Document Name i Insert Month/Year

Appendix AB Stygofauna Survey and Assessment

1. Baseline Survey

2.

................................................................................................................... 10

................................................................................................................... 12

.............................................................................................................. 12

....................................................................... 13

......................................... 14

....................................................................................................... 15

........................................................................................................................... 15

....................................................................................................... 19

.................................................................................................................... 19

........................................................................ 20

....................................................................................... 21

........................................................................................... 22

...................................................................................................................... 23

The EIS should provide a description to Order or Family taxonomic rank of the presence and nature of stygofauna occurring in groundwater likely to be affected by the project.

Sampling and survey methods should follow the best practice guideline which is currently that published by the Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority - Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors No.54 (December 2003) and No. 54a (August 2007).

In any groundwater aquifers found to contain stygofauna, describe the potential impacts on stygofauna of any changes in the quality and quantity of the groundwater, and describe any mitigation measures that may be applied.

Phase No. Samples inside Project influence No. Samples outside Project influence Total

1 15 0 15

2 15 10 25

3 12 4 16

4 0 6 7

All 42 20 62

Bore Code Lithology / Aquifer

Monitored

phase 1 phase 2 phase 3 phase 4

Sampling methods

Sampling methods

Sampling methods

Sampling methods

MB1A Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB1B Alluvium H & P H H -

MB2 Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB3A Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB3B Horse Creek Alluvium H & B H H -

MB4A Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB4B Horse Creek Alluvium H H H -

MB5 Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB6 Walloon Coal Measures H & P H - -

MB7A Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB7B Horse Creek Alluvium - H H -

MB8A Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB8B Horse Creek Alluvium - H - -

MB9 Walloon Coal Measures H & P H - -

MB10 Walloon Coal Measures H & P H H -

MB11 Walloon Coal Measures H & P H - -

MB12 Walloon Coal Measures H & P H - -

MB14 Horse Creek Alluvium - P H H

MB15 Horse Creek Alluvium - P H H

MB16 Horse Creek Alluvium - H & P H H

MB17 Alluvium - P H H

MB18 Horse Creek Alluvium - H & P - P

MB19 Horse Creek Alluvium - - - P

P1101 Walloon Coal Measures - H - -

P1102 Walloon Coal Measures - H - -

P1103 Walloon Coal Measures - H - -

P1104 Walloon Coal Measures - H - -

P1105 Walloon Coal Measures - H - -

MB7B

Horse Creek

Alluvium 29/03/2012 3 Yes Enchytraeidae indet. ELIM 1 Amphibious

*

Parastenocaris sp. ELIM 5 Stygobite

MB15

Horse Creek

Alluvium 17/07/2012 4 No Enchytraeidae indet. ELIM 1 Amphibious

*

Naididae indet. ELIM 1 Stygofauna

Aeolosoma indet. ELIM 3 Stygofauna

Parastenocaris sp. ELIM 285 Stygobite

Dussartstenocaris sp. ELIM 15 Stygobite

1. The EIS should provide a description to Order or Family taxonomic rank of the presence and nature of stygofauna occurring in groundwater likely to be affected by the project.

2. Sampling and survey methods should follow the best practice guideline which is currently that published by the Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority - Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors No.54 (December 2003) and No. 54a (August 2007).

3. In any groundwater aquifers found to contain stygofauna, describe the potential impacts on stygofauna of any changes in the quality and quantity of the groundwater, and describe any mitigation measures that may be applied.

“Upon identification of stygofauna within the zone of influence of a proposed development, proponents should address each of the following three approaches to demonstrating that the development poses no threats to the animals:

Show that species within the potential impact zone also occur outside this area (i.e. no

species is restricted to the impact zone);

Provide evidence that likely impacts will not significantly affect species within the potential

impact zone;

Produce a management plan for the potential impact zone and species within it. This plan

should ensure persistence of those species (e.g. constant recharge of the aquifer within

selected parts of the drawdown zone until completion of the project and return of water

levels to pre-development levels).

It is particularly important that detailed ecological information be obtained to gain approval for a proposal on the basis that groundwater impacts will not significantly affect stygofauna or that a management plan can be implemented to ameliorate impacts adequately.”

“A management plan to conserve stygofauna within an impact area (or approval on the basis that

likely groundwater impacts will not be significantly detrimental to stygofauna) would require the

proponent to demonstrate based on reasonably available data that an environmental

management system exists which contains the following elements:

(a) An environmental policy and corporate commitment to it;

(b) Mechanisms and processes to ensure that:

i) environmental requirements of the species are sufficiently understood and that

appropriate planning has occurred to meet the requirements;

ii) technology and expertise exist to implement necessary management actions;

iii) the species-monitoring program is sufficiently sensitive to give adequate

warning of a decline in species numbers well prior to any threat of extinction.

(c) A technically feasible and practicable alternative for rescuing species in the event that

the original management plan fails to achieve its species protection objectives.”

“The overarching philosophy of the water management strategy prepared for the Project is to minimise any adverse impacts to the surrounding environment throughout the entire life of the coal mine. This goal is to be achieved by the adoption of a comprehensive best practice approach to the management of all water over the Elimatta Project site, comprising MLA 50254, MLA 50270 and MLA 50271.”

“The following hydrogeological mitigation measures will be implemented at the Project to minimise the potential impact on or contamination of groundwater:

Chemical storage and handling areas will be bunded to contain accidental spills;

Bulk petroleum products will be loaded and unloaded in a designated area, which will

include appropriate spillage management features in its design;

A formal network of groundwater monitoring bores have been installed and these will be

monitored on a regular basis; and

Minimal extraction of groundwater where practicable.”

“Groundwater monitoring will be undertaken six (6) monthly using the existing network of monitoring bores, with further monitoring bores to be installed prior to commencement and during

mining in areas where potential adverse impacts may occur.”

The purpose of groundwater monitoring is to:

Collect baseline / background data prior to mining, during operation and after mine

closure;

Provide a means of early detection and management of groundwater related impacts;

Assess the progress of de-watering due to bores and seepage into the mine pit thus aiding

in water supply/storage management;

Identify any seepage from dams, spoil and stockpile areas;

Identify any changes in groundwater quality as a result of de-watering or seepage from

dams, spoil and stockpile areas to check for acid rock drainage generation and assess the

performance of management strategies;

Provide data for review of the groundwater model; and

Satisfy regulatory requirements.”

“Water contaminant trigger levels have been proposed for the Project, based upon baseline data, the ANZECC (2000) Guidelines for moderately disturbed aquatic ecosystems in tropical Australia and the ANZECC (2000) Livestock Drinking Water Quality guidelines. Once a statistically robust and representative sample of data is developed, site specific trigger levels will be developed using the

80th and / or 20th percentile of the reference data.”

“A water quality guideline is a numerical concentration limit or narrative statement recommended to support and maintain a designated water use. This document includes guidelines for chemical and physical parameters in water and sediment, as well as biological indicators. The guidelines are used as a general tool for assessing water quality and are the key to determining water quality objectives that protect and support the designated environmental values of our

water resources, and against which performance can be measured.”

“The guidelines have been derived with the intention of providing some confidence that there will be no significant impact on the environmental values if they are achieved. Exceedance of the guidelines indicates that there is potential for an impact to occur (or to have occurred), but does not provide any certainty that an impact will occur (or has occurred). In areas where protection of aquatic ecosystems is a designated environmental value, the Guidelines recommend direct assessment of the biological community to assess whether ecosystem integrity is being maintained, threatened or compromised to a level that causes pollution. Biological indicators should therefore be used to complement the use of physical and chemical indicators for this value. These Guidelines describe indicators for biological assessment and give guidance for determining an acceptable level of change so that the relative condition of the ecosystem can be estimated.”

“Thus, bioassessment should be seen as a vital part of assessing changes in aquatic ecosystems, and as a tool in assessing achievement of environmental values and attainment of the associated water quality objectives. At the same time, the resulting biological message provides an insight into a complex system which:

integrates multiple natural and human changes in physico-chemical conditions;

integrates disturbances over time;

absorbs human effects into complex interacting biological communities and

processes;

can give a signal from more than one component (e.g. multiple species or

community similarities or ecological processes).

The guidelines for biological assessment are intended to detect important departures from a relatively natural, unpolluted or undisturbed state — the reference condition. An important departure is deemed to be one in which the ecosystem shows substantial effects, including:

changes to species richness, community composition and/or structure;

changes in abundance and distribution of species of high conservation value or

species important to the integrity of ecosystems;

physical, chemical or biological changes to ecosystem processes.”

“Achieving protection of aquatic ecosystems entails not only managing traditional water quality (water chemistry) but also managing other attributes of the system, in particular habitat and flow. Further, it is now recognised that assessing ecosystem health is best achieved through direct measurement of biological indicators rather than through indirect assessment via system stressors such as water quality. However, measurement of ecosystem stressors remains important in determining causes of detected changes to biological attributes.”

‘Groundwater is an essential water resource for many aquatic ecosystems, and for substantial periods it can be the sole source of water to some rivers, streams and wetlands. Groundwater is also very important for primary and secondary industry as well as for domestic drinking water, particularly in low rainfall areas with significant underground aquifers. Generally these (ANZECC 2000) Guidelines should apply to the quality both of surface water and of groundwater since the environmental values which they protect relate to above-ground uses (e.g. irrigation, drinking water, farm animal or fish production and maintenance of aquatic ecosystems). Hence groundwater should be managed in such a way that when it comes to the surface, whether from natural seepages or from bores, it will not cause the established water quality objectives for these waters to be exceeded, nor compromise their designated environmental values. An important exception is for the protection of underground aquatic ecosystems and their novel fauna. Little is known of the lifecycles and environmental requirements of these quite recently-discovered communities, and given their high conservation value, the groundwater upon which they depend should be given the highest level of protection. As a cautionary note the reader should be aware that different conditions and processes operate in groundwater compared with surface waters and these can affect the fate and transport of many organic chemicals. This may have implications for the application of guidelines and management of groundwater quality.’ (ANZECC 2000 reproduced in QWQG 2009, p. 23).

3. Baseline Survey

4.

BORE LOCATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

Bore ID Date

Completed

Coordinates (MGA94 Zone 55)

Surface Elevation

Borehole Depth

Bore Depth

Screen Zone Airlift Yield2

Depth to Water

Easting Northing Top Bottom

(m) (m) (m AHD) (m bGL)1 (m bGL) (m bGL) (m bGL) (l/s) (m bGL)

MB1A 6-Sep-09 760999 7119999 244.4 29 28 14 28 0.05 10.72

MB1B 6-Sep-09 761001 7120001 244.3 7 6 3 6 - 1.76

MB2 6-Sep-09 760367 7117880 240.4 31.5 27 17 27 0.1 7.48

MB3A 5-Sep-09 763097 7117994 236.2 23 17 12 17 0.13 6.83

MB3B 5-Sep-09 763093 7118002 236.2 10.6 10.5 6.5 10.5 - 6.79

MB4A 5-Sep-09 760349 7116954 239.8 29 24 19 24 0.18 6.1

MB4B 15-Sep-09 760352 7116953 239.7 8 7.5 4.5 7.5 - 4.38

MB5 15-Sep-09 762400 7116429 257 60 57 35 57 0.85 24.03

MB7A 8-Sep-09 760019 7115207 245.3 60 54 34 54 0.6 10.11

MB7B 8-Sep-09 760021 7115207 245.3 11 7.5 4.5 7.5 - 4.9

MB8A 11-Sep-09 759276 7112983 248.5 77 68 24 68 0.37 8.4

MB8B 11-Sep-09 759279 7112978 248.5 8 7 5 7 - 5.78

MB9 12-Sep-09 761753 7112702 270.1 95 82 50 82 0.58 30.58

MB10 15-Sep-09 763543 7115939 251.1 70 69 18 69 0.34 18.95

MB11 12-Sep-09 763493 7113179 266.2 69 67 52 67 0.42 19.35

MB143 13-May-11 765229 7123665 228.79 15 14 8 14 nm 7.75

MB153 11-May-11 764461 7122489 230.63 10.5 8.2 5.2 8.2 nm 8.11

MB163 7-May-11 756901 7102939 267.49 8 6 3 6 nm 1.25

MB173 20-May-11 763008 7125369 242.05 10 5 4 5 nm 3.06

MB183 27-Oct-11 758802 7109229 256.2 10 7 4 7 nm 4.86

MB193 27-Oct-11 758487 7107668 - 6.8 6.8 3.8 6.8 nm n/a

P1101 14-Jun-11 762766 7125538 243.44 100 n/a n/a n/a n/a

2.62

P1102 15-Jun-11 763477 7125470 249.99 43 n/a n/a n/a n/a

21.39

P1103 22-Jun-11 762979 7124662 240.11 100 n/a n/a n/a n/a

7.96

P1104 23-Jun-11 762439 7123908 269.94 100 n/a n/a n/a n/a

30.75

P1105 23-Jun-11 763338 7123772 251.36 101 n/a n/a n/a n/a

18.91

MB6 16-Jun-11 761432 7114842 247.4 60 52 10 52 0.63 11.77

MB12 8-Sep-09 759272 7115706 259.8 66 61 43 61 0.04 25.15

1m bGL - metres below ground level 2Airlift yield is at the completion of development

3Bore location has not yet been surveyed. Location data provided is from a handheld GPS with accuracy in the order of <5 m