Rostellularia adscendens Acanthaceae 0-1 0-1 0-2

Rumex brownii Native Dock Polygonaceae 0-1

Senecio cunninghamii var. cunninghamii

Asteraceae 0-1

Senecio glossanthus Streaked Poverty Bush

Asteraceae 0-1 1

Sida fibulifera Pin Sida Malvaceae 1 1

Sida trichopoda High Sida Malvaceae 0-1

*Silybum marianum Variegated Thistle Asteraceae 0-1 0-2

*Sonchus oleraceus Common Sowthistle Asteraceae 0-1

*Sisymbrium orientale Indian Hedge Mustard

Brassicaceae 0-2 0-2

Swainsona procumbens Broughton Pea Fabaceae 1

Tetragonia tetragonoides Native Spinach Aizoaceae 0-1

*Trifolium spp. Clover Fabaceae 0-3 0-3 0-3




Abundance

WP CA BBW MW SS

Triptilodiscus pygmaeus Common Sunray Asteraceae 1-2

*Urtica repens Small Nettle Urticaceae 0-2

Vittadinia ?cuneata Fuzzweed Asteraceae 0-1 0-1

Wahlenbergia communis Tufted Bluebell Campanulaceae 0-1 0-2

Wahlenbergia stricta Tall Bluebell Campanulaceae 1

Xerochrysum bracteatum Golden Everlasting Asteraceae 1

GRASSES

Austrodanthonia caespitosa Ringed Wallaby Grass Poaceae 0-2

Austrodanthonia setacea Small-flowered Wallaby Grass

Poaceae 0-2

Austrodanthonia sp. Poaceae 0-2

Austrostipa scabra subsp. scabra

Rough Speargrass Poaceae 0-2

Chloris truncata Windmill Grass Poaceae 2 2 2-4

Cymbopogon refractus Barbed-wire Grass Poaceae 0-1

*Cynodon dactylon Couch Poaceae 0-3

Enteropogon acicularis Curly Windmill Grass Poaceae 1-3 1-3 1-3 2

Eragrostis brownii Browns Lovegrass Poaceae 0-2 1-3 1-2

*Eragrostis cilianensis Stinking Lovegrass Poaceae 2 0-2 0-2

Eragrostis parviflora Weeping Lovegrass Poaceae 0-3 0-3 0-3 0-2

Eragrostis setifolia Neverfail Poaceae 0-2

*Hordeum leporinum Barley Grass Poaceae 0-4 2-6

Lachnagrostis filiformis Blown Grass Poaceae 2 2 2 2

Panicum decompositum var. tenuis

Poaceae 2 2 2-3 2

Sporobolus caroli Fairy Grass Poaceae 0-1 0-1 0-2 0-1

GRAMINOIDS

Carex inversa Knob Sedge Cyperaceae 0-1 0-2

Cyperus difformis Dirty Dora Cyperaceae 0-1

Juncus sp Rush Juncaceae 0.1 0-1

FERNS

Marsilea drumondii Common Nardoo Marsileaceae 0-1 0-2


1585 Final V1 B‐III

B.2 ARCHAEOLOGY AND ABORIGINAL HERITAGE ADDENDUM

Addendum Proposed Nyngan Photovoltaic Solar Farm

Indigenous Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Assessment

A report to Infigen

November 2010

New South Wales Archaeology Pty Limited PO Box 2135

Central Tilba NSW 2546 www.nswarchaeology.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 PARTNERSHIP WITH ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES ............................................................................................. 1

1.3 OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.4 RESULTS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................ 1

2. SURVEY RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 SURVEY COVERAGE ......................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 ABORIGINAL OBJECT RECORDINGS .................................................................................................................. 5

2.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 6

3. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 8

4. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 9

Proposed Nyngan Photovoltaic Solar Farm - Addendum

New South Wales Archaeology Pty Ltd November 2010 page 1

1. SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction

New South Wales Archaeology Pty Ltd has been commissioned to undertake an Indigenous archaeological and cultural heritage assessment of the proposed Nyngan Solar Farm. The proposed Nyngan Solar Farm is defined as a Major Project (Critical Infrastructure) under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. An initial field survey in relation to this proposal was conducted in August 2010. Subsequently the proposal envelope was expanded to encompass additional areas to the east and south (Figure 1). In an assessment of adequacy in relation to the Indigenous Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Assessment regarding this project the NSW Department of Planning required that these further areas also be subject to field survey and assessment prior to determination. This report details the results of the subsequent field survey of the additional area and forms an addendum to the earlier report (New South Wales Archaeology Pty Limited 2010). 1.2 Partnership with Aboriginal Communities

This assessment has been conducted in accordance with consultation process as outlined in the NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water’s (NSW DECCW) Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation Requirements for Proponents 2010 (ACHCRP) (NSW DECCW 2010). The field survey of the additional proposed impact areas has been undertaken with the assistance of Tommy Ryan of the Nyngan Local Aboriginal Land Council (NLALC). 1.3 Objectives

This additional assessment has sought to identify and record Aboriginal objects, to assess the archaeological potential of the landscape and to formulate appropriate management and mitigation strategies. The investigation has included a field survey of the expanded proposal area as well as the proposed access road which extends from the north-western boundary of the site to the southern edge of the Nyngan township, and an analysis of results. The additional field work was undertaken in November 2010. 1.4 Results and Impact Assessment

The additional portion of the proposal area surveyed during this assessment measures approximately 123 hectares in area. It is estimated that approximately 43 hectares of that area was subject to survey inspection. Ground exposures inspected are estimated to have measured approximately 3.87 hectares in area. Of that ground exposure area archaeological visibility (the potential artefact bearing soil profile) is estimated to have been 1.55 hectares. Effective Survey Coverage is therefore relatively low and is calculated to have been 1.26 % of the area. Two additional Aboriginal object locales were recorded during the field survey, each comprised of a single stone artefact. The Effective Survey Coverage achieved during the survey in combination with the nature of the ground exposures present is considered to have been sufficient and of a quality so as to effectively characterise the nature of artefact distribution. The results of this survey are therefore assessed to be a relatively accurate reflection of the artefact density within the additional proposed impact area. Accordingly, based on the relevant predictive model of site distribution for the area, and the results of the field survey, artefact density in the study area is assessed to be very low. The area is assessed to be of low archaeological potential and significance.



Figure 1. Location of the additional surveyed areas, indicated with black outline, in relation to that which was originally surveyed in August 2010 (fainter outline to west).



2. SURVEY RESULTS

2.1 Survey Coverage

The study area is located immediately to the south of the township of Nyngan. It is situated within the Darling Riverine Plains bioregion on the Bogan River floodplain. The landform which comprises the study area is continuous with the prior area surveyed, being a flat with level gradient and open aspect that forms part of the alluvial floodplain associated with the Bogan River. The western extent of the subject study area is located ca. 3.2 kilometres east of the Bogan River while the eastern extent is ca. 5.4 kilometres to the east of that river. The area has undergone relatively high levels of prior disturbance associated with agriculture. Following the original clearance of vegetation, subsequent farming practices have impacted the entire proposal area. These impacts include fencing, the creation of mechanically graded roads and unformed internal tracks, the excavation of dams and associated shallow drainage channels as well as ongoing grazing. In addition, almost the entire area has a long history of impacts associated with ploughing (Tommy Ryan 2010 pers. comm.) which has resulted in some deflation of the soil profile as the result of aeolian action (Plates 1 and 2). This is particularly evident in the southern section of the surveyed area. These previous farming practices and their effects are assessed to have caused high levels of impact to ground surfaces and to any Aboriginal objects which may once have been present. Plate 1. Area showing evidence of ploughing in the north western section of the proposal area; looking east. There are few trees present within the subject surveyed area. All trees within areas of proposed impacts are assessed to be regrowth and estimated to be around 50 years old, but were nevertheless inspected during the survey and exhibited no evidence of Aboriginal scarring. At the time of field survey several paddocks had relatively recently been ploughed, cultivated and harvested, while some other areas possessed a reasonably consistent coverage of vegetation, predominantly in the form of weed species (Plate 3).



The survey was focused on areas of ground exposure which were found to be present along most fence lines, in areas of unformed vehicle tracks, and in numerous bare earth patches which were distributed reasonably consistently throughout the area. Archaeological visibility within many areas of ground exposure was moderate to good as the result of the ground surface being penetrated by ploughing, vehicle traffic, weathering and stock treadage. The area of the proposed access road is highly disturbed, having been repeatedly graded over time and now thickly laid with imported gravel (Tommy Ryan 2010 pers. comm.). Plate 2. Large area of bare earth associated with ploughing and stock grazing, southern section looking west. Plate 3. Area of weed growth, central section looking south.



The study area measures c. 123 hectares in size. It is estimated that approximately 43 hectares of that area was subject to survey inspection. Ground exposures inspected are estimated to have been 3.87 hectares in area. Of that ground exposure area archaeological visibility (the potential artefact bearing soil profile) is estimated to have been 1.54 hectares. Effective Survey Coverage is therefore calculated to have been 1.26% of the proposal area. 2.2 Aboriginal Object Recordings

The following Aboriginal object locales were recorded during the subject survey; their location is shown in Figure 2 (note locale numbering is sequential and continues from those originally recorded in August (NSW Archaeology 2010): Survey Unit 1/Locale 3 519623e 6504561n GDA One stone artefact was recorded in an area of exposure adjacent to a fence line (Plate 4). The broad area measures 60 x 40 m, of which 60% was ground exposure, possessing 60% archaeological visibility. The effective survey coverage is relatively high and given that one artefact only was recorded artefact density is assessed to be very low. The recorded artefact is a white quartzite proximal flake portion; size class 3 (less than 3 cm in overall dimensions). The site is likely to contain additional artefacts in a subsurface context in very low densities. The area is eroding due to water, wind, ploughing, vehicle traffic and animal treadage. Plate 4. SU1/L3 looking west.



Survey Unit 1/Locale 4 519471e 6504618n GDA One stone artefact was recorded in an area of bare earth exposure (Plate 5). The area where the artefact is located measures 120 x 50 m, of which 80% was ground exposure, possessing 60% archaeological visibility. The effective survey coverage is relatively high and given that one artefact only was recorded artefact density is assessed to be very low. The recorded artefact is a grey chert core, with 8 negative flake scars and 20% terrestrial cortex; size class 5. The site is likely to contain additional artefacts in a subsurface context in very low densities. The site area has been cultivated and eroding due to water, wind and animal agents. Plate 5. SU1/L4 looking east. 2.3 Impact Assessment

Two Aboriginal object locales were recorded during the subject field survey (SU1/L3 and SU1/L4), each comprised of a single stone artefact (Figure 2). While the Effective Survey Coverage for the surveyed area is calculated to have been relatively low at the time of survey, many extensive areas of good ground exposure possessing reasonable archaeological visibility were distributed throughout the study area. These exposures enabled a reasonable characterisation of artefact distribution within the proposal area. The subject area surveyed is located to the east and south of the original proposal envelope. The western extent of the is located c 3.2 kilometres east of the Bogan River while the eastern extent is situated c. 5.4 kilometres to the east of that river. The predictive model of site distribution for the region indicates that in such an environmental setting, distanced from access to reliable water and situated on an amorphous floodplain, artefact density would be very low. As indicated by Nyngan Local Aboriginal Land Council representative Tommy Ryan (2010 pers. comm.) such an area would have been used for hunting and transitory movement, but that the focus of Aboriginal activity in the region and associated higher densities of artefact distribution would have been nearer to the river.



As noted above, the Aboriginal object locales recorded in the additional proposed impact area are two single and isolated stone artefacts. These are both assessed to be of low archaeological significance. Undetected or subsurface stone artefacts are assessed to be present in very low density. The Effective Survey Coverage achieved during the survey is considered to have been sufficient to characterise the nature of artefact distribution in the study area. The survey results are therefore assessed to be a relatively accurate reflection of the artefact density in the proposal area. Accordingly, based on the relevant predictive model of site distribution for the area, and the results of the field survey, artefact density in the study area is assessed to be very low. The proposal area is assessed to be low archaeological potential and significance. Given that both the two recorded Aboriginal objects and the predicted undetected and subsurface artefacts are assessed to be of low significance, the impacts can be viewed as being of correspondingly low significance. This assessment forms the basis for the formulation of recommendations relating to the proposal. Figure 2. Location of Aboriginal object locales SU1/L3 and SU1/L4 recorded during the subject survey.



3. RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are made on the basis of: � A consideration of the Part 3A amendment to the Environmental Planning and Assessment

Act. � The results of the investigation as documented in this report. � Consideration of the type of development proposed and the nature of proposed impacts.

� Advice provided from Nyngan Local Aboriginal Land Council. The following recommendations are provided:

o The two recorded Aboriginal object locales and the predicted very low density subsurface artefact distribution in the subject survey area does not surpass archaeological significance thresholds which would act to preclude the proposed impacts.

o The two recorded Aboriginal object locales SU1/L3 and SU1/L4 are assessed to be representative of a very low density distribution of stone artefacts. The archaeological significance of these locales is assessed to be low. Accordingly unmitigated impact is considered to be appropriate.

o There are no identified Indigenous archaeological and heritage constraints relating to the proposal in the additional area.



4. REFERENCES

New South Wales Archaeology Pty Limited 2010 Proposed Nyngan Photovoltaic Solar Farm Indigenous Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Assessment. A report to nghenvironmental.

Tommy Ryan November 2010 personal communication.

Nyngan Solar Farm Submissions Report Final v1

Documents

Transcript of Nyngan Solar Farm Submissions Report Final v1