Bowen Basin Terminal Proposal

BBT Referral June 2014 1
Referral of proposed action

Project title: Bowen Basin Terminal (BBT)

1 Summary of proposed action

1.1 Short description
Hay Port Exports Pty Ltd (HP Exports a Mitchell Ports project company) is proposing to construct and operate a
barging and transhipping terminal, the Bowen Basin Terminal (BBT or the Project) at Hay Point south of Mackay on the
Central Queensland coast. BBT will be located within the Port of Hay Point; one of Queenslands nominated Priority
Port Development Areas (PPDA) and the largest coal port in the State. BBT will be constructed in incremental stages
of 10 to 15 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) up to 30 Mtpa to meet market demand.
Concept planning for BBT has been based on the overall objective to leverage off existing infrastructure where
possible and maximise the amount of coal that could be exported from the terminal with minimal impacts.
It will be based on the Mitchell Ports minimal dredge, no sea-dumping model, off-shore ship-loading model.
1.2 Latitude and longitude

Land based coordinates

Location
Point
Latitude Longitude
Degrees Minutes Seconds Degrees Minutes Seconds
1 21 17 56.55 149 16 12.61
2 21 18 11.48 149 16 20.33
3 21 18 5.46 149 16 24.01
4 21 18 8.52 149 16 29.36
5 21 18 9.25 149 16 42.52
6 21 18 1.22 149 16 43.40
7 21 17 23.90 149 17 18.38
8 21 17 24.85 149 17 43.98
9 21 17 20.67 149 17 48.66
10 21 17 21.45 149 17 51.63
11 21 17 24.26 149 17 53.71
12 21 17 34.05 149 17 45.28
13 21 17 43.14 149 17 37.50
14 21 17 34.86 149 17 14.22
15 21 18 12.07 149 16 44.96
16 21 18 12.74 149 16 41.71
17 21 18 35.95 149 16 51.97
18 21 18 37.72 149 16 50.59
19 21 18 39.33 149 16 52.51
20 21 18 43.92 149 16 51.70
21 21 18 43.42 149 16 47.06
22 21 18 56.00 149 16 36.72
23 21 19 4.80 149 16 39.00
24 21 19 17.25 149 16 53.63
25 21 19 25.46 149 16 58.23
26 21 19 26.88 149 16 54.99
27 21 19 7.77 149 16 35.15
28 21 18 21.52 149 16 16.74
29 21 18 14.89 149 16 19.23
30 21 18 13.47 149 16 17.26
31 21 17 57.99 149 16 10.32

Offshore coordinates including
proposed barge routes to
existing anchorage points

The Land Based Study Area (see Attachment B.1) extends beyond the proposed footprint by a buffer of
approximately 50 metres and the Marine Based Study Area (Attachment B.2 ) a buffer of approximately 500 metres ie
the Study Areas as depicted do not represent the footprint of the Project (which is a smaller area within the Study
Area).
Location
Point
Latitude Longitude
Degrees Minutes Seconds Degrees Minutes Seconds
1 21 16 59.85 149 17 50.74
2 21 14 45.58 149 31 15.55
3 21 14 10.82 149 31 53.55
4 21 14 44.85 149 32 51.58
5 21 15 39.54 149 32 14.28
6 21 15 17.72 149 31 23.85
7 21 16 57.41 149 21 14.12
8 21 17 25.05 149 21 22.38
9 21 17 50.73 149 20 49.97
10 20 17 35.94 149 20 22.39
11 21 17 30.06 149 18 8.68
12 21 17 33.87 149 17 34.99

1.3 Locality and property description
BBT would be constructed at the Port of Hay Point located approximately 38 kilometres by road and 20 kilometres
directly south of Mackay and 15 kilometres north-east of the township of Sarina in Queensland. Nearby townships
include Hay Point, Salonika Beach, Louisa Creek, Timberlands, Fenechvale Estate and Half Tide.
BBT will comprise of both terrestrial and marine infrastructure with the latter (barge loading facility) to be located within
the defined port limits of the Port of Hay Point. The Port is within the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area
(GBRWHA), which extends to the mean low water tide level and the outer port limits overlap with the Great Barrier
Reef Marine Park (GBRMP).
The Port of Hay Point is comprised of two long established coal export terminals; the Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal
(DBCT) and the Hay Point Coal Terminal (HPCT).
DBCT is leased from NQBP by DBCT Management Pty Ltd and has four operating berths with an annual coal export
capacity of 85 Million tonnes per annum (Mtpa). HPCT which is owned by BMA and operated by Hay Point Services
Pty Ltd has the ability to currently export up to 44 Mtpa. This throughout will be increased to 55 Mtpa when the current
expansion project is completed. The Port of Hay Point is serviced by the purpose-built Goonyella rail system for coal
transport to the two coal terminals and a tug harbour.


1.4
Size of the development
footprint or work area (hectares)
Approx. 160 ha including land based and barge loading facility (excludes barge
route and transhipper zone as these are operational areas at existing anchorage
and cyclone mooring points, no development works)
1.5 Street address of the site

Not Applicable
1.6 Lot description
Land-based elements of the BBT would traverse parcels of land currently owned by private landowners; the State
government and Strategic Port Land (SPL) which is owned by NQBP and allocated for port operations (refer to
Attachment C NQBPC Land Use Designations). This land is within areas identified as Rural Planning and
Strategic Port Land by the Sarina Shire Planning Scheme (refer to Attachment D Planning Scheme Map).
Table 1.1 and Attachment E Affected Parcels show the lot and plan numbers and Attachment F Tenure shows
the land tenure type for the areas within the proposed BBT footprint (noting that these include various options for
possible conveyor routes to be refined during the EIS).
Table 1.1: Lot/Plan to be potentially impacted by BBT
Real Property Description Tenure Strategic Port Land
Lot 1 on RP728282 Freehold Yes
Lot 1 on RP733719 Freehold No
Lot 32 on SP112709 Lands Lease No
Lot 10 on SP114711 Freehold No
Lot 144 on SP121683 Freehold Yes
*as at June 2014


1.7 Local Government Area and Council contact (if known)
The Study Area is within the Mackay Regional Council local government area. Contact details for the relevant council
office are located below:

Mackay Regional Council
Sir Albert Abbott Administration Building
73 Gordon Street, Mackay
Postal Address: PO Box 41 Mackay QLD 4740
Fax: (07) 4944 2400
Phone:1300 MACKAY (1300 622 529)
Email: council@mackay.qld.gov.au
Web: http://www.mackay.qld.gov.au/

The action will predominantly be occurring on land gazetted as SPL under the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 (Qld).
NQBP regulates all land uses and planning on SPL that are consistent with its Land Use Plan (LUP).

1.8 Time frame
Timing of the BBT is dependent on a number of internal and external factors, including securing approvals and market
demand. Table 1.2 provides details of the currently anticipated timelines of the Project through to commissioning.
Table 1.2: Proposed timeframe for the BBT
Stage Proposed Schedule
Referral to Australian Government (EPBC) Q2 2014
Submission of IAS Q3 2014
EIS Studies Q2 2014 to Q2 2015
EIS on public display Q2 2015
EIS assessment Q2 2015 to Q3 2015
Financial Close Q4 2015
Stage 1 construction Q1 2016 to Q1 2018
Commissioning Stage 1 (10 to 15 Mtpa) 2018
Construction stage 2 on market demand 12 to 24 months post Stage 1

1.9 Alternatives to proposed
action

No
Yes, you must also complete section 2.2
1.10 Alternative time frames etc

No

Yes, you must also complete Section 2.3. For each alternative,
location, time frame, or activity identified, you must also complete
details in Sections 1.2-1.9, 2.4-2.7 and 3.3 (where relevant).

1.11 State assessment

No
Yes, you must also complete Section 2.5

1.12 Component of larger action

No
Yes, you must also complete Section 2.7
1.13 Related actions/ proposals

No
Yes, provide details:
1.14 Australian Government
funding

No
Yes, provide details:
1.15 Great Barrier Reef Marine
Park
No
Yes, you must also complete Section 3.1 (h), 3.2 (e)
Transhipping activities will take place at existing anchorage points and
mooring during cyclones at existing mooring locations within the GBR
Marine Park general use area (refer to Appendix G.2 Transhipment and
Mooring Areas).


2 Detailed description of proposed action

2.1 Description of proposed action
Overview
HP Exports Pty Ltd (the Proponent) is proposing a transhipping based coal export facility (refer Appendix G.1 Concept
Plan, Appendix G.2 Transhipment and Mooring Areas) at the Port of Hay Point, a major coal port and an identified
Priority Port Development Area (PPDA) where new port development is to be concentrated. The BBT will contribute
directly to the Queensland governments objective of maximising the use of existing infrastructure and port capacity as
outlined in the Great Barrier Reef Ports Strategy 2012-2022 and the Queensland Ports Strategy 2014.
DBCT the existing multi-user terminal has its capacity already fully contracted with mining companies which means new or
expanded mines cannot be accommodated without additional terminal capacity being built at the port. The HPCT only
processes coal from BMA mines and it is currently being expanded to meet company demand. BBT will assist with meeting
the demands of coal export volumes incrementally from Queensland coal mines.
The objective of the BBT is to deliver up to 30 Mtpa of coal export capacity which will be developed in two stages of
approximately 10 to 15 Mtpa each. Stage 1 is forecast to be operational in 2018 (subject to demand), with the second stage
deliverable over a 12 to 24 month period again pending demand. BBT will be capable of operating 24 hours a day, seven
days a week taking into account climatic limitations such as cyclones.
Infrastructure
The scope of the proposed development will include the construction and operation of the following:
Rail loop adjacent to the DBCT rail loop;
Bottom-dump rail receival facility within the rail loop;
Stormwater collection dam within the rail loop;
Erosion and sediment controls;
Stockpiling facilities;
In-loading and out-loading conveyor systems;
Surge bins/transfer stations;
Carpark, administration office;
Waste collection facilities;
Provisioning facilities for refuelling and servicing of barges;
Access and maintenance roads;
Barge loading facility;
Reclamation area for any dredged materials;
Articulated barges and tugs;
Service vessels;
Floating off-shore purpose built transhippers; and
Navigational aids.
Supporting infrastructure including connections to power supply, water, telecommunications and sewage as well as fire-
fighting system, dust and noise suppression, drainage, fences, landscaping and lighting, will also be required as part of the
development.
A rail loop is proposed to branch off the Goonyella system with a grade crossing onto a new line that would follow the
existing rail easement that was earmarked for the proposed Dudgeon Point rail access project. The loop would provide
appropriate space for a standard Goonyella System train (10,000 tonnes) before and after the dump station.
Coal would be unloaded from the rail wagons at a dump station and conveyed into stockpiles. It will be reclaimed from the
stockpiles then transferred onto out-loading conveyors to cross (over or under) the DBCT and BHP Billiton Mitsubishi
Alliance (BMA) rail line and run along the south-eastern edge of the rail line to a transfer tower near Hay Point Road. From
the transfer tower the coal would be transferred via conveyor along an easterly path, crossing (over or under) Hay Point
Road and tidal flats to a barge loading facility. The barge loading facility would be located near-shore on the western side

within the existing Half Tide Tug Harbour (refer Appendix G.1 Concept Plan). The location is away from the current tug
operations and from the public boat ramp.
Articulated barges (loaded via enclosed chutes to a level two metres below the top of the gunnels to avoid spillage or dust)
would travel slowly to off-shore floating transhippers (one for Stage One and another one for Stage Two) that would be
anchored alongside export vessels. Coal would be transferred from the barges via enclosed grabs and closed conveyors
into the ocean going vessels, including Capesize vessels (refer Figure 2.1 and Appendix G.2 Proposed Transhipment
and Mooring Areas). The transhipping would take place at existing southern and/or outer anchorage points.
Figure 2.1: An example of a Mitchell Ports dry product export solution

HP Exports philosophy is to avoid or minimise dredging and if dredging is required to reuse the material in a reclamation
area adjacent to the shoreline. Small volumes of dredging within the tug harbour will be required for the swing basin and
approach. The appropriate method of dredging (likely to be removal of rock and some soft materials) and the land based
reuse of the dredged material will be determined during the engineering studies and after full consultation with NQBP and
the relevant government agencies.
The swing basin and loading facility design will be undertaken as part of the feasibility phase of the Project at which time
dredging volumes will be calculated.
Approximately 350 people will be employed directly on BBT during construction and approximately 250 people during the
full operational phase. Indirect community benefits will include flow-on business opportunities to the region and beyond.
It is anticipated that the workforce would be sourced from the Mackay region and there would travel to and from the site via
bus or car, hence negating the need for a construction camp.


2.2 Alternatives to taking the proposed action
No feasible alternatives to the proposed action have been identified.
No Action
The consequences of not developing the BBT include:
Loss of an opportunity for Australia to demonstrate its adoption of transhipping as an integral part of development
within Priority Port Development Areas (PPDA) at a time when there is significant national global interest in the
protection of the Great Barrier Reef;
Risk of some mining projects, particularly juniors or existing mines considering expansion not reaching financial close
due to the inability to secure coal export capacity;
Loss of future employment and business opportunities for regional Queensland;
Delays or loss of government royalties;
Increased waiting times for vessels to access other port facilities; and
Continued loss of Australias market share with lower quality coals being provided to end users by other coal
producers.
2.3 Alternative locations, time frames or activities that form part of the referred action
Port location
HP Exports team has considered various locations for the transhipping operation including at Abbot Point. The Port of Hay
Point was chosen as it is the closest port to the majority of coal mines in the central Bowen Basin region as it offers cost
efficient transport costs from pit to port.

Stockyard location and design
Constrained by the existing infrastructure in the Hay Point vicinity, the proposed rail loop and stockyard location was
selected following a review of proximity of houses, topography and environmental values within the Study Area. By locating
the stockyard within the rail loop, the footprint of the BBT would be minimised. The rail loop would be located to the western
side of the Goonyella line, immediately south of the DBCT loop.
Longitudinal and circular stockpiles have been considered. Longitudinal stockpile arrangements are most cost-effective and
have the ability to store discrete coal types in segregated stockpiles with a travelling stacker and cantilevered boom
reclaimer or similar stacking / reclaiming system.
Out-loading conveyor alignment and barge loader
A slightly shorter alignment for the out-loading conveyor running along the western side of the Hay Point rail loop was
initially considered. The alignment turned east at the intersection with Hay Point Road and ran along the Half Tide Tug
Harbour break wall with the intention of delivering coal to a barge loader located alongside the existing tug berths. This
option is currently not preferred for several reasons, including potential construction related impacts to businesses and
residences located along Hay Point Road. This option was also negated due to potential conflicts with future plans for
development of Half Tide Tug Harbour as outlined in the Draft Final Port of Hay Point Ten Year Development Master Plan
2012.

Traditional port or jetty trestle
A traditional style coal export terminal which could load coal directly into the hulls of Panamax and Capesize vessels has
been considered by other projects for Hay Point. Transhipping was selected as a preferred alternative over traditional
modes of export due to the significantly lower capital costs, minimal dredging, the flexibility to relocate during cyclones or at
end of project life and its ability to be sized up depending on demand.
Transhipper types
The project team has assessed a number of designs for transhippers with their naval architects. Two options that have
been considered to date in detail are the Princess Chloe Mark II 9 (a transhipper operated by Swire CTM) and the
Capricorn Cat, both incorporating the latest technologies for environmental protection and efficient loading.
The Capricorn Cat (Figure 2.1) has been designed specifically to meet the very high environmental standards necessary to
operate in the GBRWHA is one of the preferred transhipper options being considered for the BBT. This type of transhipper,
which transfers coal from barges to ocean going vessels, does not store any coal on-board.

Barge types
Various barge design options are being investigated by HP Exports. To ensure security of transport, maximise
manoeuvrability and to minimise the number of motors operating at any one time (thus reducing greenhouse gas
emissions), an articulated tug and barge model is one of the preferred types. This vessel arrangement sees the tug
coupling into a notch at the rear of the barge so the two units become one, operating as a small controlled vessel.

Site layouts
Constraints at Hay Point include
Proximity to residents;
Limited space due to existing coal terminals;
Topography;
Environmental protection buffers;
Rock material within the seabed of the tug harbour;
Surrounding land tenure and private land use;
The need to provide for public access to the tug harbour;
Existing roads and infrastructure (also an opportunity); and
Shallow waters off-shore.
Concept planning for staged development has been based on the overall objective to leverage off existing infrastructure
where possible and maximise the amount of coal that could be exported from the terminal with minimal footprint,
environmental, social and cultural heritage impacts. This can be achieved through the placement of the stockyard within the
proposed rail loop on the land-side of the development, aligning of conveyors as close as possible to the existing rail line,
the positioning of the proposed barge loading facility within the existing tug harbour, locating the transhipping activities at
existing anchorage points and using the cyclone mooring points allocated to the Hay Point expansion project post that
projects construction phase.
Final design layout will be modified and refined during the feasibility studies as dictated by potential impacts, costs and
other users constraints.
The transhipment method proposed by HP Exports for additional coal export at the Port of Hay Point will provide
the best solution in the near future due to its low environmental impact, speed to market, incremental growth
design and commercial viability.
2.4 Context, planning framework and state/ local government requirements
BBT is proposed at the Port of Hay Point which has been operating for over 40 years. NQBP as the statutory port authority
has in place an environmental management system (EMS) which is based on the international standard ISO 14001 and an
environmental management plan (EMP) that is specifically designed for port operations.
It is likely that the State ( through the State Assessment and Referral Agency -SARA process) will act as the Assessment
Manager for the Project, because part of the land is strategic port land (SPL) is under NQBPs planning control, whereas
the rail loop area is under the Councils planning control because it is not currently SPL. HP Exports has consulted with
NQBP in the initial overall concept planning for BBT (including provision of the draft referral for review prior to submission)
to ensure the proposed terminal will not conflict with NQBPs long term port plans and will be consistent with the LUP for
that area under NQBPs jurisdiction. BBT will be designed with the objective to align with NQBPs Desired Environmental
Outcomes as specified in the authoritys Land Use Plan for Port of Hay Point 2010. Consultation with the Mackay Regional
Council as a key stakeholder will be undertaken very early in the EIS.
Table 2.1 and Table 2.2 provide an overview of the key relevant legislation and approval requirements for the proposed
action. This list will be expanded during the EIS to include all relevant legislation pertaining to the proposed action.

BBT Referral J une 2014 11

Table 2.1: Commonwealth legislation relevant to the proposed action
Legislation Decision maker Purpose Relevance to the proposed action
Energy Efficient
Opportunities Act 2006
(Cwth)
Department of Industry Aims to improve the identification and
evaluation of energy efficiency
opportunities by large energy using
businesses and, as a result, to encourage
implementation of cost effective energy
efficiency opportunities.

Requirements of this act need to be considered and fulfilled during the Project
planning stage.
Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation
Act 1999
(EPBC Act) (Cwth)
The Commonwealth
Minister for the
Environment
Department of the
Environment
(DoE)
The EPBC Act establishes a
Commonwealth process for assessment of
proposed actions that have the potential to
have a significant impact on Matters of
National Environmental Significance
(MNES) or on Commonwealth land. DoE
will determine if the proposed action
requires assessment and if so the level of
assessment.
There are MNES within the proposed project area including the Great Barrier
Reef World Heritage Area and National Heritage Place, listed threatened
species and ecological communities, listed migratory species and listed marine
species. The proposed action is expected to result in minimal impact on MNES
however this referral is lodged as a prudent step in the EIS process.
The preliminary identification of potential impacts on MNES and proposed
mitigation measures are described in this referral and will be further
investigated in the EIS.
Great Barrier Reef Marine
Park Act 1975 (Cwth)
Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park Authority
A framework for planning and
management, including zoning plans, plans
of management and a systemof
permissions. The Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park (GBRMP) Zoning Plan 2003
ensures the protection of habitat types by
defining activities that can occur at each
location.
Permits will be required for shipping and transportation of goods in the GBR
Marine Park.
The permit application process under this act is triggered at the time of the
referral of an action under the EPBC Act.
National Greenhouse and
Energy Report Act 2007
(Cwth)
Department of Industry A national framework for the reporting of
information relating to greenhouse gas
emissions by requiring the submission of
an annual report to the Commonwealth
Department of Climate Change and Energy
Efficiency.
HP Exports will be required to submit an annual report under this act.


Legislation Decision maker Purpose Relevance to the proposed action
Native Title Act 1993 (Cwth) The Attorney Generals
Department and
Minister for Families,
Housing, Community
Service and Indigenous
Affairs
The Act recognises native title rights and
provides the government with ways in
which to validate or legitimatise past act
such as the granting of leases. Provides for
the treatment of future acts which may
impact on native title rights and the
requirement for consultation and/or
notification to relevant native title claimants,
where future acts are involved.
The EIS will investigate whether the BBT footprint will impact on land or waters
subject to native title claims and take appropriate action to work with the
claimants through an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) if necessary.


Table 2.2: Queensland State Government legislation relevant to the proposed action
Legislation Decision maker Assessment Scope Relevance to the proposed action
Aboriginal Cultural
Heritage Act 2003
Queensland (Qld)

Department of Environment
and Heritage Protection
(EHP)

The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003
established a cultural heritage duty of
care, which requires that a person who
carries out an activity must take all
reasonable and practicable measures to
ensure the activity does not harm
Aboriginal cultural heritage. The Act
establishes a framework for the conduct of
assessment of cultural heritage impact and
processes to be undertaken in preparing
Cultural Heritage Management Plans
(CHMP).
HP Exports must demonstrate a duty of care and ensure that all reasonable
and practicable measures have been taken to protect cultural heritage.

A CHMP will be developed with the native title claimants.
Coastal Protection and
Management Act 1995
(Qld)
Department of Natural
Resources and Mines
(NRM)
Tidal works interfering with quarrying
material/reclaiming land under tidal water/
coastal management district.
The Project will require operational works permission under this act for works
in a tidal area. This includes construction within tidal areas.
Environmental
Protection Act 1994
(Qld) (EP Act)
Environmental
Protection Policies (Air,
water, noise and waste)
EHP Key legislative framework for
environmental management and protection
in Queensland.
An EIS will be prepared under the State Development and Public Works
Organisation Act 1971 (SDPWO Act) to identify Environmentally Relevant
Activities (ERAs) associated with construction and operational phases of the
Project. The environmental management plan (EMP) for BBT will demonstrate
commitment to the principles of the Act and to the various environmental
protection policies.

If approved, the HP Exports will operate under an environmental authority
issued by EHP.
Fisheries Act 1994 (Qld) Department of Agriculture,
Fisheries and Forestry
(DAFF)
The Fisheries Act provides for the
protection of marine plants against all
unlawful removal, destruction and damage.
Marine plants (specifically mangroves) will be disturbed during the construction
of the conveyor and works involving the destruction, disturbance or removal of
marine plants (minimal dredging and barge loading facility construction) will
require a development application. Any waterway barrier works, either
permanent or temporary will also require a development application.


Land Protection (Pest
and Stock Route
Management) Act 2002
(Qld)
NRM

Provides a framework and powers for
improved management of weeds, pest
animals and the stock route network.

Mitigation measures are proposed in this referral to ensure weeds and pests
are not spread because of the proposed action.
Local Government Act
2009 (Qld)

Chief Executive of Mackay
Regional Council
Relevant Local Law Jurisdiction. Consistency with planning scheme where applicable.
Local laws which may be relevant include:
03 Community and Environmental Management may be applicable if
there is any potential omission which may cause a community safety
hazard and as a result, reduce the amenity of the area; and
04 - Local Government Controlled Area, Facilities and Roads applicable
if any port of the Project utilises Local Government Controlled land,
facilities, infrastructure and roads.
Maritime Safety
Queensland Act 2002
(Qld)
Department of Transport and
Main Roads (TMR)
Administered by Maritime
Safety Queensland (MSQ)
Marine vessel movements. Proposed barging and transhipping operations will have to be assessed by
MSQ to determine necessary qualifications for tug and transhipper captains
and any pilotage requirements etc. Initial meetings have confirmed that the
transhipping could take place at existing anchorage points.
Maritime Transport and
Off-shore Facilities
Security Act 2003
(MTOFS Act) (Qld)
TMR Administered by
MSQ
The purpose of Act is to safeguard against
unlawful interference with maritime
transport.
Maritime security plan is in place for Hay Point. BBT will have to develop its
own plan post the EIS to integrate with the existing plan.
Nature Conservation Act
1992 (Qld) (NC Act)

Nature Conservation
(Protected Plants)
Conservation Plan 2000
Nature Conservation
(Wildlife Management)
Regulation 2006
EHP The Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC
Act) is relevant to the Project as there are
species listed as Endangered, Vulnerable
or Near Threatened species (EVNT
species) under the Nature Conservation
(Wildlife) Regulation 2006 which are
known to occur or are likely to occur
adjacent to the Project area.

The site is not within a High Risk Area under this act. If the development
requires any felling that could have an impact on a breeding place of a
protected animal this will be addressed in the EMP for the Project to minimise
impact.
BBT is proposed within an existing port area so the disturbance to flora and
fauna will be minimal. The EIS will determine if any permits will be required.


State Development
and Public Works
Organisation Act 1971
(Qld) (SDPWO Act)
Department of State
Development Infrastructure
and Planning (DSDIP)
The SDPWO Act empowers the
Coordinator-General to declare a project to
be a coordinated project for which an EIS
is required. An application for a significant
project declaration is made to the
Coordinator-General by the Initial Advice
Statement. The EIS process is set out in
Part 4, Division 3 of the SDPWO Act.
BBT will likely be a coordinated project for which an EIS is required under this
act. An Initial Advice Statement (IAS) will be submitted to the Queensland
government to trigger the release of a Terms of Reference (ToR). The EIS will
be prepared in line with the ToR taking into account matters of interest to both
the State and Federal government.
Sustainable Planning
Act 2009 (Qld) (SP Act)
SDIP, NQBP Determines the requirement for a
development permit for the proposed
activity.
Triggers for development requiring assessment and approval under the
relevant planning scheme will be reviewed in detail during the EIS process.
BBT will be within a Coastal Management District (CMD) however it is not
within any coastal hazard areas. If any of the land to be disturbed for the BBT
is registered on the Queensland governments Environmental Management
Register (EMR) or Contaminated Land Register (CLR) it will be assessed for
the presence of contamination prior to the commencement of construction
works.
Parts of the BBT concept are situated over land designated as SPL. Under the
Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld), NQBP functions as the Assessment
Manager for SPL in the overall context of Queenslands Integrated
Development Assessment System (IDAS). All new development on SPL must
be consistent with the requirements of the Land Use Plan and must be
approved by NQBP. Parts of the Project will be located on land under the
Councils planning control. Because of multiple jurisdictions involved, a
coordinated State assessment will be required.


Legislation
Decision maker Assessment Scope Relevance to the proposed action
Transport Infrastructure
Act, 1994(Qld)

Port Land Use Plan
2010 and associated
Port Development Code
and EMP
TMR

NQBP
To ensure the development will not impact
on levels of safety, and community access
to the road network or the safety of
persons at, on or near railways.

Considers whether the proposed action is
consistent with the LUP and will comply
with the ports EMP.
HP Exports will interact with TMR during the concept planning phase in
regards to road and rail.
HP Exports will submit a Port Development Approval application to NQBP for
assessment.
Transport Operations
(Marine Safety) Act
1994 (Qld)

MSQ Provides a system that achieves an
appropriate balance between regulating
the maritime industry to ensure marine
safety and enabling the effectiveness and
efficiency of the Queensland maritime
industry to be further developed.
The Project will be required to comply with the various regulations and
standards under this act and MSQ will be a key stakeholder in the EIS
process.
Transport Operations
(Marine Pollution) Act
1995 (Qld)

MSQ Protection of Queenslands marine and
coastal environment by minimising
deliberate and negligent discharges of
ship-sourced pollutants into coastal
waters.
Penalties may apply, or permits may be required for accidental or otherwise
discharging of a pollutant froma marine vessel. This includes the transfer of
products from one ship to another. A Waste Management Plan will be
developed as part of the EMP to specify the procedures to be put in place
during the construction and operation phases of BBT.
Vegetation Management
Act 1999 (Qld) (VM Act)
NRM Regulates the conservation and
management of vegetation communities
and clearing of vegetation. It provides
protection for Regional Ecosystems (REs)
classified as Endangered, Of Concern or
Not of Concern under the VMAct. The
application to clear vegetation is made
under the SP Act.
Clearing of vegetation for the BBT will be minimal as it is proposed largely on
land previously cleared for cattle grazing or port related infrastructure. If
clearing is required, this will be specified in the EIS along with a description of
the proposed vegetation offset commitments.
Portions of the Project will be in an area mapped as supporting Category R
reef regrowth water course vegetation and sections will intersect with areas
mapped as supporting Category B remnant vegetation. These will be
ground-truthed during the EIS.

2.5 Environmental impact assessments under Commonwealth, state or territory legislation
In addition to consideration by NQBP the proposed action (the Project) will be subject to an environmental impact
assessment by the Queensland government under the SDPWO Act.
This referral will trigger a decision by the Minister for the Department of the Environment to determine whether the Project
is a controlled action under the EPBC Act. It is anticipated the Project would be assessed as a bilateral project whereby the
impact assessment requirements for MNES will be included in the Terms of Reference (TOR) to be issued by the State for
the EIS.
The contact for the State government assessment:

The Coordinator-General
Department of State Development Infrastructure and Planning
100 George Street
Brisbane Qld 4000

2.6 Public consultation (including with Indigenous stakeholders)
The project team began consultation regarding a proposed barging and transhipping terminal at Hay Point in 2012 with both
the Queensland and Australian government and since that time confidential discussions have been held with NQBP,
Aurizon, Queensland Rail and potential customers. Initial meetings have been held with TMR officers in Mackay and the
Harbour Master (MSQ) and with potentially affected landholders prior to the submission of this referral. Further consultation
will take place with these stakeholders and other relevant agencies during the EIS.
Other key stakeholders including the operators of DBCT and HPCT, Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) and the
Mackay Regional Council will be briefed about the Project in the early phase of the EIS to ensure the project team is aware
of their interests.
HP Exports will work with NQBP to plan to integrate with the authoritys established stakeholder engagement program
including making presentations to the Community Reference Group and contributing to fact sheets and newsletters.
As per the legislative process, this referral, the IAS, the ToR and the EIS will be publicly advertised and displayed for public
comment prior to the government making its final decision on approval.
2.7 A staged development or component of a larger project
A staged demand driven delivery of the BBT is proposed be developed in incremental stages of approximately 10 to15
Mtpa with a maximum potential to export up to 30 Mtpa.
The ability of transhipping to be incrementally staged is one of its key benefits. Development can be timed to meet
demand, negating the need for significant upfront capital costs for infrastructure ahead of coal export need.

3 Description of environment & likely impacts

3.1 Matters of national environmental significance
Significant data for the Study Area is available as a result of decades of monitoring conducted by various researchers and
consultants, NQBP, the Queensland government and port users. This information will be valuable input into the EIS to
enable the determination of existing environmental, social and cultural values and to assess the potential impacts that could
be presented by BBT.
Although it is likely to be minimal the Project could impact on listed, threatened and migratory species. Elements of the
action are proposed to take place in the GBRWHA, some transhipping will occur in the GBR Marine Park at existing
anchorage points and ocean going vessels loaded by BBT will traverse the GBRWHA.


3.1 (a) World Heritage Properties
Description
BBT offshore activities will be located within the boundaries of the GBRWHA (refer to Appendix H- GBRMP).
The GBR was listed on the World Heritage Register in 1981. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organisation (UNESCO) criteria against which the GBRWHA was listed remain the formal criteria for this property (UNESCO
2014) as described below:
Criterion vii: Contains superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance;
Criterion viii: Outstanding example representing major stages in the earths history, including the record of life, significant
on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features;
Criterion ix: Outstanding example representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution
and development of terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals and
Criterion x: Contains the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity,
including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of science or conservation.
Note: The UNESCO criteria apply to the World Heritage Area as a whole and do not necessarily describe the specific
environmental values of the Study Area and its immediate surrounds.
Nature and extent of likely impact
The barging and transhipping minimal dredge minimal infrastructure concept was recognised by UNESCO in its June 2012
Great Barrier Reef Mission Report:
"The mission also noted presentations from some coal export proponents regarding opportunities to develop less impacting
techniques using barges and avoiding dredging activities (specifically the proposals involving Mitchell Ports)."
"The mission was not able to assess the viability of such techniques but considers that where new bulk cargo facilities are
being considered within existing port areas, recommends that such alternatives that could reduce or eliminate dredging
requirements should be considered within the relevant Environmental Impact Assessment process as a potential means to
reduce the impacts of port development."
Construction and operation of BBT is not expected to significantly impact on the values of this important world heritage area
due to the following reasons:
Development will be within an existing working port area;
Reefs or islands of exceptional value are not within nearby offshore areas of Hay Point;
The Port of Hay Point is a tourist destination due to its port and terminal operations and the development is not
expected to impact on the world heritage experience, the natural beauty or aesthetic values because of its small jetty
structure and marine vessel designs which will incorporate appropriate colouring and lighting to ensure minimal visual
impact;
BBT will require minimal dredging and there are no significant coral communities, reefs or intra-reef lagoons nearby,
therefore is not likely to impact on geomorphic or physiographic features; and
No impact is expected on the biodiversity, the biological processes or habitats for significant species. However the
EIS will investigate potential impacts on MNES including species and habitats.

BBTs EMP will be developed and implemented to ensure the potential impacts on the values that contribute to the
Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) are addressed during the construction and operation phases ie:
Minimising the disturbance of marine fauna as a result of fauna-sensitive lighting, slow barge movements,
suppressed noise and vibration and tight dust controls;
Avoiding the introduction of marine pests through strict inspection controls;
Avoiding pollution from vessel through design, inspections, provision of facilities;
Minimising marine water quality impacts from anti-fouling agents on marine vessel hulls;
Protecting visual amenity through selection of infrastructure and vessels that blend in with the existing facilities; and
Minimising potential impacts on water quality from minimal dredging, controlled transport of dredge material and rock
to the reclamation area through a detailed dredge management plan.


3.1 (b) National Heritage Places

Description
The National Heritage List is a list of places with outstanding natural, Indigenous or historic vale to the nation.
The marine elements of the BBT would be located within the boundaries of the GBRWHA which is a listed National Heritage
Place. No other world heritage properties or National Heritage Places occur near the Study Area. Refer to Section 3.1(a) for
information on the potential impacts to the GBRWHA.
Refer to Section 3.1(a)

3.1 (c) Wetlands of International Importance (declared Ramsar wetlands)

Description
There are no Ramsar wetlands within or within proximity of the Study Area. The nearest Ramsar wetland is in the Shoalwater
and Corio Bays Area located approximately 150 kilometres to the south-east of the Project (Refer to Appendix I RAMSAR
Wetlands Map).

Given the significant distance between the proposed action and the Shoalwater and Corio Bays Area Ramsar wetland, no
impacts to Wetlands of International Importance are expected.


3.1 (d) Listed threatened species and ecological communities

Description

Conservation significant flora
Data collected during searches of publically available information including the EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool
(PMST) (Department of Environment 2014) (refer to Attachment J EPCB PMST Report) and The Queensland
Governments Wildlife Online Extract identified one threatened ecological communities, three conservation significant flora
species and 26 introduced species potentially within the Study Area (refer to Attachment K Wildlife Online Report,
Attachment B.1 Terrestrial Study Area and Attachment B.2 Marine Study Area).
The threatened ecological communities identified within the PMST Report as potentially being in the Study Area is the littoral
rainforest and coastal vine thickets of eastern Australia.
Desktop assessment of species listed under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) and EBPC Act identified three
threatened flora species, one of which were determined as having a reasonable likelihood of occurrence within or adjacent to
the Study Area based on their known associations with specific vegetation communities and/or landforms that occur within the
area (refer to Attachment L Species Occurrence Table and Table 3.1).
Table 3.1: EPBC Threatened Flora potentially occurring in Study Area
Species Status under
EPBC
Type of Presence
Cycas ophiolitica Endangered Species or species habitat unlikely to occur in Study Area.
Lesser Swamp-orchid
(Phaius australis)
Endangered Species or species habitat likely to occur in Study Area.
Siahs Backbone (Streblus
pendulinus)
Endangered Species or species habitat unlikely to occur in Study Area.

The majority of the terrestrial Study Area has been previously cleared for grazing (rail loop area) or for the current DBCT and
HPCT port operations. The current concept does not require the clearing of any Category A (vegetation offsets, compliance
notices or voluntary declarations), or Category C (high-value regrowth vegetation) vegetation types.
Clearing/disturbance of small sections of Category B (remnant vegetation) and Category R (Reef regrowth watercourse
vegetation) vegetation may be required along the alignment of the rail loop and out-loading conveyor to the barge loading
facility (refer to Attachment M Regulated Vegetation). The existing remnant vegetation has been described in terms of
Regional Ecosystems (REs), as gazetted under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act) in Table 3.2).


Table 3.2: Regional Ecosystems potentially occurring within the Study Area
RE ID Description VMA Status
8.1.1 Mangrove vegetation of marine clay plains and estuaries. Estuarine wetland. Least Concern
8.1.2 Samphire open forbland to isolated clumps of forbs on saltpans and plains
adjacent to mangroves.
Least Concern
8.2.6 Corymbia tessellaris + Acacia leptocarpa + Banksia integrifolia + Melaleuca
dealbata + beach scrub species open forest on coastal parallel dunes.
Of Concern
8.2.2 Microphyll vine forest on coastal dunes. Of Concern
8.2.1 Casuarina equisetifolia open forest to woodland with Ipomoea pes-caprae and
Spinifex sericeus dominated ground layer on foredunes.
Of Concern

Conservation Significant Fauna
A list of 140 conservation significant fauna (including 47 Commonwealth protected migratory and marine birds) were
identified within proximity to the Study Area using the PMST (Department of the Environment 2014), Wildlife Online
(Department of Environment and Heritage Protection 2014) and other desktop searches of publically available information
(refer Attachment J EPBC PMST Report and Attachment K Wildlife Online Search Results). Identified listed species
determined to be potentially occurring within the Study Area include:
38 bird species;
13 mammals;
2 sharks;
20 reptiles; and
30 fish.

There are several conservation significant species listed under the EPBC Act and NC Act with potential to occur adjacent to
and within the Study Area.
A species likelihood analysis was conducted utilising the suitability of habitat, known range and recent records of species
within the Study Area to refine the list of potential species (refer Attachment L Species Occurrence Table). From this
likelihood assessment 115 fauna species and two flora species were identified as likely to occur within or adjacent to the
Study Area based on the known distribution and habitat preferences of each species as detailed in Table 3.3.


Table 3.3: Conservation significant species that may or are likely to inhabit the Study Area
Name EPBC Act Status NC Act Stats Likelihood of Occurrence
Birds
Squatter pigeon southern
subspecies (Geophaps
scripta
scripta)
Vulnerable Vulnerable Likely to occur - suitable habitat present and
within known range.
Australian painted snipe
(Rostratula australis)
Endangered Vulnerable Likely to occur suitable habitat is present
and within known range.
Masked Owl (Tyto
novaehollandiae kimberli)
Vulnerable Vulnerable May occur- suitable habitat is present and
within known range.
Fork-tailed swift (Apus pacificus) Marine
Migratory
- Likely to occur - suitable habitat present and
within known range.
Little Tern (Sterna albifrons) Marine
Migratory
- Likely to occur suitable habitat present and
within known range.
White-bellied Sea-Eagle
(Haliaeetus leucogaster)
Marine
Migratory
- Likely to occur suitable habitat present
White-throated Needletail
(Hirundapus caudacutus)
Marine
Migratory
Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica) Marine
Migratory
Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops
ornatus)
Marine
Migratory
Black-faced Monarch (Monarcha
melanopsis)
Marine
Migratory
- May occur- within known range however
limited suitable habitat available within
Study Area.
Spectacled monarch (Monarcha
trivirgatus)
Marine
Migratory
Common Sandpiper (Actitis
hypoleucos)
Marine
Migratory
- Likely to occur within known range and
suitable habitat present.
Great Egret (Ardea ibis) Marine
Migratory
Sharp-tailed sandpiper (Calidris
acuminata)
Marine
Migratory
Sanderling (Calidris alba) Marine
Migratory
- May occur within known range and
Red Knot (Calidris canutus) Marine
Migratory
Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris
ferruginea)
Marine
Migratory
Red-necked Stint (Calidris
ruficollis)
Marine
Migratory
Great Knot (Calidris tenuirostris) Marine
Migratory
Greater Sand Plover (Charadrius
mongolus)
Marine
Migratory
Lesser Sand Plover (Charadrius
mongolus)
Marine
Migratory
Latham's Snipe (Gallinago
hardwickii)
Marine
Migratory
Bar-tailed Godwit (Limosa
lapponica)
Marine
Migratory
- May occur within known range and
Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa
limosa)
Marine
Migratory


Eastern Curlew (Numenius
madagascariensis)
Marine
Migratory
Little Curlew (Numenius minutus) Marine
Migratory
suitable habitat present
Whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus) Marine
Migratory
Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis
fulva)
Marine
Migratory
Grey Plover (Pluvialis squatarola) Marine
Migratory
Wood Sandpiper (Tringa glareola) Marine
Migratory
Marsh Sandpiper (Tringa
stagnatilis)
Marine
Migratory
Terek Sandpiper (Xenus cinereus) Marine
Migratory
Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis)

Marine
Migratory
- May occur known to occur within
proximity to Study Area
Magpie Goose (Anseranas
semipalmata)
Marine - Likely to occur within known range and
suitable habitat present
Pin-tailed Snipe (Gallinago
stenura)
Marine
Migratory
- May occur suitable habitat present but
distribution range is not well known.
Black-winged Stilt (Himantopus
himantopus)
Osprey (Pandion cristatus) Marine
Migratory
- May occur - suitable habitat present but
distribution range is not well known.
Red-necked Avocet (Recurvirostra
novaehollandiae)
Mammals
Blue whale (Balaenoptera
musculus)
Endangered - May occur suitable habitat present
adjacent to the Study Area.
Humpback Whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae)
Vulnerable
Migratory
Vulnerable Likely to occur within known range and
Water Mouse (Xeromys myoides) Vulnerable Vulnerable Likely to occur within known range and
Bryde's Whale (Balaenoptera
edeni)
Migratory - May occur within known range and
suitable habitat present adjacent to Study
Area.
Dugong (Dugong dugong) Migratory Vulnerable Likely to occur within known range and
Giant Manta Ray (Manta birostris) Migratory - May occur within known distribution range.
Irrawaddy dolphin (Orcaella
brevirostris)
Migratory
Near Threatened Likely to occur within known range and
Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin
(Sousa chinensis)
Migratory Near Threatened Likely to occur within known range and
Minke Whale (Balaenoptera
acutorostrata)
Cetacean - May occur within known range however
limited suitable habitat is present within the
Study Area.
Common dolphin (Delphinus
delphis)
Cetacean - May occur outside of known Australian
locations however suitable habitat is
present.
Spotted dolphin (Stenella
attenuata)
Cetacean - Likely to occur within known range and


Indian Ocean Bottlenose Dolphin
(Tursiops aduncus)
Cetacean - Likely to occur within known range and
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus s. str.)
Cetacean - May occur suitable habitat present
adjacent to the Study Area.
Sharks
Green Sawfish (Pristis
zijsron)
Vulnerable - Likely to occur within known range and
Porbeagle (Lamna nasus) Migratory - Likely to occur within known range and
Reptiles
Loggerhead Turtle (Caretta
caretta)
Endangered - Likely to occur within known range and
Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas) Vulnerable
Marine
Migratory
Salt-water Crocodile (Crocodylus
porosus)
Marine
Migratory
Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys
imbricata)
Vulnerable
Migratory
Marine
Olive Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys
olivacea)
Endangered
Migratory
Marine
Endangered Likely to occur within known range and
Flatback Turtle (Natator
depressus)
Vulnerable
Migratory
Marine
Horned Seasnake (Acalyptophis
peronei)
Dubios Seasnake (Aipysurus
duboisii)
Spine-tailed Seasnake (Aipysurus
eydouxii)
Olive Seasnake (Aipysurus laevis) Marine - Likely to occur within known range and
Stokes Seasnake (Astrotia
stokesii)
Spectacled Seasnake (Disteira
kingii)
Marine - May occur within known range and
suitable habitat present adjacent to the
Study Area.
Olive-headed Seasnake (Disteira
major)
Turtle-headed Seasnake
(Emydocephalus annulatus)
Elegant Seasnake (Hydrophis
elegans)
Ornate Seasnake (Hydrophis
ornatus)
Spine-bellied Seasnake Marine - Likely to occur within known range and
A Sea Krait (Laticauda colubrina) Marine - May occur within known range and
Study Area.


A Sea Krait (Laticauda laticaudata) Marine - May occur within known range and
Study Area.
Yellow-bellied Seasnake (Pelamis
platurus)
Marine - May occur within known range and
Study Area.
Fish
Shortpouch Pygmy Pipehorse
(Acentronura tentaculata)
Marine - May occur suitable habitat adjacent to
Study Area.
Pacific short-bodied Pipefish
(Choeroichthys brachysoma)
Study Area.
Fijian Banded Pipefish
(Corythoichthys amplexus)
Study Area.
Reticulate Pipefish (Corythoichthys
flavofasciatus)
Study Area.
Reef-top Pipefish (Corythoichthys
haematopterus)
Study Area.
Australian Messmate Pipefish
(Corythoichthys intestinalis)
Study Area.
Orange-spotted Pipefish
(Corythoichthys ocellatus)
Study Area.
Paxtons Pipefish (Corythoichthys
paxtoni)
Study Area.
Schultz Pipefish (Corythoichthys
schultzi)
Study Area.
Bluestripe Pipefish (Doryrhamphus
excisus)
Study Area.
Girdled Pipefish (Festucalex
cinctus)
Study Area.
Tiger Pipefish (Filicampus tigris)

Marine - Likely to occur-within known range and
Red-hair Pipefish (Halicampus
dunckeri)
Study Area.
Mud Pipefish (Halicampus grayi) Marine - May occur within known range.
Glittering Pipefish (Halicampus
nitidus)
Study Area.
Spiny-snout Pipefish (Halicampus
spinirostris)
Study Area.
Blue-speckled Pipefish
(Hippichthys cyanospilos)
Study Area.
Beady Pipefish (Hippichthys
penicillus)
Marine May occur suitable habitat adjacent to
Study Area.
Spotted Seahorse (Hippocampus
kuda)
Study Area.
Flat-face Seahorse (Hippocampus
trimaculatus)
Marine - Likely to occur suitable habitat present
Zebra Seahorse (Hippocampus
zebra) Marine -
Study Area.
Andersons Pipefish (Micrognathus
andersonii)
Thorntail Pipefish (Micrognathus
brevirostris)
Study Area.
Painted Pipefish (Nannocampus
pictus)
Marine - May occur within known range.


Pallid Pipehorse (Solegnathus
hardwickii)
Robust Ghostpipefish
(Solenostomus cyanopterus)
Rough-snout Ghost Pipefish
(Solenostomus paegnius)
Study Area.
Ornate Ghostpipefish
(Solenostomus paradoxus)
Double-ended Pipehorse
(Syngnathoides biaculeatus)
Benstick Pipefish
(Trachyrhamphus bicoarctatus)
Plants
Black Ironbox (Eucalyptus
raveretiana)
Vulnerable Vulnerable May occur within known range and
Lesser Swamp-orchid (Phaius
australis)
Endangered Endangered Likely to occur within known range and

Due to the proposed design, construction and operation of the BBT within an existing port area, with minimal dredging,
minimal infrastructure, slow moving barges and tight dust and noise controls, it is considered that the Project will not have a
significant impact on the species listed in Table 3.3 as the Project will be conducted under an EMP and:
Not lead to a long-term decrease in the size of the species populations;
Not reduce the area of occupancy or fragment any existing populations;
Not adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of the species;
Not disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population;
Not modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is
likely to decline;
Not result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species
habitat;
Not introduce disease that may cause the species to decline; and
Not interfere substantially with the recovery of the species.

3.1 (e) Listed migratory species

Description
Desktop review and likelihood analysis found that 32 Commonwealth listed migratory birds may occur within or in close
proximity to the Study Area including:
Fork-tailed swift (Apus pacificus);
Little Tern (Sterna albifrons);
White-bellied Sea-Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster);
White-throated Needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus);
Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica);
Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus);
Black-faced Monarch (Monarcha melanopsis)
Spectacled monarch (Monarcha trivirgatus);
Common Sandpiper (Actitis hypoleucos);
Great Egret (Ardea ibis);
Sharp-tailed sandpiper (Calidris acuminata);
Sanderling (Calidris alba);
Red Knot (Calidris canutus);
Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea);

Red-necked Stint (Calidris ruficollis);
Great Knot (Calidris tenuirostris);
Greater Sand Plover (Charadrius mongolus);
Lesser Sand Plover (Charadrius mongolus);
Latham's Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii);
Bar-tailed Godwit (Limosa lapponica);
Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa limosa);
Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariensis);
Little Curlew (Numenius minutus);
Whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus);
Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis fulva);
Grey Plover (Pluvialis squatarola);
Painted Snipe (Rostratula benghalensis ((sensu lato));
Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis);
Wood Sandpiper (Tringa glareola);
Marsh Sandpiper (Tringa stagnatilis);
Terek Sandpiper (Xenus cinereus); and
Osprey (Pandion cristatus).

Desktop review and likelihood analysis found that three Commonwealth listed marine birds may occur within or in close
proximity to the Study Area including:
Red-capped Plover (Charadrius ruficapillus);
Black-winged Stilt (Himantopus himantopus); and
Red-necked Avocet (Recurvirostra novaehollandiae).

Desktop review and likelihood found that 14 Commonwealth listed migratory species (excluding birds) may occur within or in
close proximity to the Study Area including:
Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae);
Bryde's Whale (Balaenoptera edeni);
Dugong (Dugong dugong);
Giant Manta Ray (Manta birostris);
Irrawaddy dolphin (Orcaella brevirostris);
Killer whale (Orcinus orca);
Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis);
Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus);
Porbeagle (Lamna nasus);
Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas);
Salt-water Crocodile (Crocodylus porosus);
Flatback Turtle (Natator depressus);
Olive Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea); and
Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata).


Threatened fauna and migratory species identified as potentially present within the Study Area are not likely to be significantly
impacted as the BBT is proposed within a brownfield site at an existing coal port and the proposed action has been designed
to minimise impacts through the use of shallow draft, slow moving barges and state-of-the-art transhippers operating within
existing anchorage areas.
BBT is not likely to impact significantly on the species listed above as the layout, construction and operation and
implementation of the EMP will:
Not substantially modify (including by fragmenting, altering fire regime, altering nutrient cycles or altering hydrological
cycles), destroy or isolate an area of important habitat;
Not result in an invasive species that is harmful becoming established in an area of important habitat; and
Not seriously disrupt the lifecycle (breeding, feeding, migration or resting behaviours) of an ecologically significant
proportion of the migratory species populations.

3.1 (f) Commonwealth marine area
Description
The proposed action will not take place within a Commonwealth marine area. Ships will traverse the Commonwealth marine
area to be loaded at the transhipper.

As noted on GBRMPA fact sheet Ports and Shipping 2012:
Environmental protection measures implemented under the Marine Park Act 1975 include compulsory pilotage and a zoning
system, in accordance with the Great Barrier Reef Zoning Plan 2003 which confines shipping traffic to designated shipping
areas.

The proposed action will have minimal impact on Commonwealth marine areas.

3.1 (g) Commonwealth land

Description
The Study Area is not located on or within close proximity to Commonwealth land.
The Study Area is not located on Commonwealth land therefore there are no expected impacts.

3.1 (h) The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park
Description
The barge loading facility will not be within the GBRMP as the port limits of HPCT to Half Tide Tug Harbour are excluded from
the marine park.
Some of the transhipping activities will occur within port limits and some offshore in the general use zones of the GBRMP at
existing anchorage points (refer to Appendix G.2 Transhipment and Mooring Areas.).
The boundary of the GBRMP zoning and the Commonwealth Marine Areas in relation to the proposed BBT footprint are
shown in Attachment H GBRMP Zoning. The EIS assessment will investigate the Project against the following GBRMPA
policies and assessment tools:
Environmental Impact Management Policy;
Structures Policy;
Dredging and Spoil Disposal Policy; and
Environmental Assessment and Management Risk Matrix Framework 2009


NQBP has developed an EMP for the Port of Hay Point which is an important reference document for current and potential
users of the Port of Hay Point. The EMP outlines the current environmental management practices and controls to ensure the
protection and enhancement of the port environment on the GBRMP.
As specified in the EMP any new project undertaken on NQBP land requires a project specific EMP which will also be required
as part of the EIS assessment process for BBT. The BBT EMP will be submitted to NQBP in draft for review prior to release of
the EIS for public and agency comment and will include:
A description of activities carried out onsite;
Roles and responsibilities;
Staff training and awareness;
Sediment and soil management;
Flora and fauna management;
Water quality protection;
Cultural heritage protection;
Dust management;
Noise controls;
Monitoring activities;
Pollution risk identification and management;
Emergency preparedness and response;
Protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of the GBRWHA;
Inspections and maintenance; and
Improvement and review.

The following standard measures, which will result in significantly reduced environmental risks, will be implemented into the
BBT:
Dust and spill control, sensitive lighting, rainwater capture, colour of vessels, propeller protection and noise reduction
controls are critical elements of the barge and transhipper design;
Barges will travel at slow speeds resulting in minimal likelihood of marine megafauna strikes;
Loading into ocean-going ships will not take place until the masters of the barges and/or transhippers and the ship
are satisfied that all preparations have been completed and the prevailing weather conditions are acceptable; and
The sea going vessels will comply with current ballast and quarantine regulations.

BBTs EMP will be developed as a stand-alone document that can be read separately from the main EIS document and it will
include site specific objectives of construction, operational, and decommissioning management.
Further discussion of impacts and mitigation measures to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park are provided in Section 3.2.

3.1 (i) A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development

Description
Not applicable as the Project is not a large coal mining development.

Not applicable as the Project is not a large coal mining development.


3.2 Nuclear actions, actions taken by the Commonwealth (or Commonwealth
agency), actions taken in a Commonwealth marine area, actions taken on
Commonwealth land, or actions taken in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park

3.2 (a) Is the proposed action a nuclear action?

No

Yes (provide details below)
If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment

3.2 (b) Is the proposed action to be taken by the
Commonwealth or a Commonwealth
agency?

No

If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment

3.2 (c) Is the proposed action to be taken in a
Commonwealth marine area?

No

If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(f))
Shipping to and from the terminal along designated shipping channels under Australian maritime controls
therefore no significant impacts are expected on the Commonwealth marine area.
3.2 (d) Is the proposed action to be taken on
Commonwealth land?

No

If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(g))

3.2 (e) Is the proposed action to be taken in the
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park?

No

If yes, nature & extent of likely impact on the whole environment (in addition to 3.1(h))

Transhipping activities will occur within the GBRMP General Use zone, within designated shipping areas
(refer to Attachment G.2 Transhipment and Mooring Areas). The proposed barging and transhipping
activities are not likely to impact upon the GBRMP if designed, constructed and operated appropriately. No
dredging is proposed outside of the existing port limits and only minimal dredging around the swing basin
approach in the tug harbour is proposed and this material will be reused as reclamation material (ie no sea
dumping). Environmental controls will include noise suppression, dust containment and control, tight
management of coal transhipping to minimise risk of spillage, water recycling, marine sensitive lighting on
vessels, and other relevant controls as agreed with NQBP and the government agencies.
Further investigations regarding the potential for spillage of coal, and the subsequent effects and mitigation
measures of coal contamination to the GBRMP will be reported in the EIS phase. Research to date indicates
the potential risk of coal spillage from the BBT operations is likely to be very low due to the contemporary
design of the proposed barges and transhippers which will use containment devices, dust control and
enclosed transfer systems.
Potential impacts on flora, fauna, water quality and world heritage values will be investigated during the EIS
by specialist scientists and independent reviewers. The investigations will include determining impacts from
construction activities (such as potential water quality impacts from the construction of the barge loading
facility and underwater noise impacts during blasting in the tug harbour) and operational activities
(associated with vessel movements and coal transhipment).

3.3 Other important features of the environment
3.3 (a) Flora and fauna
A species likelihood table outlining conservation significant flora and fauna with potential to occur within the Study Area and
an assessment of the likelihood of their occurrence based on the presence of suitable habitat can be found in Attachment
L Species Occurrence Table. Invasive flora and fauna species with potential to occur within the Study Area are provided
below (Department of Environment 2014).

Invasive flora species likely to be present within the Study Area include:
Pond apple (Annona glabra);
Cabomba (Cabomba caroliniana);
Rubber vine (Cryptostegia grandiflora);
Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes);
Hymenachne (Hymenachne amplexicaulis);
Cotton-leaved physic-nut (Jatropha gossypifolia);
Lantana (Lantana camara);
Parthenium (Parthenium hysterophorus); and
Salvinia (Salvinia molesta).

Invasive fauna species likely to be present within the Study Area include:
Mullard (Anas platyrhynchos);
Rock pigeon (Columba livia);
Nutmeg mannikin (Lonchura punctulata)
House sparrow (Passer domesticus)
Red-whiskered bulbul (Phcnontus jocosus)
Spotted turtle-dove (Streptopelia chinensis)
Common starling (Sturnus vulgaris)
Cane toad (Rhinella marina)
Domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris)
Domestic cat (Felis catus)
House mouse (Mus musculus)
Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus)
Black rat (Rattus rattus)
Pig (Sus scrofa); and
Red fox (Vulpes vulpes).

The current concept does not require the clearing of any Category A (vegetation offsets, compliance notices or voluntary
declarations), or Category C (high-value regrowth vegetation) vegetation types. Clearing and/or disturbance of small
sections of Category B (remnant vegetation) and Category R (Reef regrowth watercourse vegetation) will be required along
the alignment of the rail loop and out-loading conveyor between the transfer tower and the barge loading platform.

3.3 (b) Hydrology, including water flows

Surface water
There are a number of creeks adjacent to the Study Area located within the Sarina Catchment Area; these include Sandfly
Creek (which drains directly into Half Tide Tug Harbour), Sandy Creek, Breen Creek, Bell Creek, Alligator Creek and
Splitters Creek (which drain into Sandringham Bay).
Monitoring has been conducted within and adjacent to the Study Area for decades by port operators, regulatory agencies
and others. Water quality data for the Study Area will be collated as part of the EIS.
Flooding
Flooding in the immediate Study Area is not likely. An assessment of this will be undertaken during the EIS process to
identify potential impact from flooding,


Groundwater
Groundwater is used to irrigate crops in the region. Little information is publically available on groundwater for the Study
Area however it is expected that there will be minimal changes to groundwater hydrology and groundwater quality as a
result of the BBT.
Information regarding the quality of the groundwater in the Study Area will be investigated during the EIS process.
Marine
The Study Area is located within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Mackay/Capricorn Management Area and within the
GBRWHA. Marine waters within Hay Point are typically reported as having low turbidity.
Marine water quality has been monitored for a number of years within the Study Area by the port operators and government
agencies and will be collated in the EIS.
Wetlands
There are no Ramsar wetlands within or within proximity of the Study Area. The nearest Ramsar wetland is in the
Shoalwater and Corio Bays Area located approximately 150 kilometres to the south-east of the Project (Refer to Appendix
I RAMSAR Wetlands Map).
Proximity of nationally and internationally significant wetlands to the proposed BBT is shown in Attachment N Nationally
Important Wetlands.
The Sandringham Bay Bakers Creek Aggregation is located approximately six kilometres north-west of BBT and is 7,367
hectares in area. Sarina Inlet-Ince Bay Aggregation is located 10 kilometres north of BBT and is 27,934 hectares in area.
These wetlands are listed as a Nationally Important Wetlands and are within proximity to the Study Area. These wetlands
will not be directly impacted upon by the Project construction or operation.
An artificially constructed wetland (Lake Barfield) is adjacent to a portion of the proposed conveyor which will run alongside
the existing rail line. This wetland attracts various birds and supports freshwater fauna. BBT will be designed and operated
to ensure minimal impact.

3.3 (c) Soil and Vegetation characteristics
Desktop studies identified the following soil types in the Study Area:
Sedentary soils shallow, stony, acidic, brown lithosols;
Ferric, sodic, yellow chromosols;
Ferric, mottled, subnatric, yellow grey sodosols;
Humose, extratidal hydrosols; and
Straticrudosols.
With reference to the State Planning Policy 2/02 Guideline, Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) ASS occur predominantly in low-lying
coastal areas generally below relative level (RL) five metres Australian Height Datum (AHD) (DSDIP 2002) .
Mapping of the Hay Point-Armstrong Beach area by DERM (now EHP) found that Potential Acid Sulfate Soils (PASS)
underlie the mangrove forests and the probability of ASS occurrence in the development footprint of the Project is high.
Studies by URS however on behalf of DBCT in 2000 indicated that the soil material at the Port of Hay Point below five
metres had a low potential for acid generation (NQBP 2009).
The geology of the Study Area is co-dominated by Quaternary sediments with alluvial and lacustrine deposits. The elevated
areas within the Study Area are generally comprised of early carboniferous basic volcanics. The landform and geology of
the proposed stockyard area comprises Carboniferous Campwyn Volcanics.
Regional ecosystem mapping classified the Study Area as Land System 2 Quaternary coastal dunes and beaches with
soils being predominantly siliceous or calcareous sands.
Geology in the Study Area is dominated by three main geological units (refer to Table 3.4 and Attachment O - Geology).
The Campwyn Beds (DW) are the dominant geological formation within Hay Point; and are comprised of a succession of
andesitic and rhyolitic flows and pyroclastics, mudstone, siltstone, lithic argentite, limestone, oolitic limestone and

conglomertate (GHD 2003). Quaternary sediments are located around the HPCT. Coastal dunes are common around the
Study Area.
Table: 3.4: Geological units of the Study Area
Map
Symbol
Formation Period Rock Type Lithology Description
Dw Campwyn
Volcanics
Carboniferous Sedimentary
siliclastic
Sandstone, siltstone, mudstone (locally with
radiolarians), pebbly sandstone, breccia, mafic
hyaloclastite, rhyolitic ignimbrite; minor
conglomerate, lapilli tuff, limestone.
Qs Sediments
38484
Quaternary Regolith Quaternary sediments, undivided.
Qd Coastal
Dunes
Quaternary Regolith Coastal sand dunes, beach sand, barrier beaches,
foredune, beach ridges; calcareous and siliceous,
locally shelly and/or cemented (beach rock); locally
reworked.

3.3 (d) Outstanding natural features

There are no outstanding natural features identified for the onshore section however the offshore portion of the Study Area
extends into the GBRWHA, the Great Barrier Reef Coast Marine Park and the GBRMP. The world heritage area and the
marine parks are recognised for their outstanding natural features. The outstanding natural features of the GBRWHA are
described in Section 3.1(a).
3.3 (e) Remnant native vegetation

Mapped regulated vegetation under the Vegetation Management Act 1998 are provided in Attachment M Regulated
Vegetation. There is approximately 20 hectares of remnant vegetation within the BBT footprint, however not all of this will
be disturbed as a result of the development.

3.3 (f) Gradient (or depth range if action is to be taken in a marine area)
Not applicable.

3.3 (g) Current state of the environment

Erosion
Existing infrastructure and development within the Study Area has not created significant erosion issues.
Pest species
The area has been extensively disturbed and modified through ongoing development. Two declared pest plant species
Rubber Vine (Cryptostegia grandiflora) and Prickly Pear (Opuntia sp.) have been identified in past surveys of the port land
and lantana has been the focus of control efforts in the past (Ports Corporation Queensland 2002).
Native vegetation and crops
The majority of the area of proposed development has been previously cleared for the current DBCT and HPCT port
operations. Other land uses in the area include cane farming, sugar milling and cattle grazing (refer to Attachment P
Land Use).

3.3 (h) Commonwealth Heritage Places or other places recognised as having heritage values

Other than the GBRWHA, no commonwealth heritage places or any other places recognised as having heritage values are
known to occur within or within proximity to the Study Area (refer to Attachment Q Heritage Areas).

3.3 (i) Indigenous heritage values

The Hay Point port area is the traditional territory of the Yuibera clan group of the Birri Gubba tribe however there are
reportedly a number of Traditional Owner groups with an interest in the area including the Mackay Coloured Cooperative,
the Birri Gubba Corporation, Bindal elders Aboriginal Corporation, Birriah Touri Aboriginal Corporation, Wiri Yuwiburra Touri
Aboriginal Corporation, Birri Gubba Wadja Bimbi, Gubba Gutha Bimbi and the Yuibera Traditional Elders and the Central
Queensland Land Council (Ports Corporation Queensland 2002).
Consultation will be undertaken with the Traditional Owners to undertake a cultural heritage survey of any land to be
disturbed and a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) will be developed for the BBT.
3.3 (j) Other important or unique values of the environment
The nearest national park in the marine area is the South Cumberland Island National Park which is located approximately
45 kilometres north-east. The nearest land based National Park is Eungella National Park which is located approximately
83 kilometres north-west of the Study Area.
There are three conservation Parks within proximity to the Project route including;
Mount Hector Conservation Park (located approximately four kilometres south-west of the Study Area);
Sandringham Bay Conservation Park (located approximately eight kilometres west of the Study Area); and
Bakers Creek Conservation Park (located approximately nine kilometres north-west of the Study Area).

Three wetlands of National Significance within proximity to the Study Area include:
Sandringham Bay-Bakers Creek Aggregation (located approximately six kilometres west of the Study Area);
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (located approximately one kilometre south of the Study Area); and
Sarina Inlet-Ince Bay Aggregation (located approximately 10 kilometres south of the Study Area).
An artificially constructed wetland (Lake Barfield) to the south of the proposed BBT is located on private land. This wetland
attracts various birds and supports freshwater fauna.
A map showing the location of sensitive environmental areas and Wetlands of National Significance is provided in
Attachments M Regulated Vegetation and Attachment N-Nationally Important Wetlands respectively.

3.3 (k) Tenure of the action area (eg freehold, leasehold)
Tenure details are provided in Table 1.1 in Section 1.3. The predominant tenure type is freehold owned by NQBP and
private land holders (refer to Attachment F Tenure).

3.3 (l) Existing land/ marine uses of area
The Study Area (refer to Attachment B.1 Terrestrial Study Area) is adjacent to the small town of Half Tide close to the
beach and small rural holdings. The dominant land use within the terminal site is cattle grazing, while the broader study
area is in a port precinct.
The Project is adjacent to the long established and declared port area of the Port of Hay Point. The area has been used for
coal terminals since the early 1970s and has seen the establishment of small townships surrounding it since that time.
Other land uses in the area include cane farming, sugar milling and cattle grazing.
Marine uses are predominantly associated with shipping activities for the coal terminals, ie tug operations, shipping,
maintenance dredging and port management.
3.3 (m) Any proposed land/ marine uses of area
NQBPs Draft Final Ten Year Development Master Plan for the Port of Hay Point, which is intended to be used by NQBP for
guiding development at Hay Point over the next 10 to 15 years is a planning guide. It does not preclude NQBP from
approving development that is inconsistent with the plan, particularly if better planning outcomes can be achieved by an
alternative approach (Aurecon 2012). The Master Plan is required to align with the planning and development intents
described in the LUP.

The Project is consistent with the existing land and marine use of the area and aligns with the future plans for the Strategic
Port Land at the Port of Hay Point (refer to Attachment C NQBP Land Use Designations).

4 Measures to avoid or reduce impacts

HP Exports project team is committed to delivering a low impact, coal export solution that aligns with State and
Commonwealth government criteria for incremental development in PPDA. The Mitchell Ports barging and transhipping
model developed by the project team has been presented to UNESCO, GBRMPA, DoE, CG officers and technical and
professionals in all levels of government. It has been acknowledged as a lower impact technology that can be integrated
into existing ports.

The proponents premise of doing things smarter and leveraging off existing infrastructure will result in an avoidance and
reduction in impacts.

Port of Hay Point Environmental Management Plan
NQBP has developed an EMP for the Port of Hay Point which is an important reference document for current and potential
users of the Port of Hay Point. The EMP outlines the current environmental management practices and controls to ensure
the protection and enhancement of the port environment.

The EMP includes the following:
A description of activities carried out onsite;
Roles and responsibilities;
Staff training and awareness;
Sediment and soil management;
Flora and fauna management;
Water quality protection;
Cultural heritage protection;
Dust management and noise controls;
Monitoring activities;
Pollution risk identification and management;
Emergency preparedness and response;
Protection of the Outstanding Universal Values of the GBRWHA;
Inspections and maintenance; and
Improvement and review.

BBTs EMP will incorporate the intent of the EMP for the Port of Hay Point.


5 Conclusion on the likelihood of significant impacts

5.1 Do you THINK your proposed action is a controlled action?

No, complete section 5.2

Yes, complete section 5.3

5.2 Proposed action IS NOT a controlled action.

5.3 Proposed action IS a controlled action

Matters likely to be impacted

World Heritage values (sections 12 and 15A)

National Heritage places (sections 15B and 15C)
Wetlands of international importance (sections 16 and 17B)

Listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A)

Listed migratory species (sections 20 and 20A)
Protection of the environment from nuclear actions (sections 21 and 22A)
Commonwealth marine environment (sections 23 and 24A)

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (sections 24B and 24C)
A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development
(sections 24D and 24E)
Protection of the environment from actions involving Commonwealth land (sections 26 and 27A)
Protection of the environment from Commonwealth actions (section 28)
Commonwealth Heritage places overseas (sections 27B and 27C)


6 Environmental record of the responsible party

Yes No
6.1 Does the party taking the action have a satisfactory record of responsible environmental
management?

Provide details
HP Exports Pty Ltd and Mitchell Ports Pty Ltd have not had any penalties or infringement notices
issued in relation to their environmental performance.

6.2 Has either (a) the party proposing to take the action, or (b) if a permit has been applied for
in relation to the action, the person making the application - ever been subject to any
proceedings under a Commonwealth, State or Territory law for the protection of the
environment or the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources?

If yes, provide details

6.3 If the party taking the action is a corporation, will the action be taken in accordance with
the corporations environmental policy and planning framework?

If yes, provide details of environmental policy and planning framework
See Attachment I Proponents Environmental Policy

6.4 Has the party taking the action previously referred an action under the EPBC Act, or been
responsible for undertaking an action referred under the EPBC Act?

Provide name of proposal and EPBC reference number (if known)
Shareholder - Mitchell Ports - Fitzroy Terminal Project EPBC reference number 2011/6069


7 I nformation sources and attachments
(For the information provided above)

7.1 References
Ahrens, MJ, and DJ Morrisey. 2005. Biological Effects of Unburnt Coal in the Marine Environment. Oceanography and
Marine Biology 43: 69122.
ANZECC. 2000. Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality.
http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/53cda9ea-7ec2-49d4-af29-d1dde09e96ef/files/nwqms-
guidelines-4-vol1.pdf.
Aurecon. 2012. Draft Final Port of Hay Point Ten Year Development Master Plan. http://www.nqbp.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2012/10/Draft-Final-Port-of-Hay-Point-Ten-Year-Development-Master-Plan1.pdf.
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection. 2009. Queensland Water Quality Guidelines.
http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/water/pdf/water-quality-guidelines.pdf.
Department of Environment. 2014. EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool Report. Australian Government.
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection. 2014. Wildlife Online Database Search Report. Wildlife Online.
https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/wildlife-online/.
DSDIP. 2002. State Planning Policy 2/02 Guideline, Acid Sulfate Soils.
http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/resources/policy/spp_guidelines_oct_02_v1.pdf.
GHD. 2003. Development of Land Holdings at Dudgeon Point: Investigation Report: Prepared for PCQ.
<http://www.mackay.qld.gov.au/community/community_directory/category?root_node_selection=51263>.
Jaffrennou, C, P Giamarchi, J Cabon, L Stephan, L Burel-Deschamps, F Bautin, A Thomas, J Dumont, and S Le Floch.
2007. Simulations of Accidental Coal Immersion. Marine Pollution Bulletin 54: 193239.
North Queensland Bulk Ports Corporation Limited (NQBP). 2010. Port of Hay Point Land Use Plan.
http://www.nqbp.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/PortofHayPointLandUsePlan.pdf.
NQBP. 2009. Environmental Management Plan: Port of Hay Point. http://www.nqbp.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2012/04/PortofHayPointEnvironmentalManagementPlan.pdf.
. 2012. Port Handbook: Port of Hay Point. http://www.nqbp.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Port-of-NQBP
2012.
Ports Corporation Queensland. 2002. Port of Hay Point Environmental Management Plan.
http://d301432.u111.fasthit.net/files/Submitted_EPBC/Port/Attachments/Attachment%20No.1%20PCQ%20Docum
ents/HayPointempDec202002.pdf.
UNESCO. 2014. Great Barrier Reef. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)
criteria against which the GBRWHA.

7.2 Reliability and date of information

The information contained in Section 3 was largely sourced from the Protected Matters Search Tool Report and Interactive
Mapping Tool. Further details on NES particularly threatened flora and fauna were obtained from reputable websites
including State and Federal Government, Queensland Herbarium (Regional Ecosystem Description Database). The
information provided is preliminary as no field surveys have been undertaken to date specifically for this referral to confirm
the presence or absence of the above mentioned MNES. Impacts have been assessed as accurately as possible based on
the information available.


7.3 Attachments

attached
Title of attachment(s)
You must attach

figures, maps or aerial photographs
showing the project locality (section
1)

Attachment A Location Overview
Attachment B.1 Terrestrial Study
Area
Attachment B.2 Marine Study Area
GIS file delineating the boundary of
the referral area (section 1)
figures, maps or aerial photographs
showing the location of the project
in respect to any matters of national
environmental significance or
important features of the
environments (section 3)

Attachment C NQBP Land Use
Designations
Attachment D Planning Scheme
Attachment E Affected Parcels
Attachment F Tenure
Attachment G.1 Concept Plan
Attachment G.2 Proposed
Transhipment and Cyclone Mooring
Areas
Attachment H GBRMP Zoning
Attachment M Regulated Vegetation
Attachment N Directory of Important
Wetlands
Attachment O Geology
Attachment P Land Use
Attachment Q Heritage Areas
If relevant, attach

copies of any state or local
government approvals and consent
conditions (section 2.5)

copies of any completed
assessments to meet state or local
government approvals and
outcomes of public consultations, if
available (section 2.6)

copies of any flora and fauna
investigations and surveys (section
3)

technical reports relevant to the
assessment of impacts on protected
matters that support the arguments
and conclusions in the referral
(section 3 and 4)

Attachment I Proponent
Environmental Policy
Attachment J PMST Report
Attachment K Wildlife Online
Attachment L Species Likelihood
Assessment
report(s) on any public consultations
undertaken, including with
Indigenous stakeholders (section 3)


8 Contacts, signatures and declarations

Project title:

8.1 Person proposing to take action

Name Ben King

Title Director

Organisation Hay Point Exports Pty Ltd

ACN 600 384 969

Postal address 4/293 Queen Street, Brisbane Qld 4000 Australia

Telephone 0448 056 324

Email b.king@hpexports.com.au

Declaration
I declare that to the best of my knowledge the information I have given on, or attached
to this form is complete, current and correct.
I understand that giving false or misleading information is a serious offence.
I agree to be the proponent for this action.

Signature

Date: 30/06/2014

Bowen Basin Terminal Proposal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bowen Basin Terminal Proposal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BBT Referral June 2014 1

Referral of proposed action

You might also like