MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY:

Transcription

1 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: 11 DECEMBER 2014

2 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Report Title: Project: Client: Report Ref.: Moree Solar Farm Construction Environmental Management Plan Green Light _CEMP_001A.docx Status: Final (3) Issued: 11 December 2014 Geolyse Pty Ltd and the authors responsible for the preparation and compilation of this report declare that we do not have, nor expect to have a beneficial interest in the study area of this project and will not benefit from any of the recommendations outlined in this report. The preparation of this report has been in accordance with the project brief provided by the client and has relied upon the information, data and results provided or collected from the sources and under the conditions outlined in the report. All information contained within this report is prepared for the exclusive use of Green Light to accompany this report for the land described herein and are not to be used for any other purpose or by any other person or entity. No reliance should be placed on the information contained in this report for any purposes apart from those stated therein. Geolyse Pty Ltd accepts no responsibility for any loss, damage suffered or inconveniences arising from, any person or entity using the plans or information in this study for purposes other than those stated above. Revision History Version Date Reason for Revision Approved for Issue Draft (1) 25/09/2014 Issued to MPSC, DTIRIS Fisheries, OEH, NOW and ER Geolyse Draft (2) 23/10/2014 Issued to Green Light, Moree Solar Farm & ER Geolyse Draft (3) 12/11/2014 Issued to Green Light, Moree Solar Farm & ER Geolyse Draft (4) 19/11/2014 Issued to Green Light, Moree Solar Farm & ER Geolyse Final (1) 20/11/2014 For submission to Department of Planning and Environment Geolyse Final (2) 9/12/2014 Addressing to Department of Planning and Environment Comments Geolyse Final (3) 11/12/14 For Department of Planning and Environment Approval Geolyse PAGE I _CEMP_001A.DOCX

3 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PROJECT PROPONENT FUNCTION EPC CONTRACTOR GEOLYSE STRUCTURE AMENDMENTS AVAILABILITY... 3 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENT CONSTRUCTION PHASES CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SCHEDULING SCOPE... 5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS REQUIREMENT IMPACT MANAGEMENT... 6 SITE COMPOUND REQUIREMENT TEMPORAL FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION FOOTPRINTS RESTORATION MONITORING... 8 OBLIGATIONS REQUIREMENT DEVELOPMENT CONSENT APPROVALS COMMITMENTS AGREEMENTS DIRECTOR GENERAL REQUESTS EASEMENTS HOT WORKS EXEMPTION CONSULTATION LEGISLATION AGENCY CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT PUBLIC AUTHORITIES EVIDENCE PAGE II _CEMP_001A.DOCX

4 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES REQUIREMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OVERVIEW KEY PERSONS ENVIRONMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE TRAINING AND INDUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL DUE DILIGENCE COMPETENCY REGISTER ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS MONITORING ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WEEKLY INSPECTIONS MONTHLY COMPLIANCE AUDITS EXTERNAL COMPLIANCE AUDITS COMPLIANCE TRACKING CORRECTIVE ACTIONS MAJOR NON-CONFORMANCE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT NOTICE NON-CONFORMANCE CLOSE OUT STATEMENT OF COMMITMENTS REQUIREMENT COMPLIANCE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REQUIREMENT COMPLIANCE COMPLAINTS HANDLING PROCEDURES REQUIREMENT MSF PTY LTD PROCEDURE FROM MSF PTY LTD OTHER SOURCES COMPLAINTS REGISTER COMPLAINT RESOLUTION ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PAGE III _CEMP_001A.DOCX

5 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 INCIDENT MANAGEMENT INTERNAL REPORTING ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENT EMERGENCY RESPONSE IMMEDIATE RESPONSE EXTERNAL NOTIFICATIONS MATERIAL HARM EPA NOTIFICATION NO MATERIAL HARM INCIDENT INVESTIGATION AVOID RECURRENCE RESTORATION INCIDENT REPORTING DOCUMENTATION DISSEMINATION WORK INSTRUCTIONS REQUIREMENT WORK INSTRUCTIONS FUNCTION SCOPE SIGN-OFF TRIGGER OBJECTIVE TIMING ASSIGNING RISK RATING METHOD ENVIRONMENTAL RISK PRELIMINARY RISK MATRIX SAFE WORK METHODS MINIMISING ENVIRONMENTAL RISK INTENT PROCESS PAGE IV _CEMP_001A.DOCX

6 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE PLAN REQUIREMENT OBJECTIVES OF AHP BACKGROUND ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY CONSULTATION BACKGROUND REGISTERED ABORIGINAL PARTIES RAP CONSULTATION FOR THE AHP CONTINUED RAP CONSULTATION COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY APPROVAL MANAGEMENT OF THE ABORIGINAL HERITAGE RESOURCE PROPOSED SALVAGE UNANTICIPATED FINDS PROTOCOL POTENTIAL HUMAN REMAINS MANAGEMENT FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF ABORIGINAL SITES FATE OF ARTEFACTS ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE INDUCTION DISPUTE RESOLUTION ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE REGISTERED ABORIGINAL PARTIES GREEN LIGHT AHP ACCESS DEFINITIONS SOIL AND WATER IMPACTS REQUIREMENT MANAGEMENT MEASURES EROSION AND SEDIMENT AND CONTROL PLANS BEST PRACTICE DANGEROUS GOODS STORAGE HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES SPILL RESPONSE EQUIPMENT RE-FUELLING PLANT MAINTENANCE WATERWAY CROSSINGS GROUNDWATER INTERFERENCE WATER SOURCES FLOOD MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENT FLOOD MANAGEMENT PLAN PREDICTED WATER LEVELS BACKGROUND DATA PAGE V _CEMP_001A.DOCX

7 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 DUST SUPPRESSION REQUIREMENT PUBLIC ROADS PERFORMANCE CRITERION MANAGEMENT MEASURES MONITORING FLORA AND FAUNA MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENT OBJECTIVE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS PRE-CONSTRUCTION DURING CONSTRUCTION VEGETATION COMMUNITIES AND HABITAT PLANS AVOIDANCE REDUCTION OF PROJECT AREA MANAGEMENT METHODS ECOLOGIST VEGETATION CLEARANCE PROCEDURES AERIAL SPANNING OF HALLS CREEK WEED MANAGEMENT PEST CONTROL ENVIRONMENTAL DUE DILIGENCE INDUCTION REVIEW OF MANAGEMENT METHODS GROUND COVER MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENT AMALGAMATION TRANSITION POINT OBJECTIVE DISTURBANCE FOOTPRINT SCOPE PROCEDURE STABILISATION AND REHABILITATION SOLAR FARM ETL WEED MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVE NOXIOUS WEED REMOVAL VEHICLE/PLANT INSPECTIONS BUSH FIRE RISK OBJECTIVE PHYSICAL MEASURES WORK PRACTICES RURAL FIRE SERVICE CONSULTATION MONITORING THIRD PARTY SIGN-OFF ON-GOING MANAGEMENT SCOPE OEMP PAGE VI _CEMP_001A.DOCX

8 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENT OBJECTIVE LANDSCAPE SCREEN PLANTINGS DURING CONSTRUCTION POST CONSTRUCTION DESIGN MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES MONITORING STRATEGIES CONSULTATION STRATEGY NEIGHBOUR CONSULTATIONS CONSTRUCTION NOISE MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND SCHEDULE POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS MEASURES TO MINIMISE IMPACTS COMMUNITY CONSULTATION STANDARD CONSTRUCTION HOURS HIGH NOISE IMPACT ACTIVITIES COMPLAINTS HANDLING OUT-OF-HOURS-WORK PROTOCOL ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS NOTIFICATION OBLIGATIONS NOISE IMPACT STATEMENTS MONITORING EFFECTIVENESS BASELINE MONITORING SURROGATE INDICATOR ATTENDED MEASUREMENT OPERATIONAL NOISE PREDICTION REPORT TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENT RELEVANT ROAD AUTHORITIES DILAPIDATION AND UPGRADE REPORT CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT HEAVY VEHICLE TRAFFIC ROUTES OVERSIZED LOAD MEASURES TO MINIMISE INTERACTIONS LOCAL ROAD UPGRADES MONITORING OF ROAD CONDITIONS PROVISION OF CAR PARKING CO-ORDINATION AND SCHEDULING LANDOWNER CONSULTATION CAR POOLING SUB-CONTRACTOR SELECTION DRIVER INDUCTION MONITORING RAIL MOVEMENTS SIGNAGE QUARTERLY DILAPIDATION SURVEYS TRAFFIC CONTROLS ROAD ACCESS RESTRICTIONS LIVESTOCK SAFETY STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES PAGE VII _CEMP_001A.DOCX

9 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 EMERGENCY RESPONSE REQUIREMENT RESPONSIBILITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROCEDURES WASTE MANAGEMENT WASTE TYPES WASTE CLASSIFICATION NO BURNING STORAGE DISPOSAL RECYCLING WASTE TRACKING COMPLIANCE TRACKING PROGRAM REQUIREMENT COMPLIANCE REPORTING NON INDIGENOUS HERITAGE REQUIREMENT PROCEDURE REFERENCES FORMS MSF 01 MSF 02 MSF 03 MSF 04 MSF 05 MSF 06 MSF 07 MSF 08 MSF 09 MSF 10 MSF 11 MSF 12 MSF 13 DRAWINGS ENVIRONMENTAL DUE DILIGENCE INDUCTION REGISTER WEEKLY INSPECTION CHECKLIST CEMP AUDIT COMPLAINTS REGISTER COMPLAINTS RECORD ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENTS REGISTER ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENT REPORT WASTE REGISTER CORRECTIVE ACTION REGISTER CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT NOTICE OUT-OF-HOURS WORKS REGISTER WORK INSTRUCTION REGISTER WEED INSPECTION AND WASH DOWN REGISTER PAGE VIII _CEMP_001A.DOCX

10 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 APPENDICES APPENDIX A Environmental Policy APPENDIX B Evidence of Stakeholder Consultation APPENDIX C Community Consultation Plan APPENDIX D Emergency Response Plan APPENDIX E Noxious Weeds APPENDIX F Condition of Carbeen Trees APPENDIX G Road Upgrades Limit of Works TABLES Table 6.1 Authority/Stakeholder Consultation Table 6.2 Addressing Agency Issues Table 8.1 Objectives and Targets Table 8.2 Environmental Management System Documentation Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Table 10.1 Conditions of Approval Table 13.1 Environmental Risk Matrix Table 13.2 Preliminary Environmental Risk Register Table 13.3 Hazard Assessments Table 14.1 Registered Indigenous Sites Table 14.2 Sites requiring Protective Buffer Identification Table 14.3 Definitions Table 15.1 Hazardous Substances List Table 16.1 Flooding Data Table 18.1 Ecology Plans/Maps Table 19.1 Native Grass Mix Table 20.1 Species for On-Site Screen Plantings Table 24.1 Waste Classifications PAGE IX _CEMP_001A.DOCX

11 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 ABBREVIATIONS ACHCR AEP AES AHIP AHIMS AHMP APZ ARI BAL CCA CEMP CNMP CoA DECCW DEMP DoP DSEWP&C DTIRIS EAR EEC EMS EPA EPC EPL ER ERP ETL ESCP FBA GCMP GSW(NP) GSW(P) ha HSE HTC HW IPA kl kv Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation Requirements Annual Exceedance Probability Aboriginal Employment Service Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit Aboriginal Heritage Management System Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan Asset Protection Zone Average Recurrence Interval Basic Left Turn Copper chrome arsenate Construction Environmental Management Plan Construction Noise Management Plan Condition of Approval Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water Decommissioning Environmental Management Plan Department of Planning and Environment DSEWP&C is now the Commonwealth s Department of Environment Department of Trading and Investment Environmental Assessment Report Endangered Ecological Community Environmental Management System Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Engineering, Procurement and Construction Environment Protection Licence Environmental Representative Emergency Response Plan Electricity Transmission Line Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Framework for Biodiversity Assessment Ground Cover Management Plan General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) General Solid Waste (Putrescible) Hectare Heath, Safety and Environment High Temperature Creosote Hazardous Waste Inner Protection Zone Kilolitre Kilovolt PAGE X _CEMP_001A.DOCX

12 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 LOSP Liquid Waste m MPSC MSF MW NOW NMP OEH OEMP OOHW PAD PEC PV RAV RAP RAS RFS RMS RST SoC SDS SPS TAFE TSR TMP GIS VIVR VENM WIRES WI Light Organic Solvent Preservative Liquid Waste Metre Moree Plains Shire Council Moree Solar Farm Megawatt NSW Office of Water Noise Management Plan Office of Environment and Heritage Operation Environmental Management Plan Out-of-Hours Work Potential Archaeological Deposit Pigmented Emulsified Creosote Photovoltaic Restricted Access Vehicle Registered Aboriginal Parties Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders Rural Fire Service Roads & Maritime Services Restricted Solid Waste Statement of Commitments Safety Data Sheets Solar Power Station Tertiary and Further Education Travelling Stock Reserve Traffic Management Plan Geographic Information System Visual Impact Verification Report Virgin Excavated Natural Material NSW Wildlife Information, Rescue and Education Service Inc Work Instructions PAGE XI _CEMP_001A.DOCX

13 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Introduction 1.1 PROJECT The Moree Solar Farm (MSF) was initially granted development consent on 17 July 2011 and subsequently modified by Minister s approval on 4 February The approved project includes: 56 megawatt photovoltaic electricity generation facility; both above and underground electrical conduits and cabling connecting arrays and inverters; sets of inverters and transformers distributed around the site; on-site substation which will step the system voltage up from 22 kv to 66 kv in order to connect to the Moree Zone Substation; site administration and operations building; 66 kv transmission line connecting the existing Moree-Bellata 66kV line through the construction of a dual circuit 66 kv powerline; internal and perimeter access tracks, perimeter fencing and landscaping; and site services, reticulated potable water and fire fighting water supply tanks. 1.2 PROPONENT The development proponent is Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd. 1.3 FUNCTION This Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been prepared to satisfy a Condition of Approval (CoA) issued by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for the Moree Solar Farm (MSF); Application No: MP10_0175. Specifically, CoA C14 requires the proponent to prepare and implement a CEMP to outline environmental management practices and procedures to be followed during construction of the project. Further, the approval requires that the CEMP be submitted for the approval of the Director-General no later than one month prior to commencement of any relevant construction works associated with the project, or within such period otherwise agreed by the Director-General. Construction works cannot commence until written approval has been received from the Director- General. 1.4 EPC CONTRACTOR Green Light Contractor Pty Ltd, Elecnor Group (Green Light) is the Engineering, Procurement and Construction Contractor with the responsibility to build the MSF. 1.5 GEOLYSE Geolyse has been engaged by Green Light to prepare this CEMP. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

14 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ STRUCTURE The CEMP specification is detailed in CoA C14. To facilitate the assessment of compliance against this specification the structure, format and scope of this CEMP has been prepared against this specification. The specification is reproduced below: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p) a description of all relevant activities to be undertaken on the site during construction including an indication of stages of construction, where relevant; identification of the potential for cumulative impacts with other construction activities occurring in the vicinity and how such impacts would be managed; details of any construction sites and mitigation, monitoring, management and rehabilitation measures specific to the site compound(s) that would be implemented; statutory and other obligations that the Proponent is required to fulfil during construction including all relevant approvals, consultations and agreements required from authorities and other stakeholders, and key legislation and policies; evidence of consultation with relevant public authorities required under this condition and how issues raised by the agencies have been addressed in the plan; a description of the roles and responsibilities for all relevant employees involved in the construction of the project including relevant training and induction provisions for ensuring that all employees, contractors and sub-contractors are aware of their environmental and compliance obligations under these conditions of approval; details of how the environmental performance of construction will be monitored, and what actions will be taken to address identified potential adverse environmental impacts; specific consideration of relevant measures to address any requirements identified in the documents referred to under conditions A 1(b) and A 1(c) of this approval; the additional requirements of this approval; a complaints handling procedure during construction; maps or plans clearly indicating where the project area has been reduced to minimise impacts to Endangered Ecological Community (EEC)and native pasture in good condition; and a matrix of construction work method statements (or similar) to be prepared and the anticipated level of risk associated with each determined; measures to monitor and manage soil and water impacts in consultation with NOW and DTIRIS (Fisheries) including: control measures for works close to or involving waterway crossings (including rehabilitation measures following disturbance and monitoring measures and completion criteria to determine rehabilitation success), identification of construction activities that are likely to pose a risk of groundwater interference, and procedures for managing groundwater impacts should they occur (including to groundwater dependent species and to registered groundwater users); a flood management plan for the project area including a flood model for predicted water levels and shall include contingency measures for the site during potential floods, inclusive of measures for the removal of debris around the perimeter of the site to avoid alterations to floodpaths occurring as a result of debris build up. measures to monitor and manage dust emissions including dust generated by traffic on unsealed public roads and unsealed internal access tracks; and emergency management measures including measures to control bushfires. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

15 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ AMENDMENTS The CEMP is a live document and will be reviewed and updated as required during construction. Triggers for amendments to the CEMP will include: When there is a need to improve performance in an area of environmental impact; As a result of changes in environmental legislation applicable and relevant to the project; Where the outcomes from auditing establish a need for change; Where Work Method Statements identify changes to a construction methodology to address high environmental risk; and As a result of an incident or complaint occurring that necessitates an amendment. Modifications to the CEMP will involve the following process: Proposed change to the CEMP will be identified; The Quality and Environment Manager will prepare a case to amend the CEMP and submit this (and the proposed CEMP change) to the Environmental Representative; and Subject to securing approval from the Environmental Representative the CEMP will be updated and a digital copy issued to relevant stakeholders. Relevant stakeholders will include all individuals and/or organisations that have been previously provided a copy of the CEMP. 1.8 AVAILABILITY A copy of the approved CEMP, inclusive of all sub-plans will, consistent with CoA C7(d), be provided to MSF Pty Ltd for publishing on its dedicated website. Green Light will, on request, also make publicly available a digital copy of this CEMP. Green Light will also have a copy of this CEMP available within its site office. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

16 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Construction Activity 2.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(a) states the CEMP shall include: a description of all relevant activities to be undertaken on site during construction including an indication of stages of construction, where relevant. 2.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASES Construction will be divided into five discrete phases: Site mobilisation and preparatory civil works; Installation of arrays and associated electrical infrastructure; Grid connection; Commissioning; and Restoration and demobilisation. 2.3 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES The construction works program will include the following sequential activities: Road access improvements; Installation of perimeter fencing around the site; Site preparation, including locating temporary construction offices and compound facilities, parking areas, laydown areas and services connection; Connection to Council s water main; Earthworks, involving minor grading and trimming, construction of internal site access tracks and installation of on-site erosion and sediment controls. Delivery of PV modules, trackers, electrical conduits and balance of equipment; Installation of piles for the structural support of the individual trackers; Fixing of modules and trackers; Positioning of junction boxes, inverters and transformers; Connection of required cabling; Construction of the substation; Construction of the transmission line; Grid connection and commissioning; Restoration works; Landscape plantings; and Demobilisation. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

17 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ SCHEDULING Construction, inclusive of commissioning and the subsequent removal of all temporary construction infrastructure is scheduled for completion by end-february Construction is scheduled to commence in December 2014: representing a 16 month construction period. Green Light will notify Council in the event that the scheduling of the project should change. A detailed breakdown of construction activities and a schedule for construction works is provided in the Construction Noise Management Plan (refer Section 21). 2.5 SCOPE This version of the CEMP, and the procedures and commitments contained therein, will apply equally to each and every aspect of the MSF construction effort; including any enabling works that the Environmental Representative may determine can be undertaken prior to securing the Director General s approval of the CEMP. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

18 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Cumulative Impacts 3.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(b) states the CEMP shall include: identification of the potential for cumulative impacts with other construction activities occurring the vicinity and how such impacts would be managed. 3.2 IMPACT There is one known construction activity to occur in the locality that has the potential to cause a cumulative impact. In April 2014 Council obtained approval for the modified Waste Management Facility (Liquid Waste Spent Spa Water Disposal) and Associated Outdoor Recreational Facility (Water Ski Lakes). This development is located immediately north of the MSF and has a four (4) month construction schedule (November 2014 April 2015). To manage this potential impact, and consistent with the requirements of Council, Green Light will: Review its CEMP in conjunction with the Ski Lakes CEMP (once the latter is issued); Work with Council to manage cumulative impacts such as traffic movements on Barton Plains Road and hours of construction; Establish and maintain formal lines of communication with Council and the Principal Contractor undertaking works for the Ski-Lakes; Commit to work together to address any unforseen cumulative impacts as they arise; and Keep Council informed of the construction schedule. 3.3 MANAGEMENT Green Light will maintain constant liaison with Council and the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) during the construction program so that the potential for any cumulative impact can be monitored. In the event that any other major construction activity is to occur in the locality, Green Light will work collaboratively with Council or the DPE and the third party to help ensure that significant cumulative impacts are avoided. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

19 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Site Compound 4.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(c) states the CEMP shall include: details of any construction sites and mitigation, monitoring, management and rehabilitation measures specific to the site compound(s) that would be implemented. 4.2 TEMPORAL FACILITIES Temporal facilities will be located in the North West corner of the development site (refer Drawings). This location distances the facilities from the lower south west section of the MSF site that can be subject to inundation in times of flooding, as well as provide a buffer to ensure no construction disturbance to Aboriginal artefacts that have been recorded in the south eastern part of the site. These facilities will include: construction offices; 3 x 10 kl Static Water Supply tanks dedicated for bushfire fighting purposes; 150 L or petrol and 100 L of diesel stored on proprietary bund pallets; ablutions (including pump out tanks); 100 kva generator; waste and recyclable receptacles; parking areas; laydown areas; and potable water supply for ablution blocks. Establishment of the compound will require initial slashing of groundcover, stripping (and stockpiling) of topsoil, and compaction of a trafficable gravel hardstand. No concreting works are proposed.temporal Facilities are not required after construction is complete and post construction this area will be rehabilitated. 4.3 CONSTRUCTION FOOTPRINTS There are a range of activities to be undertaken that require earthworks. These include: upgrades to Barton Plains Road and the Barton Plains Road and Burrington Road intersection; pipeline connection to Council s water main located in Barton Plans Road; the preparatory of suitably compacted trafficable areas associated with the Temporal Facilities; formation of internal roads; and establishment of benches for the main transformer and the 28 power stations. Earthworks drawings for all civil works are being prepared under contract by SMEC Engineering for Green Light. As is standard practice, these earthworks drawings will include Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan(s) (ESCP) that will specify a limit of works (i.e. extent of disturbance). ESCPs will be prepared prior to earthworks commencing and will be submitted to the Environmental Representative for approval. These ESCPs will define the construction footprint. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

20 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ RESTORATION Immediately after construction is complete all surplus materials from the Temporal Facilities compound will be removed. The ground surface will be deep ripped to reverse the impacts of compaction, then be lightly scarified and stockpiles re-spread to encourage revegetation. Detail on the monitoring of the success of the rehabilitation of this area, and processes for determining a suitable species mix selection and sowing intent, is provided in the Ground Cover Management Plan (refer Section 19). 4.5 MONITORING Green Light will retain responsibility for monitoring this restored site compound area until the vegetative cover is well established, in good health and self-sustaining. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

21 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Obligations 5.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(d) states the CEMP shall include: statutory and other obligations that the Proponent is required to fulfil during construction including all relevant approvals, consultations and agreements required from authorities and other stakeholders, and key legislation and policies. In addition to the above: CoA A6 states that: The Proponent shall ensure that all licences, permits and approvals are obtained and maintained as required throughout the life of the project. No condition of this approval removes the obligation of the Proponent to obtain, renew or comply with such licences, permits or approvals. The Proponent shall ensure that a copy of this approval and all relevant environmental approvals are available on the site at all times during the project. 5.2 DEVELOPMENT CONSENT The Minister s Project Approvals MP_0175 (July 2011) and MP_0175 MOD 1 (February 2014) are the overarching approvals which the Proponent is required to fulfil. 5.3 APPROVALS A s.138 permit from Moree Plains Shire Council is required under the Roads Act 1993 prior to undertaking the upgrade works on Barton Plains Road and Halls Creek/Burrington Road. Council has requested before commencing any work on Council roads that its Application for Road Opening Permit be completed and returned to Council for approval. Council s Road Opening Approval will include all conditions pertaining to work on Council roads; A s.68 approval from Moree Plains Shire Council is required under the under the Local Government Act 1993 to connect to Council s water main; A Construction License has been granted from Crown Lands to allow access to that area of Crown road covered by a Crown Road enclosure permit (refer Moree Solar Farm Ltd, 9 January 2014); Prior to any construction within the railway corridor, approval is to be obtained from the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) for any works to be undertaken within the railway corridor; Passing the ETL over the existing railway line also requires ARTC approval; and Approval is required under s.45 of the Electricity Supply Act 1995 for the development of the proposed transmission line. At this stage, no other statutory approvals, licences, permits or consents are required. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

22 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ COMMITMENTS Development approval for the MSF was granted contingent on compliance with consent conditions. CoA A1 obligates the proponent to carry out the project in accordance with commitments made during the approvals process. These commitments are referred to as Statements of Commitment (SoC). The SoC for the MSF are specified in the: Submissions Report Proposed Solar Power Station Near Moree, NSW (Moree Solar Farm) (April 2011); and Response to Submissions Moree Solar Farm (9 January 2014). Section 9 of this CEMP provides a summary of all SoC, including comment on their applicability to the construction phase of the MSF and the section within this CEMP where these obligations are addressed. 5.5 AGREEMENTS The MSF Community Consultation Plan (October 2013) details agreements made in consultation with the community with respect to how information about the project will be shared. The consultation program is to be maintained by Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd. Green Light will provide reporting and information as required under this Community Consultation Plan. The Environmental Representative requires that a copy of this Community Consultation Plan be appended to this CEMP or provisions made to ensure it is easily accessible to any reader of the CEMP. A copy of the current version of this plan is appended to this CEMP as Appendix C. Green Light will ensure that the latest version of this plan is appended, noting that the plan will be updated by MSF Pty Ltd as the project unfolds. A copy of this plan is also available on the project s dedicated web-site ( 5.6 DIRECTOR GENERAL REQUESTS Green Light will comply with any reasonable requirements of the Director-General arising from the Department s assessment of: any reports, plans or correspondence that are submitted in accordance with the development approval (MP 10_0175) and relevant to the scope and function of this CEMP; and the implementation of any actions or measures contained in these reports, plans or correspondence. 5.7 EASEMENTS An easement will be established for the new section of 66 kv line. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

23 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ HOT WORKS EXEMPTION If proposed, prior to conducting any Hot Works in a Total Fire Ban an exemption must be obtained from the Commissioner of the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) pursuant to s.99 of the Rural Fires Act CONSULTATION Detail on the required consultation with authorities and other stakeholders is provided in Section LEGISLATION As it relates to the construction of the MSF, Green Light has a legal obligation to comply with the following legislation: Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997; Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; Fisheries Management Act 1994; National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974; Native Vegetation Act 2003; Water Management Act 2000; Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001; Rural Fires Act 1997; Noxious Weeds Act 1993; Local Government Act 1993; Roads Act 1993; and Electricity Supply Act. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

24 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Agency Consultation 6.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(e) states the CEMP shall include: evidence of consultation with relevant public authorities required under this condition and how issues raised by the agencies have been addressed in the plan. In addition to the above, CoA C15 states that consultation is also required with public authorities and stakeholders in the preparation of the various sub-plans that must be included in this CEMP. These sub-plans include: Flora and Fauna Management Plan; Ground Cover Management Plan; Landscape Plan; Construction Noise Management Plan; Traffic Management Plan; and Aboriginal Heritage Plan. 6.2 PUBLIC AUTHORITIES The specific consultation requirements in CoA C14 and C15 are detailed in Table 6.1. Table 6.1 Authority/Stakeholder Consultation Authority/Stakeholder CoA/SoC Requirement Moree Plains Shire Council (MPSC) CoA C14 Preparation of the Construction Environmental Management Plan CoA C15(e) Traffic Management Plan Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS) - Fisheries NSW Office of Water (NOW) Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) CoA C14(n) CoA C14(n) SoC LW6 CoA C15(a) CoA C15(b) CoA C15(f) Measures to monitor and manage soil and water impacts. Measures to monitor and manage soil and water impacts. Review of Construction Environmental Management Plan Flora and Fauna Management Plan Ground Cover Management Plan Aboriginal Heritage Plan Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders CoA C15(f) Aboriginal Heritage Plan Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) CoA C15(e) Traffic Management Plan PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

25 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ EVIDENCE Evidence of this consultation can be found in Appendix B. Where the issues raised by the agencies have been addressed in this CEMP is summarised in Table 6.2 below. Table 6.2 Addressing Agency Issues Agency Issue Raised Where Addressed Office of Environment and Heritage Flora and Fauna Management Plan/Ground Cover Management Plan Timing of clearing Pre-clearing surveys Relocation of hollows or use of next boxes Desmodium casmpylocaulon Impact to Carbeen trees Future OEMP Aboriginal Heritage Plan Roles and responsibilities Communication strategy Management and care of Aboriginal sites Definition Updating AHIMS Plan review Section Section Section Section Section Section Section 14.9 Section Section 14.6 Section Section Section Moree Plains Shire Council Roads and Maritime Service Construction Environmental Management Plan Flood debris removal Construction schedule Cumulative impacts Aboriginal heritage plan Resident consultation Noise management controls Traffic Management Plan Yielding to laden trucks Letter to Barton Plains Rd residents Application for Road Opening Permit Quarterly dilapidation surveys Car pooling Rail and road traffic interaction Warning signage Section Section 2.4 Section 3.2 Section Section Section Section Section Section 5.3 Section Section Section Section NSW Office of Water Groundwater interception Section 15.4 NSW Fisheries No issues - PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

26 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Roles and Responsibilities 7.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(f) states the CEMP shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: a description of the roles and responsibilities for all relevant employees involved in the construction of the project including relevant training and induction provisions for ensuring that all employees, contractors and sub-contractors are aware of their environmental and compliance obligations under these conditions of approval; 7.2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OVERVIEW Green Light Pty Ltd is the Engineering, Procurement and Construction Contractor with the contractual responsibility to build the MSF for the MSF owner, Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd. Accordingly, Green Light has the responsibility to ensure that construction activities are undertaken in full compliance with this CEMP. This responsibility extends to cover all sub-contractors Green Light will engage to undertake specific construction works. CoA C13 also requires Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd to nominate for the approval of the Director-General a suitably qualified and experienced Environmental Representative (ER) independent of the design, construction and operation personnel. Moree Solar Farms Pty Ltd is required to engage the ER prior to construction and until at least 6 months after commencement of operation, or as otherwise agreed by the Director-General. The ER has specific authorities and obligations that have a direct bearing on the permissible conduct of Green Light s construction activities (as detailed in Section 7.2.3). The accountabilities and relationships of key project persons for the MSF project are shown below. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

27 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Department of Planning and Environment Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd Environmental Representative Green Light Pty Ltd Project Manager Quality and Environmental Manager Construction Manager KEY PERSONS Key Green Light persons responsible for environmental compliance during construction include: Site Project Manager; Site Construction Manager; and Site Quality and Environment Manager Site Project Manager The role of a Site Project Manager, as it relates to this CEMP, is to: Ensure the Site Construction Manager and Site Quality and Environment Manager exercise their responsibilities and roles as defined in the CEMP Site Construction Manager The role of a Site Construction Manager as it relates to this CEMP, is to: Work collaboratively with the Quality and Environment Manager in ensuring construction activities are undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the CEMP Site Quality and Environment Manager The Site Quality and Environment Manager will be responsible for: Implementing all procedures and processes identified in this CEMP; Ensuring all personnel undertaking works on site understand their obligations as specified in the CEMP through attendance to an Environmental Due Diligence induction; PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

28 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Undertaking weekly (at least) inspections of works activities; Completing monthly internal compliance audits; Liaising with stakeholders, including regulatory agencies, the community and the ER; Maintaining all documentation required by the CEMP; Constantly monitoring adherence to the environmental management practices required by this CEMP; Commissioning external compliance audits; Conducting investigations of any incident or complaint that occurs and implement appropriate corrective actions; Ensure any non-conformance, and improvement opportunities are correctly implemented within a prescribed timeframe and closed out; Ensure incident, non-conformance and complaints registers are maintained up to date and analysed on a monthly basis for trends; Assuming the responsibilities of the Community Liaison Officer as identified in Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd s (October 2013) Community Consultation Plan; and Be available for ER inspections of the site Work Health and Safety As the EPC contractor Green Light has sub-contracted responsibility for work health and safety for the MSF project to CATCON; a civil engineering construction company CATCON s management of safety is carried out within the framework of: The CATCON Safety Policy - Certification to the standard of AS 4801; Certification to the Australian Government Building and Construction OHS Accreditation Scheme; and Responsibility exercised by senior management and project and site managers; As part of its contractual responsibilities CATCON will prepare emergency response procedures prior to construction work commencing on this project Ecologist Green Light will engage the services of a suitably qualified ecologist to undertake a range of tasks. These tasks are identified below and include: The conduct of pre-clearing surveys prior to the removal of native vegetation and the relocation of any native fauna encountered; When design is finalised for the road up-grade works and potable water connection, and a precise area of disturbance to construct these works can be accurately identified in the field, complete a survey and quantify the permanent loss and extent of temporary disturbance to Creeping Tick-trefoils and complete a seven part test of significance consistent with s.5a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and provide this to OEH prior to works commencing; Either undertake, or train the Quality and Environment Manager so that he/she has the skills to undertake, the pre and post clearing audits; and Supervise the relocation of hollows. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

29 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ ENVIRONMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE Pursuant to CoA C13, the nominated ER will have the following prescribed role and authority: The Environmental Representative shall: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) monitor the implementation of all environmental management plans and monitoring programs required under this approval; monitor the outcome of all environmental management plans and advise the Proponent upon the achievement of all project environmental outcomes; have responsibility for considering and advising the Proponent on matters specified in the conditions of this approval, and all other licences and approvals related to the environmental performance and impacts of the project; ensure that environmental auditing is undertaken in accordance with the requirements of Condition C12 and the project Environmental Management System(s); be consulted in responding to the community concerning the environmental performance of the project; and have the authority and independence to recommend to the Proponent reasonable steps to be taken to avoid or minimise unintended or adverse environmental impacts, and, failing the effectiveness of such steps, to recommend to the Proponent that relevant activities are to be ceased as soon as reasonably practicable if there is a significant risk that an adverse impact on the environment will be likely to occur, until reasonable steps are implemented to avoid such impact. 7.3 TRAINING AND INDUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL DUE DILIGENCE Prior to any person undertaking construction activities on-site they will be required to attend an Environmental Due Diligence induction. All personnel, prior to starting work on the site, shall be made aware of the requirements of this CEMP, CoA and SoC relevant to their respective activities COMPETENCY REGISTER An Environmental Due Diligence Induction Register (refer Form MSF01) will be maintained that requires sign-off by all attendees. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

30 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Environmental Performance 8.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(g) states the CEMP shall include: details of how the environmental performance of construction will be monitored, and what actions will be taken to address identified potential adverse environmental impacts. 8.2 OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS The following environmental objectives and targets have been set to be specific, measurable, realistic and achievable. Table 8.1 Objectives and Targets Criteria Objective Target Evidence Environmental compliance Construction to be undertaken in accordance with the MSF Development Consent. 100% compliance with the Development Consent Zero reportable environmental incidents. Weekly Inspection Checklist Form MSF02 External Audits CEMP Audit Form MSF03 Legal compliance Compliance with all environmental legal requirements 100% compliance with all environmental legal requirements Zero reportable environmental incidents CEMP Audit Form MSF03 Environmental Incidents Register Form MSF06 Environmental Incident - Form MSF07 Best practice environmental management Effective implementation of CEMP to ensure best practice environmental management 100% compliance with measurable management measures detailed in this CEMP Zero reportable environmental incidents CEMP Audit Form MSF03 Environmental Incidents Register Form MSF06 Environmental Incident - Form MSF07 Environmental complaints Minimise environmental complaints and adequately address any environmental complaints in a timely manner Zero community complaints 100% compliance with complaints response timeframes specified in CEMP Complaints Register Form MSF04 Complaints Record Form MSF05 100% compliance with timeframes outlined in CEMP for complaint investigations and close-outs. CEMP Audit Form MSF03 Incidents Minimise, avoid and appropriately manage all environmental incidents. Zero reportable environmental incidents 100% compliance with incident reporting, investigation and implementation of corrective action timeframes. Environmental Incidents Register Form MSF06 Environmental Incident - Form MSF07 CEMP Audit Form MSF03 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

31 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 8.1 Objectives and Targets Criteria Objective Target Evidence Non conformance Minimise, avoid and appropriately manage all environmental non conformances Zero reportable environmental non conformances 100% compliance with timeframes for the investigation and implementation of corrective actions. Weekly Inspection Checklist Form MSF02 CEMP Audit Form MSF03 Audit and Inspection Undertake environmental site audits and inspections in a timely manner. 100% compliance with the timeframes for environmental audits and inspections. Weekly Inspection Checklist Form MSF02 100% compliance with the timeframes for implementation of identified corrective actions External Audits CEMP Audit Form MSF03 Environmental Due Diligence All person involved in construction to be aware of their environmental obligations. 100% compliance with Environmental Due Diligence induction training. Zero reportable environmental incidents. Environmental Due Diligence Induction Register Form MSF01 CEMP Audit Form MSF MONITORING ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Environmental performance will be monitored through implementation of a documented environmental management system and the conduct of: weekly site inspections; monthly internal CEMP compliance audits; and Commissioning of two independent external CEMP compliance audits, scheduled to be undertaken to coincide with higher risk construction activities refer Section Evidence of monitoring will be in the form of internal documentation and external reporting. Specifically, internal documentation includes up-to-date and completed Forms. Copies of these Forms are provided in Appendix B and are summarised in Table 8.2. Table 8.2 Environmental Management System Documentation Form No Use MSF 01 MSF 02 MSF 03 MSF 04 MSF 05 MSF 06 MSF 07 MSF 08 MSF 09 MSF 10 Environmental Due Diligence Induction Register Weekly Inspection Checklist CEMP Audit Complaints Register Complaints Record Environmental Incidents Register Environmental Incident Report Waste Register Corrective Action Register Continuous Improvement Notice PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

32 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 8.2 Environmental Management System Documentation Form No Use MSF 11 MSF 13 MSF 12 Out-of-Hours Works Register Work Instruction Register Weed Inspection and Washdown Register External reporting will include monthly reporting provided to MSF Pty Ltd under the monthly Compliance Tracking Program as required pursuant to CoA C WEEKLY INSPECTIONS Inspections will be conducted by the Quality and Environment Manager on a weekly basis using Weekly Inspection Checklist (refer Form MSF02). All work areas will be inspected to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the on-ground environmental controls MONTHLY COMPLIANCE AUDITS The Quality and Environment Manager will conduct monthly compliance audits against all requirements of the CEMP. The aim of these audits will extend beyond verification of compliance with CEMP requirements and identify opportunities for improvements. The monthly compliance audits shall include, but not be limited to: Determination as to whether the controls, procedures and documentation associated with the CEMP has been effectively implemented and maintained; Checking to confirm that all actions listed are being completed and signed off; Ensuring that reporting requirements, incident investigations and incident close outs are occurring in accordance with the CEMP; and Checking that there are no outstanding follow-up actions that have yet to be closed off. These monthly compliance audits will be documented in CEMP Audit (refer Form MSF03) and copies issued to the ER EXTERNAL COMPLIANCE AUDITS In consultation with the ER, Green Light will also commission two external compliance audits to be undertaken. The audits will be conducted consistent with the requirements of AS/NZ ISO 19011:2003. As noted above (refer Section 8.3.1), these external CEMP compliance audits will be scheduled to be undertaken to coincide with higher risk construction activities. Within one month of construction commencing detail on the timing and focus of these compliance audits will be provided to the ER for approval. It would be expected that these two external audits would be completed within the first six months of construction starting. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

33 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ COMPLIANCE TRACKING Green Light will feed data on environmental performance into the reporting requirements associated with Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd s Compliance Tracking Program, as required by CoA C12 which requires: C12. Prior to the commencement of construction, the Proponent shall develop and implement a Compliance Tracking Program, to track compliance with the requirements of this approval during the construction and operation of the project and shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: (a) provisions for periodic reporting of compliance status to the Director-General including at least prior to the commencement of construction of the project, prior to the commencement of operation of the project and within two years of operation commencement; (b) a program for independent environmental auditing in accordance with AS/NZ ISO 19011: Guidelines for Quality and/or Environmental Management Systems Auditing; (c) (d) (e) (f) procedures for rectifying any non-compliance identified during environmental auditing or review of compliance; mechanisms for recording environmental incidents and actions taken in response to those incidents; provisions for reporting environmental incidents to the Director-General during construction and operation; and provisions for ensuring all employees, contractors and sub-contractors are aware of, and comply with, the conditions of this approval relevant to their respective activities. 8.4 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS The following processes will be adopted to identify appropriative actions to be taken to address any identified potential adverse environmental impacts. These processes apply in circumstances where either the required safeguards specified in the CEMP have not been followed or where it is apparent that the safeguards as contained in the CEMP are not adequate to prevent adverse environmental impacts MAJOR NON-CONFORMANCE The Quality and Environment Manager will have the authority to temporarily stop any work activity that is not being undertaken in accordance with requirements of the CEMP and presents an unacceptable or unanticipated environmental risk. Any major non-conformance will trigger the issuance of a required corrective action. The corrective action will specify what needs to happen before works can re-commence and will be recorded in the Corrective Action Register (refer Form MSF09) CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT NOTICE In a circumstance where it is apparent that the safeguards as contained in the CEMP are being adhered to, but are not adequate to minimise adverse environmental impacts, or can be improved, the Quality and Environment Manager will have the authority to temporarily stop that work activity (if required) and prepare a Continuous Improvement Notice (refer Form MSF10). If and as required, the CEMP will be updated and the changes required to that work activity will be communicated to the relevant persons before works re-commence. Examples of the types of corrective actions include modification to a Work Instruction, delivery of a targeted environmental due diligence session and more intense monitoring of that activity NON-CONFORMANCE CLOSE OUT Fourteen (14) days is the nominated target for close out on non-conformances. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

34 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Statement of Commitments 9.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(h) states the CEMP shall include: specific consideration of relevant measures to address any requirements identified in the documents referred to under conditions A 1(b) and A 1(c) of this approval; With the modification to the development as approved in February 2014, the relevant documents now referred to under condition A1 include: (b) Environmental Assessment Moree Solar Farm (BP Solar Site 3 Southern) (February 2011); (c) Submissions Report Proposed Solar Power Station Near Moree (Moree Solar Farm) (April 2011); (d) Specialist Report Summary of Amended Project, Proposed Moree Solar Farm (November 2013); and (e) Response to Submissions Moree Solar Farm (9 January 2014). Relevant measures in the above documents, as they relate to safeguards to be employed prior to, during and post construction, are identified as SoC. 9.2 COMPLIANCE Table 9.1 below provides a summary of all SoC, including clarification on their relevance to the construction phase of the MSF, as well as identifying where (section and page number) within this CEMP these SoC are addressed. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

35 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Statement of Commitments: Submissions Report Proposed Solar Power Station Near Moree (Moree Solar Farm) (April 2011) Managing Potential Visual Impacts Potential adverse visual impact of ETL V.1 A careful and considered route selection process has been undertaken to avoid sensitive views and loss of existing vegetation where possible No Incorporated in design. Potential adverse visual impact of ETL structures V.2 Wherever possible, angle positions selected and placed in strategic locations to minimise potential visual impact and to provide a maximum setback from residences and roads. No Incorporated into design. Potential adverse visual impact of ETL and SPS structures V.3 Selection of suitable component materials with low reflective properties. Yes Incorporated into design. Visual effects of construction stages V.4 Appropriate control and removal of spoil from construction areas. Yes Section 20.4, page 113 Visual effects of construction materials and equipment storage V.5 Selection of suitable storage areas for materials or plant with minimum visibility from residences and roads with screening where necessary. Yes Refer Drawings. Use of screen planting V.6 Undertake strategic tree or shrub planting between the view and the Project in consultation with affected residents and landowners (for moderate and above impacted residences). Yes Section 20.3, page 111 Managing Potential Noise Effects Protection of noise amenity for residential properties construction stages N.1 Construction hours generally restricted to 7.00am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday and 7.00am [sic] to 1.00pm Saturday. Work outside of the proposed hours would only occur when: activities do not cause a noise nuisance at any nearby residential building/s; delivery of materials which are required outside of normal hours for safety reasons as requested by Police or other authorities; or emergency work to avoid loss of lives and/or property. Yes Section 21.4, Page 117 Note: The 7.00 am Saturday start is inconsistent with Conditions of Approval and will be 8.00 am. Informing local residents about activities N.2 Development and implementation of a community relations program to inform residents and the community of the progress of activities and potential noise and vibration impacts of each phase of the project. Yes Section , page 117 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

36 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Protection of noise amenity for residential properties - construction stages Managing Potential Ecological Effects N.3 A "Noise Management Plan" (NMP) will be prepared as a component of the CEMP to address and manage construction noise and vibration, and methods to manage impacts. The NMP would be prepared in consultation with the approving authority and construction contractors, and address: selection of plant and equipment where practical on acoustic performance; noise certification of site plant and equipment prior to commencing site work and regular monitoring to ensure equipment noise emission levels do not deteriorate due to poor maintenance or damage; work practices to minimise potential noise and vibration impacts; a monitoring program to ensure that construction noise and vibration emissions are controlled and that the best possible practices are implemented; noise and vibration monitoring shall be conducted in response to community complaints and at the request of the DECCW. Reports of investigations shall be provided to the DECCW upon request; the establishment of procedures to address noise and vibration complaints received from the public during the construction period +undertaking to implement all practicable measures to undertake the development in a way that minimises the noise generated. Yes Section 21, 115 Protection of identified native vegetation areas E.1 Following final design (site, ETL and road alignment) all losses of native vegetation will be re-quantified. No Requantification was linked to biodiversity offsets which are now not required. Protection of identified native vegetation areas Protection of identified native vegetation areas Protection of identified native vegetation areas E.2 Offsets will be provided by long term management and ecological improvement of the 4.81 ha of on-site Carbeen Woodland (which will be within the ownership of the proponent) ; E.3 An Offset Management Plan will be prepared outlining the management proposals for the Carbeen Woodland this Plan will include: Scoring using a suitable metric system; Detailed management proposals to achieve a "No Net Loss" Outcome; and Proposals for securing the offset site in perpetuity. E.4 The management proposals referenced in E.3 will include appropriate fire management regime, fencing, appropriate retention of understorey, hollows, weed management, etc. Protected areas within the identified south-eastern corner site would also include seeding in accordance with Ozark recommendations. No The proponent has established, in consultation with OEH, that an Offset Strategy is not required. No The proponent has established, in consultation with OEH, that an Offset Strategy is not required. No The proponent has established, in consultation with OEH, that an Offset Strategy is not required. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

37 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Protection of identified native vegetation areas Protection of identified native vegetation areas E.5 Conservation plans for other sensitive areas identified for conservation purposes [e.g. the south-eastern corner site identified in the OzArk Archaeological assessment) will be drawn up in association with other relevant plans e.g. the Cultural Heritage Management Plan referenced in A.2. The management procedures identified will include: appropriate fire management regime, fencing, appropriate retention of understorey, hollows, weed management, etc. Protected areas within the identified south-eastern corner site would also include seeding in accordance with Ozark recommendations. E.6 During construction vegetated areas to be protected will be demarcated with paint or tapes. Yes Section , page 80 Yes Section , page 96 ETL vegetation management E.7 Vegetation clearing within the ETL Study Areas should be undertaken in accordance with Country Energy Procedure Vegetation Clearing Guidelines For New Power Lines CEP2010, and other provisions included in Ozark s recommendations. Yes Section , page 97 General Land Management E.8 Preparation of a Land Management Plan which includes provisions to manage the finished surface of the SPS site including consideration of groundcover planting, native grasses and potential for grazing (not to occur in areas identified for protection). Yes The scope of this LMP is covered in the Ground Cover Management Plan. Section 19, page 103 Removal of noxious weeds and reducing further weed invasion E.9 Weed control program as a component of CEMP and OEMP. Works and species mix to be documented. See Ozark (2010) Section 9 for initial guidelines Yes Section 19.7, page 107 Pest Control E.10 Inclusion of pest animal and plant control provisions in LMP in particular targeting feral cat, dog, fox, invasive native species (e.g. noisy minor. black kites). Managing impacts on threatened fauna E.11 Provisions for staff induction and training to reduce risk of avoidable damage during tree removal activities and through vehicle trauma, generally in accordance with OzArk recommendations. Yes Section , page 101 Yes Sections 7.3 (page 17) and 18 (page 77) Managing impacts on the aquatic environment E.12 Ozark identify the point where ETL crosses Halls Creek as the area of concern and Ozark's recommendations will be followed in the management of potential impacts. Yes Section , page 101 Monitoring controls and rehabilitation measures E13 CEMP and OEMP to include performance indicators and review provisions to ensure implementation. Yes Section 8.2, page 18 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

38 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Managing Potential Effects on Items of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Protection of aboriginal heritage Protection of aboriginal heritage Protection of aboriginal heritage Protection an enhancement of aboriginal heritage Managing Potential Traffic impacts A.1 Preparation of an Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan (AHMP) to determine the management arrangements for the three identified sites. This plan to be formulated in consultation with the Aboriginal community stakeholders for this project. A.2 The extent of the conservation zone and methods for its management and interpretation will be included in the AHMP to be developed for the project. A.3 To ensure no inadvertent impacts to the sites, a no-go zone will be established in the vicinity of the sites using nightline, and workers will be inducted to ensure that impacts do not go beyond the delineated impact footprint. A.4 Worker induction program includes training on approach to dealing with identification of Aboriginal sites identified during the course of construction and other work, and in regard to ETL workers that induction include awareness of the sites referenced as # l and # l in the Ozark report (i.e. sites over l00m east of the ETL study area. Yes Section 14, page 49 Yes Section 14, page 49 Yes Section 14.7, page 61 Yes Sections 7.3 (page 17) and 14.7 (page 61) Ensuring traffic safety and efficiency during construction stage T.1 Upgrading works to Barton Plains Road generally in accordance with specialist traffic study undertaken by ITPA and included in EAR No Subject to outcome of CoA C1 and C2 Ensuring traffic safety and efficiency during construction stage T.2 Upgrading of the intersection of Burrington Road and Barton Plains Road to meet standard B-Double turning paths. No Subject to outcome of CoA C1 and C2 Ensuring structural integrity of road system post development T.3 Preparation of a Construction Stage Roads Management and Maintenance Plan in consultation with Council which includes: Joint examination of existing road assets and identification of areas of concern prior to commencement of work; Regular joint inspections to identify any deterioration to council road assets due to construction stage works; Ongoing commitment to make good during the construction stages and at construction completion. No Subject to outcome of CoA C1 and C2 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

39 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Managing Potential Bushfire Impacts Ensure adequate Asset Protection Zones B.1 A 20 metre Asset Protection Zone, consisting entirely of an Inner Protection Area, will be provided around the proposed electricity generation facility, and any areas reserved for conservation purposes (i.e. EEC area and Aboriginal cultural heritage area) All grounds within the subject property not built upon will be periodically fuel reduced (e.g. grazing or slashing). Grounds below the individual photovoltaic modules will be fuel reduced to ensure direct flame contact does not occur. A Aboriginal sites recorded during Ozark-led field assessments with reference numbers will be prepared to ensure the ongoing management of the Asset Protection Zones and grounds within the subject property Yes Section 19.8, page 108 Minimising bushfire risks to on-site buildings B.2 Proposed Office/Control Room and Warehouse buildings will have gutter guards fitted having a flammability index of <5. All operable windows on the proposed Office/ Control Room and Warehouse be screened with aluminium, steel or bronze metal mesh having an aperture size of <2mm. All vents and weepholes on the proposed Office/ Control Room and Warehouse will be screened with aluminium, steel or bronze metal mesh having an aperture size of <2mm. All external hinged doors on the proposed Office/ Control Room and Warehouse will be fitted with a draught excluder having a flammability index of <5. No Incorporated into design. Minimising ignition risk from ETL B.3 Maintenance of the vegetation around the transmission lines should be undertaken in accordance with the ISSC 3 Guideline for Managing Vegetation Near Power Lines No To be dealt with in OEMP. Ensuring access design and construction is consistent with proper bushfire risk B.4 The proposed formed internal road from Barton Plains Road to the proposed Office I Control Room and Warehouse will comply with the requirements for 'Internal Roads ' as detailed in section of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 A perimeter fire trail will be provided within the Asset Protection Zone in accordance with requirements of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 No Incorporated into design. Minimising risk from combustible Fencing B.5 Combustible fencing not be installed within 10 metres of a structure. No Incorporated into design. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

40 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Ensuring sound risk management planning in the event of an emergency Ensuring water supply meets bushfire protection requirements Ensuring site landscaping does not exceed fuel load requirements Managing Potential Economic and Social impacts B.6 A Grassfire Evacuation Plan will be prepared consistent with the NSW Rural Fire Service Guideline B.7 The proposed extension to the hydrant system is to comply with the sizing, pressures and spacing of AS The proposed 200,000 litre water tank is to comply with the following: A suitable connection for fire fighting purposes is made available. A 65mm Storz outlet with Gate or Ball valve is provided. Gate of Ball valve and pipes are adequate for water flow. In the event that the 200,000 litre water tank is not provided initially, a temporary 10,000 litre Static Water Supply will be provided within close proximity to the development site before the commencement of any construction works. B.8 Landscaping around any proposed building will comply with Appendix 5 'Landscaping and Property Maintenance' of Planning for Bushfire Protection Yes Section 23.3, page 127 Yes Section , page 108 Yes Section , page 108 Potential displacement of local facilities and labour. Optimising local employment during project construction SE.1 Project construction agreements will include goals for local employment take-up, and consider the potential to plan for peak construction period around local seasonal employment availability. No A recruitment company has been engaged to maximise employment opportunities for local. Optimising local employment during project construction. Optimising training and development opportunities for young people SE.2 Proponent to participate in Council/community-based working group aimed at promoting apprenticeships and TAFE Courses for electricians, and up skilling of existing electricians for PV installation commissioning and other trades as appropriate. No Green Light is going to develop training courses with TAFE. Integration with local and regional tourism. SE.3 Proponent to participate in Council/community-based working group aimed at promoting local and regional tourism, including provision of a viewing platform at the site. No Responsibility of MSF Pty Ltd. Working with local Aboriginal Communities SE.4 Proponent to work with AES and other community representatives to actively promote training and employment of local aboriginal career seekers. No Green Light, consistent with its contractual obligation with MSF Pty Ltd, is aiming to maximise employment opportunities for the local Aboriginal community. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

41 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Managing Potential Land and Water impacts Potential for runoff from site to adversely affect local streams WL1 Preparation of a Soil and Water Management Plan in accordance with the standards of Landcom's guideline document: Soils and Construction (the "Blue Book") 2 as a component of the CEMP. Yes Section 15, page 65 Arrangements for management of all machinery and vehicles on site, including refuelling and storage to minimise potential for hydrocarbon and other leaks spills to be documented in CEMP. Sections , , (page 67) Preparation of Spill Response Plan as a component of both CEMP and OEMP. Section , page 67 Preparation of Site Restoration Management Plan for each of the stages of construction as a component of the CEMP which sets out protocols for dealing with disturbed areas to minimise potential runoff. Section 19.6, page 105 Potential for site works to adversely affect groundwater. LW.2 No access to the groundwater system required for the Proposal. Water will be drawn from reticulated system linked to Council infrastructure, roof runoff, and some small storage dams. No Sections 15.4 and 15.5 (page 69) On-site effluent treatment system to meet all required Australian Standards to ensure no adverse effects on groundwater. Section 15.4 (page 69) Ensuring appropriate site revegetation LW.3 There will be a requirement for site restoration works at the completion of construction, including revegetation of disturbed ground, weed management and control of any erosion and sedimentation. An Integrated Site Restoration Plan will be incorporated as a component of both CEMP and OEMP which appropriately integrates requirements of bushfire protection, weed management, potential for pest harbourage, soil and erosion control. Groundwater Potential Risk LW.4 Any interception or the use of groundwater may require a Licence under relevant NSW water legislation. All proposed groundwater works including bores for the purpose of investigation, extraction, dewatering, testing or monitoring will be identified and approval obtained from NOW prior to installation. Yes Section 19.6, page 105 No Section 15.4, page 68 Flooding LW.5 A flood management plan for the project area including a flood model for predicted water levels and contingency measures for the site during potential floods, will be prepared and incorporated into the CEMP and OEMP. Yes Section 16, page Error! Bookmark not defined. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

42 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Involvement of Office of Water LW.6 The CEMP and OEMP will be provided to NOW for review and is to include mitigation measures for potential contamination of surface and groundwaters [sic], prior to project commencement. Managing Potential Health Risks Health risks associated w with EMF H.1 Consideration will be given to opportunities to further reduce electromagnetic field strength in the detailed design of the ETL componentry, in accordance with the principles of prudent avoidance. Managing Potential Decommissioning Risks H.2 Within 18 months of cessation of the operation of the Project, the site shall be decommissioned and returned, as far as practical, to its condition prior to the commencement of construction. Decommissioning will occur in accordance with a decommissioning environmental management plan [DEMP prepared in consultation with the Director General of the DoP. H.3 DEMP will bring about removal of all solar PV facilities and support structures, trackers, inverters, transformers, overhead and underground cabling, and associated electrical infrastructure. Project infrastructure including access roads may only be retained on site where it would not pose an impediment on permissible land uses on the site. Yes No No No Appendix B Incorporated into design. Operations. Operations. Statement of Commitments: Response to Submissions Moree Solar Farm (9 January 2014) Extent of permanent vegetation loss for ETL M1 Permanent impact per electricity pole will be 1m 2 not 3m 2 Yes Section , page 105 ETL construction access tracks M2 No permanent construction access tracks are required for the transmission line, and temporary construction disturbance would be limited to the 30 m wide easement area and not exceed 10 ha. Yes Section , page 96 Carbeen remnants M3 Carbeen remnants on the solar farm site will no longer be impacted. No Carbeen remnants not located on MSF site (refer Figure 7 OzArk, 2010) - Appendix F Works in watercourses M4 All works within watercourse will be consistent with the NSW Office of Water s Guidelines for Controlled Activities Erosion and sediment controls M5 Adequate erosion and sediment control activities will be put in place during construction and operation until the area has been re-vegetated. Yes Section 15.3, page 67 Yes Section , page 65 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

43 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 9.1 Statement of Commitments Issue Ref. No. Commitment Relevance to Construction CEMP Reference Water source M6 Water will be sourced from appropriately licensed sources. Yes Section 15.5, page 69 Weed management M7 Weed management measures will be included within the CEMP. Yes Section 19.7, page 107 Speed limits M8 An appropriate speed limit on Barton Plains Road will be considered. Yes Section , page 124 Community Consultation Plan M9 The Community Consultation Plan will be implemented throughout the project life. Yes Responsibility of MSF Pty Ltd. 22 kv collector cables M10 The 22kV collector cables will be shielded and buried underground. No The 22kV collector cables will be buried underground. Easement creation M11 An easement will be established for the new section of 66kV line Yes Section 5.7, page 10 Electrical works and health and safety standards M12 All electrical works for Moree Solar Farm will be built to the appropriate electrical and health and safety standards. No Incorporated into design. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

44 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Conditions of Approval 10.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(i) states the CEMP shall include: the additional requirements of this approval; 10.2 COMPLIANCE Table 10.1 provides a summary of all Conditions of Approval (CoA), including clarification on their relevance to the construction component of the MSF, and the sections within this CEMP where these CoA are addressed. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

45 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 10.1 Conditions of Approval CoA Description Relevance to CEMP Yes/No CEMP Reference Part A Administrative Conditions A1 Terms of Approval Yes Entire CEMP A2 Terms of Approval Yes Entire CEMP A3 Terms of Approval Yes Section 5.6, page 10 A4 Terms of Approval No - A5 Limits of Approval No - A6 Statutory Requirements Yes Section 5.3, page 9 Part B General Conditions B1 Bushfire Risk Yes Section 19.8, page 108 B2 Bushfire Risk Yes Section , page 108 B3 Bushfire Risk Yes Section , page 109 B4 Dust Generation Yes Section 17, page 75 B5 Water Quality Impacts Yes Section 15, page 65 B6 Waste Generation and Management Yes Section 24.1, page 128 B7 Waste Generation and Management Yes Section 24.6, page 130 B8 Waste Generation and Management Yes Section 24.2, page 129 B9 Waste Generation and Management Yes Section 24.3, page 129 B10 Bunding and Spill Management Yes Section , page 66 Part C Prior to Construction C1 Traffic and Transport Impacts No Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report submitted to DPE by MSF C2 Traffic and Transport Impacts No Pty Ltd 13/10/14. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

46 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 10.1 Conditions of Approval CoA Description Relevance to CEMP Yes/No CEMP Reference C3 Operational Noise Impacts No Operational Noise Prediction Report submitted to the DPE 14/10/14 by MSF PTY LTD. C4 Flora and Fauna Vegetation Impacts Native Vegetation Impacts Yes Section , page 96 C5 Flora and Fauna - Biodiversity Offset Strategy Yes OEH will reserve final determination on the need or not for an Offset Strategy until the assessment of impacts associated with the road works is completed refer Appendix B. C6 Community Information, Consultation and Involvement Yes Section 1.8, page 3 C7 Community Information, Consultation and Involvement - Provision of Electric Information No Responsibility of MSF Pty Ltd. C8 Community Information, Consultation and Involvement - Community Information Plan No Responsibility of MSF Pty Ltd. C9 Community Information, Consultation and Involvement - Complaints Procedure Yes Section 11.2, page 38 C10 Community Information, Consultation and Involvement - Complaints Procedure Yes Section 11.4, page 39 C11 Community Information, Consultation and Involvement - Complaints Procedure Yes Section 11.3, page 38 C12 Compliance Tracking Program No Responsibility of MSF Pty Ltd. C13 Environmental Management Environmental Representative No Responsibility of MSF Pty Ltd. C14 Environmental Management - Construction Environmental Management Plan (a) (b) (c) (d) description of all relevant activities to be undertaken on the site during construction including an indication of stages of construction, where relevant; identification of the potential for cumulative impacts with other construction activities occurring in the vicinity and how such impacts would be managed; details of any construction sites and mitigation, monitoring, management and rehabilitation measures specific to the site compound(s) that would be implemented; statutory and other obligations that the Proponent is required to fulfil during construction including all relevant approvals, consultations and agreements required from authorities and other stakeholders, and key legislation and policies; Yes Section 2, page 4 Yes Section 3, page 6 Yes Section 4, page 7 Yes Section 5, page 9 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

47 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 10.1 Conditions of Approval CoA Description Relevance to CEMP Yes/No CEMP Reference (e) evidence of consultation with relevant public authorities required under this condition and how issues raised by the agencies have been addressed in the plan; Yes Appendix B (f) (g) (h) a description of the roles and responsibilities for all relevant employees involved in the construction of the project including relevant training and induction provisions for ensuring that all employees, contractors and sub-contractors are aware of their environmental and compliance obligations under these conditions of approval; details of how the environmental performance of construction will be monitored, and what actions will be taken to address identified potential adverse environmental impacts specific consideration of relevant measures to address any requirements identified in the documents referred to under conditions A 1(b) and A 1(c) of this approval; Yes Section 7, page 14 Yes Section 8, page 18 Yes Section 9, page 22 (i) the additional requirements of this approval; Yes Section 10, page 32 (j) a complaints handling procedure during construction; Yes Section 11, page 38 (k) (l) maps or plans clearly indicating where the project area has been reduced to minimise impacts to EEC and native pasture in good condition; and a matrix of construction work method statements (or similar) to be prepared and the anticipated level of risk associated with each determined. Yes Section 18.5, page 80 Yes Section 13.2, page 43 (m) measures to monitor and manage soil and water impacts in consultation with NOW and DTIRIS (Fisheries) including : control measure for works close to or involving waterway crossings (including rehabilitation measures following disturbance and monitoring measures and completion criteria to determine rehabilitation success), identification of construction activities that are likely to pose a risk of groundwater interference, and procedures for managing groundwater impacts should they occur (including to groundwater dependent species and to registered groundwater users); Yes Section 15, page 65 (n) a flood management plan for the project area including a flood model for predicted water levels and shall include contingency measures for the site during potential floods, inclusive of measures for the removal of debris around the perimeter of the site to avoid alterations to floodpaths occurring as a result of debris build up. Yes Section 16, page Error! Bookmark not defined. (o) measures to monitor and manage dust emissions including dust generated by traffic on unsealed public roads and unsealed internal access tracks; and Yes Section 17, page 75 (p) emergency management measures including measures to control bushfires. Yes Sections 19.8 (page 108) & 23 (page 127) C15 Environmental Management - Construction Environmental Management Plan (a) Flora and Fauna Management Plan Yes Section 18, page 77 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

48 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 10.1 Conditions of Approval CoA Description Relevance to CEMP Yes/No CEMP Reference (b) Ground Cover Management Plan Yes Section 19, page 103 (c) Landscape Plan Yes Section 20, page 111 (d) Construction Noise Management Plan Yes Section 21, page 115 (e) Traffic Management Plan Yes Section 22, page 121 (f) Aboriginal Heritage Plan Yes Section 14, page 49 C16 Railway Corridor Yes Section 5.3, page 9 Part D During Construction D1 Soil and Water Quality Impacts Yes Section 15.2, page 65 D2 Heritage Yes Section 26, page 132 D3 Heritage Yes Section , page 59 D4 Hours of Work and Noise Impacts Construction Noise Yes Section 21.4, page 117 D5 Hours of Work and Noise Impacts Construction Noise Yes Section , page 117 D6 Hours of Work and Noise Impacts Construction Noise Yes Section 21.5, page 118 D7 Hours of Work and Noise Impacts Work Generating High Noise Impact Yes Section , page 117 Part E Prior to Operations E1 Biodiversity Offset Package No The proponent has established, in consultation with OEH, that an Offset Strategy is not required. E2 Traffic and Transport Impacts No Prior to commencement of operation. E3 Operational Environmental Management Plan No Prior to commencement of operation. Part F During Operation F1 Noise No During operations. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

49 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 10.1 Conditions of Approval CoA Description Relevance to CEMP Yes/No CEMP Reference F2 Maintenance No During operations. F3 Visual Amenity Landscaping Requirements No Refer Sections (page 112) & 20.4 (page 113) F4 Visual Amenity Landscaping Requirements No Refer Section 20.4, page 113 F5 Visual Amenity Rehabilitation and Revegetation Yes Section 19.6, page 105 Part G Decommissioning / Post Operations G1 Decommissioning No During operation. G2 Decommissioning No During operation. G3 Decommissioning Management Plan No During operation. Source: NSW Government Department of Planning Project Approval MP10_0175 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

50 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Complaints Handling Procedures 11.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(j) states the CEMP shall include: a complaints handling procedure during construction MSF PTY LTD As the development proponent and owner of the MSF, and in accordance with its contractual arrangements with Green Light as the EPC contractor, MSF Pty Ltd will assume responsibility to ensure that the following are available for community complaints for the life of the project: a 24 hour telephone number on which complaints about construction and operational activities at the site may be registered; a postal address to which written complaints may be sent; and an address to which electronic complaints may be transmitted. The telephone number, postal address and address will be advertised in a newspaper circulating in the area on at least one occasion prior to the commencement of construction; and at sixmonthly intervals during construction and for a period of two years following commencement of operation of the project. These details will also be provided on Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd s internet site as required by CoA C7. In addition to the above, the telephone number, postal address and address will be displayed on a sign near the entrance to the construction site, in a position that is clearly visible to the public PROCEDURE FROM MSF PTY LTD Green Light will, upon notification and details of any complaint received by MSF Pty Ltd, immediately investigate the cause of the complaint and identify actions required to avoid a recurrence. This investigation and reporting back to MSF Pty Ltd will be completed within 48 hours of the notification and will be fully documented. Documentation will include Green Light updating its Complaints Register (refer Form MSF04) and completing an internal Complaints Record (Form MSF05). A copy of these will be provided to MSF Pty Ltd with 48 hours of Green Light being advised of the complaint. The complaint investigation and documentation will be the responsibility of Green Light s Quality and Environment Manager. Green Light will exercise this responsibility to cover any and all complaints that arise from the conduct of construction activity by any of its sub-contractors. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

51 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ OTHER SOURCES It is possible that Green Light will receive complaints through other means than notification from MSF Pty Ltd. That is, complaints may be made direct to Green Light or one of its contractors, and not come through the MSF Pty Ltd s community complaints system. In this circumstance, the Quality and Environment Manager will immediately notify MSF Pty Ltd of the complaint. Green Light will then implement the same procedure for the investigation and documentation of the complaint. Specifically, the Quality and Environment Manager will: Update its Complaints Register (Form MSF04); complete an internal Complaints Record (Form MSF05); and provide a copy of these to MSF Pty Ltd with 48 hours of Green Light receiving the complaint COMPLAINTS REGISTER Any complaint received through either of the above means will be recorded on an updated Complaints Register (Form MSF04) and the details recorded in a Complaints Record (Form MSF05) The Complaints Record will record: the date and time of the complaint; the means by which the complaint was made (telephone, mail or ); any personal details of the complainant that were provided, or if no details were provided, a note to that effect; the nature of the complaint; any actions taken in relation to the complaint, including timeframes for implementing the action; and if no action was undertaken in relation to the complaint, the reasons why no action was taken. A copy of the updated Complaints Register and specific Complaints Record will be provided to MSF Pty Ltd for any complaint received COMPLAINT RESOLUTION The timeframe for resolving a complaint is within 48 hours of Green Light being made aware of a complaint. Responsibility for responding to the complainant is MSF Pty Ltd, not Green Light ADDITIONAL INFORMATION If and as required, Green Light will prepare and submit a detailed response or action to MSF Pty Ltd within two weeks of the complaint being received. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

52 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Incident Management 12.1 INTERNAL REPORTING ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENT Any incident that occurs with the potential to cause an environmental impact will be reported immediately to the Quality and Environment Manager. The Environmental Due Diligence induction will emphasise this obligation to all contractors and personnel working on-site. This section of the CEMP details procedures to be followed in the event of an environmental incident, as distinct from an emergency situation EMERGENCY RESPONSE In the event of an emergency, the initial response is critical to ensure that the necessary assistance is provided in a timely manner to safeguard life. In these circumstances the protocols and procedures specified in the Site Emergency Plan apply. A copy of this Site Emergency Plan is provided in Appendix D IMMEDIATE RESPONSE Upon receiving notification of an incident with the potential to cause an environmental impact, but not constituting an emergency, the Quality and Environment Manager will immediately attend the incident. The Quality and Environmental Manager will then: Isolate the area affected by the incident. Stop works around the area. Implement containment measures to prevent the impact of the incident spreading. Make a determination as to the significance of the potential environmental impact and, as appropriate, undertake appropriate external notifications EXTERNAL NOTIFICATIONS MATERIAL HARM EPA notification is required where a pollution incident occurs in the course of an activity such that material harm to the environment is caused or threatened. Material harm to the environment is defined in s.147 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 as follows: (a) harm to the environment is material if: i) it involves actual or potential harm to the health or safety of human beings or to ecosystems that is not trivial, or ii) it results in actual or potential loss or property damage of an amount, or amounts in aggregate, exceeding $10,000 (or such other amount as is prescribed by the regulations), and PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

53 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 (b) loss includes the reasonable costs and expenses that would be incurred in taking all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent, mitigate or make good harm to the environment. The Quality and Environment Manager, as soon as the Immediate Response actions have been implemented, will make a determination as to whether material harm has been caused or is threatened EPA NOTIFICATION If the Quality and Environment Manager determines material harm exists, he/she will immediately notify the EPA and provide the following relevant information. the time, date, nature, duration and location of the incident; the location of the place where pollution is occurring or is likely to occur; the nature, the estimated quantity or volume and the concentration of any pollutants involved, if known; the circumstances in which the incident occurred (including the cause of the incident, if known); and the action taken or proposed to be taken to deal with the incident and any resulting pollution or threatened pollution, if known. Following EPA notification, the Quality and Environment Manager would also then inform Moree Plains Shire Council and the Environmental Representative of the situation. This initial notification to these stakeholders would be for information purposes alone, and Green Light would continue to concentrate exclusively on responding to any instruction or request from the EPA NO MATERIAL HARM Where an incident has occurred that has not resulted in material harm, the Quality and Environment Manager will immediately notify Moree Plains Shire Council and the Environmental Representative and provide the following relevant information. the time, date, nature, duration and location of the incident; the location of the place where pollution is occurring or is likely to occur; the nature, the estimated quantity or volume and the concentration of any pollutants involved, if known; the circumstances in which the incident occurred (including the cause of the incident, if known); and the action taken or proposed to be taken to deal with the incident and any resulting pollution or threatened pollution, if known INCIDENT INVESTIGATION AVOID RECURRENCE As soon as the incident has been contained and external notifications undertaken the Quality and Environment Manager will then undertake an incident investigation. One purpose of the investigation will be to identify and understand the cause of the incident with a view to modifying procedures to avoid the potential for a recurrence. The types of preventative actions taken could include revision to Work Instructions or undertaking targeted Environmental Due Diligence sessions at Tool Box meetings prior to works re-commencing. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

54 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ RESTORATION The other purpose of the incident investigation will be to define the appropriate remediation work required in order to address any bio-physical impact of the incident. The appropriate remediation work (if required) would be determined by the specific circumstances of the incident. An example of what remediation could include would be stabilising and re-seeding an area that was inappropriately cleared INCIDENT REPORTING DOCUMENTATION Any environmental incident will be recorded on an Environmental Incident Report (refer Form MSF07) and an updated Environmental Incidents Register (refer Form MSF06) will be maintained throughout the construction period. Each Environmental Incident Report will include details on: the date, time and duration of the incident; clarify whether there was material harm to the environment; detail the nature of the incident; climatic conditions; the location of the incident; pollutants involved; circumstances in which the incident occurred; and corrective action taken; external notification (EPA) DISSEMINATION For any environmental incident for which there is no material harm, the Quality and Environment Manager will provide a copy of the Environmental Incident Report to both Moree Plains Shire Council and the Environmental Representative within 72 hours of the incident occurring. For an incident in which material harm has or could have resulted and the EPA has been notified, the Quality and Environment Manager will provide reporting to the EPA as may be instructed, in accordance with the timeframes that may be so specified by the EPA. Copies of any EPA reporting associated with an environmental incident would also be provided to the Department of Planning and Environment, Moree Plains Shire Council and the Environmental Representative. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

55 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Work Instructions 13.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(l) states the CEMP shall include: a matrix of construction work method statements (or similar) to be prepared and the anticipated level of risk associated with each determined WORK INSTRUCTIONS FUNCTION Work Instructions (WI) are documents that will be prepared that detail how discrete and specific construction activities (for which there is a risk of environmental impact) will be undertaken. These WI will constitute the construction work method statements referred to in CoA C14(l) SCOPE A WI will include specification of: the techniques and construction methodology for a particular activity; plant, equipment and personnel involved; and environmental controls and safeguards to be adopted during the works SIGN-OFF WI will be prepared and approved prior to particular work activities commencing. Specifically, WI will be developed by the work crew that is to undertake a construction activity, and will be signed off by the Quality and Environmental Manager and the Site Construction Manager TRIGGER The trigger for the need to prepare a WI will be an assessment, by the Quality and Environmental Manager, of the environmental risk associated with the conduct of the particular work activity proposed; before it is undertaken. The Quality and Environmental Manager will make this risk assessment against all discrete and specific construction activities. The principles that the Quality and Environmental Manager will apply to this risk assessment are outlined below (Section 13.3) OBJECTIVE The objective of preparing WI, and having these approved prior to particular works being undertaken, is to ensure that appropriate environmental safeguards are incorporated into the construction methods in order to ensure that, consistent with CoA C14(l), the anticipated level of risk is appropriately managed. Appropriate management means that the anticipated environmental risk, after environmental safeguards have been considered and incorporated into a WI, will be low, not medium or high (refer Section 13.3 below for definitions). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

56 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ TIMING As and when discrete and specific construction activities are refined and scheduled, the need for a WI will be assessed by the Quality and Environmental Manager. This is a process that will continue throughout the construction program. Requisite detail on the number and scope of packaged construction activities is not known as of November 2014, so no completed WI have yet been prepared. Form MSF 12 will be used to demonstrate compliance with the above process. Green Light will also keep hard copies of all approved WI at its office ASSIGNING RISK RATING METHOD When provided with detail on a work activity (i.e. where, how and when) the following risk assessment principles will be applied by the Quality and Environmental Manager to assign risk, and therefore make a decision as to whether a WI is required. The decision is made on the basis of whether, in the absence of identified environmental safeguards being adopted, the environmental risk associated with that work activity would have a medium or high risk rating. That is, the decision is made on the assumption that no environmental safeguards or controls are proposed. Risk rating is a factor of the consequence of an impact occurring and the likelihood of the impact occurring. Table 13.1 identifies the rating criteria to be followed for determining Low, Medium or High risk, noting: Likelihood is interpreted as: Very likely expected to occur Likely probably will occur Unlikely might occur Very unlikely could occur but doubtful Consequence is interpreted as: Catastrophic irreversible and material harm Major significant but reversible impact Moderate serious impact but readily managed Minor localised and acceptable impact Table 13.1 Environmental Risk Matrix Environmental Consequence Likelihood Very Likely Likely Unlikely Very Unlikely Catastrophic High High High Medium Major High High Medium Medium Moderate High Medium Medium Low Minor Medium Medium Low Low The Quality and Environment Manager will apply the above principles of rating to identify those activities that trigger the requirement for the preparation of a WI. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

57 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ ENVIRONMENTAL RISK Judgements on the consequence and likelihood of risk require an understanding of what potential environmental risks actually exist. When the detail on the discrete work package is known (i.e. how, where and when), relevant environmental risks can be identified and considered. To inform this decision making the following lists key potential environmental risks associated with the construction effort: damage to Aboriginal sites; spread of weeds; causing a bushfire; generating excessive dust; generating offensive noise; damage to the endangered aquatic ecological community at Halls Creek; unauthorised, excessive disturbance to native vegetation, including Desmodium campylocaulon; sedimentation and pollution of receiving waters; soil contamination; groundwater interference; and contributing to flooding off-site PRELIMINARY RISK MATRIX A preliminary environmental risk matrix for the various construction phases is provided in Table The Quality and Environmental Manager will ensure that a WI is prepared for those activities that are marked as medium or high environmental risk. As other work activities are detailed (i.e. where, how and when) the risk assessment principles will be applied by the Quality and Environmental Manager to assign risk, and therefore make a decision as to whether a WI is required. Table 13.2 Preliminary Environmental Risk Register Number Project Phase Risk 1 Mobilisation Increased traffic movements Cause Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Effect/Impact Road congestion Current Risk Rating Consequence Likelihood Rating 1 Minor L Likely 1L Medium 2 Mobilisation Increased traffic movements Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Vehicle collisions 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 3 Mobilisation Increased traffic movements Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Animal collisions 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 4 Mobilisation Noise Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Impact on local noise amenity 2 Moderate L Likely 2L Medium 5 Mobilisation Dust generation Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Short term impact on local air quality 3 Major L Likely 3L High 6 Mobilisation Community not engaged Lack of community information dissemination Website not established Community uproar 2 Moderate VU Very Unlikely 2VU Low 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 7 Site civil works Soil and water movement Inappropriate or lack of ESCP measures Lack of ESCP maintenance Water pollution Movement of soil off-site 8 Site civil works Flora and fauna impacts Excessive clearing/site works Undertaking clearing works at wrong time Not adhering to management plan Impacts on local flora and fauna 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium 9 Site civil works Aboriginal heritage impacts Excessive clearing/site works Not adhering to management plan Impacts on Aboriginal heritage 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium 10 Site civil works Fire Hot work, machinery sparks Uncontrolled bush fire 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

58 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 13.2 Preliminary Environmental Risk Register (continued) Number Project Phase Risk 11 Site civil works Increased traffic movements Cause Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Road congestion Effect/Impact Current Risk Rating Consequence Likelihood Rating 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 12 Site civil works Dust generation Vehicle and equipment movement Lack of dust control Local air quality impacts 3 Major L Likely 3L High 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium 13 Site civil works Lack of water No water in on-site storages Potential dust generation 14 Site civil works Noise Vehicle and equipment movement Heavy machinery Impact on local noise amenity 2 Moderate L Likely 2L Medium 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 15 Site civil works Spreading of weeds Construction vehicle movement Soil/vegetation movement Spreading of weeds 16 Site civil works Air emissions Vehicle and equipment movement Poor machinery maintenance Local air quality impacts 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 17 Site civil works Litter generation Lack of bins Too infrequent bin removal Lack of compliance by site personnel 18 Site civil works Flooding impacts Not locating switchyard above 100 year flood line Local amenity impacts Flood imapct on equipment/infrastructure Potential floodwater pollution 19 Site civil works Flooding impacts Creating barriers to flood movement Redirection of floodwaters 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 20 Site civil works Spills Refueling Chemcial storage Surface water pollution Soil contamination 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 21 Mechanical works Noise Hammering posts Air wrenches Machinery movements Impact on local noise amenity 3 Major L Likely 3L High 22 Mechanical works Waste generation PV module packaging Excess steel/construction materials Increased waste to local landfill Litter 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 23 Mechanical works Air emissions Vehicle and equipment movement Poor machinery maintenance Local air quality impacts 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 24 Mechanical works Increased traffic movements Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Delivery of materials Road congestion 1 Minor L Likely 1L Medium 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 25 Mechanical works Soil and water movement Inappropriate or lack of ESCP measures Lack of ESCP maintenance Water pollution Movement of soil off-site 26 Mechanical works Fire Hot work Uncontrolled bush fire 27 Electrical works Flora and fauna impacts Excessive clearing/site works at Halls Creek Undertaking clearing works at wrong time Not adhering to management plan Impacts on local flora and fauna 28 Electrical works Waste generation Excess/waste construction materials Impact on Halls Creek and EEC 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 29 Electrical works Increased traffic movements Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Delivery of materials Road congestion 1 Minor L Likely 1L Medium 30 Electrical works Spills Refueling Filling of transformers Surface water pollution Soil contamination 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium 31 Electrical works Fire Hot work Sparks Uncontrolled bush fire 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium 32 Electrical works Soil and water movement Inappropriate or lack of ESCP measures Lack of ESCP maintenance Water pollution Movement of soil off-site 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium 33 Demobilisation Visual impact Lack of screening Impact on local visual amenity 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 34 Demobilisation Increased traffic movements Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Road congestion 1 Minor L Likely 1L Medium 35 Demobilisation Increased traffic movements Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Vehicle collisions 2 Moderate U Unlikely 2U Medium PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

59 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Table 13.2 Preliminary Environmental Risk Register (continued) Number Project Phase Risk 36 Demobilisation Increased traffic movements Cause Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Effect/Impact Animal collisions Current Risk Rating Consequence Likelihood Rating 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 37 Demobilisation Noise Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Impact on local noise amenity 2 Moderate L Likely 2L Medium 38 Demobilisation Dust generation Vehicle and equipment movement Construction personnel movement Short term impact on local air quality 3 Major L Likely 3L High 39 Demobilisation Community not engaged Lack of community information dissemination Website not established Community uproar 2 Moderate VU Very Unlikely 2VU Low 40 All Cumulative impacts Other major development(s) occur in the region 41 All Non compliance with CEMP Lack of personnel training Additional road congestion Lack of resources Non compliance with CEMP Possible environmental impact 1 Minor U Unlikely 1U Low 3 Major U Unlikely 3U Medium SAFE WORK METHODS Procedures also exist for daily hazard and risk assessments and workforce sign-off on safe work methods. The site will conduct a daily Pre Start Meeting for all Contractors before they start work. All Contractors will sign onto the Pre Start Document after the Pre Start Meeting has concluded. Table 13.3 highlights how hazards will be captured and communicated to all Site Personnel on a daily basis. Table 13.3 Hazard Assessments Reporting Method Daily Pre Start Meeting Site Inspection Toolbox Meeting Ad hoc report during the day s work verbally or by using SF-08 Hazard and Incident Report; report to Supervisor New hazard identified during project planning or construction Action Needed Hazards identified in the previous shift and for the coming shift are discussed by the crew; identify the person in charge of each work group and its work methods; recorded on the Pre Start Meeting Record (SF-24) Inspecting personnel assign a response and a priority; tracked to implementation and completion (SF-06) Site Manager assigns a response and a priority; tracked to implementation and completion (SF-14) Immediate response and control by supervisor; reported at the next Daily Pre Start Meeting (SF-24). If required, Project Manager may determine further control measures (submit all SF-08 to QSEM in Head Office on the day of the report). JSEA / SWMS prepared or noted; prepared and presented before the task is undertaken (SF-05 etc) SWMS signed by all Personnel involved with the Task Accident investigation Project manager assigns a response and a priority; tracked to implementation and completion (SF-08) Source: CATCON Systems Procedure Managing Hazards SPS MINIMISING ENVIRONMENTAL RISK INTENT The intent is to have a WI prepared for any construction activity that is initially assessed as having a medium or high environmental risk rating, and for those works not to commence until a WI has been approved on the basis that the anticipated risk (i.e. after controls are put in place) is minimised to a low rating. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

60 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ PROCESS The process of preparing WI will be as follows. A discrete work activity will be identified and scheduled; Detail on this activity will be provided to the Quality and Environment Manager who will assign a risk rating; For any activity assigned a medium or high risk rating, a WI will be prepared; A WI will be submitted to the Quality and Environment Manager; The Quality and Environment Manager will review the WI, inspect the proposed works location, check applicable safeguards and requirements specified in this Construction Environmental Management Plan have been incorporated into the construction method, and then add any applicable safeguards required to minimise the anticipated risk rating to low; The Construction Manager will then sign-off on the WI; MSF 12 Work Instructions Register will be updated and a copy of the approved WI kept in hard copy at the site office; and The approved WI will then be explained to the work crew undertaking the activity prior to them commencing works. This explanation will be delivered at the tool-box meeting before works commence PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

61 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Aboriginal Heritage Plan 14.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C15(f) states the CEMP shall include: an Aboriginal Heritage Plan to monitor and manage Aboriginal heritage shall be developed in consultation with the OEH and registered Aboriginal stakeholders, and include the following: i. details of further archaeological investigations and/or salvage measures to be carried out prior to construction; ii. procedures for the management of identified objects within the project area; iii. procedures for dealing with unidentified objects and/or human remains consistent with condition D3; iv. Aboriginal cultural heritage induction processes for construction personnel; and v. procedures for ongoing Aboriginal consultation and involvement OBJECTIVES OF AHP This AHP addresses the specific issues associated with the management of Aboriginal cultural heritage which is of significance to the Gomeroi people of the Moree area. This plan provides information and actions required to: Protect both identified and unidentified Aboriginal cultural heritage from damage or harm; Ensure that in the event that Aboriginal cultural heritage cannot be protected that appropriate management measures, such as salvage and storage of Aboriginal cultural heritage material, are implemented; and Ensure that effective and open consultation with the Gomeroi people occurs through the establishment of a continued consultation protocol and site specific consultation over site management BACKGROUND Two Aboriginal Heritage Assessments have been undertaken for the MSF project; both by Ozark Environmental and Heritage Management (November 2010 and October 2013 refer References) in consultation with Aboriginal community stakeholders. As it relates to the approved development, these investigations concluded that a number of Aboriginal archaeological sites exist in the locality and have the potential to be impacted by the development and therefore need to be carefully managed so unacceptable impacts can be avoided. These sites include: an open site with Potential Archaeological Deposit (PAD), registered on the NSW Aboriginal Heritage Management System (AHIMS) as Site ; and four artefacts associated with two previously recorded AHIMS Sites and In addition to the above, a scarred tree exists in Barton Plains Road. Whilst OzArk concluded this tree is likely to be of European origin, one of the RAS did not agree. OzArk concluded that: The fact that it is being conserved within the impact footprint means, however, that we can leave this issue unresolved. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

62 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 This scarred tree has not been registered on AHIMS. Its location in relation to the development is shown on Figure 14.1 with the nomenclature used by OzArk (i.e. BPS-ST1). The location of AHIMS registered site is also shown in Figure 14.1 and Figure 14.3 shows the location of the four recorded artefacts associated with AHIMS Sites and Site reference names, site type, co-ordinates and comment is provided in Table Table 14.1 Registered Indigenous Sites AHIMS Site Ref Site Type Easting Northing Comment Open Site Open site with Potential Archaeological Deposit located around the perimeter of an extinct ephemeral billabong Isolated Find Located approximately 39 metres north west of the existing 66kV transmission line Open Artefact Scatter Located approximately 33 metres north west of the existing 132kV transmission line, and approximately 58 metres south west of the existing 66kV transmission line. BPS-ST1 1 Scarred tree Located approximately 7.5 m east of the Barton Plains Road edge, and approximately 32 m south of the Barton Plains Road and Halls Creek-Burrington Road intersection. Note: This scarred tree is not an AHIMS registered site but is being effectively treated as an item of Aboriginal origin that can and will be protected. Better scale imagery showing the location of these sites in relation to identifiable landscape features is provided in Figures PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

63 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 14.1: Registered Aboriginal Sites PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

64 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 14.2 Site Source: OzArk (November 2010) PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

65 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 14.3: Site and Site Green dots are the four (4) artefacts recorded by OzArk in its 2013 investigations PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

66 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 14.4: Site BPS-ST ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY CONSULTATION BACKGROUND Consultation for this project was undertaken according to the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation Requirements for Proponents 2010 (ACHCRs). OzArk 2011 provides a detailed review of the consultation and fieldwork undertaken for the original project scope, which comprised a much larger physical footprint. After modifications to the project layout, additional assessment and consultation with the Aboriginal community took place in The details of this are summarised in OzArk As a result of the consultation since 2011 and the Minister s approval of the project, Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAP) have been identified for the project REGISTERED ABORIGINAL PARTIES Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders (RASs), consistent with the Minister s consent, are those Aboriginal stakeholders identified as registered stakeholders in the Moree Solar Farm Environmental Assessment prepared by BP Solar, Walsh Consulting and Fotowatio Renewable Ventures dated 1 February Notwithstanding the above, additional RASs were identified as part of the Aboriginal Heritage Assessment Proposed Moree Solar Farm Project Modification (OzArk 2013). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

67 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 The seven RASs for the MSF are identified in Table Stakeholder Moree Local Aboriginal Land Council Alf Priestley Traditional Owner Wayne Nean Traditional Owner Terry Hie Hie Aboriginal Co-op Bernadette Duncan Pitt Family - Gomeroi Traditional Owners C/O Loretta Tighe-Pitt & Dorothy Tighe Ray Tighe Notwithstanding that the term Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders (RAS) comes from the Minister s approval, the more appropriate term is Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAP), not stakeholders. This is consistent with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water s (April, 2010) Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation Requirements for Proponents 2010 (ACHCR). For the purposes of this AHP, and to be consistent with the ACHCR, the Registered Aboriginal Parties are the Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders. Forthwith, the term RAPs will be used for consistency RAP CONSULTATION FOR THE AHP Plan Development Development of this AHP began in August 2014 subsequent to notification that the Moree Solar Farm had been approved by the NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure. A preliminary draft of the AHP was prepared and distributed to the RAPs on 29 August An updated version of the AHP was sent to the RAPs on 14 October 2014 along with an invitation to attend an Aboriginal Focus Group Meeting (AFGM) at Moree on 20 October Key issues raised by the RAPs at the AFGM included the following: 1. If artefacts are found or salvaged they should be stored in a secure enclosure located on the property until the Traditional Owners have determined their preferred long term fate for these objects. 2. It was requested that the same procedures specified for the recording of salvage sites prior to relocation, be specified for any unanticipated finds prior to relocation. That is, Section should not rely on reference back to Section Employment opportunities during construction is a key consideration, with the expectation that 20% of the workforce will be Indigenous. 4. Consideration should be given to two full time monitoring positions for the duration of construction. 5. The Traditional Owners remain of the opinion that there remain unresolved issues relating to Native Title. 6. Conservation in perpetuity should be provided for the protection of the site located near the extant billabong (i.e. beyond the 25 year life of the MSF). With respect to the above, the following outcomes/commitments/positions were made by Green Light and MSF Pty Ltd. 1. Green Light will ensure appropriate lockable storage of any recovered/salvaged artefacts will be undertaken. 2. Section has been updated in this version of the AHP to specify the required recording procedure if an unanticipated find requires relocation. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

68 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 3. Whilst outside the scope of the AHP, Green Light has committed to ongoing dialogue with the Aboriginal community to maximise employment opportunities. This has included, to date, meeting with Aboriginal Employment Strategy and directing principal subcontractors to this service. 4. From an archaeological perspective, and because the development footprint has been moved away from known sites, the need for full time monitoring is considered unwarranted and, from a Work Health and Safety perspective, is dangerous. 5. Whilst outside the scope of the AHP, the development proponent, Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd, has completed considerable due diligence and is satisfied the current Native Title status allows construction and operation of the project. 6. Mechanisms for providing for the appropriate conservation of the site recorded at the billabong will be considered and addressed in both the Operational Environmental Management Plan and Decommissioning Management Plan for the Moree Solar Farm; both of which are requirements of the Minister s project approval Plan Review Following the AFGM a copy of this updated AHP was issued to all RAPs, along with minutes from the AFGM, providing the opportunity for RAPs to review the AHP and provide comment. A two (2) week review period was made available. A covering letter issued with the updated AHP ensured RAPs were provided with contact details so that they can discuss aspects of the AHP, if there were difficulties in providing any written comment. No comment on the AHP was received in the two week review period. After the two week period closed follow up calls were made to all RAP s on 7 November 2014 to check whether any comments would be forthcoming. Contact was made with four (4) of seven (7) RAPs; all of whom indicated verbally they had no comments. Messages were left for the remaining 3 RAP s who could not be contacted when called. A review of the consultation undertaken with the RAP as part of the preparation of this AHP is provided in Appendix B. A copy of the updated AHP was also provided to OEH to keep them informed of the AHP development and the consultation processes in place Plan Approval Evidence that OEH has been consulted and has approved the AHP is provided in Appendix B CONTINUED RAP CONSULTATION Specific measures for consultation in relation to the salvage of artefacts and potential unanticipated finds are outlined in Section The purpose of this section is to guide more general consultation with the RAPs throughout the life of the project. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

69 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 For the purpose of any further consultation, it is suggested that: The preference of the RAPs with respect to signage that may be erected at site AHIMS , recognising the local Aboriginal community and traditional owners, will be sought and acted on; A representative of the RAPs will be invited to participate in the Aboriginal heritage component of the Due Diligence inductions; RAPs be invited to an inspection of the Moree Solar Farm (MSF) once construction is complete and to be involved in any opening ceremony once the plant becomes operational; That the contact list of RAPs be kept up-to-date into the operational phase of the Solar Plant; and Arrangements and protocols for facilitating safe access to site AHIMS once the MSF is operational, should RAPs wish to undertake cultural activities/visits to the site. As access would need to be gained through the MSF some protocols would need to govern access. These would include, at minimum: Provision for a minimum of 5 working days notice to be given to the MSF operator requesting site access; That the number of people visiting be provided to MSF; and That members of the visiting group adhere to the Workplace, Health & Safety policies of the MSF in terms of appropriate clothing, vehicles etc. and undertake whatever site inductions are needed to meet site WHS requirements COMMUNICATIONS Green Light Contractor Pty Ltd, Elecnor Group (Green Light) is the Engineering, Procurement and Construction Contractor with the responsibility to build the MSF. Under the contract with the MSF owner, Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd, Green Light must operate the MSF for a period of two years after construction. Until this point is reached, Green Light s Quality and Environment Manager will be available and responsible for liaising with the RAPs. Before Green Light ends its contractual obligation with the owner of the MSF, contact details for ongoing communications with Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd will be made available to the RAPs AGENCY APPROVAL Consistent with the Minister s consent, this AHP will be submitted to the Office of Environment and Heritage for approval prior to it being issued to the Director General for approval MANAGEMENT OF THE ABORIGINAL HERITAGE RESOURCE PROPOSED SALVAGE Due to the significance of Aboriginal site # , the Proponent has altered the layout and extent of the photovoltaic units such that this site and the landform feature with which it is associated, is now avoided (refer Figure 14.5). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

70 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 BUFFER OF 36 METRES SURVEYED BILLABONG FORESHORE Figure 14.5: MSF Layout against mapped billabong extent PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

71 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Although this revised layout avoids direct impact to site # , it is acknowledged that the ploughing of the western part of the in-filled billabong has moved Aboriginal objects primarily in a westerly direction. Despite the fact that no artefacts were originally recorded to the north, there is however, limited potential that objects may have drifted north and lie in the impact footprint for the southern boundary fence of the solar farm and the southernmost photovoltaic units. As a precautionary measure, it is consequently proposed that this part of the impact footprint be walked by representatives of the RAPs and an archaeologist to collect any artefacts visible via surface collection. Should any artefact be observed a recording of the object (s) will be prepared, including photographs, measurements, a description of the object and GPS position. These artefacts will then be relocated for storage in a secure enclosure located on the property until the Traditional Owners have determined their preferred long term fate for these sites. Should artefacts be collected this way a short report would be prepared with photographs and GPS locations and supplied to OEH with an Aboriginal Site Impact Record form. This form will be submitted to OEH within three (3) months of the impact on a site so that the AHIMS can be updated UNANTICIPATED FINDS PROTOCOL Considering the knowledge of site # and the dispersal of associated artefacts via ploughing, there is limited potential that the construction process may encounter an Aboriginal stone artefact relating to this site. Should any previously unidentified Aboriginal object or site be revealed during construction, then work in the area should cease and the local vicinity of the find (for a single artefact a 2 x 2 m) should be cordoned off until a RAP representative or an archaeologist has verified the find 1. This verification process may be handled as follows: Object is photographed by the Site Supervisor (several images from different angles, with a scale, using a macro setting) and photographs ed to an archaeologist and/or RAP representative. Confirmation as to whether the object is Aboriginal will be completed within four (4) hours by Green Light. If the object is Aboriginal in origin, a detailed recording of the object (s) will be prepared. This would include the photographs already taken along with measurements, GPS location and a description of the object. The artefact will then be relocated for storage in a secure enclosure located on the property until the Traditional Owners have determined their preferred long term fate for these sites. As long as the artefact is similar to previously recorded artefacts of site # (an isolated artefact, or a small scatter of less than 5 stone artefacts made of silcrete, chalcedony, quartzite, quartz or chert), it/they will be managed in the manner outlined in Section The performance criterion regarding dealing with confirmed Aboriginal artefacts is that works should have recommenced within eight (8) hours. If the artefact or site type is not consistent with those previously recorded over site # , an OEH representative and the RAPs should be contacted to discuss how best to proceed POTENTIAL HUMAN REMAINS Should suspected ancestral human remains be encountered, the following process should be adhered to: Do not further disturb or move the remains; Immediately cease work in the vicinity and cordon area off; 1 In terms of the Aboriginal object recognition, the induction processes and provision of laminated artefact recognition cards for all construction staff should ensure as accurate identification as possible, hence minimising unwarranted delays to construction. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

72 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Notify the NSW Police; Notify the OEH s Environment Line on as soon as practicable and provide available details of the remains and their location; and Do not re-commence work in the area unless authorised in writing by OEH MANAGEMENT FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF ABORIGINAL SITES Conservation of Site Site # is an open site with Potential Archaeological Deposit located around the perimeter of an extinct ephemeral billabong. It has been previously determined that: This site is a rare example of an open camp site that is still associated with a significant landscape feature. The western portion of the site has been disturbed by ploughing, reducing the site s overall structural integrity (in both lateral and vertical planes), however the eastern section (i.e. the eastern shore of the billabong) appears to hold the possibility of intact subsurface deposits and it is particularly here that the site s significance lies. This site and Potential Archaeological Deposit has been assessed as having both high cultural and scientific significance and its conservation has been identified as having great importance to the RAPs. Site # is located outside the proposed project footprint, and hence will not be impacted by the construction or operation of the Moree Solar Farm The southern fence of the MSF will ensure that no inadvertent impacts occur through machinery deviating from the construction area and inductions will ensure that construction and operation teams are aware of the site, it s significance and legislative protection under the National Parks and Wildlife Act Conservation of other Identified Sites During detailed design of the re-conductoring works on the existing Essential Energy Transmission Line (TL), Green Light will ensure impacts to Aboriginal sites # and # are avoided through selective pole placement and aerially spanning across the length of the sites; and To ensure no inadvertent impact to known sites, a suitable protective buffer will be established through the installation of protective fencing to ensure no harm to those objects to which construction works are to be undertaken in close proximity. This includes clear delineation of buffers at the following Aboriginal sites: Table 14.2 Sites requiring Protective Buffer Identification Site Site Type Easting Northing Comment Isolated Find Located approximately 46 m north west of the existing transmission line. Impact can be avoided Open Artefact Scatter Located approximately 50 m south west of the existing transmission line. Impact can be avoided. BPS-ST1 Scarred tree Located approximately 7.5 m east of the Barton Plains Road edge, and approximately 32 m south of the Barton Plains Road and Halls Creek-Burrington Road intersection. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

73 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ FATE OF ARTEFACTS The final fate of objects retrieved via surface salvage was to be determined by the RAPs at the AFGM. Prior to the AFGM it was suggested that this could entail, for example, collecting the artefacts and placing them on the eastern shore of the billabong, within the intact area of site # , well outside the impact footprint. The artefacts could be placed on the surface, photographed and a GPS point taken. This information would then be forwarded to OEH via Aboriginal Site Impact Record form. Following the AFGM it was discussed that any recovered artefacts would be relocated for storage in a secure, lockable enclosure located on the property until the Traditional Owners have determined their preferred long term fate for these sites ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE INDUCTION All construction personnel will be required to undertake an Environmental Due Diligence induction prior to commencing works on site. This Environmental Due Diligence induction will incorporate a specific component relating to Aboriginal heritage. This component will cover the following: Introducing the Registered Aboriginal Stakeholder group and acknowledging the Kamilaroi (Gumm-il uh-rah-ee) country; The legal obligation not to disturb Aboriginal sites and offences of harm prescribed under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974; It will be emphasised that it is illegal to knowingly (or otherwise) disturb Aboriginal heritage sites; A description of the types of sites/objects of Aboriginal origin that do exist in the landscape they are working in; This will include presentation of photographs of known recorded sites so that all parties can examine what artefacts recorded in the area actually look like; Specific discussion on the location of the known Aboriginal sites, the function of the temporary protective fencing in creating no-go zones around these sites, and clear instruction that workers must not undertake any activity within these protective buffer areas; A detailed explanation of the protocols to be followed in the event that unidentified objects or ancestral remains are uncovered; The emphasis will be to stop works and immediately report the presence of any material that may be an Aboriginal object or site to the Environmental Manager. The key message will be to exercise caution and stop work if uncertain; and Workers attending the induction will sign a register indicating their understanding of the cultural heritage importance and legislative requirements to protect Aboriginal sites. This sign-off will include worker agreement in ensuring that the artefact cards are kept at hand when undertaking ground surface disturbance DISPUTE RESOLUTION Both the MSF owner Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd and the EPC Contractor Green Light are committed to genuine partnerships, ethical standards of practice, integrity in all engagement and respect for cultural diversity. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

74 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 These principles guide engagement with all project stakeholders, including the RAPs. Should disputes arise during the course of the project specifically regarding the management of Aboriginal cultural heritage, the following process would be followed: Wherever possible disputes will be negotiated and resolved directly between RAPs and Green Light. Should a meeting be formally requested to discuss a dispute, all parties will meet within 5 working days; If the issue remains unresolved, advice may be sought from the Office of Environment and Heritage, and/or an independent mediator/specialist (depending upon the dispute) will be engaged; and Meeting will occur between all parties no later than 10 days after the initial meeting, or as soon as practicable thereafter, considering key person availability ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES For the consultation process to be effective, all parties must appreciate and respect each other's perspective and understand each other's interests, roles and responsibilities OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE The Director General of OEH is the decision-maker who decides whether to grant or refuse an AHIP application. If an AHIP is issued, conditions are usually attached and DECCW is responsible for ensuring the AHIP holder complies with those conditions. When considering an application under Part 6 of the NPW Act, the Director General will review the information provided by proponents in line with its internal policies and procedures to assess potential or actual harm to Aboriginal objects or places (DECCW, 2009). The OEH expects proponents and Aboriginal people should: be aware that Part 6 of the NPW Act establishes the Director General or delegate of DECCW as the decision-maker; and recognise that the Director General's (or delegates) decisions may not be consistent with the views of the Aboriginal community and/or the proponent. However, DECCW will take into account all relevant information it receives as part of its decision-making process. Further information about the structure of DECCW, and the roles and responsibilities of various groups and the services provided, such as EPRG, Culture and Heritage Division (CHO), and Parks and Wildlife Group (PWG) can be found at: gov.au/whoweare/planorgs.htm REGISTERED ABORIGINAL PARTIES The interests and obligations of Aboriginal people relate to the protection of Aboriginal cultural heritage. It is only Aboriginal people who can determine who is accepted by their community as being authorised to speak for Country and its associated cultural heritage. Where there is a dispute about who speaks for Country, it is appropriate for Aboriginal people, not OEH or the proponent (i.e. Green Light and Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd), to resolve this dispute in a timely manner to enable effective consultation to proceed. It is expected that OEH, Green Light, Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd and service providers that act on their behalf should: display a meaningful appreciation, understanding and respect for the belief system, spiritual connection and sense of belonging that Aboriginal people have to their land, people and environment, which includes plants, animals, waterways, sacred sites and other places of cultural significance and importance; uphold and respect the traditional rights, obligations and responsibilities of Aboriginal people who hold cultural knowledge in accordance with traditional lore arid custom, particularly as these relate to the cultural business of men and women; PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

75 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 encourage active participation of culturally experienced and appropriate Aboriginal people who hold cultural knowledge in the consultation process; encourage opportunities for the effective transfer of cultural knowledge from older to younger generations in accordance with traditional lore and custom through the consultation process; have an awareness and understanding of how colonisation has impacted the Aboriginal people of Australia; and have an understanding and respect for the lore and customs, cultural practices, responsibilities and obligations that Aboriginal people have toward the continued care and conservation of Aboriginal objects and places. Aboriginal people should: have an awareness and understanding of the commercial environment and constraints in which proponents operate; and develop and display an awareness and understanding of the opportunities to input into regulatory processes to contribute to decision making by proponents and government authorities GREEN LIGHT Green Light operates within a commercial environment which includes: financial and management issues, priorities and deadlines; the need to obtain broad community support and acceptance in order to secure any necessary approval/consent/licence/permit to operate; the desire for clearer processes and certainty of outcomes; the need for suitable access to land for the purpose of their development project; a need to work efficiently within the project's time, quality and cost planning and management parameters; and the need for culturally appropriate assessment findings relevant to their project. Under these requirements, Green Light should: bring the RAPs or their nominated representatives together and be responsible for ensuring appropriate administration and management of the consultation process; consider the cultural perspectives, views, knowledge and advice of the RAPs involved in the consultation process in assessing cultural significance and developing any heritage management outcomes for Aboriginal object(s) and/or place(s); provide evidence to OEH of consultation by including information relevant to the cultural perspectives, views, knowledge and advice provided by the RAPs; accurately record and clearly articulate all consultation findings in the final cultural heritage assessment report; and provide copies of their cultural heritage assessment report to the RAPs who have been consulted AHP ACCESS A copy of the finalised and approved Aboriginal Heritage Plan will be provided to Council and, consistent with CoA C7(d), a copy of the AHP will be provided to MSF Pty Ltd for publishing on its dedicated website. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

76 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ DEFINITIONS Table 14.3 Definitions Term Definition Source Aboriginal object Aboriginal owners Artefact A statutory term, meaning:... any deposit, object or material evidence (not being a handicraft made for sale) relating to the Aboriginal habitation of the area that comprises NSW, being habitation before or concurrent with (or both) the occupation of that area by persons of non-aboriginal extraction, and includes Aboriginal remains (s.5 NPW Act). Aboriginal owner is a term used under the Aboriginal Lands Rights Act 1983 and the National Parks and Wildlife Act Aboriginal owners are defined as persons whose names are entered on the Register of Aboriginal Owners because of the persons cultural association with particular land. (ALR Act 1983) For the purposes of this Code, artefact has the same meaning as an object, (excluding the extension of the term to deposits ) as defined in the NPW Act. OEH 2011/0263 DECCW 2009/781 DECCW 2010/798 Dispute To engage in argument. Macquarie Dictionary Due Diligence Harm Local Aboriginal Land Council Native Title Taking reasonable and practical steps to determine whether a person s actions will harm an Aboriginal object and, if so, what measures can be taken to avoid that harm. A statutory term, meaning any act or omission that destroys, defaces, damages an object or place or, in relation to an objectmoves the object from the land on which it had been situated (s.5 NPW Act). Local Aboriginal Land Councils, or LALCs, are corporate bodies constituted under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act Under the ALR Act, LALCs have defined boundaries within which they operate. Native Title refers to those rights and interests in land and water of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that are derived from the traditional laws and customs of their nations (see s.223 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) for a detailed statutory definition). DECCW 2010/798 OEH 2011/0263 DECCW 2009/781 DECCW 2009/781 Registered Parties Aboriginal Aboriginal people, Aboriginal organisations or their representatives who have registered an interest in being consulted in accordance with stage 1 of the requirements DECCW 2009/781 Registered Stakeholders Aboriginal Aboriginal stakeholders identified as registered stakeholders in the Environmental Assessment. CoA (Definitions) Registered native title claimant(s) Sites A person or persons whose name or names appear in an entry on the Register of Native Title Claims as the applicant in relation to a acclaim to hold native title in relation to the land and waters. Note: The Register of Native Title Claims is administered by the National Native Title Tribunal. Is sometimes used as another name for Aboriginal objects and material traces of past Aboriginal land use. The term is commonly used in archaeological assessments and discourse. DECCW 2009/781 DECCW 2010/783 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

77 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Soil and Water Impacts 15.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(m) states the CEMP shall include: measures to monitor and manage soil and water impacts in consultation with NOW and DTIRIS (Fisheries) including: control measures for works close to or involving waterway crossings (including rehabilitation measures following disturbance and monitoring measures and completion criteria to determine rehabilitation success), identification of construction activities that are likely to pose a risk of groundwater interference, and procedures for managing groundwater impacts should they occur (including to groundwater dependent species and to registered groundwater users); 15.2 MANAGEMENT MEASURES EROSION AND SEDIMENT AND CONTROL PLANS The MSF site represents a low risk environment. The site is flat and does not contain any drainage lines. There are a range of activities to be undertaken that do require earthworks. These include: upgrades to Barton Plains Road and the Barton Plains Road and Burrington Road intersection; pipeline connection to Council s water main located in Barton Plans Road; the preparation of suitably compacted trafficable areas associated with the Temporal Facilities (refer Drawings); formation of internal roads; and establishment of benches for the main transformer and the 28 power stations. Earthworks, regardless of the site, create a risk of erosion and sedimentation. Earthworks drawings for all civil works are being prepared under contract by SMEC Engineering for Green Light. As is standard practice, these earthworks drawings will include Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan(s) (ESCP) that will specify soil and water management controls that will be installed to minimise soil erosion and the discharge of sediment and other pollutants to lands and/or waters during construction activities. The controls to be included in these ESCPs will be prepared in accordance with: Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Conservation (Landcom, 2004); Managing Stormwater: Urban Soils and Construction 2A Installation of Services (DECC 2008); and Managing Stormwater: Urban Soils and Construction Vol 2C Unsealed Roads (DECC 2008). The ESCPs will be prepared prior to earthworks commencing and will be submitted to the Environmental Representative for approval. Copies of all ESCP will be held on-site. The effective of the controls specified in the ESCP will be monitored by the Quality and Environment Manger undertaking weekly site inspections, complemented by inspections following significant localised rainfall events, to check the controls specified are installed and effective. All inspections, including photographic evidence, will be recorded on the Weekly Inspection Checklist (refer Form MSF02). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

78 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ BEST PRACTICE The following procedures will also be implemented to minimise erosion and sedimentation risks. Ensure that a minimum of land is exposed to the risk of erosion for the shortest period of time; Ensure no stockpiles of spoil, fill or erodible material is placed in or near drainage lines; Following any rainfall event access tracks will be inspected to ensure that they can be used without causing erosion or sedimentation, and that erosion control structures and measures in place remain effectiveness; Works will not be undertaken immediately prior to or during periods of high rainfall; and When and wherever possible works will be undertaken in a manner to facilitate progressive revegetation DANGEROUS GOODS STORAGE Any dangerous goods (as defined by the Australian Dangerous Goods Code) and combustible liquids will be stored and handled in accordance with: all relevant Australian Standards; a minimum bund volume requirement of 110% of the volume of the largest single stored volume within the bud; and the EPA s Environment Protection Manual Technical Bulletin Bunding and Spill Management. The only Dangerous Goods to be stored on-site will be 120 L unleaded petrol. In addition to this 300 L of diesel will also be stored on-site. Bunding for the storage of fuel (petrol and diesel) will be proprietary pallet bunds. GLC, its Principal Electrical Contractor and Principal Civil Contractor will each store diesel in 5x20 L containers on pallet bunds. Similarly, GLC, its Principal Electrical Contractor and Principal Civil Contractor will each store 2x20 L containers of petrol on separate pallet bunds. These will be located in the Temporal Facilities. Fuel will be stored in identified approved containers on pallet bunds in a segregated, caged lockable storage area complete with signs HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES Apart from dangerous goods, minor quantities of hazardous materials will also be stored and used onsite. Detail of these, and the maximum quantity of each stored on-site is provided in Table Table 15.1 Hazardous Substances List Substance Maximum Quantity Stored On-Site Diesel PVC Priming Fluid Unleaded petrol PVC Pipe Cement Gold Galvanising Paint Marking Paint Jointing Compound 300 L 20 L 120 L 20 L 10 L 5 L 5 KG All hazardous substances will be stored in secure containers with appropriate signage. The location of these storage areas will be clearly marked on a site plan, and copies of Safety Data Sheets (SDS) for all hazardous substances will be held on-site. These SDS will be held in a collated, accessible file on site and include an up-to-date register at the front of the folder that specifies all hazardous materials, and the maximum quantity of each, that are stored on-site. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

79 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Sulfur hexafluoride (a non-flammable gas) will not be stored on site. The 15 kl of insulating oil for the main transformer (a non hazardous substance) will be stored on-site temporarily, with delivery to be scheduled to minimise the time this material is held on-site before the transformer is filled SPILL RESPONSE EQUIPMENT Appropriately sized spill kits would be provided and maintained for mobile refuelling plant. In the event of a spill the following procedures would be followed. Immediate notification to the Quality and Environment Manager; Isolate the spill utilising the spill kit; Scrape and collect soil to a depth where there is no visible contamination staining, and place material in a secure covered receptacle; The Quality and Environment Manager would have samples analysed to establish the waste classification; and The material would be transported and disposed of at a waste facility legally permitted to accept the material. An Environmental Incident Report (refer Form MSF07) would be completed for a spill occurrence RE-FUELLING No refuelling to be undertaken anywhere near a drainage line: a buffer of >50 m would be maintained PLANT MAINTENANCE Apart from routine daily maintenance checks, no higher risk maintenance works (e.g. oil changes) of plant and equipment would be undertaken on-site WATERWAY CROSSINGS The only works to be undertaken in the vicinity of a waterway is re-conductoring of the existing 66 kv transmission line in the vicinity of Halls Creek. Halls Creek is an ephemeral waterway with intermittent flow. It is, however, part of an endangered ecological community (EEC) listed in the Fisheries Management Act 1994: specifically, the Aquatic Ecological Community in the Natural Drainage System of the Lowland Catchment of the Darling River. OzArk s advice that for the purposes of auditing, 30 metres either side of the creek would be considered part of the EEC. Notwithstanding the above, waterfront land is defined by legislation as the bed of the creek and any land within 40 metres of the creek banks. Any works undertaken within waterfront land that includes: the erection of a building or the carrying out of a work, or the removal of material (whether or not extractive material) or vegetation from land, whether by way of excavation or otherwise, or the deposition of material (whether or not extractive material) on land, whether by way of landfill operations or otherwise, or the carrying out of any other activity that affects the quantity or flow of water in a water source, requires approvals/permit under the Water Management Act 2000 and the Fisheries Management Act PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

80 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Whilst the development consent issued under s.75c of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 negates the need for an approval/permit under the Water Management Act 2000 and the Fisheries Management Act 1994, works associated with the ETL re-conductoring in the vicinity of Halls Creek is an activity that will be undertaken in proximity to a sensitive environment with high conservation values and will be subject to the preparation of a WI before works proceed. This WI will need to demonstrate a construction methodology that complies with the following. No infrastructure is to be installed, or plant traverse, 10 m either side of the creek s centreline, as this is part of the EEC. The EEC will be aerially spanned by the ETL and construction will not impact the EEC. Works will be undertaken to ensure that no vehicle or plant traverses Halls Creek; and If infrastructure or plant are to access waterfront land (i.e. 40 m either side of the creek s bank), then this work and infrastructure must not result in: the removal of material or vegetation from land, whether by way of excavation or otherwise, or the deposition of material on this land, or affecting the quantity or flow of water in a Halls Creek GROUNDWATER INTERFERENCE There is no construction activities proposed that are likely to pose a risk of groundwater interference. Groundwater investigations undertaken for the Moree landfill, located immediately north of the site, has established that two aquifers exist in the locality: a shallow aquifer at 19 m to 25 m depth, and deep aquifer between 30 m and 60 m depth (Coffey, 2005). The only activities requiring sub-surface works include: shallow excavation associated with foundations for the power station pads, main substation and control centre (restricted to likely maximum 2 m depth); driving the steel supports for the PV modules to a depth not exceeding 6m; and auger drilling for the new power pole placements to as yet unknown, but expected depth not exceeding 8 m. All these activities would be localised and transient. In the extremely unlikely event that groundwater was intercepted and any dewatering was required, the following criteria would be applied. Discharge of water to the environment would be undertaken in a manner that avoids any of the following environmental impacts: Erosion at the discharge location or in receiving environments; Erosion of structures or services; Harm to native vegetation; Sediment build-up in drainage lines; and Energy dissipation will be provided at the surface of any dewatering discharge outlet. In the review of this CEMP, NSW Office of Water requested (refer Appendix B) that if groundwater is intercepted, then the NSW Office of Water should be contacted immediately, with any necessary licences obtained to account for any incidental water. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

81 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 The application of treated effluent on-site will not occur. All effluent (limited to domestic grade effluent from staff amenities) will be treated and pumped out for conveyance to Council s sewerage scheme WATER SOURCES Water will be sourced through a connection to Council s existing water main located in Barton Plains Road. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

82 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Flood Management Plan 16.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(n) states the CEMP shall include: a flood management plan for the project area including a flood model for predicted water levels and shall include contingency measures for the site during potential floods, inclusive of measures for the removal of debris around the perimeter of the site to avoid alterations to floodpaths occurring as a result of debris build up FLOOD MANAGEMENT PLAN Consistent with the above this flood management plan identifies how a flood would be managed for the site during construction. The CEMP, of which the flood management plan is part of, outlines practices and procedures to be followed during construction. This flood management plan does not: quantify any changes to flooding behaviour off-site as a result of the MSF; or identify flood levels to inform design considerations. Both the above are considerations that will be determined prior to construction commencing. This flood management plan forms part of the CEMP and is restricted in scope to identifying how a flood would be managed during construction. It is predicated on the assumption that any results of separate flood modelling that will be undertaken to inform the MSF design, to ensure that unacceptable alterations to floodpaths off-site are avoided, will have been undertaken prior to construction commencing and therefore fall outside the scope of this CEMP PREDICTED WATER LEVELS Predicted water levels, for the site, have been determined through a conceptual flood model. The model was a physical representation of observed flood heights/patterns overlain on the detailed site survey. For the MSF site: there is some flood history information to verify that there are flood risks in the area; the flood history provides guidance in the possible severity and extent of the flood risk; there is detailed site survey across the site; and there are calculated data from previous studies that can be used to inform the derivation of flood levels within a limited geographical area using judgement. Therefore, the conceptual flood model derived for the CEMP would be classed as confidence Category 1 as described in the Moree and Environs Floodplain Risk Management Plan (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2008). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

83 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 The role of the conceptual flood model for the CEMP is to predict water level across the site so that a flood can be managed during construction. The Category 1 assessment undertaken to derive the conceptual flood model is deemed to be appropriate and adequate for the role of the CEMP BACKGROUND DATA Previous flooding investigations (Paterson Consultants 2011 and Paterson Consultants 2012) identified that flooding of the site occurs through local runoff and overland flows from Tycannah Creek. This pattern of flooding is confirmed through analysis of the November 2011 flood. Of these two types of events, floods from overland flows from Tycannah Creek results in higher flood levels across the MSF site. Based on past observations the ponding effect caused by the Werris Creek Moree railway embankment does not impact on flooding patterns at the MSF site. Overland flows break out of Tycannah Creek near Welcannah approximately 8.8 km south-east of the MSF site. These flows head in a north-westerly direction and are split by a low rise about 2.5km south-east of Tirisma. The southern flows join with other overland flow from Tycannah Creek and head to the west along the Muldoon Floodway. The northern flows continue past Tirisma along a drainage line known as Clarkes Gully. It is the flows along Clarkes Gully that are considered based on current assessment to cause flooding of the MSF site. Data from previous flooding investigations for Clarkes Gully, including observed and modelled flood levels are summarised in Error! Reference source not found. for major floods recorded in the area. Also shown in this table are estimated flood levels for the November 2011 flood derived from interpretation of the oblique aerial photographs and site survey data. Note that Tirisma is approximately 800m upstream of the south-east corner of the MSF site along Clarkes Gully. Table 16.1 Flooding Data Location 2001 flood (mahd) November 2011 flood (mahd) February 2012 flood (mahd) Modelled 1% AEP flood (mahd) Tirisma Na Na Clarkes Gully, eastern MSF boundary Na Na Barton Plains Road, south-west corner MSF site Na Na Na Barton Plains Road, northern extent of flooding Na Na Na Clarkes Gully upstream of railway Source/notes: 1 Paterson Consultants (2012) 2 Estimated from oblique aerial photography and survey data 3 Paterson Consultants (2011) 4 Observed flood level (Paterson Consultants, 2011) 5 Modelled flood level (Paterson Consultants, 2011) noting that there was substantial culvert enlargement at the railway and highway following the 2011 flood The flooding patterns derived from the November 2011 are shown on Figure The extent of flooding is marked on this photograph. It is noted that flood water cannot be seen across the majority of the MSF site however this would be due to the residual crop obscuring the view of water. Survey contour data indicates water would flow across the site to the west and north-west. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

84 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 MSF site Approximate flooding extent Area of flooding not visible due to crops Tirisma Figure 16.1: November 2011 flood (OEH Tamworth, 1235hrs) Paterson Consultants (2012) reported the following flood frequencies for the area: The January/February 2001 flood was approximately a once in 20 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) event (5% AEP); The 2011 flood was approximately a one in 10 year ARI event (10% AEP); and The February 2012 flood was the highest flood on record METHOD The following method was used to estimate 1% AEP catchment flood levels across the site for the purpose of managing such an event during construction: 1. The background data was reviewed (previous reports, photographs and observed flood levels) to get an understanding of flooding patterns. This confirmed that catchment flooding along Clarkes Gully crosses the MSF site. 2. Photographs of the February 2011 flood were used to estimate flooding extents on the MSF site and areas immediately downstream of the site. 3. Detailed site survey, and survey data downstream of the site were used to estimate flood levels at the extents of the mapped 2011 flood. This created a three dimensional flood surface that covered the MSF site. 4. Data in the previous flood study showed that the modelled 1% AEP flood level in Clarkes Gully at the railway is 0.05m higher than the 2011 flood and 0.08m higher than the 2012 flood. The observed flood levels reported for Tarisma show that the 2012 flood was 0.11mm higher than the 2011 flood. 5. The three dimensional flood surface derived from the 2011 flood was raised 0.15m based on the relationships observed at the railway and Tarisma to approximate the 1% AEP flood surface noting that: The modelled 1% AEP level at the railway was higher than the 2011 and 2012 flood; and The 2012 flood is noted as being the flood on record, which has been used to approximate a 1% AEP flood. 6. The raised three dimensional flood surface was intersected with the digital terrain model developed from the detailed site survey. The extent of flooding was defined where the raised flood surface intersected the ground level. Then the depth of flooding was calculated by taking the difference in elevation between the raised flood surface and the ground level. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

85 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 7. The extent of flooding and depth of flooding derived are shown on Figure The estimated 1% AEP flooding pattern shows that flood water enters the MSF site at the south-east corner near the cultural heritage area. The deepest flood water would be observed in the cultural heritage area with depths of up to 0.8m. Flood water then moves to the west and north-west at shallow depths ranging from zero to 0.4m, with isolated deeper areas. The flood gradients are low (approximately to 0.002m/m; or <2m in 1,000m) and flow velocity would also be expected to be low. This flooding pattern interacts with the south-west half of the MSF development (refer to Figure 16.2). Some overland flow would be expected across the remainder of the MSF site due to local catchment runoff. However this would be expected to be shallow (typically less than 0.1m) and would only persist during, and for short periods following, rainfall. The estimated flood levels for the 1% AEP flood are: mAHD at the eastern MSF site boundary; mAHD at the south-west corner of the MSF boundary; mAHD at the north-west corner of the MSF boundary; mAHD at the location of the switchyard and substation; and mAHD at the control centre. It should be noted that this Category 1 assessment has resulted in an estimated 1% AEP flood level at the eastern MSF site boundary that is 1.15 m higher than estimated in the modelling presented in Paterson (2011) CONTINGENCY MEASURES LOCATION OF TEMPORAL FACILITIES The Temporal Facilities have been located on a portion of the site that is located above the predicted 1% AEP flood level for the site SITE SECURITY The Project Manager will monitor weather conditions throughout the construction period and the construction site will be made secure and temporarily vacated in the event of localised flooding. This will include inspection of the perimeter fencing prior to flooding to ensure it is free of debris DEBRIS REMOVAL In the event that any localised flooding results in an accumulation of debris on the perimeter fence, this material will be removed. The removal of debris will be undertaken as soon waters subside and site conditions permit access by staff, including if safe during the flooding event. Where ever possible, debris will be removed within 48 hours. The material will not be burnt on site, rather, it will be transported to Council s landfill or other approved facility for disposal. Perimeter fencing up to potential flooding level will be selected to provide a mesh spacing that will facilitate finer crop residue material (i.e. the most likely debris type) to pass through the fence, and constructed in a manner that would minimise impedance to flood waters. This could include options such as manually tripped hinged posts that enable the bottom of the fence to lift and pass water and debris underneath the fence; or installation of the fence mesh on the side of the fence posts and wires away from the direction of flooding. The specification (fence configuration and construction) has yet to be determined. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

86 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 16.2: Estimated 1% AEP flood depths PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

87 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Dust Suppression 17.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(o) states the CEMP shall include: measures to monitor and manage dust emissions including dust generated by traffic on unsealed public roads and unsealed internal access tracks PUBLIC ROADS It is noted that prior to construction commencing, upgrade works on Barton Plains Road must be completed. Specifically, CoA C1 and C2 require that these upgrade works are implemented, to the satisfaction of Council and Roads and Maritime Service, prior to the commencement of construction. Similarly, SoC T1 and T2 identify that these works happen prior to commencement of construction. The ER has determined that these road works themselves are part of construction. These upgrade works include provision of a sealed pavement on Barton Plains Road and the upgrade of Barton Plains Road and Burrington Road intersection. Accordingly there will be no construction related traffic on unsealed public roads PERFORMANCE CRITERION Construction must be undertaken in a manner that minimises dust generation from the site, and for vehicle movements on unsealed public roads, including wind-blown and traffic-generated dust, as far as practicable. All project related activities on the site must be undertaken with the objective of preventing visible emissions of dust from the site MANAGEMENT MEASURES Adequate strategic watering as required; Enforcement of low speed (<15 km/hour) restrictions on all vehicle movements with the work sites; In extreme adverse conditions (dry and windy), consideration would be given to a temporary cessation of construction activity which will generate dust; Areas of soil disturbance will be kept to a minimum for construction purposes; Loads of material with the potential to generate particulates delivered to or transported from the construction sites will be suitably covered during transport; No burning of vegetation or waste material would take place; and Topsoil stripped as part of preparatory civil earthworks will be stockpiled (no higher than 1 metre) and a silt fence will be installed around the toe of the stockpile batters. Contingent on the season, it can be expected that the stockpile with its seed bank will naturally and quickly establish a vegetative cover. Only if required would this stockpile be seeded. The Quality and Environment Manager will monitor the cover of the stockpile as part of the weekly inspection and the need for seeding will be checked as part of this process. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

88 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ MONITORING The Quality and Environment Manager will undertake visual daily inspections at selected off-site locations to monitor whether dust emissions attributable to construction activity are visible. If dust emissions are visible the Environmental Manager will immediately meet with the relevant work crew to identify and implement all practicable dust mitigation measures such that visible off-site emissions of dust cease. As a last resort the Quality and Environmental Manager will have the authority to temporarily stop works. This monitoring is proactive and will be undertaken by the Quality and Environment Manager to manage dust, rather than works continuing until someone complains. The parameter for monitoring fugitive dust emissions is the Performance Criterion (refer Section 17.3) which is derived directly from CoA B4 which states: All project related activities on the site shall be undertaken with the objective of preventing visible emissions of dust from the site. Daily inspections by the Quality and Environmental Manager are considered the most effective means of determining whether work is too dusty. The opinions of individuals will not be the determinant. The Quality and Environment Manager will assess compliance against the applicable performance criterion, and has the authority to temporarily stop works if required. The Quality and Environment Manager will also use prompts to intensify the monitoring effort at different times. Specifically, these prompts will include: monitoring forecasted weather conditions; and consideration of the location and type of construction works underway. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

89 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Flora and Fauna Management Plan 18.1 REQUIREMENT As part of the CEMP, CoA C15(a) requires: a Flora and Fauna Management Plan, developed in consultation with OEH, to outline measures to protect and minimise loss of native vegetation and native fauna habitat as a result of construction of the project. The Plan shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) consideration of the recommendations in the Terrestrial Ecology Assessment undertaken by Ozark Environmental and Heritage Management titled "Proposed BP Solar Power Station in Moree" dated November 2010, plans showing terrestrial vegetation communities; important flora and fauna habitat areas; locations of EECs and native pastures; and areas to be cleared. The plans shall also identify vegetation adjoining the site where this contains important habitat areas and/or threatened species, populations or ecological communities; methods to manage impacts on flora and fauna species and their habitat which may be directly or indirectly affected by the project, such as location of fencing, procedures for vegetation clearing or soil removal/stockpiling and procedures for re-locating hollows or installing nesting boxes and managing weeds; procedures to accurately determine the total area, type and condition of vegetation communities to be cleared; reference to the Ground Cover Management Plan required in condition C15(b); and a procedure to review management methods where they are found to be ineffective. In addition to the above, CoA C4 states: The clearing of all native vegetation is to be limited to the minimal extent practicably required. Details regarding the procedures for clearing vegetation and minimising the extent of clearing shall be clearly included in the Flora and Fauna Management Plan contained in condition C15(a) OBJECTIVE The objective of the Flora and Fauna Management Plan (FFMP) is to protect and minimise the loss of native vegetation and native fauna habitat PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Measurable performance criteria will include full compliance with the management measures specified in this FFMP, which provide the procedures and controls to be followed to ensure that clearing is restricted only in approved areas, and limited to the minimum extent feasible in order to physically undertake the construction. By extension, the key performance criterion will be zero clearance of vegetation or habitat that is not approved under this FFMP ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations relating to the management of ecological impacts are provided in not only the Terrestrial Ecology Assessment undertaken by OzArk Environmental and Heritage Management titled "Proposed BP Solar Power Station in Moree" dated November 2010, but also in the Terrestrial Ecology Assessment undertaken by OzArk Environmental and Heritage Management titled "Proposed Moree Solar Farm 66kV Powerline" dated October This latter assessment was completed as part of the approved consent modification. Recommendations from these reports are reproduced verbatim below and will be implemented. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

90 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ PRE-CONSTRUCTION General All personnel undertaking works would be inducted to ensure awareness that any stand of native vegetation outside the existing easement has not been assessed and there are legislative consequences of impacts without approval under Part 3A of the EP&A Act; Evidence of all personnel receiving an induction should be kept on file (signed induction sheets etc.). Should an incident happen followed by an OEH/DSEWPaC 2 investigation, this process is likely to reduce the severity of the repercussions to Proponent whilst encouraging the willingness to comply with the ground crews; Clearing be restricted to clearing easement tracks and the powerline except easement to a nominal width of metres of the proposed centre line; Clearing be limited to the minimum amount necessary to provide for the safety and security of the asset and people; and Low growing species that do not pose a safety or security risk to the asset or people should be allowed to regenerate in the easement. There is no restriction for clearing Acacia farnesiana (mimosa bush) as it s a weed. Waterways Include all recommendations from General above; Control measures will be implemented to manage risks associated with the handling of fuel through providing spill kits in close proximity to major plant items, using spill trays when undertaking in field re-fuelling (although avoid and use service station where practicable) and temporary fuel storage to be positioned away from waterways and bunded; Develop administrative controls to establish and maintain sediment and erosion; Plan to use structures to minimise potential impacts to Halls Creek if required; and Develop administrative controls to monitor weather patterns during construction to inform construction staff about the threat of flooding. Endangered Ecological Communities Include all recommendations in General above; Identify the nature and extent of Natural grasslands on basalt and fine-textured alluvial plains of northern New South Wales and southern Queensland endangered ecological community (Figure 6-2) on suitably scaled maps to be used in site inductions (refer Section Plans) below. GIS shape files can be provided by the consultant upon request. This community has also been identified as BR250 Windmill Grass - Bluegrass derived grassland in Moderate to Good condition on Figure 6-1 (refer Section Plans); and The induction would include identifying Halls Creek as an Aquatic EEC. Staff would be informed that the waterway is generally dry however provides habitat for the regions listed fish and invertebrate food species when inundated. The nature and extent of Aquatic endangered ecological community has been shown on Figure 6-2. (refer Section Plans). For the purposes of auditing, ten metres either side of the creeks centreline would be considered part of the EEC 3. 2 DSEWP&C is now the Commonwealth s Department of Environment. 3 Different buffer distances (10, 30 and 40 m) from the creek are referenced in different sections of the OzArk 2010 and 2013 Ecology Assessments in terms of defining the extent of the Aquatic EEC. Consultation with OzArk in September 2014 has determined that the appropriate buffer is 30 m either side of the watercourse. OzArk advise that the issue of what is the requisite size of a buffer was up until week ending 19 September 2014 undefined. It has now been resolved with the release of the NSW Biodiversity Offsets Policy for Major Projects and Framework for Biodiversity Assessment (FBA). Pursuant to the FBA, Halls Creek is a Third Order waterway thus a 30 m buffer is required. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

91 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Threatened Species Desmodium campylocaulon is the only threatened species to have been previously observed by the consultant in the ETL Study Area. It is recorded 50 meters south of Halls Creek and about 20 metres east of the 66kV powerline alignment in low densities (Figure 5-1) (refer Section Plans) and adjacent to (west of) the Moree Waste Management Facility and Proposed Moree Evergreen Precinct Water Storage Ponds Study Area in high densities. It was not recorded under the ETL Study Area in Induct all construction staff that all grassland identified in Figure 6-1 (refer Section Plans) as BR250 Windmill Grass - Bluegrass derived grassland in Moderate to Good condition provides potential habitat for this species. Avoid impacting individuals by adhering to the easement and approved tracks; Undertake a pre-clearing audit i.e. photographs and general notes showing what the existing population of BR250 Windmill Grass - Bluegrass derived grassland in Moderate to Good condition (mapped on Figure 6-1) (refer Section 18.3 Plans) was like pre-clearing activities. This activity can be undertaken by on ground construction staff but should be kept on record in the event of a report to OEH; and Undertake a post clearing audit immediately after the works i.e. photographs and general notes showing post-clearing activities. Impacts to the existing habitat have potential to impact extant individuals however this species responds vigorously to disturbance. Post works audit would allow for contextualisation of the effect to the extent population and any additional site specific management as required. Threatened Fauna Administrative control would see the induction include a requirement that strictly no one is to handle any species of bat if they are encountered during clearing works or deconstruction works. Bats have potential to carry zoonoses (a disease that animals carry which can affect humans); Do not clear native vegetation in spring as many small bird species nest in Acacia farnesiana (mimosa bush a weed species); and If injured wildlife is found immediately contact 'WIRES' (ph: ) for further advice. Weeds Contractors will be responsible for developing 4 and implementing clean vehicle procedures DURING CONSTRUCTION During operations the following amelioration measures should be undertaken. Areas to be cleared would be clearly marked on suitably scaled maps and plans to ensure no accidental clearing occurs. All staff should be orientated on site to show the relationships between the maps and the study area; Any infrastructure and machinery required for the proposed activities would be located to avoid retained native vegetation (e.g. adjacent vegetation outside designated clearing areas but remain within areas assessed in the report); Within the ETL Study Area the contractors should check shrubs for the presence of birds or nestlings before immediately prior to removal. If an occupied a birds nest is encountered avoid the area until an ecologist can clear the nest. Any noxious weed and other weed material encountered during activities, should be destroyed and/or removed from the site using appropriate methods to ensure weeds do not spread to other sites, especially in regards to invasion of drainage lines and dams; 4 To clarify - contractors will be responsible for implementing, not developing, the clean vehicle procedures identified in Section The above wording, as stated, is verbatim from the prior recommendations made by OzArk. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

92 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Drainage and runoff should be controlled in such a way as that no foreign substrates or materials leave the site; Sediment and erosion control structures, which conform with the relevant guidelines, should be installed; and Exposed surface soil should be stabilised as soon as possible to avoid potential erosion (by mulching, covering or replanting with native species) VEGETATION COMMUNITIES AND HABITAT PLANS CoA C15 (a) states that the Flora and Fauna Management Plan include: plans showing terrestrial vegetation communities; important flora and fauna habitat areas; locations of EECs and native pastures; and areas to be cleared. The plans shall also identify vegetation adjoining the site where this contains important habitat areas and/or threatened species, populations or ecological communities; Plans showing the above are sourced from the two approved ecological assessments undertaken by OzArk (2010 and 2013) as part of the approvals process for the MSF. For referencing purposes Table 18.1 below collates and cross references the figure nomenclature and descriptor from OzArk s two assessment reports against figure numbering used in this Flora and Fauna Management Plan. Table 18.1 Ecology Plans/Maps FFMP Fig No OzArk Fig No (Yr) Descriptor (2013) Mapped EECs, listed fauna and habitat for extant listed flora (2013) Mapped recorded native vegetation communities (2013) Wildlife Atlas Results (2013) Locations of other known populations of Desmodium campylocaulon in the Moree Local Government Area (2013) Locations of other known populations of Desmodium campylocaulon assessed by OzArk in the Moree LGA near the ETL Study Area (2013) Location of OzArk (2008) study areas showing property details (red stars show where Desmodium campylocaulon was recorded (2010) Location of the 0.1ha, 4.8ha and 0.6 ha Carbeen Woodland remnants (2010) Locality map showing Bothriochloa biloba population (between the blue triangles) and Dichanthium setosum (labelled, under a blue triangle) (2010) Local population of Desmodium campylocaulon (2013) s75w Modifications Project Study Area showing ETL alignment options (2010) Desmodium campylocaulon (colonising disturbed soils associated with Moree Plains Shire Council desalinisation water pipeline) (2010) Desmodium campylocaulon (colonising disturbed soils associated with the Moree Plains Shire Councils Waste Management Facility. The red square is 1x1m placed on a constructed earth bund). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

93 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.1: Mapped EECs, listed fauna and habitat for extant listed flora PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

94 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.2: Mapped recorded native vegetation communities PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

95 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.3: Wildlife Atlas Results PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

96 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.4: Locations of other known populations of Desmodium campylocaulon in the Moree Local Government Area PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

97 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.5: Locations of other known populations of Desmodium campylocaulon assessed by OzArk in the Moree LGA near the ETL Study Area PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

98 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.6: Location of OzArk (2008) study areas showing property details (Red stars show where Desmodium campylocaulon was recorded PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

99 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.7: Location of the 0.1ha, 4.8ha and 0.6 ha Carbeen Woodland remnants PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

100 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.8: Locality map showing Bothriochloa biloba population (between the blue triangles) and Dichanthium setosum ( labelled, under a blue triangle) PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

101 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.9: Local population of Desmodium campylocaulon In addition to the above, the Development Consent issued for Moree Plains Shire Council s Evergreen Precinct Recreational Facility (Outdoor) Ski Lakes development immediately north of the Moree Solar Farm, also identifies 85.2 ha of land dedicated for the Conservation of Desmodium campylocaulon (refer Figure 18.10). This plan identifies vegetation adjoining the site where this contains important habitat areas and/or threatened species, populations or ecological communities. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

102 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.10: Desmodium Conservation Area Adjacent to Barton Plains Road AVOIDANCE Review of the above OzArk maps/plans against the proposed MSF layout shows the following: the reduced array footprint avoids Carbeen remnants; disturbance to the 60 m wide Halls Creek Aquatic Endangered Ecological Community is avoided; and disturbance to the extant wetland (billabong) in the south of the site, where greater vegetation diversity exists, has been avoided. Figure identifies the Endangered Ecological Communities in relation to MSF infrastructure. This figure has been produced through layering the ecology shape files (sourced from OzArk) and mapping on geo-referenced Six Maps aerial imagery (Coordinate Reference System EPSG: WGS84). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

103 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.11: Ecology Sensitive Areas PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

104 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ REDUCTION OF PROJECT AREA CoA C14 (k) requires that the CEMP include: maps or plans clearly indicating where the project area has been reduced to minimise impacts to EEC and native pasture in good condition. The only EEC and native pasture in good condition within the project area occurs along a section of the ETL alignment. Whilst detailed design of the ETL has not yet been completed, and exact locations of poles remain unknown (with the exception of the no-go zone within the 60m wide Halls Creek Aquatic Endangered Ecological Community), the design has progressed enough to confirm that Option 1b has been selected as the preferred alternative. The project approval was based on two possibilities for the ETL connection (OzArk, 2013). These were referred to as Option 1a and Option 1b and both contained components of a new transmission line (greenfield) and re-conductoring the existing ETL. Option 1a involved construction of a new line to the point of connection along the existing Moree- Bellata 66 kv line, north west of Council s waste management facility. This new line would have been approximately 6.1 km in length and entail new line works in approximately 2.5 km of EEC. Option 1b entails connection to the existing Moree-Bellata 66 kv line immediately west of the solar farm site. Figure below shows the spatial relationship between the two options. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

105 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 No new ETL to be constructed in this area of EEC. Figure 18.12: s75w Modifications Project Study Area showing ETL alignment options. Source: Specialist Report Summary of Amended Project Impacts: Proposed Moree Solar Farm, OzArk 2013, Figure 1-2 PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

106 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Option 1(b) minimises the impact on EEC through avoiding new ETL works in approximately 2.5 km of EEC. In addition to the above, the approved project area has been reduced in two other locations, although neither of these is in an area of EEC and native pasture in good condition. Detail on where the approved project has been reduced to minimise impacts to vegetation is provided below. With the approval of Moree Plains Shire Council, the proposed road upgrade works have resulted in less impact to vegetation. Specifically, Rather than upgrade Barton Plains Road between Burrington Road and the site with a 7m wide sealed pavement and 0.5m wide gravel shoulders, Council has approved shaping and sealing the existing unsealed section of Barton Plains Road to match the formation of the existing sealed section of Barton Plains Road; and Rather than require upgrade of Burrington Road and Barton Plains Road intersection to a Fig 6.24 of Austroads Part 5 Intersection at Grade (Type BAL for rural sites where Side Road 50 and for Articulated Vehicles), Council has approved a rural basic left-turn treatment from Barton Plains Road only, and not required a left turn treatment from Burrington Road. Whilst not significant, both these outcomes have minimised disturbance to roadside vegetation albeit vegetation that is not an EEC or native pasture in good condition. Similarly, the footprint for the solar arrays and associated infrastructure within Lot 4 has also been reduced. Comparison of the two figures below show a smaller area of disturbance, albeit again in an area that does not contain EEC or native pasture in good condition. The figure labelled approved denotes the approved project footprint, whilst the figure labelled reduced shows the footprint for infrastructure as now proposed. The latter is significantly smaller. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

107 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure :18.13 Approved Figure :18.14 Reduced PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

108 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ MANAGEMENT METHODS ECOLOGIST Green Light will engage the services of a suitably qualified ecologist to undertake a range of tasks. These tasks are identified below and include: The conduct of pre-clearing surveys prior to the removal of native vegetation and the relocation of any native fauna encountered; When design is finalised for the road up-grade works and potable water connection, and a precise area of disturbance to construct these works can be accurately identified in the field, complete a survey and quantify the permanent loss and extent of temporary disturbance to Creeping Tick-trefoils and complete a seven part test of significance consistent with s.5a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and provide this to OEH prior to works commencing; Either undertake, or train the Quality and Environment Manager so that he/she has the skills to undertake, the pre and post clearing audits; Supervise the relocation of hollows; and In the event that a post construction audit finds any additional area has been accidentally impacted, advise the Quality and Environment on what rehabilitation procedures are required to restore the impacted area VEGETATION CLEARANCE PROCEDURES Solar Farm Ten trees will be cleared. Nine (9) of these are Carbeen trees which, as determined in the OzArk (2010) assessment, have been previously impacted by chemical spraying and have a low chance of recovering. The other tree is a Whitewood which was identified as having active hollows used by small parrots for breeding. It must also be assumed that these trees also contain cracks and fissures suitable for microbats. As requested by OEH the current condition of these trees was confirmed by visual inspection on 21 October. Photographs of these trees are provided in Appendix F and confirm they are either dead or in very poor health. Timing of Clearing Where possible clearing these trees should be done during February to April. Pre-clearing Surveys Pre-clearing surveys will be completed prior to the removal of any native vegetation by a qualified ecologist. These surveys will confirm the area, type and condition of any native vegetation to be cleared. Any native fauna encountered should be relocated to an appropriate site, identified in advance, by the ecologist. Relocation of Hollows The intent is to relocate the hollows from the Whitewood tree rather than provide substitute nest boxes. The felling of the Whitewood tree for the purpose of relocating the hollows will be supervised by an ecologist. The following procedures would be followed: 1. Before felling the trunk would be tapped to scare animals from the hollows. This would be repeated several times with the aim to substantially shake the tree. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

109 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 2. Non hollow bearing branches would be removed before hollow bearing branches. 3. After felling, the hollows would be re-checked to ensure no animals have become trapped or injured during clearing operations. 4. The salvaged hollows would then be placed in the trees located within the southern part of the solar farm properties, located around the extant billabong Transmission Line Disturbance will be restricted to construction activity within the existing and proposed 30 m wide easements. Disturbance would primarily be temporary, and limited to include rubber tyred vehicles driving over grassland. No formed construction track is proposed. Clearing would be limited to pole locations and may entail the removal of some lower and mid storey woody vegetation. Given the vegetation structure of the ETL alignment, clearing consistent with Essential Energy s Operational Procedure: Vegetation Clearing Guidelines for New Power Lines (CEP2010) can be achieved without clearing trees. The clearing zone width for 66 kv bare conductors is 30 m and clearing requirements under this procedure are to remove trees overhanging more than 25% into the clearing zone. It is understood no trees require removal to comply with this specification. Peg Easement/Demarcation The edges of the easements will be pegged so that construction personnel restrict their activities wholly within these easements; Adjacent vegetation to be protected will be demarcated with paints or tapes to avoid accidental or unintentional clearing; Induction The location of those areas of Windmill Grass Bluegrass derived grassland in Moderate to Good condition, as identified on Figure 18.2, will be discussed with the construction crew prior to works commencing in these locations; Pre and Post Audits Prior to works commencing a pre-construction audit (i.e. photographs and general notes) showing the condition of Windmill Grass-Bluegrass derived grassland in Moderate to Good condition will be undertaken; A post-construction audit (i.e. photographs and general notes) will be undertaken immediately after the works are complete; In the event that a post construction audit finds any additional area has been accidentally impacted the Quality and Environment Manager will obtain advice from the consulting Ecologist (refer Section ) on what rehabilitation procedures are required to restore the impacted area. To reduce potential risks of mis-identification, inconsistencies in data collection or data storage, the identification of Desmodium campylocaulon and these audits will be undertaken by an ecologist, or Quality and Environment Manager, subject to this person receiving suitable training from an ecologist. Timing of Clearing Where possible clearing of any native vegetation should be done during February to April. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

110 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Pre-clearing Surveys Pre-clearing surveys will be completed prior to the removal of any native vegetation by a qualified ecologist. These surveys will confirm the area, type and condition of any native vegetation to be cleared. Shrubs will be checked for the presence of birds or nestlings immediately prior to removal. Any native fauna encountered should be relocated to an appropriate site, identified in advance, by the ecologist. Injured Wildlife After the pre-clearing survey is complete and construction commences, in the event that any wildlife is injured WIRES (Ph: ) will be contacted immediately for further advice Road Upgrade and Extension to Water Mains Assessing Significance of Impact to Desmodium campylocaulon The threatened flora species Creeping Tick-trefoil (Desmodium campylocaulon) is located in, and adjacent to the Barton Plains Road Reserve. Known locations of this species in proximity to the Limit of Works, as previously recorded by OzArk (2010) are provided in Appendix G. OEH has noted that potential impacts on this species as a result of the road works and extension to Council s water main were not considered in conclusions as to the significance of the impacts of the MSF on this species in the original Environmental Assessment. Accordingly, the following assessment measures are proposed. When design is finalised for the road up-grade works and potable water connection, and a precise area of disturbance to construct these works can be accurately identified in the field, a suitably qualified ecologist will complete a survey and quantify the permanent loss and extent of temporary disturbance to Creeping Tick-trefoils. The ecologist will complete a seven part test of significance consistent with s.5a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and provide this to OEH prior to works commencing. OEH has confirmed (Appendix B) that this protocols meets its requirements. Vegetation Clearance Protocol The following protocol will be followed prior to physical vegetation clearance. Peg Extent of Works When design of the road works and water mains extension are complete, the extent of works will be pegged so that construction personnel restrict their activities wholly within these areas. Induction The presence of Desmodium campylocaulon in the road reserves will be discussed with the construction crew prior to works commencing in these locations; and Construction personnel would be advised of the presence of this flora species and photographs provided as to what the plant looks like (refer Figure 18.2 and Figure 18.3). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

111 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Pre and Post Audits Prior to works commencing a pre-construction audit (i.e. photographs and general notes) showing the condition of vegetation in the impact area will be undertaken; A post-construction audit (i.e. photographs and general notes) will be undertaken immediately after the works are complete; and In the event that a post construction audit finds any additional area has been accidentally impacted the Quality and Environment Manager will obtain advice from the consulting Ecologist (refer Section ) on what rehabilitation procedures are required to restore the impacted area. To reduce potential risks of mis-identification, inconsistencies in data collection or data storage, the identification of Desmodium campylocaulon and these audits will be undertaken by an ecologist, or Quality and Environment Manager, subject to this person receiving suitable training from an ecologist. Timing of Clearing Where possible clearing of any native vegetation should be done during February to April. The road upgrade works must be completed prior to construction of the MSF, consistent with the Minister s project approval. As such, given the construction schedule proposed, these works will be undertaken prior to February. Pre-clearing Surveys Pre-clearing surveys will be completed prior to the removal of any native vegetation by a qualified ecologist; and Any native fauna encountered should be relocated to an appropriate site, identified in advance, by the ecologist. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

112 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.15: Desmodium campylocaulon (colonising disturbed soils associated with Moree Plains Shire Council desalinisation water pipeline). Source: Terrestrial Ecology Assessment: Proposed BP Solar Power Station in Moree, OzArk 2010, Figure 10. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

113 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Figure 18.16: Desmodium campylocaulon (colonising disturbed soils associated with the Moree Plains Shire Councils Waste Management Facility. The red square is 1x1m placed on a constructed earth bund). Source: Terrestrial Ecology Assessment: Proposed BP Solar Power Station in Moree, OzArk 2010, Figure AERIAL SPANNING OF HALLS CREEK Halls Creek is part of the Aquatic Ecological Community in the Natural Drainage System of the Lowland Catchment of the Darling River, an endangered ecological community listed in the Fisheries Management Act OzArk state that for the purposes of auditing and definition of the Aquatic EEC, 30 metres either side of the creek would be considered part of the EEC. The location of this 60 m wide protection zone is shown on Figure This community will be aerially spanned by the ETL and construction will not impact the EEC WEED MANAGEMENT Weed management and hygiene protocols will be adhered to consistent with the requirements of the Ground Cover Management Plan (refer Section 19) PEST CONTROL Suitable waste management practices (principally placing food scraps in secure covered receptacles and for these to be regularly disposed of off-site) will be enforced during construction; and Perimeter fencing will assist feral animal control (pigs and wild dogs) and pests (kangaroos). Contingent on the above, it is considered highly unlikely that construction activities would do anything to increase the risk of introducing pest animals such as feral cat, dog, fox or invasive native species (e.g. noisy minor. black kites). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

114 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ ENVIRONMENTAL DUE DILIGENCE INDUCTION The following information about ecological constraints processes and obligations will be included in the Environmental Due Diligence induction. Vegetation in the ETL alignment is predominately disturbed native vegetation: specifically Windmill Grass-Bluegrass derived grassland of the Moree plains of the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion. This grassland is listed as the Nationally endangered ecological community (EEC) Natural grasslands on basalt and fine-textured alluvial plains of northern New South Wales and southern Queensland. The approval granted is predicated on the assumption that permanent losses of area of occupancy of grassland habitat will not exceed 147 m 2. This is a constraint that must be achieved; Halls Creek is part of the Aquatic Ecological Community in the Natural Drainage System of the Lowland Catchment of the Darling River, an endangered ecological community listed in the Fisheries Management Act 1994; This EEC is located within the ETL alignment and at this location the ETL must be aerially spanned and construction not impact on the EEC; No clearing can be undertaken without the Vegetation Clearance Procedure (refer Section ) first being undertaken. Details of this procedure will be provided, including an overview of the clearing maps there function and use, and the pre and post clearing audits; Any native vegetation outside the area assessed as part of the approvals process, which includes a 45 m wide corridor along the ETL alignment, has not been assessed, and there are legislative consequences of impacts without approval; Clearing must limited to the minimum amount necessary to provide for the safety and security of the asset and people; Acacia farnesiana (mimosa bush) is a weed and there is no restriction on its clearing; If clearing is undertaken in spring, shrubs (including mimosa bush) need to be checked for the presence of birds or nestlings immediately prior to removal. If an occupied birds nest is encountered avoid the area and report this to the Quality and Environment Manager who will organise for a wildlife carer to relocate the nest; No one is to handle any species of bat if they are encountered. Bats have potential to carry zoonoses; If injured wildlife is found immediately this must be reported to the Quality and Environment Manager who will then contact 'WIRES' (ph: ) or further advice; and Details of requirements in relation to weed management and hygiene (as detailed in the Ground Cover Management Plan) REVIEW OF MANAGEMENT METHODS Those management measures that rely on personnel adhering to the protocols, checks and reporting detailed in the Flora and Fauna Management Plan will be audited in the regular monthly compliance audits. Measures will be revised where they are found to be ineffective. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

115 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Ground Cover Management Plan 19.1 REQUIREMENT As part of the CEMP, CoA C15(b) requires: A Ground Cover Management Plan, developed in consultation with OEH and an agronomist. ecologist or environmental specialist with suitable experience to outline measures to ensure adequate vegetation cover and composition beneath the solar PV array. The Plan shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) procedures to minimise disturbance to ground cover not impacted by the project particularly in the area of the native pasture in good condition; procedures for the stabilisation, rehabilitation and revegetation of disturbed ground cover including reference to field trials where required; weed management measures to control and prevent the spread of noxious weeds; monitoring methods to assess the impact of the project on the ground cover vegetation; and a procedure to review management methods where they are found to be ineffective AMALGAMATION Apart from CoA C15(b), there are a number of SoC and CoAs that are pertinent to the scope of this Ground Cover Management Plan (GCMP). These include requirements relating to: Bush fire risk; Weed management; Aboriginal site heritage; and Land management. How and where these other considerations have been incorporated into this GCMP is identified through cross referencing in Table 9.1 and Table Requirements related to the management of these ground cover related considerations extend beyond the ground beneath the solar array TRANSITION POINT Contractually Green Light must operate the MSF for a period of two years after practical completion. This means Green Light s responsibilities with respect to ground cover extend for a period of two years post completion of construction. This document is a CEMP and is restricted to activities and responsibilities whilst the MSF is still being built. Activities and responsibilities of Green Light for the two year period of operation are required. These would be identified and approved in an Operation Environmental Management Plan (OEMP). CoA E39(d) requires the OEMP include standards and performance measures to be applied and means by which environmental performance can be periodically monitored, reviewed and improved (where appropriate), and what actions will be taken in case non-compliance is identified. The management of vegetation, soil erosion, weed control and bushfire hazard are identified as key environmental performance issues to be addressed in the OEMP: all linked directly to a ground cover management regime. The OEMP must be submitted for the Director-General s approval no later than one month prior to commencement of operation (i.e. defined as the production of electricity for contribution to the electricity grid but does not include commissioning), or within such period as otherwise agreed by the Director-General. MSF Pty Ltd can not commence operation until written approval has been received from the Director-General. Green Light will prepare the OEMP. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

116 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ OBJECTIVE The long term objective of the GCMP must be to establish a healthy, self-sustaining weed free groundcover beneath the solar arrays that does not create a fuel hazard. How this can best be achieved, and maintained, after construction will require monitoring and implementation of adaptive management principles. Mechanisms would include a combination of slashing and periodic crash grazing. As noted above, the techniques and management regimes for managing ground cover beneath the solar arrays, on an ongoing basis, post construction, are to be covered in the OEMP. During construction the only measures available to help ensure adequate vegetation cover and composition beneath the solar arrays is to minimise the extent of disturbance to the existing vegetation cover and composition. Further detail is provided in Section below DISTURBANCE FOOTPRINT SCOPE The procedures identified below seek to minimise disturbance to ground cover not impacted by the project, particularly in the area of the native pasture in good condition, and are those relevant to the construction phase of the MSF project. Procedures required post construction will be dealt with in the OEMP PROCEDURE The best procedure to minimise disturbance to ground cover not to be impacted by construction is to clearly delineate the area within which construction activity needs to be contained and enforce this limitation Solar Farm For the arrays this will be physically defined by the site perimeter fence which encompasses an area of ha. Clearing vegetation within this area will be limited to that required to establish the Temporal Facilities (2.97 ha), internal roads (25.7 ha), inverter power stations (1.5 ha); substation (0.6 ha) and trenching of LV, MV and comms trenches The residual of the ha site (84%) will be slashed and subject to vehicle movements, but will not require vegetation to be removed. This area has been subject to cereal cropping and contains no native groundcover vegetation. There will be no requirement for any construction activity to occur in the ha southern portion of the ha MSF site (Lot 4). The management of this area will be influenced by the Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders preferences with respect to the management of the recorded open camp site (refer Section 14.8 of the Aboriginal Heritage Plan). It is expected that management would focus on minimisation of fuel loads through slashing or crash grazing. Beneath the Solar Arrays The measures to be adopted during construction to help ensure adequate vegetation cover and composition beneath the solar arrays are to minimise the extent of disturbance to these areas. Disturbance impacts with the potential to compromise either the retention of existing, or natural recolonisation of groundcover, include removal and loss of topsoil and the seed bank, and loss of soil structure resulting from excessive compaction. Measures to minimise these impacts will include: restricting vehicle movements to internal dedicated access tracks; adopting a construction methodology such that plant placing arrays supports requires just a single pass (i.e. not back and forth movements along an array row resulting in unnecessary compaction of the topsoil); as required, lightly (by hand) scarifying the ground surface under the array; and PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

117 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Monitoring weekly (refer Section 19.9) to detect the presence of weeds, assess fuel loads and the check the health of ground cover. In the event that areas are not revegetating and/or control methods are not proving effective in the control of weeds, Green Light will engage the services of a local agronomist to refine a spraying/seeding program. The criteria for deciding that seeding needs to be considered will be based on the results of the weekly monitoring and consideration of the prevailing seasonal conditions. Specifically, seeding will be considered when it is apparent that natural re-establishment of groundcover is not going to happen, and the seasonal circumstance (temperature and soil moisture profiles) will result in a successful seed strike if applied Road Works Road upgrades, consistent with the project approval, and as identified in the Council and RMS approved Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report include: Up-grading the intersection of Burrington Road and Barton Plains Road to a rural basic left-turn treatment (BAL), including extending or relocating the existing culvert; and Removing the existing stock grid on Barton Plains Road and shaping and sealing the existing ~790 m unsealed section of Barton Plains Road to match the formation of the existing sealed section of Barton Plains Road. Section defines the procedure to be followed to minimise disturbance prior to and during these works Transmission Line For the ETL, disturbance will be restricted to within the existing and proposed easements. The edges of these easements will be pegged so that construction personnel restrict their activities to within these easements. Within these 30 m easements temporary construction disturbance would be limited to include rubber tyred vehicles driving over grassland. No permanent construction access tracks will be required. Permanent impacts will be restricted to 1m 2 for each electricity pole. These poles will be located in Windmill Grass Bluegrass derived grassland in moderate to good condition, Windmill Grass Bluegrass derived grassland in poor condition, and within disturbed areas. No poles will be located in Halls Creek bed or banks, or on waterfront land (being 40 m from the banks). It has been determined by OzArk (2013) that, based upon the observed effects to grassland environments from adjoining power lines and the condition of the existing easements that the grasslands will naturally and quickly recover. Notwithstanding, vegetation disturbance, including groundcover impacts resulting from temporary construction vehicle movements is a higher environmental risk activity and consistent with Section 13 a WI will be prepared prior to field crews starting these activities STABILISATION AND REHABILITATION SOLAR FARM The formation of internal roads, benches for the main transformer and the 28 power stations, and the temporal facilities (refer Drawings) requires earthworks, including the stripping and stockpiling of topsoil. The quantity of topsoil and the stockpile locations will be defined in earth works design drawings being prepared by SMEC Engineering, as a sub-contractor to Green Light. These earthworks drawings will include specification of the location and form of the required sedimentation and erosion controls. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

118 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Topsoil stripped as part of preparatory civil earthworks will be stockpiled (no higher than 1 metre) and a silt fence will be installed around the toe of the stockpile batters. Contingent on the season, it can be expected that the stockpile with its seed bank will naturally and quickly establish a vegetative cover. Only if required would this stockpile be seeded. The Quality and Environment Manager will monitor the cover of the stockpile as part of the weekly inspection and the need for seeding will be checked as part of this process. A revegetation and rehabilitation program will be implemented for all areas of the development footprint which are disturbed during the construction of the project, but which are not required for the ongoing operation. This would include the construction site compound, laydown and car parking areas. During construction the health of all ground cover across the entire development site, including areas under the solar arrays (as they are erected), will be monitored and recorded on Weekly Inspection Checklist (Form MSF 2). Indicators of ground cover conditions in this weekly checklist include: Vegetative cover and fuel load; Whether there are areas that require, and can (construction activity is complete) be seeded to expedite re-establishment of a vegetative ground cover; Whether there are noxious weeds present; Whether landscape plantings are healthy; Whether there are any signs of localised erosion; and Whether rehabilitation works are effective. Combined, weekly checks against all these indicators will provide an adequate monitoring regime to check the health of ground cover. After construction is complete and all plant and infrastructure has been removed from the Temporal Facilities, the ground surface will be deep ripped to reverse the impacts of compaction and the stockpiled topsoil will be spread over this area. Again, it is expected that this area will naturally re-establish a ground cover without the need for seeding. Notwithstanding, the same monitoring regime as for the stockpiles above will be undertaken by the Quality and Environment Manger. If seeding is required, a suitable native species mix guide is provided in Table 19.1 including short statured grasses more suited for growing in the area. Table 19.1 Native Grass Mix Grasses Chloris ventricosa (tall chloris) Bothriochloa macra (redleg grass) Dichanthium sericeum (Qld Bluegrass) Austrostipa aristiglumis (plains grass) Atriplex nummularia (old man saltbush) Austrostipa scabra subsp. falcata (rough speargrass) Aristrida behriana (three-awned speargrass) Panicum decompositum (native panic) Eriochloa australiensis (Australian cupgrass) Short Statured Grasses Chloris truncata (windmill grass) Atriplex semibaccata (creeping saltbush) Austrodanthonia auriculata (lobed wallaby grass) A. bipartita (bandicoot grass) A. caespitosa (ringed wallaby grass) A. setacea (small-flowered wallaby grass) Astrebla lappacae (curly Mitchell grass) A. setacea (small-flowered wallaby grass) Elymus scaber var. scaber (common wheatgrass) A. scabra subsp. scabra (rough speargrass) Enteropogon acicularis (curly windmill grass) The mix would be determined by species availability at the time and advice from a local agronomist on how best to seed, maintain and manage the groundcover given prevailing seasonal conditions. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

119 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ ETL It has been determined by OzArk (2013) that, based upon the observed effects to grassland environments from adjoining power lines and the condition of the existing easements, the grasslands will naturally and quickly recover as result of the construction activity WEED MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVE The objective of the weed management practices to be employed during construction is to prevent the spread of noxious weeds NOXIOUS WEED REMOVAL Any noxious weed detected during construction will be treated using appropriate methods. Weeds detected include African Boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum), Lippia (Phyla canescens), and Tiger Pear (Opuntia aurantiaca) within the existing transmission line easement north of Halls Creek. Particular attention will also be paid to Coolatai Grass and African Love Grass which are emergent weed species that will need to be treated if found; Mimosa Bush (Acacia farnesiana), also commonly known as Needle Bush, exists in the ETL and is also a weed although not listed as Noxious or a Weed of National Significance; and Visual identification of noxious weeds will be included in the Environmental Due Diligence induction. Appendix E provides photographs of these species VEHICLE/PLANT INSPECTIONS All sub-contractors will be instructed that vehicles arriving at site (including plant) are expected to arrive and leave clean and weed free. A dedicated vehicle cleaning bay will be located near the Temporal Facilities. This bay will be provided to enable drivers to inspect and remove weed material from vehicles before leaving the site. Final detail on the wash down infrastructure has yet to be determined. Facilities will include either a shovel, broom, air compressor, high pressure water spray, covered waste bin and hand spray packs of a proprietary decontaminant (e.g. Farmcleanse ), or a proprietary, drive through wheel and under-body wash. Vehicle movements that are limited to accessing the site and restricting movements to formed internal roads and trafficable hardstand areas around the temporary construction site facilities, do not need to use the cleaning bay on departure from the site. Drivers and operators of all other vehicles (and plant) that access areas outside formed trafficable surfaces (i.e. in areas where weed seed could be picked up) will be instructed that they must inspect and clean vehicles/plant at the cleaning bay on arrival, and again prior to leaving the site. An Inspection and Washdown Register (Form MSF 13) will be held at the wash down bay and drivers will be instructed to complete this register to demonstrate compliance. The Quality and Environment Manager will undertake regular compliance audits to check that this procedure is being adhered to; and Waste from the weed wash down will be managed as specified in Section 24. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

120 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ BUSH FIRE RISK OBJECTIVE To prevent construction activity sparking a bush fire PHYSICAL MEASURES Asset Protection Zone A 20 metre wide Asset Protection Zone is provided around the electricity generating facility refer Drawings Perimeter Fire Trail Within the 20m wide Asset Protection Zone a perimeter fire trail will be provided. This trail will have a carriage way of 4 m width and the 20 m wide Asset Protection Zone will be slashed as required to reduce fuel load (i.e. clear of bushes and long grass) Water Supply Rural Fire Service has confirmed (refer Appendix B) it is amenable to two specific departures from commitments made by the (then) proponent of the MSF during the approvals process, as it relates to the provision of an adequate water supply for fighting purposes. Specifically, the commitments included: provision of a hydrant system; and installation of a single 200 kl tank (albeit not reserved exclusively for fire fighting purposes). A hydrant system is not required and alternate supply arrangements provide a better supply option. The alternative is for the strategic positioning of three (3) 10 kl tank supplies, being Static Water Supplies dedicated exclusively for fire fighting purposes. Two of these tanks will be 10 kl. Signage will be installed indicating that they are solely for fire fighting purposes and not to be used for any other purpose. The third tank, which may be up to 50 kl in capacity, will be installed to provide a supply of water for other operational purposes (i.e. cleaning of solar PV panels). This third tank will, however, be plumbed to maintain a minimum 10 kl reserve at all times dedicated solely for fire fighting purposes. Signage to this effect will be installed on this third tank. The scope for departing from recommendations of the Bushfire Hazard Assessment Report (November 2010) (from where the hydrant and 200kL tank recommendation comes from) is permitted consistent with CoA B2 and only requires confirmation in writing from the RFS Fuel Reduction The fuel load over the construction site (excluding works in the existing ETL easements) will be monitored weekly and reduction measures will be implemented as required. These measures will be restricted to mechanical slashing or stock crash grazing Landscape Plantings No landscape plantings will be undertaken around the Control Centre building. In so doing, compliance with Appendix 5 Landscaping and Property Maintenance of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 is assured. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

121 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ WORK PRACTICES No burning of vegetation or any waste material would take place on the construction site; Fire extinguishers will be available in all vehicles; All vehicle and plant movements beyond formed roads and trafficable hard stand areas will be restricted to diesel, not petrol vehicles; During the bushfire season the fire danger status would be monitored daily (through the RFS website ) and communicated to personnel; Total Fire Ban rules will be adhered to. That is, Green Light will not: (in any grass, crop or stubble land) drive or use any motorised machine unless the machine is constructed so that any heated areas will not come into contact with combustible matter; carry out Hot Works (e.g. welding operations or use an angle grinder or any other implement that is likely to generate sparks), unless Green Light has the necessary exemption from the NSW RFS Commissioner and complies with all requirements specified in the exemption; and It is not anticipated that any fuel or flammable liquid will be stored on-site. If any is, this material would be stored in a designated area and will be sign posted Fuel Storage Area. A register will be maintained that confirms the quantities and location of any flammable material stored on-site RURAL FIRE SERVICE CONSULTATION The Quality and Environment Manager will regularly consult with the local RFS to ensure the local brigade is aware of the construction timetable and scheduling, and the final location of all infrastructure on site. NSW Rural Fire Service Moree Brigade Captain Mr Jonathon Walker Mobile: Green Light will comply with any reasonable request of the local RFS to reduce the risk of bushfire and to enable fast access in emergencies MONITORING During construction the Quality and Environment Manager will undertake weekly monitoring to check ground cover management objectives are being realised. This monitoring will be undertaken weekly (Weekly Inspection Checklist Form MSF02) and focus on detecting the presence of weeds, assessing fuel loads and the health of ground cover. In the event that areas are not revegetating and/or control methods are not proving effective in the control of weeds, Green Light will engage the services of a local agronomist to refine a spraying/seeding program THIRD PARTY SIGN-OFF Green Light will continue to monitor the revegetation and rehabilitation program for those areas of the development footprint which are disturbed during construction, but which are not required for the ongoing operation of the MSF, until such time that the independent and suitably qualified expert (whose appointment has been agreed to by the Director-General) has verified these areas have a vegetated ground cover that is well established, in good health and self-sustaining. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

122 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ ON-GOING MANAGEMENT SCOPE Consistent with CoA C15(b) the Ground Cover Management Plan is about ensuring adequate vegetation cover beneath the solar PV array, not the ETL easement. Further, neither Green Light nor the MSF owner (Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd) will have the authority to influence future land management practices within the ETL easement. The ETL will be an Essential Energy asset and the easement (both existing and new) will continue to be managed by Essential Energy. The OEMP for the MSF can not include a management regime that aims to maintain and improve the condition of the grassland EEC within the ETL easement for the life of the MSF. It is noted, however, that the modified layout of the MSF (with all solar arrays to be located within the 288 ha Lot 4 DP ), results in a 96.5 ha portion of this site that will fall outside the array perimeter fence. Measures to actively manage this area for maximising conservation (and cultural heritage) outcomes do exist and will be addressed in the OEMP OEMP Green Light will prepare and submit the OEMP for the Director-General s approval no later than one month prior to commencement of operation. As required by the scope of the OEMP, this will include standards and performance measures to be applied and means by which environmental performance can be periodically monitored, reviewed and improved, and what actions will be taken in case non-compliance is identified, as it relates to the regime of ground cover management for the period of two years post construction. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

123 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Landscape Plan 20.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C15(c) requires that a Landscape Plan form part of the CEMP and that it be prepared in consultation with Council and for the approval of the Director-General. The condition states that the landscape plan: should include the building design and landscaping measures to enhance the design of, and minimise, mitigate and/or offset the impacts of the project in relation to visual amenity and heritage values. The Plan shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) identification of landscaping objectives and standards based on visual impacts and local environmental values; details of species used to enhance, mitigate and/or augment landscaping to minimise the visual impact of the project, particularly with respect to the impacts on nearby residences identified as moderate or moderate to high within the "landscape and visual impact assessment" prepared by Green Bean Design dated December 2010; implementation, management and monitoring strategies to ensure the establishment and ongoing maintenance of landscaped areas; a consultation strategy to seek feedback from affected residents and the interested community on the proposed landscape measures OBJECTIVE The landscaping objective is minimise the visual impact of the MSF on the two residences identified as likely to experience moderate, and moderate to high impacts LANDSCAPE SCREEN PLANTINGS DURING CONSTRUCTION The CoA C15(c) requires the Landscape Plan to form part of this CEMP to include details of species used to enhance, mitigate and/or augment landscaping to minimise the visual impact of the project, particularly with respect to the impacts on nearby residences identified as moderate or moderate to high within the "landscape and visual impact assessment" prepared by Green Bean Design dated December Green Bean Design (2010) identifies two residences with an anticipated moderate and moderate to high visual impact; these being the two southern most homes on Barton Plains Road Location and Extent Landscape plantings to mitigate the visual impact of the Project for these residences to the north are proposed as part of the construction. These plantings will be undertaken north of the solar arrays and consider regular viewpoints from these residences so as to break up but not completely screen the view of the Project from those viewpoints. The plantings would comprise clusters. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

124 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Clusters will be planted as opposed to a continuous row such that this vegetation can be managed in conjunction with the Asset Protection Zone in terms of active management of fuel loads on the solar farm site. The location and extent of these clusters to be planted will be finalised in consultation with the two northern residents (refer Section 20.7) and Council and in consideration of the need to not overshadow the PV arrays Species Mix The species mix from which plantings will be selected in this landscape planting is detailed below; noting that the species are native and endemic to the Moree locality. Table 20.1 Species for On-Site Screen Plantings Common Name Botanical Name Size (m) Form Cooba Acacia salincina 5 12 Pendulous foliage Deanes Wattle Acacia deanei 2 4 Fast growing, multi-stemmed Brigalow Acacia harpophylla 5 10 Erect to spreading Boree Acacia pendula 5 10 Erect to spreading Budda Eremophila mitchellii 2 Small stemmed tree Spotted Fushcia Eremophila maculata 2 3 Perennial shrub Eurah Eremophila bignoniiflora 7 Small tree Amulla Eremophila debillis 1-2 Prostrate spreading shrub POST CONSTRUCTION The Visual Impact Verification Report (VIVR) (required by CoA F3) makes clear that identifying reasonable and feasible screening and landscape planting options available at each receptor is required within six (6) months of commissioning of the MSF. CoA F3 states that within six months of the commissioning of the project, Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd as the proponent shall prepare and submit the VIVR for the Director-General's approval. Under the existing contractual arrangements, Green Light has responsibility to manage and operate the MSF for a period of two years post commissioning. As such, Green Light has responsibility to prepare the VIVR. Pursuant to CoA F3, unless otherwise agreed to by the Director-General, this VIVR shall: (a) (b) confirm the visual impacts at each of the receptors and roadways identified in the Environmental Assessment as having the potential to be 'moderate and moderate to highly impacted', considering the final model and layout of generating components on site as well as site specific mitigating factors at the receptors and roadways (such as receptor orientation, intervening screening factors and design of permanent buildings to minimise visual intrusion including appropriate external finishes). identify all reasonable and feasible screening and landscape planting options available at each receptor and roadways at which potential impacts have been verified to be 'moderate and moderate to high' including demonstration that these measures have been determined in consultation with affected receptors and relevant road authorities. Nominating the location, extent and species for these off-site landscape plantings falls outside the scope of this CEMP and will be specified in the VIVR and incorporate outcomes from Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd s Community Consultation Plan (October 2013). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

125 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 This plan states that MSF Pty Ltd will: Deliver a visual screening program to neighbours as agreed upon during visual amenity workshops: Start program at the beginning of construction. To remain open 12 months after completion of the project. Initial maintenance of the plants will be carried out by MSF until plants are established DESIGN MITIGATION Measures incorporated into the design phase of the MSF that will mitigate visual impacts are detailed below. These mitigation measures are derived from the Green Bean Design (December 2010) Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and the OzArk (November 2013) Visual Impact Assessment recommendations. A considered ETL route selection has been undertaken to avoid sensitive views and loss of existing vegetation where possible; Matt colours for the Control Centre building; Galvanised finished agricultural mesh-style fencing material; Wherever possible, angle positions have been selected and placed in strategic locations to minimise potential visual impact and to provide maximum setback from residences and roads; and Selection of suitable component materials and selected treatment with low reflective properties CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES Measures to minimise visual impacts during the construction phase include: Strategic watering will be undertaken as required to suppress dust; Complete vegetation removal beneath the solar arrays will be avoided; and Waste will be managed so that litter does not accumulate on site or blow off site, and temporary stockpiles of waste materials will be located so that they do not compromise landscape values for residents MONITORING STRATEGIES Plantings will be undertaken as soon as seasonable conditions are favourable and there is adequate moisture in the soil profile (i.e. after Summer). The health of the plantings will be monitored as part of the Weekly Inspection Checklist (Form MSF02). If and as required replacement plantings will be undertaken for any planting that does not survive CONSULTATION STRATEGY Green Light will seek feedback from affected residents and the interested community on the proposed landscape measures identified in this Landscape Plan. This consultation will include face-to-face meetings with the two residents identified as having potentially moderate, and moderate to high impacts in order to determine the location and extent of cluster plantings to screen infrastructure; Presentation of this Landscape Plan, and clarification about the role and function of the Visual Impact Verification Report (post construction), at community meetings convened as part of the Moree Solar Farm s Community Consultation Plan; and Consultation with Council. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

126 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ NEIGHBOUR CONSULTATIONS The first neighbour consultation meeting relating to fencing and screen plantings was held 10 November Evidence this occurred is provided in Appendix B. Outcomes and agreements made at this meeting included the following: In terms of fencing, the neighbours preference is for a standard, secure rural style fence that can be readily lifted and re-hung if it is damaged by flood waters; and Neighbours to the east want screen plantings. Green Light advised there was no capacity to provide on-site screen plantings along the east MSF boundary (because of shadowing effects on the arrays), there was a commitment, as part of the construction program, to liaise with these eastern landowners and look for opportunities to provide plantings on their properties to screen MSF infrastructure. The drawing showing the extent and location of the screen plantings presented to the northern neighbours is provided below. Figure 20.1: Landscape Planting PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

127 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Construction Noise Management Plan 21.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C15(d) requires a Construction Noise Management Plan (CNMP) form part of the CEMP. The CNMP is to manage noise impacts during construction and to identify all feasible and reasonable noise mitigation measures. Specifically, CNMP must include: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) details of construction activities and an indicative schedule for construction works; identification of construction activities that have the potential to generate noise impacts on surrounding land uses, particularly residential areas; detail the requirements for Noise Impact Statement(s) for discrete work areas, including construction site compounds; detail what reasonable and feasible actions and measures would be implemented to minimise noise impacts, inclusive of any recommendations in the "operational and construction noise and vibration assessment Solar Power Farm Moree" prepared by Atkins Acoustics and Associates Pty Ltd dated November 2010; procedures for notifying sensitive receivers of construction activities that are likely to affect their noise amenity, as well as procedures for dealing with and responding to noise complaints; an out-of-hours work (OOHW) protocol for the assessment, management and approval of works outside of standard construction hours as defined in condition D5 of this approval, including a risk assessment process under which an Environmental Representative may approve out-of-hour construction activities deemed to be of low environmental risk and refer high risk works for the Director-General's approval. The OOHW protocol shall detail standard assessment, mitigation and notification requirements for high and low risk out-of-hour works, and detail a standard protocol for referring applications to the Director-General; and a description of how the effectiveness of these actions and measures would be monitored during the proposed works, clearly indicating how often this monitoring would be conducted, the locations where monitoring would take place, how the results of this monitoring would be recorded and reported; and, if any exceedance is detected how any non-compliance would be rectified CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND SCHEDULE A detailed breakdown of construction activities and a schedule for construction works is provided below. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

128 REV00_Updated Works Program_2003_R06 SC.mpp ID Nombre de tarea Duration Start Finish % Complete Free Slack Total Slack Critical Predecessors Successors 1 MSF 425 days Mon 14/07/14 Mon 29/02/16 13% 0 days 0 days Yes 2 Milestones 425 days Mon 14/07/14 Mon 29/02/16 15% 0 days 0 days Yes 3 Completion of milestones 425 days Mon 14/07/14 Mon 29/02/16 15% 0 days 0 days Yes63FF 4 Down payment (Achievement of Commencement Date and Title to Solar Farm Land transferred) 0 days Tue 15/07/14 Tue 15/07/14 100% 0 days 0 days No Mobilization to site 0 days Wed 17/12/14 Wed 17/12/14 0% 0 days 312 days No 184,4 6 6 Engineering (List of documetation to be 0 days Wed 17/12/14 Wed 17/12/14 0% 312 days 312 days No 5,101 supplied by Contractor) 23 Jun '14 04 Aug '14 15 Sep '14 27 Oct '14 08 Dec '14 19 Jan '15 02 Mar '15 13 Apr '15 25 May '15 06 Jul '15 17 Aug '15 28 Sep '15 09 Nov '15 21 Dec '15 01 Feb '16 14 Mar '16 T T T T T T S W S T M F S W S T M F S W S T M F S W S T M F S W S T M F S 13% 15% 15/07 17/12 17/12 7 Delivery of trackers 120 days Fri 06/02/15 Fri 24/07/15 0% 155 days 155 days No 0% 8 8 MWac 0 days Fri 06/02/15 Fri 06/02/15 0% 275 days 275 days No / MWac 0 days Fri 27/03/15 Fri 27/03/15 0% 240 days 240 days No / MWac 0 days Fri 01/05/15 Fri 01/05/15 0% 215 days 215 days No / MWac 0 days Fri 29/05/15 Fri 29/05/15 0% 195 days 195 days No / MWac 0 days Fri 26/06/15 Fri 26/06/15 0% 175 days 175 days No / MWac 0 days Fri 24/07/15 Fri 24/07/15 0% 155 days 155 days No /07 14 Delivery of modules 114 days Mon 12/01/15 Fri 19/06/15 0% 180 days 180 days No 0% MWP 0 days Mon 12/01/15 Mon 12/01/15 0% 294 days 294 days No / MWP 0 days Thu 05/02/15 Thu 05/02/15 0% 276 days 276 days No / MWP 0 days Tue 03/03/15 Tue 03/03/15 0% 258 days 258 days No / MWP 0 days Wed 08/04/15 Wed 08/04/15 0% 232 days 232 days No / MWP 0 days Thu 14/05/15 Thu 14/05/15 0% 206 days 206 days No / MWP 0 days Fri 19/06/15 Fri 19/06/15 0% 180 days 180 days No /06 21 Delivery of inverters 140 days Fri 20/03/15 Fri 02/10/15 0% 105 days 105 days No 0% 22 4 Units 0 days Fri 20/03/15 Fri 20/03/15 0% 245 days 245 days No / Units 0 days Fri 03/04/15 Fri 03/04/15 0% 235 days 235 days No / Units 0 days Fri 15/05/15 Fri 15/05/15 0% 205 days 205 days No / Units 0 days Fri 03/07/15 Fri 03/07/15 0% 170 days 170 days No / Units 0 days Fri 14/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 140 days 140 days No / Units 0 days Fri 02/10/15 Fri 02/10/15 0% 105 days 105 days No /10 28 Driven piles 66 days Mon 23/02/15 Tue 26/05/15 0% days days No 0% 29 8 Mwac 0 days Mon 23/02/15 Mon 23/02/15 0% days days No / MWac 0 days Mon 23/02/15 Mon 23/02/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Tue 10/03/15 Tue 10/03/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Thu 14/05/15 Thu 14/05/15 0% 206 days 206 days No / Mwac 0 days Mon 11/05/15 Mon 11/05/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Tue 26/05/15 Tue 26/05/15 0% days days No /05 35 Mechanical erection 72.5 days Wed 06/05/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 140 days 140 days No 0% 36 8 MWac 0 days Wed 06/05/15 Wed 06/05/15 0% days days No / MWac 0 days Wed 06/05/15 Wed 06/05/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Mon 25/05/15 Mon 25/05/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Fri 14/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 140 days 140 days No / Mwac 0 days Fri 14/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 140 days 140 days No / Mwac 0 days Fri 14/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 140 days 140 days No /08 42 LV electrical installation 72.5 days Thu 07/05/15 Tue 18/08/15 0% days days No 0% 43 8 MWac 0 days Thu 07/05/15 Thu 07/05/15 0% 211 days 211 days No / MWac 0 days Thu 07/05/15 Thu 07/05/15 0% 211 days 211 days No / Mwac 0 days Tue 26/05/15 Tue 26/05/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Fri 14/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Fri 14/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% days days No / Mwac 0 days Tue 18/08/15 Tue 18/08/15 0% days days No /08 49 Substation 190 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 21/09/15 0% 114 days 114 days No 0% 50 Desing approval 0 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 29/12/14 0% 304 days 304 days No /12 51 Substation Supply 0 days Fri 31/07/15 Fri 31/07/15 0% 150 days 150 days No 659,662 31/07 52 Substantial completion 0 days Mon 21/09/15 Mon 21/09/15 0% 114 days 114 days No /09 53 Switchyard 195 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 28/09/15 0% 109 days 109 days No 0% 54 Desing approval 0 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 29/12/14 0% 304 days 304 days No /12 55 Switchyard supply 0 days Mon 18/05/15 Mon 18/05/15 0% 204 days 204 days No /05 56 Substantial completion 0 days Mon 28/09/15 Mon 28/09/15 0% 109 days 109 days No / kV Transmission Line 170 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 24/08/15 0% 134 days 134 days No 0% 58 Desing approval 0 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 29/12/14 0% 304 days 304 days No /12 59 Powerline Supply 0 days Mon 09/03/15 Mon 09/03/15 0% 254 days 254 days No /03 60 Substantial completion 0 days Mon 24/08/15 Mon 24/08/15 0% 134 days 134 days No /08 61 Substantial completion 0 days Tue 24/11/15 Tue 24/11/15 0% 68 days 68 days No /11 62 PAC 1 day Wed 23/12/15 Wed 23/12/15 0% 47 days 47 days No /12 63 Final Completion 0 days Mon 29/02/16 Mon 29/02/16 0% 0 days 0 days Yes760 3FF 29/02 64 EPC 336 days Tue 15/07/14 Tue 27/10/15 17% 0 days 20 days Yes 27/10 17% 65 NTP 0 days Tue 15/07/14 Tue 15/07/14 100% 0 days 0 days No 4,184,120FS+7 15/07 66 Contract award 0 days Thu 24/07/14 Thu 24/07/14 0% 5 days 5 days No /07 67 Commencement date 0 days Thu 31/07/14 Thu 31/07/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes66 114FS+40 days 31/07 68 Design and Engineering Submittals 89.5 days Tue 15/07/14 Mon 17/11/14 62% 0 days 80.5 days No 517FS+3 mons 69 Previous estimates, investors, series, 16 wks Tue 15/07/14 Mon 03/11/14 72% 0 wks wks No 65SS 70SS+2 structure and definition of the same wks,77,72ss+8 days,73ss+8 70 Layout definition 8 wks Thu 14/08/14 Wed 08/10/14 90% 0 wks 2.64 wks No 69SS+2 wks 78SS,100,72SS 90% 72% 62% 71 Line Diagram 10 days Thu 04/09/14 Wed 17/09/14 70% 39.9 days 39.9 days No 70% 72 Low Voltage (DC) 6 days Thu 04/09/14 Thu 11/09/14 75% 0 days 43.9 days No 69SS+8 days,70 78SS,80,87FS 0 75% 73 Low Voltage (AC) 8 days Thu 04/09/14 Mon 15/09/14 75% 0 days 41.9 days No 69SS+8 days,70 78SS,80,87FS 0 75% 74 Auxiliary Services 6 days Thu 04/09/14 Thu 11/09/14 60% 0 days 32.2 days No 69SS+8 days,70 78SS,80,87FS 0 60% 75 Medium Voltage 10 days Thu 04/09/14 Wed 17/09/14 75% 0 days 39.9 days No 69SS+8 days,70 78SS,80,87FS 0 75% 76 Equipments 6 days Thu 04/09/14 Thu 11/09/14 60% 0 days 43.9 days No69SS+8 days,7078ss,80,87fs 0 60% 77 Building 9 days Tue 04/11/14 Fri 14/11/14 16% 81 days 81 days No % 78 Plotting ditches plant wiring DC and AC generation 10.5 wks Thu 04/09/14 Mon 17/11/14 51% 0 wks 0.1 wks No 70SS,72SS,73SS % 79 Plant Layout DC and AC wiring (LV) 10 days Thu 09/10/14 Wed 22/10/14 69% 18 days 18 days No 69% 80 8 Mwac 3 days Thu 09/10/14 Mon 13/10/14 90% 0 days 22.2 days No 70,72,73,74,75, 81 90% 81 8 Mwac 2 days Tue 14/10/14 Wed 15/10/14 85% 0 days 20.5 days No % Mwac 2 days Thu 16/10/14 Fri 17/10/14 50% 0 days 19.5 days No % Mwac 1 day Mon 20/10/14 Mon 20/10/14 50% 0 days 19 days No % Mwac 1 day Tue 21/10/14 Tue 21/10/14 50% 0 days 18.5 days No % Mwac 1 day Wed 22/10/14 Wed 22/10/14 50% 17.5 days 18 days No % 86 Cabling plant Plotting AC (MV) 30 days Thu 11/09/14 Wed 22/10/14 70% 18 days 18 days No 70% 87 8 Mwac 6 days Thu 11/09/14 Thu 18/09/14 100% 0 days 0 days No70FS 0.91 mons88 100% 88 8 Mwac 6 days Fri 19/09/14 Fri 26/09/14 100% 0 days 0 days No % Mwac 6 days Mon 29/09/14 Mon 06/10/14 100% 0 days 0 days No % Mwac 6 days Tue 07/10/14 Tue 14/10/14 50% 0 days 18 days No % Mwac 3 days Wed 15/10/14 Fri 17/10/14 0% 0 days 18 days No % Mwac 3 days Mon 20/10/14 Wed 22/10/14 0% 17.5 days 18 days No % 93 Cabling plant Plotting AC (AA.SS) 16 days Thu 09/10/14 Thu 30/10/14 8% 12 days 12 days No 8% 94 8 Mwac 3 days Thu 09/10/14 Mon 13/10/14 40% 0 days 12 days No 70,74 95,100SS 40% 95 8 Mwac 3 days Tue 14/10/14 Thu 16/10/14 0% 0 days 12 days No % Mwac 3 days Fri 17/10/14 Tue 21/10/14 0% 0 days 12 days No % Mwac 3 days Wed 22/10/14 Fri 24/10/14 0% 0 days 12 days No % Mwac 2 days Mon 27/10/14 Tue 28/10/14 0% 0 days 12 days No % Mwac 2 days Wed 29/10/14 Thu 30/10/14 0% 11.5 days 12 days No % 100 Plotting cabling plant monitoring 10 days Thu 09/10/14 Wed 22/10/14 0% 17.5 days 18 days No 70,94SS 101 0% 101 Engineering Finish 0 days Mon 17/11/14 Mon 17/11/14 0% 0.5 days 0.5 days No 78,85,92,99, / Construction Environmental Management Plan (submitted 1mth prior to site mobilisation) 90 days Tue 15/07/14 Mon 17/11/14 75% 0 days 0 days Yes 111 Project Management Plan (PMP) 45 days Thu 25/09/14 Wed 26/11/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 75% 0% 115 Secondary Approvals (all pre construction Part 3A and other obligations) 90 days Tue 15/07/14 Mon 17/11/14 75% 0 days 0 days Yes 118 Main Supplies 240 days Fri 31/10/14 Fri 02/10/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 75% 0% 119 Purchase Orders 5 days Fri 31/10/14 Fri 07/11/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% 120 Driven Piles 0 days Fri 31/10/14 Fri 31/10/14 0% 0 days 0.5 days No 65FS+79 days 156FS+5 wks 31/ Tracker System 0 days Fri 31/10/14 Fri 31/10/14 100% 0 days 0 days No 65FS+79 days / Modules 0 days Fri 07/11/14 Fri 07/11/14 70% 0 days 0 days Yes65FS+84 days / Inverter Skid 0 days Fri 07/11/14 Fri 07/11/14 100% 0 days 0 days No 65FS+84 days / FAT 135 days Mon 01/12/14 Fri 05/06/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% 125 Ingeteam 135 days Mon 01/12/14 Fri 05/06/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% 126 Batch 1 (5 Units) 5 days Mon 01/12/14 Fri 05/12/14 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 148 0% 127 Batch 2 (5 Units) 5 days Mon 15/12/14 Fri 19/12/14 0% 25 days 25 days No 149 0% 128 Batch 3 (5 Units) 5 days Mon 12/01/15 Fri 16/01/15 0% 15 days 15 days No 150 0% 129 Batch 4 (5 Units) 5 days Mon 02/03/15 Fri 06/03/15 0% 10 days 10 days No 151 0% 130 Batch 5 (4 Units) 5 days Mon 13/04/15 Fri 17/04/15 0% 15 days 15 days No 152 0% 131 Batch 6 (4 Units) 5 days Mon 01/06/15 Fri 05/06/15 0% 10 days 10 days No 153 0% 132 Maritime Transport & Custom 220 days Mon 03/11/14 Fri 04/09/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% 133 Tracker System 170 days Mon 03/11/14 Fri 26/06/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% Mwac 10 wks Mon 03/11/14 Fri 09/01/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes ,135 0% Mwac 7 wks Mon 12/01/15 Fri 27/02/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes ,164 0% Mwac 5 wks Mon 02/03/15 Fri 03/04/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes ,165 0% Mwac 4 wks Mon 06/04/15 Fri 01/05/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes ,166 0% Mwac 4 wks Mon 04/05/15 Fri 29/05/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes ,167 0% Mwac 4 wks Mon 01/06/15 Fri 26/06/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes % 140 Modules 140 days Mon 10/11/14 Fri 22/05/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% MWP 26 days Mon 10/11/14 Mon 15/12/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes ,170 0% MWP 18 days Tue 16/12/14 Thu 08/01/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes ,171 0% MWP 18 days Fri 09/01/15 Tue 03/02/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes ,172 0% MWP 26 days Wed 04/02/15 Wed 11/03/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes ,173 0% MWP 26 days Thu 12/03/15 Thu 16/04/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes ,174 0% MWP 26 days Fri 17/04/15 Fri 22/05/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes % 147 Inverter & Transformer Station 195 days Mon 08/12/14 Fri 04/09/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% Units 55 days Mon 08/12/14 Fri 20/02/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes123, ,149 0% Units 10 days Mon 23/02/15 Fri 06/03/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes148, ,150 0% Units 30 days Mon 09/03/15 Fri 17/04/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes149, ,151 0% Units 35 days Mon 20/04/15 Fri 05/06/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes150, ,152 0% Units 30 days Mon 08/06/15 Fri 17/07/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes151, ,153 0% Units 35 days Mon 20/07/15 Fri 04/09/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes152, % 154 Delivery at Work 215 days Mon 08/12/14 Fri 02/10/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% 183 Construction 239 days Thu 27/11/14 Tue 27/10/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% 184 Mobilization 0 days Wed 17/12/14 Wed 17/12/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes65,103FS+1 mo 5,261,190,192, 17/ Civil Works 141 days Thu 27/11/14 Thu 11/06/15 2% 48 days 48 days No 2% 259 Driven Pile Installation days Mon 22/12/14 Tue 26/05/15 0% 0.5 days 0.5 days No 0% 322 Mechanical erection 145 days Mon 26/01/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% 323 Tracker Installation 145 days Mon 26/01/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% 386 Module Installation 140 days Mon 02/02/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% 453 LV electrical installation days Mon 09/02/15 Tue 18/08/15 0% 0.5 days 0.5 days No 0% 516 Security System Installation 92.5 days Tue 17/02/15 Thu 25/06/15 0% 48 days 48 days No 0% 523 Monitoring System Installation days Tue 03/03/15 Tue 27/10/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% 555 Inverter & Transformer Station 150 days Mon 23/03/15 Fri 16/10/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes Installation 590 AC MV Electrical 153 days Fri 27/03/15 Tue 27/10/15 0% 0 days 20 days Yes 0% 0% 653 Substation, Switchyard & TL 315 days Tue 15/07/14 Mon 28/09/15 2% 0 days 0 days Yes 758 2% 654 MSF Substation 310 days Tue 15/07/14 Mon 21/09/15 1% 4 days 4 days No 1% 655 Engineering and Documentation 24 wks Tue 15/07/14 Mon 29/12/14 7% 0 wks 0 wks Yes65 656,657SS+12 wks,667ss, Order Substation Equipment 0 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 29/12/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes ,662 7% 29/ Mobilise on site 0 days Wed 17/12/14 Wed 17/12/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes655SS+12 wks, / Site Civil Works (Earthworks, Excavation, Foundations, Trench, Fencing, Building, surfacing) 659 Delivery of Major Equipment to site except Transformer 660 Install Equipment Except Transformer 661 Electrical Works (Cabling, Termination, Panels, Relays etc) 20 wks Thu 18/12/14 Wed 06/05/15 0% 1.6 wks 2.4 wks No wks Tue 30/12/14 Mon 18/05/15 0% 0 wks 0.8 wks No ,51 6 wks Tue 19/05/15 Mon 29/06/15 0% 0 wks 0.8 wks No 658, ,664 6 wks Tue 30/06/15 Mon 10/08/15 0% 0.8 wks 0.8 wks No FF 0% 0% 0% 0% 662 Transformer Delivery (substation 7 mons Tue 30/12/14 Fri 31/07/15 0% 0 mons 0 mons Yes ,51 supply) 663 Install Transformer and complete 2 wks Mon 03/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes662,661FF 664 electrical work 664 Testing and Commissioning 2 wks Mon 17/08/15 Fri 28/08/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes663, ,752 0% 0% 0% 665 Approval to Connect MSF to Grid 0 days Mon 21/09/15 Mon 21/09/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 677,664 52,687 21/ kV Switchyard 315 days Tue 15/07/14 Mon 28/09/15 3% 0 days 0 days Yes 3% 667 Engineering and Documentation 24 wks Tue 15/07/14 Mon 29/12/14 10% 0 wks 0 wks Yes655SS 669,680SS,54,6 wks,674, Civil Design and Studies 12 wks Tue 26/08/14 Mon 17/11/14 5% 0.8 wks 0.8 wks No 667FF 6 wks 5% 10% 669 Order Substation Equipment 0 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 29/12/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes / Mobilise on site 0 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 29/12/14 0% 0 days 5 days No 667, / Site Civil Works (Earthworks, Excavation, Foundations, Trench, Fencing, Building, surfacing) 19 wks Tue 30/12/14 Mon 11/05/15 0% 1 wk 1 wk No ,674,673FS wks 0% 672 Delivery of Major Equipment to site 20 wks Tue 30/12/14 Mon 18/05/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes ,673FS 4 wks, Install Equipment and structures 8 wks Tue 21/04/15 Mon 15/06/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes672FS 4 wks,671fs 4 675,674FS 2 wks 674 Electrical Works (Cabling, Termination, Panels, Relays etc) 8 wks Tue 02/06/15 Mon 27/07/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes672,671,673FSwks, % 0% 0% 675 Testing and Commissioning 4 wks Tue 28/07/15 Mon 24/08/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes674,671, ,677,752 0% 676 Principal Own Float 4 wks Tue 25/08/15 Mon 21/09/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes % 677 Approval to Connect EE Switchyard 0 days Mon 21/09/15 Mon 21/09/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes675,684, ,678SS and TL to the grid 678 Testing and Commissioning after 1 wk Tue 22/09/15 Mon 28/09/15 0% 0 wks 0 wks Yes677SS 56,687,696,705 connection kV Transmission Line 290 days Tue 15/07/14 Mon 24/08/15 3% 4 days 4 days No 3% 21/09 0% 680 Engineering and documentation 24 wks Tue 15/07/14 Mon 29/12/14 7% 0 wks 0.8 wks No 667SS 681,58 7% 681 Order Materials 0 days Mon 29/12/14 Mon 29/12/14 0% 0 days 4 days No / Delivery of materials 10 wks Tue 30/12/14 Mon 09/03/15 0% 0 wks 0.8 wks No ,59 0% 683 Construction including standing poles, Dressing Poles, stringing, 5 weeks outage, ARTC approval) 23 wks Tue 10/03/15 Mon 17/08/15 0% 0 wks 0.8 wks No 682, % 684 Testing 1 wk Tue 18/08/15 Mon 24/08/15 0% 0 wks 0.8 wks No ,60,687,69 0% 685 Commissioning Solar Farm 40 days Tue 29/09/15 Mon 23/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 758 0% MWac 16 days Tue 29/09/15 Tue 20/10/15 0% 4 days 4 days No 0% Mwac 2 days Tue 29/09/15 Wed 30/09/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 684,678,455, % Mwac 2 days Thu 01/10/15 Fri 02/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 687,456, % Mwac 2 days Mon 05/10/15 Tue 06/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 688,457, % Mwac 2 days Wed 07/10/15 Thu 08/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 689,458, % Mwac 2 days Fri 09/10/15 Mon 12/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 690,459, % Mwac 2 days Tue 13/10/15 Wed 14/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 691,460, % Mwac 2 days Thu 15/10/15 Fri 16/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 692,461, % Mwac 2 days Mon 19/10/15 Tue 20/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 693,462, % MWac 16 days Tue 29/09/15 Tue 20/10/15 0% 4 days 4 days No 0% Mwac 2 days Tue 29/09/15 Wed 30/09/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 464,601,678, % Mwac 2 days Thu 01/10/15 Fri 02/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 696,465, % Mwac 2 days Mon 05/10/15 Tue 06/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 697,466, % Mwac 2 days Wed 07/10/15 Thu 08/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 698,467, % Mwac 2 days Fri 09/10/15 Mon 12/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 699,468, % Mwac 2 days Tue 13/10/15 Wed 14/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 700,469, % Mwac 2 days Thu 15/10/15 Fri 16/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 701,470, % Mwac 2 days Mon 19/10/15 Tue 20/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 702,471, % Mwac 20 days Tue 29/09/15 Mon 26/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% Mwac 2 days Tue 29/09/15 Wed 30/09/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes610,678,684, % Mwac 2 days Thu 01/10/15 Fri 02/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes705,474, % Mwac 2 days Mon 05/10/15 Tue 06/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes706,475, % Mwac 2 days Wed 07/10/15 Thu 08/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes707,476, % Mwac 2 days Fri 09/10/15 Mon 12/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes708,477, % Mwac 2 days Tue 13/10/15 Wed 14/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes709,478, % Mwac 2 days Thu 15/10/15 Fri 16/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes710,479, % Mwac 2 days Mon 19/10/15 Tue 20/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes711,480, % Mwac 2 days Wed 21/10/15 Thu 22/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes712,481, % Mwac 2 days Fri 23/10/15 Mon 26/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes713,482, % Mwac 20 days Wed 21/10/15 Tue 17/11/15 0% 4 days 4 days No 0% Mwac 2 days Wed 21/10/15 Thu 22/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 484,621, % Mwac 2 days Fri 23/10/15 Mon 26/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 716,485, % Mwac 2 days Tue 27/10/15 Wed 28/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 717,486, % Mwac 2 days Thu 29/10/15 Fri 30/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 718,487, % Mwac 2 days Mon 02/11/15 Tue 03/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 719,488, % Mwac 2 days Wed 04/11/15 Thu 05/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 720,489, % Mwac 2 days Fri 06/11/15 Mon 09/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 721,490, % Mwac 2 days Tue 10/11/15 Wed 11/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 722,491, % Mwac 2 days Thu 12/11/15 Fri 13/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 723,492, % Mwac 2 days Mon 16/11/15 Tue 17/11/15 0% 4 days 4 days No 724,493,630 0% Mwac 20 days Wed 21/10/15 Tue 17/11/15 0% 4 days 4 days No 0% Mwac 2 days Wed 21/10/15 Thu 22/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 495,632, % Mwac 2 days Fri 23/10/15 Mon 26/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 727,496, % Mwac 2 days Tue 27/10/15 Wed 28/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 728,497, % Mwac 2 days Thu 29/10/15 Fri 30/10/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 729,498, % Mwac 2 days Mon 02/11/15 Tue 03/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 730,499, % Mwac 2 days Wed 04/11/15 Thu 05/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 731,500, % Mwac 2 days Fri 06/11/15 Mon 09/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 732,501, % Mwac 2 days Tue 10/11/15 Wed 11/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 733,502, % Mwac 2 days Thu 12/11/15 Fri 13/11/15 0% 0 days 4 days No 734,503, % Mwac 2 days Mon 16/11/15 Tue 17/11/15 0% 4 days 4 days No 735,504,641 0% Mwac 20 days Tue 27/10/15 Mon 23/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% Mwac 2 days Tue 27/10/15 Wed 28/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes506,643, % Mwac 2 days Thu 29/10/15 Fri 30/10/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes738,507, % Mwac 2 days Mon 02/11/15 Tue 03/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes739,508, % Mwac 2 days Wed 04/11/15 Thu 05/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes740,509, % Mwac 2 days Fri 06/11/15 Mon 09/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes741,510, % Mwac 2 days Tue 10/11/15 Wed 11/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes742,511, % Mwac 2 days Thu 12/11/15 Fri 13/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes743,512, % Mwac 2 days Mon 16/11/15 Tue 17/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes744,513, % Mwac 2 days Wed 18/11/15 Thu 19/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes745,514, % Mwac 2 days Fri 20/11/15 Mon 23/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes746,515,652 0% 748 ACTION FROM THE PRINCIPAL 206 days Fri 14/11/14 Mon 31/08/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 0% 749 GL Deliver to DPE the CEMP 0 days Mon 17/11/14 Mon 17/11/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes 750SF,751SF,1 17/ FRV Revision and Aproval the 3rd Draft of CEMP 1 day Fri 14/11/14 Mon 17/11/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes749SF 751 ER Revision and Aproval the 3rd Draft 1 day Fri 14/11/14 Mon 17/11/14 0% 0 days 0 days Yes749SF of CEMP 752 Commissioning Date (Essential Energy) 0 days Mon 31/08/15 Mon 31/08/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes664,675, SF 21 days,754sf FRV Deliver to AEMO the 0 days Fri 31/07/15 Fri 31/07/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes752SF 21 days Commissioning Program 754 Generator Registration (GR) 0 days Fri 14/08/15 Fri 14/08/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes752SF 11 days 755SF 75 days, 0% 0% 31/07 14/08 31/ FRV Deliver to AEMO the Solar Energy 0 days Fri 01/05/15 Fri 01/05/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes754SF 75 days Conversion Model (ECM) 756 AEMO Due Diligence response 0 days Fri 01/05/15 Fri 01/05/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes754SF 75 days 01/05 01/ Starting Data and Provision of Information 0 days Mon 02/03/15 Mon 02/03/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes754SF 119 days 758 Substantial Completion 1 day Tue 24/11/15 Tue 24/11/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes685, ,61 02/03 24/ PAC Test 20 days Wed 25/11/15 Tue 22/12/15 0% 0 days 0 days Yes758 62,760FS+20 d 0% Progreso de tarea crítica Tarea División Progreso de tarea Tarea manual Sólo el comienzo Sólo fin Sólo duración Línea base División de la línea base Hito de línea base Hito Progreso del resumen Resumen Resumen manual Resumen del proyecto Tareas externas Hito externo Tarea inactiva Hito inactivo Resumen inactivo Fecha límite Página 1

129 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS The construction activities that have the potential to generate noise impacts on surrounding land uses, particularly residential areas, include road works, access track construction, site preparation and driving steel structural supports for the PV modules. Activities such as panel installation, wiring and the transmission line erection have less potential to cause noise impacts MEASURES TO MINIMISE IMPACTS COMMUNITY CONSULTATION Green Light will make available detailed and constantly updated information about the progress and scheduling of works to feed into Moree Solar Farm s Community Consultation Plan. In addition to the above, residents on Barton Plains Road and those located east of the MSF will be individually consulted. Who and how this will be undertaken will be defined by the Proponent s (MSF Pty Ltd) Community Consultation Plan. As the construction contractor, Green Light will comply with the requirements of this Community Consultation Plan STANDARD CONSTRUCTION HOURS Works will be restricted to approved construction hours. That is, construction activities associated with the project that would generate an audible noise at any sensitive receptor will be restricted to the following hours: 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Mondays to Fridays, inclusive; 8:00 am to 1:00 pm on Saturdays; and at no time on Sundays or public holidays. There would be no construction activity outside these hours without first securing approval under the Out-Of-Hours Work Protocol HIGH NOISE IMPACT ACTIVITIES CoA D7 states that during construction: Any work generating high noise that has impulsive, intermittent, low frequency or tonal characteristics, including jack hammering, line drilling, pile driving, rock hammering, rock breaking, saw cutting, sheet piling, vibratory rolling but excluding blasting, must only be undertaken: (a) (b) (c) between the hours of 8:00am and 6:00pm Monday to Friday; between the hours of 8:00am and 1:00pm Saturday; and in continuous blocks of no more than three hours, with at least a one hour respite between each block of work generating high noise impact, where the location of the work is likely to impact the same receivers; except as otherwise approved by the Director-General. For the purposes of this Condition 'continuous' includes any period during which there is less than a one hour respite between ceasing and recommencing any of the work the subject of this Condition. Pile driving of the steel supports for the arrays is an activity with the potential to generate impulsive noise. Unless it has the approval of potentially affected residents, Green Light will undertake this activity in accordance with the above conditions. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

130 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Driving the steel supports will be a discrete works package to be undertaken by a sub-contractor. To minimise the potential for noise from this activity, in awarding this scope of works, Green Light will specify the following as key selection criteria in the contract documentation: Details on plant to be used and associated sound power levels; Specific work practices that can and will be employed by the sub-contractor to minimise noise; The availability, form and effectiveness of controls that can be implemented to mitigate noise if required; and Confirmation that the requirements of this Construction Noise Management Plan (CNMP) have been considered by the sub-contractor, that the requirements and processes in place under this CNMP are understood, and confirmation that the sub-contractor can and will comply with the requirements of the CNMP. It is also noted that noise has been identified as a high risk activity (refer Section 13 of the CEMP) and, consistent with the protocol for preparing Work Instructions (WI) to manage environmental risk, the sub-contractor undertaking these works will be required to prepare a Works Instruction that specifies: The techniques and construction methodology; The plant, equipment and personnel to be involved; and Environmental controls and safeguards to be adopted during the works. As detailed in Section 13 the procedure associated with enforcement of the Work Instruction is as follows. A draft WI will be submitted to the Quality and Environment Manager; The Quality and Environment Manager will review the WI, inspect the proposed works location, determine environmental risks, then add applicable controls to incorporate into the WI to minimise environmental risk; This assessment process will be undertaken through cross-referencing the activity and location against the Environmental Risk Matrix For Work Instructions; The revised WI will then be submitted to the Construction Manager for approval; and The approved WI will then be explained to the work crew undertaking the activity prior to them commencing works. This explanation of the WI will be delivered at the tool-box meeting before works commence COMPLAINTS HANDLING In the event that a complaint is made, the Quality and Environment Manager will immediately investigate the source of the noise and investigate measures to avoid recurrence. Any complaint received will be documented and reported to the Environmental Representative consistent with the Complaints Handling Procedure (refer Section 11) OUT-OF-HOURS-WORK PROTOCOL ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS In circumstances apart from an emergency or NSW Police Force instruction, no construction activity will be undertaken outside the approved construction hours without the following protocol being followed. If Green Light has evidence that potentially affected residents do not object to the varied hours, the works will be classified as low environmental risk and referral will be made to the Environmental Representative for approval; PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

131 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 In the absence of having evidence that potentially affected residents do not object to the works being undertaken outside standard construction hours, a Noise Impact Statement will be prepared (refer Section 21.6 below); Contingent on the Noise Impact Statement concluding the variation to hours would be a low environmental risk, it will be referred to the Environmental Representative for approval; and If the Noise Impact Statement concludes the variation to hours would be a high environmental risk, it will be referred to the Director General for approval. No works would be undertaken outside approved construction hours without first securing either the approval of the Environmental Representative or the Director-General. All works out of hours will be recorded on the Out-of-Hours Works Register (refer Form MSF11) NOTIFICATION OBLIGATIONS Prior to undertaking any out-of-hours works the Quality and Environment Manager will consult with potentially affected residents. This consultation will be over the phone or in-person. Written notification would be restricted to those potentially affected residents who request written notification. The content of the consultations and/or written notifications will provide residents details of: the proposed works; the duration and nature of the works during construction; what is being done to minimise noise; when respite periods would occur; how updates on the progress of the works will be communicated; and how the resident can contact the Quality and Environment Manager. Consultations and notification would occur at least 7 days prior to the intent to work at varied hours. Records of all resident contact will be documented and provided to the Environmental Representative on request NOISE IMPACT STATEMENTS Noise Impact Statements will be prepared if, for reasons other than an emergency or a NSW Police instruction, any construction work is proposed to be undertaken outside the approved standard construction hours and the Quality and Environment Manager does not have evidence that potentially affected residents do not object to the works. These Noise Impact Statements will be prepared to demonstrate the ability to comply with applicable noise performance criterion at receiver, and will be submitted to the Environmental Representative, along with details of the: location, nature, timing and duration of the out-of-hours works proposed; clarification of buffer distances to receptors; a justification for the request, including an explanation as to the need for the activities to be undertaken during varied construction hours; any other information necessary to reasonably determine that activities undertaken during the varied construction hours will not adversely impact on the acoustic amenity of receptors in the vicinity of the site; and a conclusion as to whether the activities constitute a low or high environmental risk. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

132 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ MONITORING EFFECTIVENESS BASELINE MONITORING Green Light will engage the services of an independent acoustic specialist to complete regular monitoring and data capture from the commencement of construction to establish baseline data. The frequency and location of ongoing monitoring will be refined as the construction schedule unfolds, particular works activities are undertaken, and as determined to be appropriate by the acoustic specialist, given the results of the monitoring SURROGATE INDICATOR Community consultation and the absence of complaints will be used as the surrogate indicator of the effectiveness of the measures adopted to avoid adverse noise impacts to neighbours. This monitoring would be continual ATTENDED MEASUREMENT Where a complaint is recurring, or can not be resolved through consultations with an affected landowner, Green Light will undertake attended noise monitoring with a suitably calibrated noise level meter to establish whether applicable noise management levels are or are not been achieved. Where exceedance of the noise management level is occurring, Green Light will temporarily cease those works causing the problem and, in consultation with an acoustic specialist, identify and implement both structural and non-structural attenuation measures to achieve compliance. Confirmation that the additional mitigation measures are effective will be validated through attended measurement OPERATIONAL NOISE PREDICTION REPORT MSF Pty Ltd has submitted the Operational Noise Prediction Report (Blackett Acoustics, Version B, October 2014) to the Department of Planning and Environment on 14 October 2014 as required by CoA C1 and C2. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

133 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Traffic Management Plan 22.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C15 states that the CEMP must include a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to manage conflicts that may be generated during construction. The TMP must address the requirements of the relevant road authority and include: i) Details of how construction of the project will be managed in proximity to local and regional roads; ii) iii) iv) Details of traffic routes for heavy vehicles, including any necessary route or timing restriction for oversized loads; Demonstration that all statutory responsibilities with regard to road traffic impacts have been complied with; Details of measures to minimise interactions between the project and other users of the roads such as the use of fencing, lights, barriers, traffic diversions etc.;; v) Procedures for informing the public where any road access will be restricted as a result of the project; vi) vii) viii) Procedures to manage construction traffic to ensure the safety of livestock and to minimise disruption to livestock; Speed limits to be observed along routes to and from the site and within the site; and Details of the expected behavioural requirements for vehicle drivers travelling to and from the site and within the site RELEVANT ROAD AUTHORITIES Relevant road authorities for this project include both the Roads and Maritime Service (RMS) and Moree Plains Shire Council (MPSC). MPSC is the roads authority for Barton Plains Road and Burrington Road; and RMS is the roads authority for the Newell Highway DILAPIDATION AND UPGRADE REPORT Separate to this TMP, CoA C1 and C2 require the preparation of a Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report that must be submitted to the Director-General prior to the commencement of construction. The requirements of these conditions are re-produced below. C1 C2 Prior to the commencement of construction of the project, the Proponent shall commission a suitable qualified expert to assess the condition of all Council controlled public roads proposed to be traversed by construction traffic associated with the project (including over-mass or overdimensional vehicles) in consultation with Council. Prior to commencement of construction of the project, in consultation with Council and RMS, the Proponent shall identify any upgrade requirements to accommodate project traffic for the duration of construction (including culvert, bridge and drainage design; intersection treatments; vehicle turning requirements and site access) considering final traffic volumes and works identified within the report by Transport and Traffic Planning Associates titled BP Solar Proposed Solar Power Station Moree Assessment of Traffic and Transport Implications dated December PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

134 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 The results of CI and C2 shall be contained within a road dilapidation and upgrade report, and shall be submitted to the Director-General prior to the commencement of construction clearly identifying recommendations made by the Council and the RMS and how these have been addressed. The Proponent shall ensure that all upgrade measures identified in the report are implemented to the satisfaction of Council and the RMS, prior to the commencement of construction. The Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report and Traffic Management Plan was approved by both MPSC (24 September 2014) and RMS (8 October 2014) CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT Access to the construction site will be via vehicle movements headed south down the Newell Highway, with a left turn onto Burrington Road, then a left onto Barton Plains Road. Traffic movements on public roads will be managed throughout the construction program through a range of means. These will include: Upgrading of local roads; Regular monitoring of the condition of local roads; Provision of parking on-site for construction traffic; Co-ordination and scheduling of heavy vehicle movement deliveries to minimise impacts; Landowner consultation; and Driver induction. Further detail on these measures is provided below HEAVY VEHICLE TRAFFIC ROUTES Heavy vehicle deliveries to the site will originate from either Brisbane or Moree, turning left off the Newell Highway onto Burrington Road. Vehicles originating in Brisbane will travel via the route shown below. Vehicles travelling from Moree will use the same route from Moree to the project site. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

135 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ OVERSIZED LOAD One over-dimensional and over-mass delivery will be required to the project site. As required, the Restricted Access Vehicle (RAV) delivery will: Secure the appropriate permits issued by RMS and the NSW Police; Use escort vehicles as required; Use traffic controllers as required; Be restricted to daylight hours (outside of school bus hours); and Be coordinated with any known vehicular activity on the Newell Highway and other roads along the delivery route MEASURES TO MINIMISE INTERACTIONS LOCAL ROAD UPGRADES An assessment of the proposed access route to the project site has been undertaken which has identified road upgrades required prior to the commencement of construction. These upgrades, consistent with the project approval, and as identified in the Council and RMS approved Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report include: up-grading the intersection of Burrington Road and Barton Plains Road to a rural basic left-turn treatment (BAL), and removing the existing stock grid on Barton Plains Road and shaping and sealing the existing unsealed section of Barton Plains Road to match the formation of the existing sealed section of Barton Plains Road. The environmental management measures specified in this CEMP will apply to the local upgrade works. This will include measures required to minimise interactions with other users of the roads to provide continuity of access, consultation and dust suppression. Any required traffic control measures to be installed during the road upgrade works will be undertaken in compliance with conditions imposed by Council as part of the s.138 permit and its Road Opening Approval (refer Section 5.3) MONITORING OF ROAD CONDITIONS Consistent with the Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report, Green Light will undertake quarterly conditions assessments of the road infrastructure to identify any deterioration to Council road assets resulting from construction PROVISION OF CAR PARKING A site compound to be established on the site will incorporate adequate car parking provision to ensure there is no need for car parking on any public road CO-ORDINATION AND SCHEDULING Green Light will co-ordinate and schedule heavy vehicle movements to minimise the potential for cumulative impacts or exacerbating traffic hazards. Specifically: Heavy vehicle movement deliveries will be scheduled not to coincide with the school bus run on Barton Plains Road. Based on advice from Wick s Bus Service (Wayne: mobile ) the school bus run down Barton Plains Road occurs at around 8.15 am and then again around 3.45 in the afternoon; PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

136 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Construction personnel in light vehicles arriving (0600 hrs 0700 hrs) and leaving the site (1800 hrs 1900 hrs) will also be outside these bus run times; and Heavy vehicle deliveries will be co-ordinated to ensure simultaneous arrival of heavy vehicles do not cause platooning, and that no traffic hazard is created because of the proximity of the existing rail level crossing on Burrington Road. Responsibility for scheduling and co-ordination of heavy vehicle movements will reside with a dedicated logistics co-ordinator. This logistics coordinator will be responsible for liaising with the haulage companies on a daily basis and will monitor and manage the program and delivery schedules. The scheduling of the materials (including plant and machinery) will be programmed to ensure that the delivery times do not coincide, whilst maintaining the deadlines of the construction program LANDOWNER CONSULTATION All residents and businesses fronting the Council controlled roads along the proposed access route will be informed of the proposed works via a letter drop. Green Light will provide details of a contact person for residents and businesses to contact if they have any issues relating to construction related traffic. Council has also requested it would like to work with Green Light to write a joint letter to the few residents of Barton Plains Road asking them to assist in keeping the laden trucks on the sealed section of Barton Plains Road CAR POOLING The teams of different sub-contractors associated with discrete work phases will be required to share vehicles (i.e. car pool) to reduce traffic numbers. This requirement will be realized through contractor s needing to comply with this CEMP, which will for an annexure to all the contracts SUB-CONTRACTOR SELECTION Green Light will engage freight haulage companies for the delivery of construction materials to site that manage their drivers within the bounds of the legislative requirements from the NSW Code of Practice for Long Haul Drivers (log book entries, verification of licenses, etc.). Wherever possible, Green Light will engage local drivers to ensure familiarity with the haulage routes DRIVER INDUCTION All personnel driving construction vehicles to and from the site, and within the site, will be provided with instruction in relation to expected behavioural requirements as part of the Due Diligence induction Speed Limits Drivers will be instructed to remain under posted speed limits: noting that there is a posted 50 km/hr limit on that section of Burrington Road east of the railway crossing; Further, drivers will be instructed not to exceed 80 km/hr on any section of either Burrington Road or Barton Plains Road; and Within the site, and as required as a management measure for minimising dust emissions (refer Section 17.4), enforcement of low speed (<15 km/hour) restrictions on all vehicle movements with the work site. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

137 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ Behavioural Code The induction will emphasise the following points: Consideration and courtesy are essential when driving on public roads and within the site; Speed limits must be strictly adhered to; Drivers must adhere to any directions given by site personnel; Any contact with any member of the public must be reported immediately to the Environmental Manager; and As requested by Council, unladen trucks are to yield to the laden trucks allowing them to remain on the sealed section of road MONITORING RAIL MOVEMENTS RMS has raised the issue of traffic conflicts resulting from rail movements on the existing low level rail crossing on Burrington Road during peak vehicle movements. There are just two (2) passenger movements a day on this rail line. A train leaves Moree at 8.05 am (1 hour after the shift start at the MSF) and a train arrives at Moree 6.00 pm (before the shift finishes at MSF). There is no conflict point for rail passenger trains. Freight movements vary with seasonal circumstances. ARTC indicate an average of 12 movements a week is typical. At 7.00 pm every night the ARTC Network Controller for the line at Moree receives notification of what train movements there will be in the next 24 hour period from mid-night. To manage potential conflicts, Green Light will contact this controller on a daily basis to get an accurate summary of rail movements for the following day. If and as required, this information will feed into the logistics to schedule deliveries and staff/contractor arrival and departure times so that conflicts are avoided. ARTC Network Controller (Moree) Ph: SIGNAGE Prior to the commencement of construction the following advance warning signage will be provided. Size C Gateway Traffic Turning (W5-25) with 300 metre distance plates shall be provided adjacent to the Newell Highway 300 metres either side of Newell Highway and Burrington Road intersection. The signs shall be erected in consultation with Roads and Maritime and be visible during construction and decommissioning stages and removed from the road reserve outside of these periods QUARTERLY DILAPIDATION SURVEYS Council has requested, and Green Light will comply, for quarterly dilapidation inspections to be carried out with a Council Officer present. Contact will be made with Council to arrange a suitable time for the future inspections TRAFFIC CONTROLS With upgrade works on Barton Plains Road completed prior to construction of the solar farm infrastructure, no traffic controls are required in terms of fencing, barriers or traffic diversions ROAD ACCESS RESTRICTIONS With the exception of the single delivery of the main transformer in a Restricted Access Vehicle (RAV), no road access will be restricted as a result of the project. Residents and businesses fronting the Council controlled roads along the proposed access route will be informed in advance of the RAV movement. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

138 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ LIVESTOCK SAFETY The majority of the access route to the project site is along fenced public roads. Use of these public roads, by licenced drivers, driving in accordance with road regulations will not create an interaction between construction vehicles and livestock. A section of Burrington Road does pass through a Travelling Stock Reserve (TSR), parts of which are closed off with Enclosure Permits (i.e. temporary fencing). Stock do, and will continue to, negotiate crossing Burrington Road when the TSR is in use. As part of the Due Diligence induction all drivers will be advised of the need to exercise caution and be made aware of the existence and use of the TSR STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 states that a person must not: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) erect a structure or carry out a work in, on or over a public road, or dig up or disturb the surface of a public road, or remove or interfere with a structure, work or tree on a public road, or pump water into a public road from any land adjoining the road, or connect a road (whether public or private) to a classified road, otherwise than with the consent of the appropriate roads authority. Pursuant to the above, the road upgrade works proposed for Barton Plains Road and Burrington Road trigger the requirement for Green Light to obtain a s.138 permit prior to these works being undertaken. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

139 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Emergency Response 23.1 REQUIREMENT CoA C14(p) requires that the CEMP include emergency management measures RESPONSIBILITY As the EPC contractor Green Light has sub-contracted responsibility for work health and safety for the MSF project to CATCON; a civil engineering construction company CATCON s management of safety is carried out within the framework of: The CATCON Safety Policy - Certification to the standard of AS 4801; Certification to the Australian Government Building and Construction OHS Accreditation Scheme; Responsibility exercised by senior management and project and site managers; Support from the Health & Safety Advisors; and Encourage ownership of personal health & well-being EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROCEDURES As part of its contractual responsibilities CATCON has prepared an Emergency Response Plan (ERP) prior to construction work commencing on this project. Procedures will include a grassfire evacuation plan consistent with NSW RFS Guidelines and will include evacuation triggers in Catastrophic and Extreme Fire Danger Rating periods. The Fire Danger Rating for the area can be found by: listening to local news; visiting NSW RFS website at ;or calling the information line on 1800 NSW RFS ( ). A copy of this ERP is provided in this CEMP (Appendix D). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

140 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Waste Management 24.1 WASTE TYPES Building the MSF will generate a range of wastes. The range of liquid and non-liquid wastes generated during construction is detailed below in Table Information is provided on the source and waste classification. The waste classification is as defined in Schedule 1 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act Table 24.1 Waste Classifications Source Waste Classification Personnel rubbish Glass/food scraps/plastics General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Packaging Plastic General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Packaging Rubber General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Packaging, off-cuts Metal General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Packaging, office Paper General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Replaced power poles Concrete General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Packaging, office Cardboard General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Weed Wash Down Residual Solids General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Earthworks Virgin Excavated Natural Material Note 3 General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Clearing Vegetation Note 4 General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Packaging, Wood Note 2 General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Personnel Food scraps and contents of litter bins General Solid Waste (Putrescible) Amenities Effluent Liquid Survey marking Spray cans General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Spill Hydrocarbon contaminated soil Subject to testing. Spill Rags and oil absorbent material Note 1 General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible) Note 1: Only if rags and material contain non-volatile petroleum hydrocarbons and do not contain free liquids. Note 2: means sawdust, timber offcuts, wooden crates, wooden packaging, wooden pallets, wood shavings and similar materials, and includes any mixture of those materials, but does not include wood treated with chemicals such as copper chrome arsenate (CCA), high temperature creosote (HTC), pigmented emulsified creosote (PEC) and light organic solvent preservative (LOSP). Note 3: VENM means natural material (such as clay, gravel, sand, soil or rock fines) that has been excavated from areas that are not contaminated with manufactured chemicals, or with process residues, as a result of industrial, commercial, mining or agricultural activities, and does not contain any sulfidic ores or soils or any other waste. Note 4: Garden waste includes waste that consists of branches, grass, leaves, plants, loppings, tree trunks, tree stumps and similar materials, and includes any mixture of those materials. It is noted that construction will not generate building and demolition waste as this waste type must comprise, amongst other things, unsegregated material. Waste segregation to maximise recycling opportunities will be undertaken. Wash down from vehicle cleaning associated with weed hygiene will be evaporated. If a proprietary drive through system is used wash down undergoes solids separation and is then recycled through the system. If manual cleaning is used the wash down area will be graded to collect any surface runoff to a basin where it will be evaporated. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

141 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 No waste will be received at the site from outside of the site unless an Environment Protection Licence is first gained WASTE CLASSIFICATION No quantities of hazardous waste are expected to be generated from the construction. Conceivable problematic waste would be restricted to quantities of hydrocarbon contaminated soil that results from a spill or burst hydraulic hose. In the event that this circumstance occurs, or in the event that any unanticipated waste does possess hazardous characteristics, a check will be made that it hasn t been pre-classified by the EPA and if not, it will be chemically assessed to determine whether it is hazardous, restricted solid or general solid waste (putrescible and non-putrescible). This assessment process will be undertaken in accordance with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water s (2009) Waste Classification Guidelines. The EPA may classify waste as restricted or hazardous solid waste from time to time. All currently gazetted restricted wastes will be listed on the EPA s website at NO BURNING No burning of any waste type, including vegetation will be undertaken STORAGE Wastes containing putrescible material (generated from the amenities office and including food scraps, lunch wrappings, etc.) will be stored in secure covered bins DISPOSAL The Moree Landfill is located immediately adjacent to the MSF site. This waste disposal facility is a EPA licensed landfill (EPL: 12788) that is permitted to take the following waste types. General Solid Waste (Putrescible); General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible); Asbestos; Certain Organics; and Contaminated Soil (exclusively from Toby Drilling Campaign Camp-site at Boggabilla). Wastes requiring disposal will be disposed of at Council s landfill or at another waste management facility lawfully permitted to accept the materials. Noting that with respect to the contaminated soil, the EPL caps the total quantity of contaminated soil storage held at the landfill to 150m 3. Green Light will consult with Council and the EPA to determine whether there is the capacity for any minor quantities of contaminated soil (restricted to hydrocarbon contamination resulting from a fuel spill or hydraulic hose break) to be disposed of at the landfill. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

142 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/ RECYCLING The construction effort will generate a range of material types that are recyclable. Skips and storage bays will be provided in the compound area that permits waste separation to maximise recycling opportunities. Alternatively, and contingent on consultations with Council, recyclable materials will be transported to the recyclables drop-off at Council s landfill. Materials generated from the construction phase that would be recycled include: glass; metal; paper; concrete; wood; VENM; and vegetation WASTE TRACKING All wastes from this project will be tracked using Waste Register (refer Form MSF08). This register will identify the following as a minimum: Date and time that loads departed site; Who inspected the load and type of waste; Vehicle rego and load quantity; and Fate of waste (disposal, composting or recycling). PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

143 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Compliance Tracking Program 25.1 REQUIREMENT Pursuant to CoA C12, Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd, as the proponent, is required to develop and implement a Compliance Tracking Program to track compliance with the requirements of the MSF approval during the construction and operation of the project. Green Light as the contractor responsible for construction the project will provide the necessary information to Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd as is required to enable Moree Solar Farm Pty Ltd to fully comply with CoA C COMPLIANCE REPORTING To this end, the following information will be submitted to Moree Solar Farms Pty Ltd: Results of monthly internal compliance audits; Constantly updated Complaints/Incidents Register; and Results of the two external audits. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

144 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Non Indigenous Heritage 26.1 REQUIREMENT CoA D2 states: If during the course of construction the Proponent becomes aware of any previously unidentified heritage object(s), all work likely to affect the object(s) shall cease immediately and the Heritage Council of New South Wales shall be notified immediately in accordance with section 146 of the NSW Heritage Act Relevant works shall not recommence until written authorisation from the Director-General of OEH advising otherwise is received by the Proponent PROCEDURE Should any suspected human remains be encountered during construction, then work in the area will cease and the local vicinity of the find should be cordoned off. The following process will then be adhered to: Do not further disturb or move the remains; Immediately cease work in the vicinity and cordon are off; Notify the NSW Police; Notify the NSW OEH Environment Line on as soon as practicable and provide available details of the remains and their locations; and Do not recommence work in the area unless authorised in writing by NSW Police and NSW OEH. If any previously unidentified suspected historical relics are uncovered, all work with the potential to affect the artefact will cease and the Quality and Environment Manager will be notified. The Quality and Environment Manager will then inspect the artefact and consult with a heritage specialist in order to establish whether the object is of heritage significance and s.146 notification of the Heritage Council of New South Wales is required pursuant to the Heritage Act If notification is required the works area will be cordoned off, the Heritage Council of New South Wales will be immediately notified. Relevant works will not recommence until written authorisation from the Director-General of OEH advising otherwise is received by the Proponent. PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

145 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 References The following documents were researched and referenced during the preparation of this CEMP. Walsh Consulting (February 2011) Environmental Assessment Report - Proposed Solar Power Station Near Moree, NSW Blackett Acoustics (October 2014) Moree Solar Farm Operational Noise Prediction Report Walsh Consulting (April 2011) Submissions Report - Proposed Solar Power Station Near Moree, NSW Project Approval MP10_0175 (17 July 2011) Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (April, 2010) Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation Requirements for Proponents 2010 Modification of Ministers Approval MP_0175 (4 February 2014) AECOM (December 2013) 66 kc Transmission Line Concept Report Geolyse (October 2014) Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report OzArk Environmental and Heritage Management (November 2010) Aboriginal Heritage Assessment Proposed Solar Power Station in Moree OzArk Environmental and Heritage Management (October 2013) Aboriginal Heritage Assessment Proposed Moree Solar Power Farm Proposed Modification OzArk Environmental and Heritage Management (November 2013) Specialist Report Summary of Amended Project Proposed Moree Solar Farm OzArk Environmental and Heritage Management (November 2010) Terrestrial Ecology Assessment Proposed BP Solar Power Station in Moree Coffey (2005) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and Groundwater Assessment for a Landfill Study, Moree Coffey Geotechnics (December 2010) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for a Proposed Development BP Solar Pty Ltd, Moree MSF PTY LTD Services Australia (9 January 2014) Responses to submissions to the Application for Modification of Development Consent MP 10_0175 Essential Energy (March 2012) Operational Procedure: Vegetation Clearing Guidelines for New Power Lines NSW Rural Fire Service (undated) Bushfire Survival Plan Paterson Consultants Pty Limited (August 2011) Solar Farm, Moree Flooding and Drainage Investigations - Hydrodynamic modelling Paterson Consultants Pty Limited (February 2012) Moree Solar Farm Flooding and Drainage Investigations November 2011 and February 2012 Floods Moree Solar Farm NSW Australia (October 2013) Moree Solar Farm Community Consultation Plan PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

146 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 Forms Environmental Management System Documentation Form No Use MSF 01 MSF 02 MSF 03 MSF 04 MSF 05 MSF 06 MSF 07 MSF 08 MSF 09 MSF 10 MSF 11 MSF 12 MSF 13 Environmental Due Diligence Induction Register Weekly Inspection Checklist CEMP Audit Complaints Register Complaints Record Environmental Incidents Register Environmental Incident Report Waste Register Corrective Action Register Continuous Improvement Notice Out-of-Hours Works Register Work Instruction Register Weed Inspection and Wash Down Register PAGE _CEMP_001A.DOCX

147 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM-MSF01: Environmental Due Diligence Induction Register Date Name Organisation Training Received (please tick) General environmental awareness Aboriginal Heritage Signed I confirm that I have attended the induction and understand my environmental responsibilities PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF01.DOCX

148 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM MSF02: WEEKLY INSPECTION CHECKLIST This form is be completed weekly or immediately prior to or following significant rainfall (>15mm in 24 hours) Section A GENERAL Yes No N/A A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 Is fuel load reduction required? Site is litter free? Are there areas that require and can be seeded? Any noxious weed evident? All work being confined to designated areas? Are landscape plantings healthy? Were there any incidents? Were any complaints received? Section B Erosion and Sedimentation Controls Yes No N/A B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 Are all work areas clearly marked and defined? Are all temporary and permanent drains operating effectively (ie not eroding, discharging to stable areas)? Are all sediment traps functioning? Are any additional sediment traps required? Do any silt traps need cleaning? Were any actions taken after the last inspection adequate and effective? Are rehabilitation works effective? Section C Non-Conformance and Corrective Action Item (i.e. A1, A2 etc.) Non-Conformance Action Required Form Completed By Signed Date: PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF02.DOCX

149 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM - MSF03: CEMP Audit Date Completed By Any non-compliances? (yes/no) List CEMP Sections Actions PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF03.DOCX

150 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM MSF04: COMPLAINTS REGISTER Complaint No. Date Nature of Complaint PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF04.DOCX

151 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM MSF05: COMPLAINTS RECORD DATE: TIME: COMPLAINT NO: HOW COMPLAINT WAS LODGED: Telephone: Post: Verbal: Other: COMPLAINT DETAILS: Name: Address: Phone: Preferred Method of Contact: NATURE OF COMPLAINT: CAUSE: ASSIGNED TO: CORRECTIVE ACTION? FOLLOW-UP CONTACT REQUIRED? CLOSE OFF: SIGNATURE: DATE: PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF05.DOCX

152 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM MSF06: ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENTS REGISTER Incident No. Date Nature of Incident PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF06.DOCX

153 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM MSF07: ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENT REPORT Incident No: Time: Date: Is there a risk of material harm to the environment? Duration of Incident: Yes: No: If Yes, Notify EPA at earliest opportunity. Nature of Incident: Temperature:... o C Relative Humidity:... % Fire Danger Rating:... Wind direction & speed:...km/hr Rainfall since 9am:...mm The location of the place where pollution is occurring or is likely to occur: The nature, the estimated quantity or volume and the concentration of any pollutants involved (if known): The circumstances in which the incident occurred, including the cause of the incident (if known): The corrective action taken or proposed to be taken to deal with the incident and any resulting pollution or threatened pollution (if known): Has EPA been notified? Yes: N/A: Name: Signature: Date: Time: Close-off: Name: Signature: PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF07.DOCX

154 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM-MSF08: Waste Register Date Description of Waste Waste Classification Weight (kg) Quantity Volume (m 3 ) Tick one end use Recycled Disposed Removal Organisation Key to Waste Classification Code: GSW(NP) General Solid Waste (Non-putrescible); GSW(P) - General Solid Waste (Putrescible); RST Restricted Solid Waste; HW Hazardous Waste: LW Liquid Waste PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF08.DOCX

155 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM-MSF09: Corrective Action Register Date Nature of Non-conformance Required Corrective Action Works Can Resume Yes No Signed PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF09.DOCX

156 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM MSF10: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT NOTICE Notice No: Date: Who Raised It: Is there a risk of material harm to the environment? Time: Yes: No: If Yes, Notify EPA at earliest opportunity. Was the work activity stopped?: Yes: No: Reason for Issuance of Notice: What Improvement is Proposed? What actions are required as a result of the improvement ( eg. update CEMP, revise Work Instruction, communicate improvement): The corrective action taken or proposed to be taken to deal with the incident and any resulting pollution or threatened pollution (if known): Can the Work Activity Resume? Yes: No: N/A: Name: Signature: Date: Close-off: Name: Signature: Date: PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF10.DOCX

157 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM-MSF11: Out-of-Hours Works Register Date Hours Activity Approval Notification Signature PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF11.DOCX

158 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM-MSF12: Work Instruction Register Date Work Package Risk Rating (L,M,H) Need for WI (Y/N) WI Number Quality & Environment Manager Construction Manager Anticipated Risk (L) PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF12.DOCX

159 CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN MOREE SOLAR FARM VERSION: FINAL (3) DATE: 11/12/14 FORM-MSF13: Weed Inspection and Wash Down Register Date Vehicle Registration/Plant Item Driver/Operator Arrival Inspection Departure Signed PAGE 1 OF _FORM-MSF13.DOCX

160 Drawings

161 1500x1500 WINDOW x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 500x x x1000 WINDOW 2x36W 1000x1000 WINDOW 2x36W WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x x x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 2030x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 2030x x500 CUADRO ELECTRICO 500x x750 RESP. SUBSTATION TEAM 5: SUPERVISOR TECH. OFF.: ELECTRICAL TECH. OFF.: DRAFTSMAN 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE RESP. INTERCONECTION TEAM 5: RESPONSIBLE TECH. OFF.: MECHANIC TECH. OFF.: RESPONSIBLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x x x1000 TEAM 4: SUPERVISOR TEAM 3: SUPERVISOR TEAM 4: RESPONSIBLE TEAM 3: RESPONSIBLE PROYECT MANAGER TEAM 2: SUPERVISOR TEAM 1: SUPERVISOR SOLAR PLANT 500x x x x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE TEAM 2: RESPONSIBLE TEAM 1: RESPONSIBLE CONST. MANAGER BOX 500x500 CUADRO ELECTRICO 500x x820 A/A A/A SECURITY STAFF EPC CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION + PRUCHASING & LOGISTIC + QUALITY & ENVIRONMENT + HEALTH & SAFETY ZONE FOR SUBCONTRACTORS TOILETS, SHOWERS & SINKS CHANGING ROOMS & LOCKERS DINING AREA 1500x1500 WINDOW 1500x1500 WINDOW SECURITY STAFF WEED WASH DOWN/CLEANING AREA ASSET PROTECTION ZONE (20 m WIDTH) ltr TANK 18 WEED WASH DOWN/CLEANING AREA ltr TANK SEPTIC TANK TEMPORAL FACILITIES SEPTIC TANK YARD FOR MODULES 2000 M2 YARD FOR MODULES AND STRUCTURE 2000 M2 WASTE STORAGE YARD FOR OTHERS 2000 M2 YARD FOR OTHERS 2000 M x x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE EPC CONSTRUCTION WING WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x x x1000 ADMINISTRATION + PRUCHASING & LOGISTIC + QUALITY & ENVIRONMENT + HEALTH & SAFETY WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 P&L RESPONSIBLE P&L EXPOT 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE H&S MANAGER H&S TECHNICAL 2 H&S TECHNICAL x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 Q&E TECHNICAL 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE ADMINISTRATIVE Q&E MANAGER WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE TOILETS, SHOWERS & SINKS CHANGING ROOMS & LOCKERS 3 ELECTRIC 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE YARD FOR MODULES 2000 M2 YARD FOR OTHERS 2000 M2 500x500 RACK VOICE & DATA ZONE FOR SUBCONTRACTORS A/A 1000x1000 A/A WINDOW WINDOW WINDOW DINING AREA WINDOW CUADRO ELECTRICO WINDOW WINDOW WINDOW 1000x x x1000 YARD FOR MODULES AND STRUCTURE 2000 M2 YARD FOR OTHERS 2000 M2 8 9 WASTE STORAGE EPC CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION + PRUCHASING & LOGISTIC + QUALITY & ENVIRONMENT + HEALTH & SAFETY x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x x x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE 2030x750 RESP. SUBSTATION TEAM 5: SUPERVISOR TECH. OFF.: ELECTRICAL TECH. OFF.: DRAFTSMAN WING RESP. INTERCONECTION TEAM 5: RESPONSIBLE TECH. OFF.: MECHANIC TECH. OFF.: RESPONSIBLE 2030x x750 TEAM 4: SUPERVISOR TEAM 3: SUPERVISOR TEAM 4: RESPONSIBLE TEAM 3: RESPONSIBLE 2030x x750 TEAM 2: SUPERVISOR TEAM 1: SUPERVISOR TEAM 2: RESPONSIBLE TEAM 1: RESPONSIBLE ELECTRIC BOX WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 CULTURAL x650 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 P&L RESPONSIBLE 500x x650 P&L EXPOT 2030x x x650 SPLIT 2030x650 H&S MANAGER 2030x750 H&S TECHNICAL 2 H&S TECHNICAL x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE Q&E TECHNICAL 2030x750 RACK VOICE & DATA ADMINISTRATIVE Q&E MANAGER 2030x x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 2030x750 RACK VOICE & DATA 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE 1000x1000 WINDOW+GRILLE TOILETS, SHOWERS & SINKS CHANGING ROOMS & LOCKERS PROYECT MANAGER SOLAR PLANT CONST. MANAGER ZONE FOR SUBCONTRACTORS DINING AREA WINDOW CUADRO ELECTRICO A/A OWNER A/A 1000x1000 A/A WINDOW WINDOW WINDOW 1000x x1000 WINDOW WINDOW CONTRACTOR A/A WINDOW 1000x1000 TITLE ESCALE DRAWING # REV.

162 Appendix A ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

163 INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, QUALITY MANAGEMENT, OCCUPATIONAL RISK PREVENTION, ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND R&D MANAGEMENT POLICY As part of its Corporate Responsibility model, Elecnor management has wanted to lay down as strictly as possible its Environmental Management, Quality Management, Occupational Risk Prevention, Energy Management and R&D Management policies. These five driving forces comprise the Group's Integrated Management Policy, each with specific goals and strategies, but all with one common mission: continuous improvement in the organisation. By way of demonstration of Elecnor's rigour in this respect, it has based its Integrated Management Policy on a decided commitment to R&D and precise knowledge about the nature and magnitude of the environmental impact, the energy use and consumption in our facilities and projects, customers' expectations and risks for workers of our activities and products. Furthermore, it has voluntarily taken on the requirements contained in the standards for its auditing and certification. General principles Elecnor has established principles to which it is committed and that must govern the organisation s entire operations with regard to Quality, the Environment, Energy, Occupational Risk Prevention and R&D, such that they are used as a reference to define and revise objectives that continuously improve the effectiveness of the management systems. These principles are as follows: The strict compliance with current applicable legislation and other requirements that Elecnor must subscribe to in all markets in which it operates. The satisfaction of our customers. The prevention of damage to and deterioration of our employees health, by improving their work conditions in order to increase the level of protection of their safety and health. The prevention of contamination. The efficient energy use and consumption. The generation of a favourable impact of our activities on local communities. The improvement of competitiveness through R&D. Principles of conduct in Environmental Management. Aware of the environmental impact that our activities may have, Elecnor has defined and applied the most effective corrective mechanisms to minimise their extent. Similarly, Elecnor has taken on certain activities that contribute to the protection of the natural environment and its resources as an intrinsic part of its business operations. These activities include, among others, generating renewable energies, processing and recycling water and efficiently using energy in each of its actions, as established in the Energy Policy. General speaking, our strategy with regard to Environmental Management is governed by the following principles of conduct: The on-going search for a balance between economic profitability and environmental protection, providing approaches so that one supports the other. Consider the environmental component when making decisions regarding investments in new projects and activities being studied by the Group. Involve the employees through appropriate training and awareness actions. Involve our remaining stakeholders (shareholders, customers, suppliers and society in general) in the overall search for useful solutions to the challenge of preserving the environment and energy resources. 1

164 Principles of conduct in Quality Management Quality has formed part of Elecnor's culture ever since its incorporation, with a clear focus on customer service, which distinguishes it on the market. General speaking, our strategy with regard to Quality Management is governed by the following principles of conduct: Always start with an understanding of customers' actual expectations before designing and supplying products and services. Develop the mentality of continuous improvement at all levels within the organisation, leaving no room for complacency, lack of rigour and other attitudes that represent an obstacle to this principle. Involve each member of the staff in the Quality challenge, such that everyone assumes a sincere personal commitment to customer service. Principles of conduct in Occupational Risk Prevention INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, QUALITY MANAGEMENT, OCCUPATIONAL RISK PREVENTION, ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND R&D MANAGEMENT POLICY The safety and health of the employees are essential values for Elecnor. General speaking, our strategy with regard to Occupational Risk Prevention is governed by the following principles of conduct: Provision of the material resources necessary to contribute to safety. Emphasis on accident prevention techniques. Campaigns to raise awareness among all employees and managers. On-going inspections and site audits, adopting corrective measures where necessary. No corporate initiative can be successful without the full cooperation of all workers when: Performing their jobs in accordance with the rules, instructions and procedures established by the Company Correctly using the individual and collective protection equipment provided by the Company. Using the equipment, tools, vehicles and any other resource used to carry out their job appropriately. Refraining from activities that pose a serious and imminent risk, and reporting them to line managers, so that they can determine any risk mitigation measures necessary. Principles of conduct in Energy Management. Elecnor assumes the promotion and development of the activities aimed at efficient Energy Management as a differentiating factor for the organisation as well as the commitment to environmental sustainability in all activities carried out by the company. General speaking, our strategy with regard to Energy Management is governed by the following principles of conduct: Understand the energy use and consumption of our facilities and projects, ensure that the information is available and establish the measures necessary to meet objectives and reach goals while continuously improving energy performance. The on-going search for a balance between economic profitability and environmental protection in the acquisition of energy and products, as well as the design of facilities. Ensure employees and suppliers are aware of the importance of efficient and responsible energy use and consumption. Principles of conduct in R&D Elecnor gears its R&D and innovation activities towards areas that add value and enable the Company to differentiate itself from its competitors. Technological areas of interest are related to energy, the environment and sustainability, infrastructure and ICTs, among others. 2

165 R&D activities are strategic in order to guarantee Elecnor's competitiveness and sustainability and are developed in accordance with the following principles of conduct: Elecnor promotes the systematic generation of innovative ideas within the company and supports them until transforming them into R&D projects. The purpose of the systematic use of R&D tools is to generate new opportunities and projects in this field. These projects are the driving force of Elecnor's R&D management system and are geared towards increasing the competencies and competitiveness. Disclosure Elecnor has established adequate information and communication channels so that this policy may be wellknown and understood by all of the organisation's personnel and by those that work on its behalf, such that they are aware of their obligations and the commitments involved. This policy is also available to the public and interested parties on the company's web page June 2013 INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, QUALITY MANAGEMENT, OCCUPATIONAL RISK PREVENTION, ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND R&D MANAGEMENT POLICY 3

166 Appendix B EVIDENCE OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

167 Andrew Brownlow From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Daniel Boyce Monday, 20 October :12 PM Andrew Brownlow 'Orange Document Control' RE: CEMP Hi Andrew, Thank you for your most recent update. I can confirm that the CEMP (subject to your amendments below) meets Council requirements. Regards, Daniel Boyce Assessment Manager Planning and Development MOREE PLAINS SHIRE COUNCIL T F E daniel.boyce@mpsc.nsw.gov.au W mpsc.nsw.gov.au This message, and any files transmitted with it, is intended only for the addressee named and may contain confidential and/or legally professional privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender immediately. Any retransmission, dissemination, reliance on or other use of this communication by persons other than the intended recipient is prohibited. Views expressed in the message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of the Moree Plains Shire Council. From: Andrew Brownlow [mailto:abrownlow@geolyse.com] Sent: Monday, 20 October :48 PM To: Daniel Boyce Cc: 'Orange Document Control' Subject: CEMP Daniel Appreciate the feedback. Red text below is what I intend to incorporate into the version of the CEMP to be submitted to the Department. If you could indicate whether this response meets your requirements that would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks Andrew Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley St PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Ph: Fx: Mob: abrownlow@geolyse.com Web: Facebook LinkedIn... 1

168 IMPORTANT This and any attachments may contain material which is proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. This , together with any attachments, is for the exclusive and confidential use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use of, or reproduction without prior written consent is strictly prohibited. If received in error, please delete all copies and advise the sender immediately. Geolyse Pty Ltd does not warrant or guarantee this message to be free of errors, interference or viruses. From: Daniel Boyce Sent: Tuesday, 7 October :54 PM To: Andrew Brownlow Subject: RE: Moree Solar Farm CEMP Hi Andrew, I write in reference to the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), attached to your below, prepared by Geolyse. Please see my initial comments prior to my confirming on letterhead. 1. The structure of the CEMP (on page 2) refers to the old wording of Condition C14(n) it should be updated to reflect the amended wording of Condition C14(n) which is included above. Noted, updated words will be included. In particular inclusive of measures for the removal of debris around the perimeter of the site to avoid alterations to floodpaths occurring as a result of debris build up. It would appear that the CEMP deals with the issue of debris removal in Section of the CEMP, which states: DEBRIS REMOVAL In the event that any localised flooding results in an accumulation of debris on the perimeter fence, this material will be immediately removed. The material will not be burnt on site, rather, it will be transported to Council s landfill for disposal. In this regard it is requested that the proponent include a deadline for the removal of the debris (e.g. within 48 hours, etc.). The removal of debris will be undertaken as soon waters subside and site conditions permit access by staff. Where ever possible, debris will be removed within 48 hours. 2. Scheduling the CEMP states that the Construction will be completed over a 13 month period, commencing in November 2014 with commissioning to be completed in December The construction schedule (in Section 21.2 of the CEMP) differs from this as it states that construction won t be complete until the end of February 2016? In this regard it is requested that the scheduling be clarified to be consistent throughout the CEMP and that the proponent notify Council in the event that the scheduling of the project should change, if such a comment is not already within the CEMP, to ensure that it is appropriately informed on the progress of the project. We will clarify that completion, inclusive of commissioning, and the subsequent removal of all temporary construction infrastructure is scheduled for completion by end February We will include the commitment that Green Light will notify Council in the event that the scheduling of the project should change. 3. Impact the CEMP states There are no other known major construction activities to occur in the locality during the construction period (November 2014 December 2015). The potential for a significant cumulative impact is remote. 2

169 I am currently considering this statement and reviewing our development control records to confirm that this is the case. There is one known construction activity to occur in the locality that has the potential to cause a cumulative impact. In April 2014 Council obtained approval for the modified Waste Management Facility (Liquid Waste Spent Spa Water Disposal) and Associated Outdoor Recreational Facility (Water Ski Lakes). This development is located immediately north of the MSF and has a four (4) month construction schedule (November 2014 April 2015). To manage this potential impact, Green Light will: 1. Review its CEMP in conjunction with the Ski Lakes CEMP (once the latter is issued). 2. Work with Council to manage cumulative impacts such as traffic movements on Barton Plains Road and hours of construction. 3. Establish and maintain formal lines of communication with Council and the Principal Contractor undertaking works for the Ski Lakes. 4. Commit to work together to address any unforseen cumulative impacts as they arise. 5. Keep Council informed of the construction schedule. 4. I note that the Aboriginal Heritage Plan (Section 14 of the CEMP) is not complete There will be outcomes from the on site meeting with the RAS to be held on 9 October that will feed into the finalisation of this AHP. This version does, however, address some comments made by the ER on an earlier draft. It is requested that a copy of the revised Aboriginal Heritage Plan be submitted to Council once finalised. This requirement will be noted and acted on. 5. Noise Management Condition C15(d)(iv) requires the Construction Noise Management Plan (which is incorporated into the CEMP) to: detail what reasonable and feasible actions and measures would be implemented to minimise noise impacts, inclusive of any recommendations in the "operational and construction noise and vibration assessment Solar Power Farm Moree" prepared by Atkins Acoustics and Associates Pty Ltd dated November 2010 The report prepared by Atkins Acoustics and Associates Pty Ltd dated November 2010 states: Predicted construction noise levels for typical site activities at reference assessment locations are presented in Table 20. The modelling assumed the plant schedules referenced in Table 17 with no account of additional attenuation from topography or ground absorption. Noise predictions summarised in Table 20 show that construction noise at the Barton Plains Road residential property exceeds the daytime target assessment goal (40dBA) during Stage 1 and Stage 2 site works. At the dwellings further to the east of the SFP the predicted construction noise levels exceed the daytime target assessment goal (40dBA) during the Stage 1 site works. At the assessment residential dwellings on the western side of the Newell Highway the predicted construction noise levels satisfy the target noise assessment noise goal of 47dBA. To assist with the control of construction noise where practical and feasible, plant selections, temporary controls and work practices would be considered to minimise noise impacts. To further assist with the management of construction noise impacts, it is recommended that consultation be undertaken with affected landowners. The Construction Noise Management Plan within the CEMP includes the following statement regarding consultation: 3

170 Green Light will make available detailed and constantly updated information about the progress and scheduling of works to feed into Moree Solar Farm s Community Consultation Plan. It is unclear what this means for the residents in the Barton Plains Road residential property or the dwellings further to the east of the SFP. In this regard it is requested that the residents of these properties be notified specifically when construction works for Stages 1 and 2 are to take place as the noise levels will exceed the daytime targets during Stages 1 and 2 for the Barton Plains Road residential property and during Stage 1 for the dwellings further to the east of the SFP. This requirement will be noted and a commitment made to consult with these residents. It is understood that who and how this will be undertaken will be defined by the Proponent s (FRV) Community Consultation Plan. As the construction contractor, Green Light will comply with the requirements of this Community Consultation Plan. The Construction Noise Management Plan within the CEMP includes the following section: HIGH NOISE IMPACT ACTIVITIES CoA D7 states that during construction: Any work generating high noise that has impulsive, intermittent, low frequency or tonal characteristics, including jack hammering, line drilling, pile driving, rock hammering, rock breaking, saw cutting, sheet piling, vibratory rolling but excluding blasting, must only be undertaken: (a) between the hours of 8:00am and 6:00pm Monday to Friday; (b) between the hours of 8:00am and 1:00pm Saturday; and (c) in continuous blocks of no more than three hours, with at least a one hour respite between each block of work generating high noise impact, where the location of the work is likely to impact the same receivers; except as otherwise approved by the Director General. For the purposes of this Condition 'continuous' includes any period during which there is less than a one hour respite between ceasing and recommencing any of the work the subject of this Condition. Pile driving of the steel supports for the arrays is an activity with the potential to generate impulsive noise. Unless it has the approval of potentially affected residents, Green Light will undertake this activity in accordance with the above conditions. However, it does not appear that the Construction Noise Management Plan within the CEMP has effectively looked at plant selections, temporary controls or work practices to reduce potential noise impacts, as recommended in the report prepared by Atkins Acoustics and Associates Pty Ltd dated November It is requested that the proponent include sections within the Construction Noise Management Plan that deal with plant selections, temporary controls and work practices to minimise noise (where possible and practical to do so). Driving the steel supports will be a discrete works package to be undertaken by a sub contractor. In awarding this scope of works, Green Light will specify the following as key selection criteria in the contract documentation: Details on plant to be used and associated sound power levels; Specific work practices that can and will be employed by the sub contractor to minimise noise; The availability, form and effectiveness of controls that can be implemented to mitigate noise if required; Confirmation that the requirements of this Construction Noise Management Plan (CNMP) have been considered by the sub contractor, that the requirements and processes in place under this 4

171 CNMP are understood, and confirmation that the sub contractor can and will comply with the requirements of the CNMP. It is also noted that noise has been identified as a high risk activity (refer Section 13 of the CEMP) and, consistent with the protocol for preparing Work Instructions to manage environmental risk, the subcontractor undertaking these works will be required to prepare a Works Instruction that specifies: The techniques and construction methodology; The plant, equipment and personnel to be involved; and Environmental controls and safeguards to be adopted during the works. The procedure associated with enforcement of the Work Instruction is as follows. A draft WI will be submitted to the Quality and Environment Manager; The Quality and Environment Manager will review the WI, inspect the proposed works location, determine environmental risks, then add applicable controls to incorporate into the WI to minimise environmental risk; This assessment process will be undertaken through cross referencing the activity and location against the Environmental Risk Matrix For Work Instructions; The revised WI will then be submitted to the Construction Manager for approval; and The approved WI will then be explained to the work crew undertaking the activity prior to them commencing works. This explanation of the WI will be delivered at the tool box meeting before works commence. Regards, Daniel Boyce Assessment Manager Planning and Development MOREE PLAINS SHIRE COUNCIL T F E daniel.boyce@mpsc.nsw.gov.au W mpsc.nsw.gov.au This message, and any files transmitted with it, is intended only for the addressee named and may contain confidential and/or legally professional privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender immediately. Any retransmission, dissemination, reliance on or other use of this communication by persons other than the intended recipient is prohibited. Views expressed in the message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of the Moree Plains Shire Council. From: Andrew Brownlow [mailto:abrownlow@geolyse.com] Sent: Friday, 26 September :03 AM To: Daniel Boyce Cc: 'Orange Document Control' Subject: FW: Moree Solar Farm CEMP From: Andrew Brownlow [mailto:abrownlow@geolyse.com] Sent: Friday, 26 September :52 AM To: Daniel.Boyce@mpc.nsw.gov.au Cc: 'Lila-Jane Fisher'; 'Orange Document Control'; 'Paula de la Paz Pineda' Subject: Moree Solar Farm CEMP Daniel Boyce Moree Plains Shire Council 5

172 Daniel Geolyse was commissioned by Green Light to prepare the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the Moree Solar Farm. The Minister s consent required that this plan be prepared in consultation with Council (and a range of other state government departments) and further, that evidence of this consultation be obtained. To this end please find attached the CEMP for your consideration. If there is additional information required or you would like anything clarified please do not hesitate to call. With thanks Andrew Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley St PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Ph: Fx: Mob: abrownlow@geolyse.com Web: Facebook LinkedIn... IMPORTANT This and any attachments may contain material which is proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. This , together with any attachments, is for the exclusive and confidential use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use of, or reproduction without prior written consent is strictly prohibited. If received in error, please delete all copies and advise the sender immediately. Geolyse Pty Ltd does not warrant or guarantee this message to be free of errors, interference or viruses. Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley St PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Ph: Fx: Mob: abrownlow@geolyse.com Web: Facebook LinkedIn... IMPORTANT This and any attachments may contain material which is proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. This , together with any attachments, is for the exclusive and confidential use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use of, or reproduction without prior written consent is strictly prohibited. If received in error, please delete all copies and advise the sender immediately. Geolyse Pty Ltd does not warrant or guarantee this message to be free of errors, interference or viruses. Click here to report this as spam. This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. 6

173 From: David Ward Sent: Tuesday, 30 September :24 PM To: Andrew Brownlow Subject: Re: Moree Solar Farm CEMP Hi Andrew, Thank you for providing me with a copy of this CEMP. Fisheries are satisfied with the measures taken in the CEMP for containment of soil & water impacts and have nothing further to add. Cheers David David Ward Regional Assessment Officer (Tamworth) Aquaculture & Aquatic Environment Department of Primary Industries 4 Marsden Park Road Calala NSW 2340 T: F: M: E: david.ward@dpi.nsw.gov.au W: On 26 September :12, Andrew Brownlow <abrownlow@geolyse.com> wrote: David Ward Regional Assessment Officer Aquaculture & Aquatic Environment Department of Primary Industries David You may recall our discussion earlier this month about the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the Moree Solar Farm. One of the Minister s consent conditions required that the measures to manage soil and water impacts be prepared in consultation with NOW and DTIRIS (Fisheries) and further, that we secure evidence that this consultation has occurred. We are consulting with NOW separately. Please find attached a copy of the CEMP for your consideration and comment. If there is anything you would like to discuss please do not hesitate to call. With thanks Andrew Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd

174 Andrew Brownlow From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mitchell Isaacs Thursday, 9 October :31 PM abrownlow@geolyse.com vanessa.hornsby@dpi.nsw.gov.au; Christie Jackson Re: Moree Solar Farm CEMP Hi Andrew The NSW Office of Water has reviewed the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the Moree Solar Farm. The Office of Water s comments are as follows: The CEMP outlines a number of Statement of Commitments (SOC) for the project. The Office of Water acknowledges the incorporation of our recommended SOC during the recent modification review process into this list. The CEMP in Section 15.4 Groundwater Interference outlines it is unlikely that groundwater would be intercepted on the site due to the depth of the aquifers. However, the CEMP outlines criteria in the unlikely event that groundwater would be intercepted. If groundwater is intercepted the Office of Water should be contacted immediately, with any necessary licences obtained to account for any incidental water. The CEMP outlines a Work Instruction will be prepared prior to works proceeding within/ adjacent to Halls Creek. The Office of Water supports the preparation of this to minimise potential impacts of the project on Halls Creek, during construction. The Office of Water has no further comments on the CEMP. If you have any further queries, please contact Christie Jackson in the Tamworth Office on T: E: christie.jackson@dpi.nsw.gov.au Regards Mitchell >>> "Andrew Brownlow" <abrownlow@geolyse.com> 9/26/2014 8:20 am >>> Referrals NSW Office of Water Cc: Christie Jackson Referrals/Christie Geolyse was commissioned by Green Light to prepare the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the Moree Solar Farm. One of the Minister s consent conditions required that the measures to manage 1

175 soil and water impacts be prepared in consultation with NOW and further, that we secure evidence that this consultation has occurred. In addition to the above, one of the proponent s Statement of Commitments was to provide the full CEMP for NOW s consideration. To this end please find attached the CEMP. If there is additional information required or you would like anything clarified please do not hesitate to call. Regards Andrew Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley St PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Ph: Fx: Mob: abrownlow@geolyse.com Web: Facebook LinkedIn... IMPORTANT This and any attachments may contain material which is proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. This , together with any attachments, is for the exclusive and confidential use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use of, or reproduction without prior written consent is strictly prohibited. If received in error, please delete all copies and advise the sender immediately. Geolyse Pty Ltd does not warrant or guarantee this message to be free of errors, interference or viruses. -- Mitchell Isaacs Manager Strategic Stakeholder Liaison 2

176 Department of Primary Industries NSW Office of Water Level 11, 10 Valentine Ave Parramatta NSW 2124 PO Box 3720 Parramatta NSW 2124 T: M: E: W: Please note change in address Requests for review or comment on reports or specific projects can be sent directly to for action This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of their organisation. 3

177 Your reference Our reference: DOC14/ Contact: Erica Baigent (02) Date 7 November 2014 Andrew Brownlow Manager Geolyse Pty Ltd PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Dear Andrew, Moree Solar Farm - Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) revised information I refer to your (31 October 2014) requesting further Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) comments on the revised CEMP (dated 21 October 2014) for the above project. OEH has already confirmed that the revised CEMP has satisfactorily addressed Issues 1.1, 1.2, and 4.1 raised in our previous correspondence dated 17 October This letter provides comments relating to the outstanding Issues 4.2, 5.1 and 6.1 as set out in our previous correspondence. Issue 4.2 The Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) has confirmed that the Barton Plains Road/Burrington Road components of the overall proposal are covered by the current Approval, and that the Approval allowed deferred assessment. Regarding the Burrington Road/Barton Plains Road, the Response to Submissions 1 for the original Moree Solar Proposal (ie prior to the 2013 Modification) stated: and With respect to the prospective road upgrading works which will be required for site access during the construction period, design details have not yet been finalised or agreed with the local Moree Plains Shire Council. The proponent had proposed to undertake appropriate vegetation assessment following the finalisation of the design details with Council. The requirements for road upgrades will be identified once the final route into the site has been finalised. At this time the area proposed for upgrades will be surveyed by a suitably qualified ecological surveyor and any loss of native vegetation fully quantified. Within the Response to Submissions, the Proponent s Statement of Commitments were also revised to include: Following final design (site, ETL and road alignment), and prior to construction commencing, all losses of native vegetation will be checked and if necessary re-quantified. PO Box 2111 Dubbo NSW 2830 Level Wingewarra Street Dubbo NSW Tel: (02) Fax: (02) ABN

178 Page 2 Similarly, the Director General s Assessment Report 2 accompanying the original Approval stated: where the nature and extent of impacts are not able to be quantified prior to the final design stage, the additional commitments regarding the quantifying of the existing native vegetation following the final design for the site, ETL and road alignment, as well as an offset strategy and management plan provided in the Submissions Report, would ensure that any unavoidable impacts would be adequately quantified, managed and offset. OEH notes that nothing presented in the 2013 Modification related to the Barton Plains Road or Burrington Road upgrades. The revised CEMP notes that Desmodium campylocaulon is located in the Barton Plains Road Reserve. It indicates that the road upgrade works should not require disturbance beyond the existing road formation and trenching for the water pipeline will be restricted to a localised and temporary disturbance. The CEMP proposes that when the design for the road upgrade works and water connection is finalised and the precise area of disturbance has been identified, then an ecological assessment will be undertaken to quantify the loss of D. campylocaulon. The CEMP has chosen to use the 7-part Assessment of Significance to inform this assessment. This appears to fulfil the commitments made in the original Response to Submissions and Statement of Commitments. However please note that the previous OEH advice regarding biodiversity offsets dated 26 June 2014 (as per condition C5 of the Approval Conditions) was provided in the absence of information about the impacts of the road upgrade works and water pipeline. At that time OEH had been informed by OzArk (meeting with Phil Cameron on 26 June 2014) that the biodiversity impacts of the overall Moree Solar Project would be limited to the very small areas of grassland previously discussed as being associated with the construction of the electricity transmission line (ETL) in its modified alignment. Therefore following the quantification of the impacts of the road upgrade works and water pipeline, it will be necessary for the proponent to again consult with OEH regarding the need (or otherwise) to offset those impacts, in accordance with condition C5 and E1. Issue 5.1 OEH notes the photos you have provided of the Carbeen trees at the proposed array site. OEH has no additional comments to make in relation to these trees and does not intend to recommend an offset associated with their removal. Issue 6.1 OEH has previously recommended ( dated 26 June 2014) that the proponent ensure appropriate management of the grassland within the ETL easement for the life of the project in lieu of a formal, inperpetuity offset for the small extent of impacts associated with the ETL. OEH had not been made aware earlier that the future ownership and management arrangements for the ETL would be a barrier to that proposal. OEH notes your alternative proposal to manage an area of up to 96.5ha adjacent to the solar array site for conservation and cultural heritage outcomes. OEH currently has insufficient information about this specific site to comment on that proposal, however we do note that the OzArk Ecological Assessment 3 describes the solar array site and surrounds as having been converted to cropping. As noted above, following the assessment of the impacts of the road upgrade works the need or otherwise for a biodiversity offset will be revisited. If it is determined that no formal offset is required in relation to the road upgrade works, OEH would encourage the proponent to consider including within the

179 Page 3 OEMP suitable compensatory measures related to the project s biodiversity impact (such as management for conservation of an appropriate area for the life of the project, as per previous discussions). Please contact us should you have any questions regarding this advice. Yours sincerely, SONYA ARDILL Senior Team Leader Planning, North West Region Regional Operations 1 BP Solar (2011) Proposed Solar Power Station near Moree (Moree Solar Farm) Commonwealth Solar Flagships Program Part 3A Project, Critical Infrastructure, NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Submissions Report. Report dated 12 April Prepared by Pacific Hydro, Walsh Consulting and Ozark. 2 NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure (2011) Major Project Assessment: BP Solar Site 3- Southern Moree Solar Farm - MP10_ Director-General s Environmental Assessment Report, Section 75l of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Report published June OzArk Environmental & Heritage Management Pty Ltd. (2010) Proposed BP Solar Station in Moree Terrestrial Ecology Assessment. Report dated November Prepared by OzArk for Walsh Consulting, on behalf of BP Solar.

180 Date: 17 October 2014 Your reference: _CEMP_001A Our reference: DOC14/ Contact: Erica Baigent (02) Andrew Brownlow Manager Geolyse Pty Ltd PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Dear Andrew RE: Moree Solar Farm Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) I refer to your request dated 26 September 2014 seeking comment from the Office and Environment and Heritage (OEH) on the CEMP for the Moree Solar Farm. We have reviewed the information provided and our preliminary comments regarding biodiversity matters are attached as requested. OEH has previously provided advice on the Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan (AHMP). We note that the copy of the AHMP submitted with CEMP remains unchanged. OEH has therefore not provided updated comments on the AHMP. If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact Erica Baigent on or erica.baigent@environment.nsw.gov.au Yours sincerely, SONYA ARDILL Senior Team Leader Planning, North West Region Regional Operations Attachment A: OEH Preliminary Biodiversity Comments Moree Solar Project Construction Environmental Management Plan PO Box 2111 Dubbo NSW 2830 Level Wingewarra Street Dubbo NSW Tel: (02) Fax: (02) ABN

181 Page 2 Preliminary Biodiversity Comments ATTACHMENT A Moree Solar Project Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) 1. Timing of Clearing In reference to the nine Carbeen trees and one hollow-bearing Whitewood tree, page 64 of the CEMP states Where scheduling permits, these trees will not be cleared from mid-april to mid- October. And in relation to other native woody vegetation (particularly Acacia farnesiana) page 63 states Do not clear native vegetation in spring, these time periods do not cover the breeding seasons of the types of species predicted to utilise these habitats. OEH is of the view that it would be preferable for the non-clearing times to be extended to run from mid-april to the end of January, meaning that where possible the native vegetation clearing should be done during February to April. Recommendations: 1.1 That where possible native vegetation clearing should be done during February to April; 1.2 If clearing is to be done outside of the February to April period, a qualified ecologist must be present to conduct pre-clearing surveys. 2. Pre-clearing surveys The CEMP shows that native vegetation will be cleared during construction including native grassland, shrubby habitat, nine Carbeen trees and one Whitewood which was identified as having active hollows used by small parrots for breeding. It is also assumed that these trees also contain cracks and fissures suitable for microbats. Project approval requirement C14 (a) (iii) has not been fully addressed in the plan. Pre-clearing surveys should be conducted prior to clearing of any native vegetation. Recommendation: 2.1 That pre-clearing surveys be conducted prior to the removal of any native vegetation. Any native fauna encountered should be relocated to an appropriate site, identified in advance, by a suitably qualified person. 3. Relocation of hollows or use of nest boxes Condition C14 (ii) requires the CEMP to include procedures for relocating hollows or installing next boxes. This does not appear to be addressed within the CEMP. Recommendation: 3.1 That the CEMP address condition C14(ii). 4. Desmodium campylocaulon The CEMP proposes pre and post clearing audits of the threatened flora species Desmodium campylocaulon and indicates that the identification of this species, and the proposed audits and data management will be undertaken by ground construction staff. OEH has briefly investigated the issue raised by Andrew Brownlow of Geolyse on 17 October 2014 where it appears that potential impacts to D. campylocaulon as a result of the Barton Road upgrade were not considered in conclusions as to the significance of the impacts of the project on this species

182 Page 3 in the original Environmental Assessment. OEH has since spoken with Phil Cameron of OzArk who has indeed confirmed that the potential impacts of the Barton Road upgrade were not considered in the Ecological Assessment, and that D. campylocaulon does occur in the vicinity of the road. OEH has contacted the Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) to discuss this matter and is awaiting a response. Recommendation: 4.1 To reduce potential risks of mis-identification, inconsistencies in data collection or data storage, the identification D. campylocaulon and the proposed audits and data management should be allocated to a specific, suitably trained person on-site such as the Quality and Environmental Manager. 4.2 OEH will provide further advice on any further assessment, management or offsetting recommendations for D. campylocaulon in relation to the Barton Road upgrade following agreement on an approach with DP&E. 5. Impacts to Carbeen Trees Previous advice provided by OEH regarding the need for biodiversity offsets was based on the understanding that no Carbeen remnants would be disturbed by the project. The CEMP has highlighted that 9 isolated Carbeen trees at the solar array site will be removed. It is noted in the CEMP that these trees were (in 2010) observed to be in poor condition, potentially having been poinsoned by over-spray of herbicides, and were unlikely to survive. OEH would appreciate clarification of the current condition of these trees prior to finalising the OEH recommendations for the content of the management plans for the project. Recommendation: 5.1 That Geolyse make an assessment of the current condition of the trees and associated groundcover during their next site visit and provide this information to OEH. 6. Future Operational Environmental Management Plan OEH understands that the CEMP and the Ground Cover Management Plan applies only to the project construction and that operation of the facility and maintenance of the site and infrastructure will occur under the Operational Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) which will be developed prior to commencement of operation. OEH has previously advised the proponent that OEH does not intend to recommend the establishment of an in-perpetuity offset for the expected native grassland impacts in this instance. In this particular case we feel that a better outcome for this proposal would be provision within the relevant management plans for appropriate management of the native grasslands within the electricity transmission line (ETL) easement for the life of the project. Particular attention should be paid to the ongoing management of the Commonwealth Endangered Ecological Community Natural grasslands on basalt and fine-textured alluvial plains of northern NSW and Southern QLD. Please note that OEH may make additional recommendations regarding D. campylocaulon and Carbeen dependent on the outcomes of recommendations 4.2 and 5.1 above. Recommendation: 6.1 When the OEMP is developed, OEH expects that this plan will, at a minimum, set out a management regime which aims to maintain and improve the condition of the grassland EEC within the ETL. The specific threats to this community must be considered in the development of any plans for weed control, grazing, slashing and seeding of native grasses.

183 Your reference: AHP Draft version 2 Our reference: DOC14/ Contact: Sonya Ardill Date: 10 November 2014 Andrew Brownlow Manager Environmental Geolyse Pty Ltd PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Dear Andrew RE Aboriginal Heritage Plan for Moree Solar Farm I refer to your dated 28 October 2014 requesting comments from Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) on the revised Aboriginal Heritage Plan for this project. OEH advises that it is satisfied that the Aboriginal Heritage Plan (Draft Version 2 dated 23/10/2014) prepared for Moree Solar Farm has addressed the matters previously raised by OEH. Should you require further information regarding issues that are the responsibility of the OEH please contact Sonya Ardill, Senior Team Leader Planning on (02) Yours sincerely, SONYA ARDILL Senior Team Leader Planning, North West Region Regional Operations PO Box 2111 Dubbo NSW 2830 Level Wingewarra Street Dubbo NSW Tel: (02) Fax: (02) ABN

184 Your reference OEH Our reference :DOC14/ Contact Sonya Ardill Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley Street ORANGE NSW 2800 Att: Latisha Ryall 7 th September 2014 Dear Latisha, RE: Moree Solar Farm - Aboriginal Heritage Plan I refer to your dated 3 rd September 2014 requesting comments from the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) on the Aboriginal Heritage Plan for the Moree Solar Farm Project. OEH has reviewed the strategy and our detailed comments are attached. Should you require further information regarding issues that are the responsibility of the OEH please contact myself on (02) or sonya.ardill@environment.nsw.gov.au Yours sincerely, SONYA ARDILL Senior Team Leader Planning, North West Region Regional Operations The Department of Environment Climate Change and Water is now known as The Office of Environment and Heritage.. PO Box 2111, Dubbo NSW Wingewarra St Dubbo NSW Tel: (02) Fax: (02)

185 ATTACHMENT OEH COMMENTS ON MOREE SOLAR FARM ABORIGINAL HERITAGE PLAN Issue 1: Roles and Responsibilities for the all parties including the Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAPs) For clarity, this plan should include roles and responsibilities for all parties, so there is no confusion from any party. Recommendation Update plan to include roles and responsibilities all parties in consultation with the RAPs. Issue 2: Communication strategy OEH is unsure how the RAPs and the proponent will communicate between each other which may lead to confusion. Recommendation That the proponent develop a communication strategy in consultation with the RAPs. Issue 3: Dispute resolution There is no dispute resolution process in relation to this plan. Recommendation That the proponent develop a dispute resolution process (with appropriate timeframes) in consultation with the RAPs. Issue 4: Management and care of Aboriginal objects OEH is unsure how the salvaged objects will be managed and cared for (both long and short term).e.g. how will the objects be stored and catalogued, is a care agreement required for the long term care of the objects? Recommendation: That the proponent develop a process in consultation with the RAPs for the care and management of objects that maybe savaged. which may include the need to apply for a care agreement from OEH. Issue 5: Definition: There is no definition table in the plan. This may lead to confusion for either party or misunderstanding of terminology, e.g what is a dispute The Department of Environment Climate Change and Water is now known as The Office of Environment and Heritage. PO Box 2111, Dubbo NSW Wingewarra St Dubbo NSW Tel: (02) Fax: (02)

186 Recommendation That the proponent include a definition table to facilitate a clear understanding by all parties as to the meaning of certain words Issue 6 Updating the Aboriginal Heritage Management System (AHIMS) for sites which will be impacted upon by the development. Recommendation: The proponent must complete and send an Aboriginal site impact recording form for each site that has been impacted by the development to OEH within a reasonable timeframe (within 3 months) of the impact to the site. This form can be found: Issue 7: Process for reviewing the plan The plan has not incorporated a review process. Recommendation: That the proponent incorporate a review process for the plan to ensure that the plan is current and up to date. The Department of Environment Climate Change and Water is now known as The Office of Environment and Heritage. PO Box 2111, Dubbo NSW Wingewarra St Dubbo NSW Tel: (02) Fax: (02)

187 MOREE SOLAR FARM AFGM MEETING MINUTES 20 OCTOBER 2014 AFGM MINUTES Location Moree Services Club, 3 Albert Street, MOREE NSW 2400 Date & Time Objective Monday 20 October 2014, Meeting Opened at 3.10 pm To Discuss the Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan with Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAP s) in regards to the Moree Solar Farm project. Attendance Jodie Benton (OzArk), Sturt Daley (FRV), Pedro Fernandez (Green Light), Paula De La Paz Pineda (Green Light), Enrique Ortiz (Green Light), Allan Murphy (Geolyse) and Latisha Ryall (Geolyse). Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAP s) and others Dorothy Tighe, Louella Tighe, Loretta Tighe, Veronica Roberts, William Swan, Alf Priestley, Ray Tighe, Susan Leslie Briggs, and Bernadette Duncan. Attendance sheet is attached. Apologies Wayne Nean. 1. Welcome and Introductions a) Welcome and acknowledgement of traditional owners of country (Jodie Benton). b) Respect to Country (Alf Priestly) Alf advised that he would acknowledge that non-traditional member attendees are here; Minutes silence for people past and present and the future; and Alf welcomed members to the meeting and acknowledged that we are on Gomeroi country and welcome to the meeting. c) Attendees introduced themselves and their representation. 2. Project Discussion and Background a) Project Overview (Green Light) Alf requested a copy of the Green Light presentation, and this was agreed that Latisha would this information to attendees. b) General discussion about impacts (solar storms, water usage, EMF and reflected sun impacting birds). Sturt offered to make his contact details available if anybody wanted to contact him to ask questions about the project. Sturt s details are: sturt.daley@frv.com c) Overview of cultural heritage assessment of the project since Alf has been involved since Ray, Dorothy, Loretta and Veronica involved in the 2013 assessment. There has been a few different assessments; Discussed down-sizing of project scale; PAGE MINUTES_OCTOBER 2014.DOCX

188 MOREE SOLAR FARM AFGM MEETING MINUTES 20 OCTOBER 2014 Discussed significance of open site around old billabong BPSOS1, and how plough lines running east/west can pull/drift artefacts in an east west direction. North eastern shoreline has remained intact; and Discussed that MSF proponent had elected to conserve this site because it is of such high significance by moving all their impacts to the north to avoid sensitive areas, including those where artefact drift to the west of the billabong had occurred. d) Noted Aboriginal Heritage Plan (AHP) needs to be finalised, Latisha will send out a copy of the amended AHP as an action of this meeting to all registered parties, with request for feedback and comments. 3. General Discussions and Issues a) FRV explained one of the first things people will be doing is establishing a barrier straight across the land so no construction disturbance will occur south of this line. This will provided mechanical protection straight away so as people can see which is their worksite area. There will be a barrier to delineate cultural sensitive area to ensure no one enters this area. Sturt explained where the entrances and exits to site will be put up for a constructability point of view and advised of the consequences to workers who disobey these actions; b) Alf asked what distance is the buffer zone of artefacts to the fenceline of the culturally significant area: Distance between the areas is 30 metres; c) Discussed that the AHP is part of the project approval and that consultation with the Registered Aboriginal Parties was required in the development of the AHP; d) Project has been approved from the State government; and e) FRV explained the role of the Environmental Representative who is independent and essentially engaged by Department of Planning and Environment, who will be on site regularly and will ensure that what is being said will be done, is being done; f) Why can t we have an aboriginal response officer or representative traditional owners on the land? (Susan Leslie Briggs); g) Dorothy Tighe said that she had put this to Jodie previously, that when site salvage is being undertaken the representatives would like a traditional owners on the land while the monitoring is taking place; h) Alf Priestley has future acts lawyers form the Native Title Department, representing 19 applicants of the Gomeroi country, wants it clearly stated that he speaks on behalf of the nation for native title rights; i) Discussion about Native Title, land tenure and adequacy of State legislation. Alf Priestley indicated he would be involving his lawyers and land is protected under Native Title rights and interests; j) Extensive discussions amongst RAP s about who individuals were representing in terms of Native Title, family and the Gomeroi Nation. Dorothy noted that this debate be taken outside the meeting; k) Many people are Traditional Owners, if Green Light and MSF want to work with traditional owners they will be working with many people (Alf Priestley); l) The alignment of the fence at the south of the site will be walked over before this fence is erected. Bunting tape would be installed so that the position of this fence in relation to the billabong can be seen in the field; m) Ray Tighe stated that salvage was not part of their game and moving sites extinguishes their rights; PAGE MINUTES_OCTOBER 2014.DOCX

189 MOREE SOLAR FARM AFGM MEETING MINUTES 20 OCTOBER 2014 n) Protracted discussion about where salvaged sites should be relocated to. General consensus was that if artefacts are found or salvaged they should be stored in a secure, lockable enclosure located on the property until the Traditional Owners have determined their preferred long term fate for these objects. Artefacts should not be removed from the development site and any finds would be documented, measured, photographed, registered with GPS coordinates and include a short description; o) RAP s would like two full time monitoring positions for the duration of construction. Discussion that the AHP identified the procedure for managing sites, if detected, and that the area had been subject to prior archaeological field survey, and that there were Work Health and Safety considerations; and p) Employment opportunities during construction is a key consideration, with the expectation that 20% of the workforce will be Indigenous. RAP s wanted another meeting to negotiate employment. Closure and Finalisation of Meeting Jodie Benton, Green Light and FRV thanked everyone for their time and attendance at this meeting. Closure of Meeting 5.25 pm PAGE MINUTES_OCTOBER 2014.DOCX

190

191 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Aboriginal Stakeholders Consultation Log Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes Susan Leslie- Briggs 29/08/ /08/2014 ed a copy of the draft AHP to MLALC and followed up with a phone call. No answer, left message on voic . Additional Notes: Donna Briggs-Forde is no longer the contact at MLALC. Contact has been made with Susan Leslie-Briggs 01/09/2014 Called left voice message again for Donna to return my call. RESPONSE: Susan Leslie-Briggs called back 01/09/ PM and advised that Donna Briggs Forde has left Moree LALC and she is now the contact. Susan has received the AHP and advised that she would be free to attend a site visit, on instruction from meeting details. I advised that I would send all registered parties a meeting request to respond to with date and time. 04/09/2014 Phone call to Susan at LALC to confirm tentative availability for Thursday 11/09/2014. Susan advised she was free on this date. Susan also advised after my request that Dorothy Tighe and Loretta Tighe-Pitt both live with their father Ray and that Dorothy is out of town at the moment and contact can be passed on to both from Ray. 08/09/2014 AM Susan called regarding the invitation and advised that she would be available for the meeting on the 16/09/2014. Susan advised that she was unaware of the site location and perhaps I should send directions and a google map of the area to meet. I also requested that an reply from the meeting request be sent back. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

192 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 10/9/2014 received from Noeline Briggs Smith with interest in attending site meeting x 2 comments in additional notes. Noted that I did not send this out today? RESPONSE: ed response back extending invite to Noeline and advising that Susan Leslie-Briggs is also attending from the MLALC. From: Latisha Ryall Sent: Wednesday, September 10, :04 AM Subject: FW: Site Meeting - Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders Moree Solar Farm 1 Yaama Latisha, Would be interested in attending site meeting if you are arranging transport. Aunty Noelie Aboriginal Elder. 2 Yaama Latisha, I would seriously suggest as a Kamilaroi Elder that you have representation from our Local Moree Aboriginal Land Council ---the CEO Susan Briggs Leslie or current members of the Board, such as myself. Susan will oblige with the names of the other Board members who should be current stakeholders also. Aunty Noelie 15/09/2014 Phone call to MLALC left a voice message for Susan re cancellation of meeting. All parties have been notified by also. 19/09/2014 Phone call to MLALC left a voice message. Phone call 3.38 PM left another voice message re cancellation and if any questions to please contact us. Another phone call to MLALC left another message. This was to clarify some information regarding aboriginal Deaths and Native Title Meetings. 22/09/2014 ed availability request to all RAS parties for intention of meeting on 9/10/2014 after discussion with Green Light 23/09/ AM Susan Leslie Briggs called to advise that she would be available for the meeting on 9 October I advised that I would send out all information as per previous scheduling PM ed Meeting Invitation to all RAS members Details 9/10/2014 at 2.30 PM 03/10/2014 Cancelled Meeting invite for the 9 th October Phone call to Susan at MLALC left a voice message to notify cancellation of meeting PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

193 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 07/10/2014 received from Susan Leslie Briggs stating she would be available of the week starting the 20/10/ /10/2014 Meeting invitation sent for 20/10/ /10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP and Meeting agenda ed. 17/10/2014 Phone call left message for confirming attendance. 20/10/2014 Attendance at RAP meeting held at Moree. 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Copy of amended AHP sent via for comment by 7/11/2014 and copy of Green Light PP presentation. 28/10/ /10/2014 digital Minutes of AFGM meeting sent via Read receipt received. 7/11/2014 Transparency call to RAPS for comment on final AHP. Left voice message for someone to call me back in regards to any comments on the AHP Action: 5.00 PM no comment no callback. Alf Priestley 29/08/ /08/2014 digital x 2 (First address bounced back, Second address successful) ed a copy of the draft AHP to Mr Priestley. bounced. Phone call on and left a voice message. I called and spoke to Colleen Priestley who took a message and advised that she would pass on message by 3.30 PM. Coleen Priestley called back at 3.40 PM and gave me an updated address for Mr Priestley I ed the copy of the AHP to this address and advised that I would follow up again this afternoon via phone call at 4.15 PM RESPONSE: Spoke to Mr Priestley, he has received the and will be available for a site meeting proposed next Friday 5/09/2014 I advised I will be in contact he was excited about the opportunity to promote indigenous work during construction phase and wants to talk to someone regarding job opportunities. (Perhaps in the induction process? I did not advise just agreed that I would be in touch next week). 04/09/2014 Phone call to Alf, advising availability next week he cannot make the 9/11/2014 as will be in Sydney for the RAPs meeting for Native Title but will be available on Friday 12/09/2014. I advised I will be in touch with a time and date. 05/09/2014 Phone call to Alf Priestley who advised that he has his dates mixed up and cannot attend the meeting next Friday and Ray Tighe will be with him, I asked if both Ray and Alf would be available the following week and he said yes that would be suitable. invitation sent to all registered stakeholders for meeting to be held on 16/09/2014, awaiting response. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

194 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 8/09/2014 Phone call spoke to colleen Priestley re giving me another number as Alf is in transit. Colleen advised she had spoken to him quickly and he should be ok for next week. Phone call and left a voice message. Phone call to Alf left voice message as in transit and went straight to txt. Phone call at 4.03 PM went straight to msg, did not leave a message. 15/09/2014 Phone call to Alf Priestley he is ok to attend tomorrow. Phone call to Alf Priestley left a voice message re cancellation of meeting. All parties have been notified by also. RESPONSE: Alf called back at 1.54 PM I advised that the meeting had been cancelled and apologised for any inconvenience. He asked if could forward the information onto Susan Leslie Briggs, I advised that all RAS have been notified via . 17/09/2014 RESPONSE: received from Alf Priestley responding to my cancellation . Thank you 19/09/2014 Phone call to Alf Priestly, Alf is able to attend on 24/09/ /09/2014 ed availability request to all RAS parties for intention of meeting on 9/10/2014 after discussion with Green Light RESPONSE: Mr Alf Priestley called me to discuss the constant change of the RAS meeting after receiving the I had send that morning Mr Priestley expressed that he is the native title landholder and the meetings should be made around himself and Mr Ray Tighe as a supporting applicant and member of the Terry Hie community. Mr Priestly advised that he was elected by the nation s people and represents this land at Federal Level not state. He was a little frustrated that the meetings had been changed to accommodate other RAS members as they do not have the significant land title authority for Nation Claim. After discussion Mr Priestley advised that he would attend the meeting if Mr Ray Tighe was available. I reassured him that once Mr Tighe gave his availability this date would be locked in for the meeting PM ed Meeting Invitation to all RAS members Details 9/10/2014 at 2.30 PM PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

195 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 2/10/2014 Alf Priestley called to say that he and Mr Ray Tighe will not be able to make the 9 October as they will be in Tamworth for another meeting, and have proposed the 8/10/2014 at 2.30 PM. RESPONSE: Called Alf back to see if he was free on 10/10 his response was no and had more important business as Whitehaven Coal Mine dates unavailable next week are 9/10/ and 11/10/2014. He advised that no one else will be able to represent the Kamilaroi people 03/10/2014 Called Alf Priestley to explain cancellation, left a voice message. Cancelled Meeting invite for the 9 th October Called second number Alf is ok with the changes and is happy for any date of the week of the 20 October I will discuss with Jodie on Tuesday. Alf advised his phone has died and to contact him on another number. 9/10/2014 Meeting invitation sent for 20/10/ /10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP and meeting Agenda ed. 17/10/2014 Phone call to Colleen passed on message to confirm Alfs attendance on Monday at 2.30 PM Colleen will phone me back. Colleen phoned back advising that Alf is ok to attend this meeting. 20/10/2014 Attendance at RAP meeting at Moree. 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Copy of amended AHP sent via for comment by 7/11/2014 and copy of Green Light PP presentation. 28/10/ /10/2014 digital Minutes of AFGM meeting sent via and copy of Green Light PowerPoint presentation. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

196 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 3/11/ AM Phone call message 9.13 AM to Latisha Ryall and Andrew Brownlow Name = Coleen Priestly for Alf Priestly Number = Wanted to confirm an upcoming meeting in regards to the cultural and heritage walkover in Moree AM Andrew ed Jodie Benton at OzArk asking if Jodie could act on this phone message as Latisha is away ill today and it relates to the fence walkover. Latisha Ryall was cc d in all correspondence PM Jodie Benton OzArk consultation I have spoken to Alf. Latisha will need to record this in the log. He asked if he was sent a hard copy of the AHP? I did not know, but he has not received one and he wants one. He will always need hard copies of correspondence sent him, as do many RAPs, due to challenges in access to computers/printers etc. He noted again he wanted his lawyers to review the AHP. I did tell him that he could forward the e-copy we sent him onto them. He said he would look for it. I noted there would not be able to be a walkover to salvage artefacts until comments were received on the AHP PM Jodie Benton OzArk consultation If you could get your admin trainee to get a hard copy of the AHP to ALF in express post today, I think that would be great. He advised that he has not got it and date for feedback supposed to end 7th Nov. Hi address is 6 Jamida Place Moree (maybe double check that with Latisha s info). I presume she did not already send a hard copy? Action: Hard copy sent in mail via express post the tracking number is /11/2014 PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

197 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 7/11/2014 received from Alf in regards to who to send his consultation invoice to. Reiterating that he is the elected representative and the Applicant for this area under the registered Native Title Claim for the Gomeroi People in the Federal Court of Australia and also that I am a Traditional Owner Has well Transparency call to RAPS for comment on final AHP PM ½ hour conversation with Alf Priestly Item 1 discussed was payment for the meeting held on 20/10/2014. I advised that no payment would be made. Alf felt disrespected and insulted that his contribution at the meeting was to give consulting advice on the land as the traditional native title holder. He said that by not paying this was disrespecting their culture and heritage and he would be advising his legal team, although he did not want to go down that path. He said he would be issuing an invoice and expects to be paid. He was unhappy that other attendees were paid e.g. Dorothy Tighe for travel and Jodie at OzArk. If he had known that this meeting was initial and no payment would be made he would not have made the effort to attend. He said that the solar farm would generate money for the construction company and it seems that no one wants to talk to the traditional owners about payment and again felt disrespected and insulted. He advised that the registration for native title is before the courts and is a federal matter. He thought that Green Light would act in good faith with payment, and it is not about the cost but about the principal and insult. Again consultant fees should be paid. Item 2 discussed was the lack of response from Sturt Daley. Alf advised that he had called Sturt 3 times with no return calls. He stated he is also a board member for the land council. Item 3 discussed was comments for the AHP. Alf advised that he had already spoke to Jodie re this and he has passed on this information to his lawyers and they will probably comment. He advised that this is a major project and that the soil will be disturbed even with the 30m buffer zone was not good enough on a very sacred place. Even though the site had previously been farmed it was not done in consultation with the traditional owners of Gomeroi country and times have changed, and he has a legal right. It is a massive amount of land and there would be evidence of culture and heritage as artefacts can be from 5mm to 5cm e.g. Artefacts would cover the entire area and there would be crown land underneath. Alf said that he is quite happy to stick to those points addressed in the consultation meeting but is not happy about the whole thing. Again said that the sunlight was used by Gomeroi natives long before Australians came here. He and the native traditional owners do not want to be ripped off. He said it would not be a good thing if a Media Campaign were to happen on the destruction of native land and disrespecting culture and heritage. Action: I advised that I understand that he is frustrated and I will pass on all information. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

198 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes Wayne Nean 29/08/ /08/2014 Digital ed a copy of the draft AHP to Mr Nean as group registered stakeholders and as acting as the Terry Hie-Hie Aboriginal Group. Phoned 3.30 PM left voice message PM Mr Nean called back and left an msg to say he had received the . I called back to follow up RESPONSE: Spoke to Mr Nean, he has received the and will be available for a site meeting proposed next Friday 5/09/2014 I advised I will be in contact and also advised that this is also relevant for the Terry Hie Hie group. 04/09/2014 Phone call made to Mr Nean, left voice message for him to call me back. RESPONSE: Wayne Nean called back and left a msg as I was out of the office, I returned his call at 1.45 and explained that a tentative meeting date will be for next Friday 12/09/2014 and I will send him an invite. 05/09/2014 Phone call to Wayne Nean he advised that there would be no implication of Mr Tighe not attending the site meeting on Friday 12 September invitation sent to all registered stakeholders for meeting to be held on 16/09/2014, awaiting response. 10/09/ AM Wayne Nean called to advise he would be attending the site meeting but would need to organise a lift. I advised that I will send through directions of meeting point. Wayne also asked who else would be attending and that Ray and Alf are in Sydney for the RAPS meeting and he would get a lift with them. 15/09/2014 Phone call to Wayne Nean left a voice message re cancellation of meeting. Advised that another meeting will be rescheduled but I do not have dates at this time. Wayne asked what the problem was I advised that it was contractual and out of our hands. All parties have been notified by also. 19//09/2014 Phone Call to Wayne, He is available to attend on Wednesday and asked if was speaking to Ray to tell him not to forget to pick Wayne up. I advised that I will send another out with the information PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

199 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 22/09/2014 ed availability request to all RAS parties for intention of meeting on 9/10/2014 after discussion with Green Light RESPONSE: received from Mr Wayne Nean Your trying your best to make this meeting happen and you just got to keep trying. Yep I'll be there if you could make this one happen. All the best with this new arrangement. 23/09/2014 Response sent back to Mr Nean thanking him for his time and will send out details in near future PM ed Meeting Invitation to all RAS members Details 9/10/2014 at 2.30 PM 03/10/2014 Cancelled Meeting invite for the 9 th October /10/2014 Meeting invitation sent for 20/10/ /10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP and meeting Agenda ed Phone call to Wayne Nean he was a little unhappy but will make whatever date that we can he suggested that next meeting a proxy will have to be sent on behalf of whoever can t make the date. Wayne responded with an to notify that he would be available whenever the next meeting is scheduled. 20/10/2014 Did not attend RAP meeting, Phone call made prior to meeting start with no answer. 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Copy of amended AHP sent via for comment by 7/11/2014 and copy of Green Light PP presentation. 28/10/ /10/2014 digital Minutes of AFGM meeting sent via 7/11/2014 Transparency call to RAPS for comment on final AHP. Wayne advised that he had no comments and seems all fine. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

200 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes Wayne Nean c/- 29/08/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /10/2014 9/10/ /10/ /10/ /10/ /10/2014 7/11/2014 As above Bernadette Duncan 29/08/ /08/2014 digital ed a copy of the draft AHP to Bernadette Duncan. Will follow up another on Monday 1/09/2014 as there is no phone contact. 01/09/2014 Phone number located, called Bernadette RESPONSE: Bernadette advised that she has not read her s and would call me back tomorrow after she has reviewed the plan. 03/09/2014 Phone call to Bernadette and left a voice message that I will try again this afternoon. (AM) Called again and left another phone message. (PM) 04/09/2014 Phone call to Bernadette, left a voice message advising I will send an invite for site meeting proposed for next week. 05/09/2014 Phone call to Bernadette, spoke to family member she was not available at the time I have left a message for her to call me back and I will send her an regarding the meeting. invitation sent to all registered stakeholders for meeting to be held on 16/09/2014, awaiting response. 12/09/2014 Phone call to Bernadette, she advised that she will respond to me later today as she has a sick daughter. Could not give me a definite answer. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

201 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 15/09/2014 Phone call to Bernadette Duncan advised that she will be in attendance, there is a chance that if she cannot make this her brother Lonnie Duncan will attend on her behalf. Discussions on directions, Bernadette advised she will print the correspondence off this morning. Phone call to Bernadette left voice message advising cancellation of meeting. All parties have been notified by also. Phone call left voce message again re cancellation at 3.40 PM. If any questions have asked Bernadette to contact us. RESPONSE: 19/09/2014 Phone Call to Bernadette left voice message Bernadette called back, I advised that the meeting would not take place tomorrow but would be in the future. Bernadette advised that there is a Native Title Meeting re Boggabilla community that will be happening at the end of the month. The proposed 29/08/2014 will not be acceptable for a meeting for that whole week. 22/09/2014 ed availability request to all RAS parties for intention of meeting on 9/10/2014 after discussion with Green Light 23/09/2014 ed Meeting Invitation to all RAS members Details 9/10/2014 at 2.30 PM RESPONSE: 03/10/2014 Cancelled Meeting invite for the 9 th October Phone Call to Bernadette Duncan, Bernadette confirmed that she can attend the meeting on 9/10/2014 at 2.30 PM Phone call to Bernadette left a voice message. 9/10/2014 Meeting invitation sent for 20/10/ /10/ /10/2014 digital Draft AHP and meeting Agenda ed 17/10/2014 Phone call to Bernadette Duncan, left a message with her partner, I will try again late today PM Called Bernadette confirmed that she would be there. 20/10/2014 Late Attendance at RAP meeting 20/10/2014 request for $20.00 fuel money to get back to Bogabilla. 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Copy of amended AHP sent via for comment by 7/11/2014 and copy of Green Light PP presentation. 28/10/ /10/2014 digital Minutes of AFGM meeting sent via Read receipt received PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

202 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 7/11/2014 Transparency call to RAPS for comment on final AHP. Left message with Partner to call back regarding the AHP. Action 5.00 PM no comment no callback Loretta Tighe-Pitt and Dorothy Tighe 29/08/ /08/2014 Digital x 2 (First address bounced back, Second address successful - DOROTHY) ed a copy of the draft AHP to Loretta Tighe- Pitt and Dorothy Tighe. bounced back for Loretta. Proceeded to call (Number Disconnected). Phoned Dorothy Tighe left voice to txt TELSTRA msg. Additional Notes: Dorothy and Loretta live with Ray Tighe 01/09/2014 Phone call to Dorothy voice to txt TELSTRA msg. 03/09/2014 Phone call to Dorothy voice to txt TELSTRA msg. follow up resent to Dorothy and Loretta - again Loretta bounced back. 04/09/2014 Phone call made to Dorothy Voice to Txt TELSTRA message left. Phone call made to Ray Tighe advising date of intended meeting to be held on Friday 12/09/2014 went straight to voice message. 05/09/2014 Phone call to Dorothy again and left Voice to Txt TELSTRA message. invitation sent to all registered stakeholders for meeting to be held on 16/09/2014, awaiting response. RESPONSE bounced for Loretta Tighe PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

203 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 09/09/2014 RESPONSE: Dorothy Tighe called at AM responding to my invite and advised that she and Loretta will attend this meeting on 16/09/2014. Dorothy gave me a new contact number which I have now updated. Dorothy also asked if shipping fees and payment of PA will occur. I advised not at this stage. Dorothy advised that all correspondence will be forwarded onto Loretta by herself and that Dorothy is currently living in Ballina. Phone call to Dorothy spoke to her regarding the cancellation of the meeting, she was fine and said thank you for letting her know. I advised that we will arrange another meeting in the near future. All parties have been notified by also. 19/09/2014 Phone call to Dorothy went to voice bank, asked if available for next Wednesday and if Loretta and Ray would be able to attend also. 22/09/2014 ed availability request to all RAS parties for intention of meeting on 9/10/2014 after discussion with Green Light 23/09/2014 Phone call to Dorothy Tighe, left a voice message. RESPONSE: Dorothy Tighe called back, msg taken by reception. Confirming her attendance only, enquiry made about payment refer to notes. Notes Dorothy Tighe called while you were at lunch. She confirmed attendance for herself for the 9th October at 2:30. However, she said asked that you ring Loretta to confirm her attendance. She didn t want to confirm this herself. She also mentioned that she wanted to start negotiations with the Solar Farm and Stakeholders for the day s wages and travel. She mentioned closing the gap between the Aboriginal Community. She asked for someone get in touch with her about this. Phone call to Loretta Tighe phone rang out, no message left 3.34 PM ed Meeting Invitation to all RAS members Details 9/10/2014 at 2.30 PM 25/09/2014 Phone call to Loretta Tighe no answer PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

204 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 03/10/2014 Cancelled Meeting invite for the 9 th October Phone call taken by Ashleigh Cunial, notes provided below. I have just taken a call from Dorothy Tighe. She was calling about an that she received about the meeting being cancelled. She is aware that the meeting has now been cancelled for next week and that Latisha is in the process of rescheduling. She enquired as to why and said that a few of the stakeholders could no longer attend. She then proceeded the mention the negotiations between the partnership and the aboriginal stakeholders. She emphasised that they are the traditional owners of the land. She said she knows the owner of the land of the proposed site and believes he is getting paid. She said that legal processes might have to be put in place. She proposed a three way conversation with the partnership, Allan and the stakeholders to discuss negotiations. She accused me of not passing on the first message as no one called her back. I told her that I am not in a position to comment as I am not aware of the situation and assured her that I would pass on the message again. She would like to speak to the manager about these negotiations. She doesn t know her number but said that Latisha had it. She also expressed the inconvenience that this has caused her as she has to travel to Moree from Ballina. 8/10/2014 Phone call from Dorothy Tighe, she advised that she would be free on the 20/10/2014 for the RAS meeting. Discussions held about questions she could ask and what type of solar panels would be used. Advised that there would be opportunity for her to ask at this meeting. Dorothy advised that she has been researching the company and Concentrated Panels along with digging requirements and periodic table reference. Advised that she had taken minutes of the previous meeting held with Jodie at OzArk. And reiterated that the land is important to her re her mothers and fathers country surrounding the solar site. Advised I would send information through. 9/10/2014 Meeting invite sent for 20/10/2014 Dorothy advised that Ray Tighe uses her address and he can obtain the information. 10/10/2014 Received response for meeting acceptance from Dorothy. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

205 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 14/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP and meeting Agenda ed Dorothy called and left a message as to why this meeting is not held on Country Action: Called back left a message. 15/10/2014 Phone call to Dorothy no answer left message. Dorothy phoned back, lengthy discussion regarding negotiations for payment. I advised that this was an initial meeting and the meeting will be held in Moree with the option to go to site after, she advised the time was late at 2.30 PM, She wanted to talk regarding payment and who to talk to at Green Light. She said that this should have native title involvement and cause delays, Negotiations should happen within 5 days. She also stressed that as other attendees would be getting paid to attend the meeting so should the elders and travel expenses. Dorothy called, I phoned her back and we discussed the meeting on Monday where there is no payment for the initial meet and greet, it is an invitation. We also talked about what will be discussed on the day and Dorothy requested plans to be put up of the site on the whiteboard on the day. Dorothy asked who would be doing the acknowledgement of country, I advised that Jodie would be acknowledging this and Dorothy asked that she would be doing the acknowledgement that this should be done by an elder. If Jodie has any problems to call her. A certain point was made regarding a sacred women s business location. Talked about travel expenses more than happy to provide options on the day of getting out to site. 17/10/2014 Phone call to Loretta to confirm attendance Loretta advised that she will be there 20/10/2014 Attendance at RAP Meeting, Dorothy requested fuel money $50.00 to get back to Ballina as travel expense 23/04/ /10/2014 Digital Copy of amended AHP sent via for comment by 7/11/2014 and copy of Green Light PP presentation. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

206 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 27/10/2014 Phone call from Dorothy Tighe, phone message taken by Ashleigh. Action: Phone call returned. Dorothy was asking if Green Light had been in touch with a company called Job Network Agency in Moree. Dorothy has a meeting with the agency today at 4 PM. They had advised that Green Light will start preparations next week. Dorothy was concerned that this should not take place until the AHP has been finalised. Dorothy requested something in writing to take to the meeting today. I advised that I would try to get in touch with Green light and call Dorothy back by 3.30 PM. An was sent to Paula and Pedro asking these questions. I called Dorothy back at 3.50 as had no response from Green Light. Dorothy then asked about who is paying the attendees wages for the meeting last week. Dorothy said that she would like me to follow up on who is paying the attendees of the meeting last week and can I get back to her, Dorothy commented that the agenda was on OzArk letterhead and is it up to Geolyse and OzArk to meet half way in paying the attendees? I advised that as previously discussed no payment was agreed on for the attendance at that meeting and that I would have to discuss this with management. 28/10/ /10/2014 digital Minutes of AFGM meeting sent via . Confirmed received after discussions on 31/10/2014 PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

207 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 31/10/2014 Phone call to Dorothy Tighe at AM I advised that No payment would be given for the attendance at the meeting last week. There was no disagreement on this topic. I advised that the employment agency Green Light had approached was Aboriginal Employment Strategy Ltd and this was done prior to the meeting (AM) on 20 October Dorothy advised that Heather at Job Link Plus had told her that preparations for construction on site would start on 10/11/2014. Dorothy had told Heather that this should not occur until the consultation process has finished and the AHP has been signed off. Dorothy wanted to know if anyone has been in contact with this company to advise that this would not happen. I called back left a message and advised I advised that Green Light has had no contact with this company at all and that the requirements of the AHP are understood. Dorothy advised that she would me Heathers details for our records. Dorothy advised that Alf and Ray had finished their other meetings and that a walkover (salvage) could likely occur next week. Dorothy requested that feedback be given at the next consultation meeting instead of in writing or via phone. I have advised that I could not comment on this and perhaps it would be best speaking to Jodie at OzArk. Dorothy agreed and will call Jodie today. Dorothy also asked about payment for the next meeting and I advised that this would be a decision not made by Geolyse. Dorothy suggested that she May contact Sturt in regards to payment via . 6/11/2014 Dorothy Tighe called (PM) and asked when the next meeting date is and when is salvage going to occur? I advised that we do not have a date for arranging the next meeting, but Jodie may have more information than I do, Dorothy has asked if Jodie can call her. Dorothy requested that next Wednesday would be a good day 12 November Action: ed Jodie asap and advised that Dorothy would like to speak with her. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

208 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 7/11/2014 Transparency call to RAPS for comment on final AHP. Phone call to Dorothy Tighe, her daughter answered I asked if she could get Dorothy to call me back today PM Action: 5.00 PM no comment no callback 2.45 PM phone call to Loretta Tighe, spoke with Loretta and she had No comments for the AHP. 10/11/2014 Phone message left by Dorothy Tighe asking why Jodie had not returned her call from last week. Action: sent to Jodie Benton at OzArk to respond. sent to Dorothy Tighe explaining that I will call on 11/11/ /11/2014 received from Jodie at OzArk explaining unavailable as in Courses until 12/11/2014 and advised to let Dorothy know that once a date has been determined letters of invite will be sent out. Jodie has flagged a date with Paula, but need to check whether everyone is happy with that date. A decision will then be made on whether OzArk is taking over the consultation for the salvage or not? Action: Phone call to Dorothy Tighe AM. Went straight to message bank left message will call back before 12 PM today. Phone call to Dorothy Tighe 11.45AM Went straight to message bank, left message that I will contact tomorrow 12/11/2014. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

209 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 12/12/2014 Dorothy Tighe Called at 2.43 PM left message with Reception for a call back. RESPONSE: I called Dorothy back, Ray Tighe answered the phone to advise that he was unhappy with Green Light and the negotiation process. He advised that the minutes were incorrect. He wanted it stated for the record that this will end up in arbitration court. He advised that in the minutes Alf Priestley and Ray Tighe proposed that a salvage and next meeting be held in the first two weeks of November 7/11/2014. He said that both he and Alf need to be consulted in everything that happens on their land. He said that soil has already been turned over and in every stage someone representing native title should be in the background. He was extremely frustrated that Sturt had returned their calls and sated that in the minutes Discussed in section B Sturt was available for discussions. He said that we are not idiots. He believes that as a native title applicant and legal representative of the land, Green Light are not prepared to negotiate properly. He advised that if he had known that there would not be payment for the consultation meeting he would not have given and feedback and would have required at least 2 weeks notice prior to the meeting date. He advised that he wants to know when the next consultation meeting is and that Green Light should be consulting the RAP s for a date that suits them not the other way around. He advised that negotiations have not been undertaken in a proper manner and that legal proceedings may occur. He advised that he would have to reschedule meetings with his solicitor on 25/11/2014. The end of the month is no good as there are other meetings scheduled with other projects that Native Title are involved with. He would like someone to contact him back in regards to this matter. Ray Tighe 29/08/ /08/ /09/2014 Digital to Dorothy Hardcopy to Ray Tighe As above details for Dorothy Tighe, left msg TELSTRA voice to txt. Additional Notes: Dorothy and Loretta live with Ray 01/09/2014 As above Called and left a message TELSTRA voice to txt message again. 01/09/2014 Phone call to Ray Tighe. RESPONSE: Ray is extremely interested in this he wants a hardcopy of the report to be posted and gave me postal details of Native Claim Title Group, PO Box 1183 Moree NSW He wants to be included in employment and the Native Title element. Draft Aboriginal Heritage report sent with letter our Ref _LET_001A in post. 03/09/2014 Phone call to Ray, he still has not received the draft copy of the AHP posted on Monday, I advised I will call 4/09/2014 to follow up. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

210 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 04/09/2014 Phone call made to Ray Tighe advising proposed date of intended meeting to be held on Friday 12/09/2014 went straight to voice message TELSTRA. Follow up phone call to Ray Tighe, regarding proposed meeting date arranged for 12/09/2014. RESPONSE: Ray advised he will be in Sydney and won t be able to make this meeting but wants to attend. Ray said that no-one can access the land as it is Terry Hie Hie land. I advised that Alf Priestley and Wayne Nean would be attending and that I would get back to him. 02/09/2014 Phone call to Ray, tried to explain that we would be holding a meeting next Friday to tie in with the other stakeholders (Alf Priestley, Wayne Nean Susan Leslie-Briggs) and if he could have someone represent him in his absence on his behalf. RESPONSE: Ray advised that he has already told me that he would not be able to make this meeting. He was upset and rude, and advised that I had upset him and he became defensive, he would not let me explain any further options and hung up on me. invitation sent to all registered stakeholders for meeting to be held on 16/09/2014, awaiting response via . Copy of invitation posted to Ray Tighe along with covering letter our REF _LET_002A. 15/09/2014 Phone Call to Ray Tighe by Allan Murphy to explain cancellation of meeting as below. Notes Tried to call Ray! Went to message bank, left a brief message- will call again later. Phone call to Ray Tighe. I tried again at 3.40 PM, and left another message. 19/09/2014 Phone call to Mr Tighe, left a message TELSTRA voice to txt I received a phone call from his 5.43 PM and she acknowledged the message, and asked us to please contact them when the meeting is re-scheduled I said that we would do so. 22/09/2014 ed availability request to all RAS parties for intention of meeting on 9/10/2014 after discussion with Green Light PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

211 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 23/09/2014 Phone call to Ray Tighe, spoke directly with Mr Tighe, he advised that he is definitely OK to attend the meeting on the 9/10/2014. I advised I will send information out as have done so previously for him this will be sent via post. Advised that I had been in discussions with Alf yesterday and this date would be locked in PM ed Meeting Invitation to all RAS members Details 9/10/2014 at 2.30 PM (Hard Copy sent to Ray). 25/09/2014 Hard copy _LET_003A sent with meeting details 03/10/2014 Cancelled Meeting invite for the 9 th October Called Ray Tighe, he was ok with the change but has requested the 20/10/2014 which is the Monday. 14/10/ /10/2014 Hard Copy Digital to Dorothy Meeting invitation send hard copy and draft AHP and meeting Agenda sent in post 20/10/2014 Attendance at RAP meeting with William Swan in Moree. 23/10/ /10/2014 Hard Copy Digital to Dorothy 29/10/ /10/2014 Hard Copy Digital to Dorothy Copy of amended AHP sent via post for comment by 7/11/2014 and copy of Green Light PP presentation. Copy of AFGM Minutes sent to Ray via post 7/11/2014 Transparency call to RAPS for comment on final AHP. Phone call to Ray Tighe 2.47 PM Telstra Voice to TXT message asking if he could please call me back today re AHP comments. Action 5.00 PM no comment no call back PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

212 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes 12/11/2014 Ray Tighe Comments from Return phone call to Dorothy Latisha called Dorothy back, Ray Tighe answered the phone to advise that he was unhappy with Green Light and the negotiation process. He advised that the minutes were incorrect. He she wanted it stated for the record that this will end up in arbitration court. He advised that in the minutes Alf Priestley and Ray Tighe proposed that a salvage and next meeting be held in the first two weeks of November 7/11/2014. He said that both he and Alf need to be consulted in everything that happens on their land. He said that soil has already been turned over and in every stage someone representing native title should be in the background. He was extremely frustrated that Sturt had returned their calls and sated that in the minutes Discussed in section B Sturt was available for discussions. He said that we are not idiots. He believes that as a native title applicant and legal representative of the land, Green Light are not prepared to negotiate properly. He advised that if he had known that there would not be payment for the consultation meeting he would not have given and feedback and would have required at least 2 weeks notice prior to the meeting date. He advised that he wants to know when the next consultation meeting is and that Green Light should be consulting the RAP s for a date that suits them not the other way around. He advised that negotiations have not been undertaken in a proper manner and that legal proceedings may occur. He advised that he would have to reschedule meetings with his solicitor on 25/11/2014. The end of the month is no good as there are other meetings scheduled with other projects that Native Title are involved with. He would like someone to contact him back in regards to this matter. 18/11/2014 Ray Tighe called and left a message with Ashleigh Cunial Name = Ray Tighe Number = Said that he heard that there was a meeting on the 26th November and he has something on that day so he won t be able to attend. He mentioned an applicants meeting. The line wasn t very good and I couldn t really make about what he was trying to say but he would like Latisha to call him back. 19/11/ AM Latisha called Sheridan at OzArk to relay the message, left a message with Jane on reception she advised to send Sheridan an with the comments. 20/11/2014 received from Sheridan at OzARk Hey Latisha sent to Sheridan asking if she would be happy to phone Ray with the details given and to call me with any issues. Thanks for that, I spoke to Ray- all good. Enjoy your weekend Cheers Sheridan PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

213 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes Veronica Roberts 3/11/2014 from Paula at GLC giving Geolyse Veronica Roberts contact details Hi Andrew, Latisha, The phone number of Veronica is, Could you contact to her? I don t have her . Action: AM Andrew Brownlow called Veronica Roberts and advised that no payment for her attendance at the AFGM consultation was intended or proposed. She accepted this, but did want confirmation that involvement in any site walk over would be paid. I confirmed that this would be the case. NTSCorp Correspondence Ross 13/11/ received from Sturt Daley at FRV requesting either GLC, OzArk or Geolyse follow up with Ross in regards to his concerns. Details below: Ross called and left a message on the 1800 number : He called yesterday 12/11/14 12:44pm He just got a call for the Heritage Management Plan for MSF. He would like to know the contact person as they have some comments that they would like to submit this week. Thanks Sturt 13/11/2014 Andrew Brownlow rang NTSCorp at PM and left a message for Ross, and gave his mobile number. 14/11/2014 to Paul and Jodie from Andrew Brownlow Update on NTSCorp contact follows. Just spoke with Ross McKay who returned my call. He was doing so on behalf of a colleague Ms Hema Hariharan - who he says is dealing with the matter. Basically wanted a contact person and their details to send comments to (if Hema decides to do so) on the AHP. I gave Ross my . I asked for context but Ross was vague stating that Hema was the person who had spoken with their client. He did not name who this was, but I think we can assume it was Alf. I talked him through the process of consultation undertaken and that the period for comment on the AHP closed last Friday. If anything more develops I will let you know immediately. Andrew PS. Paula this link explains who NTSCorp is. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

214 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes Post RAP Consultation Paula de la Paz Pineda 12/11/2014 received from Paula with details of an sent by Sturt Daley at FRV. 9.45AM 12/11/2014 Action 2: 12/11/2014 Action 3: Alf Priestley had called Sturt RE a payment for the consultation. Sturt requested Green Light call him back on Action 1: received from Paula 9.58 AM requesting Geolyse to contact Alf informing him what has been decided regarding the payment for consultation? response to Paula by Andrew Brownlow AM Details Below. Andrew Brownlow sent to Paula advising that Latisha spoke with Alf last week (on Friday) and advised him that no payment was proposed. The reason why was explained (ie. consultation rather than field services). Alf essentially stated he was going to ignore this and said he would submit an invoice anyway he did not say who to. He also stated that he was annoyed that three calls he made to FRV (Sturt) had not been returned. I recommend you let Sturt know this, as there is nothing more we can do. He needs to call Alf. Geolyse already has and we can tell him nothing different than what we told him on Friday. Alf is calling Sturt because at the AFGM Sturt asked that RAPs call him if they have issues. Andrew Brownlow sent correspondence to Paula 5.20 PM updating her that Geolyse is starting to receive more calls from RAPs who claim that Sturt is not returning their calls. Details below. This has included a call from Ray Tighe and his daughter Dorothy just this afternoon. As mentioned this morning (following Alf Priestly s same complaint), the RAPs are doing this because Sturt invited them to contact him at the AFGM. This was confirmed in the AFGM Minutes (which were approved by FRV before circulating the Minutes to the RAPs). Could you please advise Sturt that this is happening. As you would appreciate upsetting the RAPs by not returning calls could prove to be problematic. And on matters relating to payment for attendance at the AFGM, it should be made clear to Sturt that any and all RAP that has asked, either before or after the AFGM, was informed (by Geolyse) that no payment for time at the meeting was proposed. To date, this has been raised by Veronica Roberts, Dorothy, Ray and most recently Alf. Geolyse has clearly communicated to all that payment was not proposed as this was consultation as opposed to employment for field assessment. This was a decision reached in consultation with Green Light and FRV. Two RAPs were given money at the AFGM on the day to cover out of town travel expenses Dorothy $50 and Bernadette Duncan $20 PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

215 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes OEH Paul Houston and Sonya Ardill 03/09/ /09/2014 Digital Phone call made to Paul Houston a planning officer in Dubbo Voice Message left An introduction and to obtain address to send off a draft copy of the AHP. (AM) Phone call to OEH and put through to Phil Purcell (works in the same department as Paul Houston and advised that he had gone home but would be back in the office tomorrow 04/09/014) Advised to send to both Sonya Ardill (manager) ed draft copy to both at 2.50 PM 04/09/ /09/2014 Phone call to Paul Houston left message on voice mail for him to call me back to discuss the sent yesterday. Paula advised via that she did not want a copy of the AHP to be sent to OEH without prior MSF review. I ed back to advise yes one has been sent but am following this up via phone calls today. 05/09/ /09/2014 Phone call to Paul Houston, left voice message. 08/09/2014 RESPONSE: Paul Houston retuned my calls, and advised that yes he has received the draft AHP and noted a few comments that he will provide in writing at the end of this week or early next week. Items to be addressed may include: A communication strategy; Roles and Responsibilities of all parties including RAP s; and Long term care of objects/items. I advised that this is still in progress and a meeting will be held next week with relevant stakeholders; and updates will be made to the report. 12/09/2014 received from Sonya Ardill with comments on Draft Aboriginal Heritage plan 10/11/2014 Phone call to Paul Houston, out of office until 6/2/2015 advised to contact Michelle Crawford for OEH Consultation. Phone call to Sonya Ardill as follow up call from sent via Andrew Brownlow. Voice message left. Phone call to Michelle Crawford 3.23 PM Michelle advised that she was currently writing a letter to Andrew to notify that the OEH is satisfied with the changes made to the AHP. Return phone call left message to request copy of OEH letter 11/11/2014 Approval received from Sonya Ardill at OEH via for OEH Approval dated 10/11/2014. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

216 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes Paula de la Paz Pineda And Pedro Fernandez Steve Jackson 14/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP 14/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP Jodie Benton 14/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP Allan Murphy/Andre w Brownlow 14/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP RAP s as above 14/10/ /10/2014 Digital/Hard Copy (RT) Draft AHP Paula de la Paz Pineda And Pedro Fernandez 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP Sturt Daley 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP Jodie Benton 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP Allan Murphy/Andre w Brownlow 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital Draft AHP RAP s as above 23/10/ /10/2014 Digital/Hard Copy (RT) Draft AHP Paula de la Paz Pineda And Pedro Fernandez 28/10/ /10/2014 Digital Minutes Sturt Daley 28/10/ /10/2014 Digital Minutes Jodie Benton 28/10/ /10/2014 Digital Minutes PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

217 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Registered Stakeholder Consultation Date Date Draft AHP Sent Digital or Hard Copy Notes Allan Murphy/Andre w Brownlow 28/10/ /10/2014 Digital Minutes RAP as above 28/10/ /10/2014 Digital/Hard Copy (RT) Minutes Additional Notes: 9/10/2014 Formal acceptance to attend meeting on 20/10/2014 after ing meeting invitation Andrew Brownlow. Jodie Benton. Latisha Ryall. Paula de la Paz Pineda. Wayne Nean. Sturt Daley FRV. Dorothy Tighe RAP. Susan Leslie Briggs - RAP. Alf Priestley RAP. Ray Tighe RAP. Meeting attendance for 20/10/2014 Ray Tighe advised this is the date he wants the meeting. Alf Priestley advised the week of the 20/09/2014 is fine. Wayne Nean advised that the week of the 20/09/2014 is fine. Susan Leslie Briggs advised that the week of the 20/09/2014 is fine. Bernadette Duncan yet to discuss. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

218 ABORIGINAL STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION LOG GREEN LIGHT 11/12/2014 Dorothy Tighe yet to discuss. Loretta Tighe yet to discuss. Meeting attendance for 8/10/2014 All parties could attend except for Green Light. Meeting attendance for 9/10/2014 Pedro Fernandez attending. Paula de la Paz Pineda attending. Allan Murphy attending. Latisha Ryall attending. Susan Leslie Briggs attending. Ray Tighe attending. Alf Priestley attending. Wayne Nean attending. Bernadette Duncan- attending. Dorothy Tighe- attending. Loretta Tighe yet to respond. Additional Notes: Meeting attendance for 24/09/2014 at 2.30 PM 19/09/ Voice message came in automated, Ashleigh receptionist received at 3.00 PM 19/09/2014. I am unable to attend the meeting next week as there has been 3 aboriginal deaths in our community no number of who this is from and no name was recorded possibly Ray Tighe but cannot be 100% certain. PAGE _CONSULTATION LOG_DOP.DOCX

219

220

221

222

223

224 For Office Use Only Council File: Receipt No: Date: / / Application for Road Opening Permit About this form Why a Road Opening Permit is required? To provide a standard policy for the management of public space openings and Restorations that will minimize Council s risk exposure and limit damage to Council s assets. Under the section 138 of Road Acts 1993, a person must require the consent of the road authority to work on road reserve.. Common reasons for a Road Opening Permit as follows: Service connections (water, electricity, telephone, sewer, etc). Storm water connection. Conduit and/or pit installations for public utilities including under boring. Generally all work undertaken on and above road reservation. When does the application become a Permit? The application becomes a permit when: A receipt for the payment of fees for the permit is attached. The permit has been signed by the authorised Council Officer. A Permit number has been provided by council. APPLICANT S DETAILS Applicant s name: _ Given names: _ Postal address: _ Post Code: _ Phone ( ) _ Fax ( ) _ address: CONTRACTOR S DETAILS Contractor s name (if different from above): _ Given names: _ Postal address: _ Post Code: _ Phone ( ) Fax ( ) _

225 DETAILS OF ROAD OPENING Reason for Road Opening: _ Address of the location: Post Code: _ Nearest Cross Street: _ DA /CC Number: Start date: / _/ _ Finish date: _/ _ / Hours of work Monday to Friday: Saturday/Sunday: _ LOCALITY SKETCH Please draw a sketch indicating the street, nearest cross streets, the plant is to stand and be operated, and the footpath/ road way to be affected. Include adjacent properties in the sketch and the nearest cross street. (Please see the attached map). Traffic Control/Management Plans for the proposed work must be attached.

226 INSURANCE DETAILS Name of insurance Company: _ Public Liability Policy No: _ Limit of Indemnity: _ Expiry Date: (Please attach a copy of your certificate of currency to this application form) APPLICATION FEE Fee of $94.00 (inclusive GST) per opening shall apply for Road Opening Permit & Pre- Commencement Inspection. Bond of $ (inclusive GST) per opening shall apply for Road Opening Restoration. To enable refund of bond, please complete and return attached FORM to council@mpsc.nsw.gov.au AGREEMENT ( PLEASE READ & SIGN ) I, the undersigned, apply for permission to make the road opening (s) set out above. I have read the conditions of Public Space Opening & Restoration Policy of Moree Plains Shire Council that is attached with this application and agree to comply with them. I understand that failure to meet any of the conditions can result in the immediate cancellation of the permit and recovery of any associated costs. Signature of applicant: _ Date: PROCEDURE TO LODGE THE APPLICATION By post: Moree Plains Shire Council PO Box 420 Moree NSW 2400 Personal delivery: Level 2 Max Centre Arcade 30 Heber Street Moree NSW 2400 By fax or electronically: Fax: (02) council@mpsc.nsw.gov.au Internet:

227 PAYMENT INFORMATION GUIDELINE Payment in Person Payment can be made in person at Moree Plains Shire Council Administration Office located at Level 2, 30 Heber Street, Moree. Cash, EFTPOS, Credit Card or Cheque will be accepted at this location. Payment through online If you wish to pay through online please make the direct credit to the following Bank Account: BSB Account For fee For bond Payment by Post - Cheque If you wish to pay by cheque please make the cheque payable to Moree Plains Shire Council. You will need two (2) separate cheques. The first will be for the road opening permit fee of $94.00 and the second cheque is for the bond of $ Please post the two cheques with the completed Form to: Moree Plains Shire Council, PO Box 420, MOREE, NSW, 2400 Payment by Credit Card If you wish to pay by credit card please provide the information below: (Please note that two (2) separate transactions will be made; one for the fee of road opening permit and the second for the bond).please note that AMERICAN EXPRESS CARD IS NOT ACCEPTED Credit Card No: Credit Card Expiry Date: Name on the Credit Card: A. Fee of Road Opening Permit: $ B. Bond: $ C. Total Amount being paid: (A+B = C) $ Type of Card/Bank: eg. Visa Credit Card Holder s Contact Number: Card Holders Signature: Date:

228

229

230 Paula de la Paz Pineda Asunto: RE: Confirmation Council is OK with Final Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report From: Lila-Jane Fisher [mailto:lila.fisher@mpsc.nsw.gov.au] Sent: Friday, 10 October :09 PM To: Andrew Brownlow Cc: Murray Amos Subject: RE: Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report Thank you for the update of RMS s additions and your amended report on the 4 th and 7 th October. Council has no concern with the additions to the documents being the road dilapidation and upgrade report and the traffic management plan. Lila Fisher Project and Development Manager Moree Plains Shire Council From: Andrew Brownlow [mailto:abrownlow@geolyse.com] Sent: Friday, 10 October :36 AM To: Lila-Jane Fisher Cc: 'Orange Document Control'; 'Paula de la Paz Pineda' Subject: Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report Lila Apologies for having to ask, but it appears we need something (e mail would suffice) confirming the requirements of the RMS in relation to the Road Dilapidation and Upgrade Report and Traffic Management Plan are acceptable to Council. The two s referenced below, included in the RMS letter ( Appendix B in the upgrade report), and attached to this , clarify what changes were made in these documents in addition to the RMS request for the signage (which is included in an added Section in the upgrade report). Our client is keen to get these reports into Department of Planning and evidence that Council has no issue with the reports, as amended as a result of RMS comment, is being asked for. With thanks Andrew Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley St PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Ph: Fx: Mob: abrownlow@geolyse.com Web: Facebook LinkedIn... IMPORTANT 1

231

232

233

234 Appendix C COMMUNITY CONSULTATION PLAN

235 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Community Consultation Plan (CCP) October

236 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Table of Contents Community Consultation Plan (CCP) Executive summary Introduction Purpose Goal Objectives Stakeholders Engagement parameters Messages Key themes... 7 Strategy Phase one: Pre-construction Phase two: Construction Phase three: Operations Phase four: End of operational life Engagement techniques Engagement techniques Community Reference Group Marketing materials Complaint and feedback management Evaluation Certification Appendix A: Stakeholder database Appendix B: ARENA funding deed - Clause 15 compliance Appendix C: CEFC compliance Appendix D: Planning permit compliance Appendix E: Complaints Procedure Appendix F: Previous Community Consultation Plan Appendix G Community Reference Group Terms of Reference Appendix H: CCP accreditation/certification - FutureEye proposal Appendix I: Meeting facilitation proposal Invigor Consulting

237 Community Consultation Plan October Executive summary The Moree Solar Farm (MSF) consortium is experienced in the development of large-scale Solar and other renewable energy infrastructure projects, and community consultation activities that support such developments. MSF knows that community support is a cornerstone to the ultimate success of any large infrastructure project and as such, will ensure its activities leave a long-term positive legacy in Moree and provide an opportunity for knowledge sharing and positive engagement with the community and other stakeholders. This Community Consultation Plan (CCP) provides a comprehensive engagement strategy in line with best practice (based on IAP2 guidelines) that will: Re-engage with stakeholders and review (and update if required) key themes that have been identified via past consultation, Ensure all stakeholders have up to date information about the project and the MSF partners, Have the opportunity to have direct input into aspects of the Moree Solar Farm s development, and Know where and how to get information relevant to their needs. This plan will also ensure that the objectives and requirements as outlined by ARENA and the CEFC in the Moree Solar Farm Funding Deed are adhered to. (Refer to Appendix B) The CCP s activity plan (Section 9) summarizes the communication tools and timelines applicable to the rollout of the consultation program. Importantly, both the timeline and communication tools will be reviewed as part of the consultation process with the community to ensure they remain appropriate for the project needs and community expectations, in line with best practice. Other critical aspects of the CCP include: A comprehensive Complaints Management Procedure designed to record, track and manage all feedback, complaints and enquiries in accordance with agreed benchmarks. A Complaints Register - to be managed by the Community Engagement Team Activities to ensure adherence to agreed levels for best practice community engagement during all phases including planning, construction and operations. MSF s past activities and engagement in the community is detailed in Appendix E. 3

238 Community Consultation Plan October Introduction The Moree Solar Farm enjoys strong support in the local Moree community from a range of stakeholders that include the general public in Moree, the Council and local MPs, educational facilities and Indigenous community members However, while the broader community is supportive of the project, the project s neighbours do have some concerns that MSF will address using a collaborative approach. The project s history has been a bit of a rollercoaster ride for the community which has included excitement about the project receiving approvals and a grant via the federal Solar Flagships program, to the disappointment of having this federal grant recanted. So while support is strong in the community, it would be naive to assume that there will not be some nervousness present. Communications must be open and honest with trust and transparency provided to the community in order to achieve strong engagement outcomes. This will also be important in the unlikely event that the project is not able to proceed commercially. This Community Consultation Plan (CCP) assumes four project phases: Phase 1 - Pre-construction, Phase 2 - Construction, Phase 3, Operations and Phase 4 - End of operating life. The CCP is a living document, and as each of the four phase s progress, the document will be updated and revised accordingly. In this CCP, the two key techniques to help build strong relationships and demonstrate MSF s commitment to positive outcomes for the community are the Community Reference Group (CRG) and neighbour workshops. The CRG will represent the project s key stakeholders and be formed primarily to design the criteria upon which success of the project will be judged, from the community s perspective, based on the key themes that have been identified through previous consultation and design the criteria/guidelines for a grant that will be made available during operation. Additionally, the Community Reference Group will be asked to review the consultation plan, will reengage the Solar Champions and provide a vehicle for regular project updates to be provided to the community. The workshops with neighbours will focus on collaborating to minimize impacts on the project s neighbours. As required under the ARENA and CEFC guidelines, the CCP will be reviewed at regular intervals and audited in line with best practice. 4

239 Community Consultation Plan October Purpose The purpose of this document is to outline a detailed Community Consultation Plan (CCP) for the Moree Solar Farm pre-construction, referred to in this plan as Phase 1. It will also provide a preliminary, high-level overview of MSF s activities plans throughout the remaining project lifecycles known as phases 2-4. As further information is available about project timings these aspects of the plan will be updated. Phase 2 (construction) will see a CCP written in collaboration with the EPC contractor. The Community Consultation Plan is a living document, designed to be updated and revised as the project progresses. 4. Goal To facilitate meaningful and results based engagement between MSF, the EPC contractor and the Moree community, including Council, community groups, traditional owners, project neighbours and other stakeholder groups throughout the lifecycle of the project to ensure relationships are based on mutual trust and respect. A value set based on collaboration between stakeholders and MSF has been assumed. Inherent in this plan is the flexibility to anticipate, identify and respond to emerging issues. This plan establishes a framework to outline the ongoing activities that MSF has committed to in the lead up to the commencement of construction. 5. Objectives Activities that will support the relevant planning permit conditions; Activities that will fulfil relevant funding conditions relating to community consultation in the ARENA and CEFC funding deed; Ensure measures are in place to record and respond to community concerns, queries and complaints with the aim of working collaboratively to resolve all complaints and issues; Ensure MSF is held accountable to all commitments made to the community throughout each phase of the project; Ensure the positive reputation of MSF and the project is upheld; Activities that promote ongoing strong support for the Moree Solar Farm; Ensure the community has up to date and accessible information throughout the lifecycle of the project; Reengage with project stakeholders to reaffirm support and provide opportunities to have input into preconstruction activities and further phases of the project. 5

240 Community Consultation Plan October Stakeholders MSF has developed a database of stakeholders. This database is a live document and is used to ensure information is distributed to relevant stakeholders, and that a record of communication with stakeholders remains up to date. The CCP will build on existing relationships, provide an avenue for new stakeholders to be informed and ensure there is an ongoing dialogue between MSF and the stakeholder groups. MSF has identified the following stakeholder groups as critical to the project s success: Local Council Government agencies Immediate neighbours Moree community in general Community groups Employment networks Local businesses Traditional owners Landowners Education providers Media 7. Engagement parameters Geographic: Geographically MSF aims to ensure that all people living in the Moree Plains Shire and surrounding area have the opportunity to obtain information and provide feedback about the Moree Solar Farm development and the partners within MSF (Pacific Hydro and FRV). MSF will determine the geographic engagement boundary through meetings and conversations with local community members. Communities within the immediate vicinity of the project (i.e. Moree) will however, remain the key area of focus for engagement activities. Legislative: MSF must comply with: Commitments made in the bid for funding to ARENA; The ARENA funding deed agreement; Commitments made to the CEFC; Planning conditions; EPA legislation; Other legislation relevant to the project; Commitments made through the CCP; Commitments made at workshops and Community Reference Group meetings. 8. Messages MSF is committed to the development of the Moree Solar Farm (even though there are still several key milestones to overcome). The Moree Solar Farm has reduced significantly in size but is still expected to provide a significant number of jobs during construction. MSF is committed to maximising opportunities for local workers. MSF have signed a funding deed from ARENA but funding is conditional on the satisfaction of a number of conditions. MSF have received a loan from the CEFC which is conditional on the project achieving certain Conditions Precedent. There are still several milestones to be reached before we start construction. Pacific Hydro and FRV make up MSF. 6

241 Community Consultation Plan October Key themes The top eight key themes identified in previous Community Consultation Plans as critical components of the project s development from the community s perspective were: 1. Employment 2. Education 3. Water 4. Tourism 5. Energy/Electricity 6. Land, infrastructure and accommodation 7. Security 8. Aboriginal opportunities While these themes will be reviewed with the Community Reference Group to confirm they still represent the top priorities for the community, it is assumed in this CCP that they still represent the most critical aspects of the project, from a community perspective. The Community Reference Group will develop criteria that measure the project s success against these key themes. This set of criteria will be critical to the evaluation of the CCP. In addition to these key broad themes, the project s neighbours, who are treated as a separate stakeholder group to the broader community, have raised the following as the two most important areas. Water flow / flooding Visual amenity Other issues that have been raised by the project s neighbours are: Electromagnetic Frequency and effects on health; Noise levels from the substation, inverters and tracking system; Weed management during operation; Construction traffic and other construction issues inherent with building large scale infrastructure; Glare/reflectivity from the metal support system framing the solar panels; Water management and use especially what water will be used to establish the visual screening plants; Property values; Crop dusting and the height of powerlines; Traffic access during operation, specifically from tourists wishing to view the site Safe design for high winds on site 7

242 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Strategy 9.1 Phase one: Pre-construction This phase takes into consideration engagement activities to be completed between the date of this plan and the start of construction, (expected to be mid-2014). Activities listed below are designed to collaboratively engage with stakeholders and provide information about the project. The most important aspects will be workshops with the project neighbours and other stakeholders on individual topics and moving forward with a Community Reference Group. Direct notification Activity Details When Direct notification (letter, , phone call or visit) to all recorded stakeholders providing an update on the CRG and relevant workshops. Meetings and presentations Community Reference Group (CRG) Dedicated Community Liaison Arrange meeting and presentations to community organisations such as local landcare, CMA, RFA etc. Set up a CRG to develop the criteria that will identify how the community will measure the project s success. The CRG will also provide an opportunity for regular project updates to be provided to key stakeholders and an opportunity for the community to develop the community fund based on priorities for the Moree area. EPC contractor to be involved in this process as required to address contractor-related concerns once shortlisted. An external facilitator will need to be employed to manage this process. required. Material will provide Develop marketing materials for distribution that give the project a visual identity and communicate key messages Letters to go out regarding the CRG in October and notification of workshops as required. November The Terms of Reference have been developed following consultation with stakeholders. Aim for first meeting of the CRG in November Initially this will be a non-locally based person. Once an EPC contractor has MSF has appointed, and made been appointed and financial close contact details (phone, and reached, the contractor s community mailing address) known for a first liaison will be locally based. This person point of contact for the will be required to work with the MSF community. community liaison to ensure continuity Develop a project overview brief, FAQ s and other materials as clear information about the project and MSF, including information for accessing further details about the project and the contact information for the Community Liaison person. across project phases. Developed in consultation with ARENA. Updates will be made available when relevant. 8

243 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Set up and maintain complaints/comments register Participate in local events Liaise with employment networks including Indigenous employment offices to further a skills gap analysis Strategic media placement, briefings and updates MSF to work proactively to ensure EPC contract includes requirements that they are to adhere to best practice community engagement, outrage mitigation and collaborative issues management principals. Workshops with neighbours re flooding/water flow, visual amenity and construction This is to be managed and set up To be complete by end October. by Community Liaison Hold an information Local markets may be the most stand(s)/market stall at appropriate place to attend on a regular appropriate community events as basis. another way to share information ** liaise with Moree Tourism and Moree with the community. Council Further links with local employment networks including Indigenous employment contacts with the aim of undertaking skills gap analysis (possibly via consultancy) **Note, a key focus area for MSF is to identify and provide Indigenous employment opportunities. In order to ensure job opportunities that can be realised we must understand current skills that exist within the community. A skills gap analysis will be critical in building local job targets in EPC contract** Proactively seek out appropriate opportunities to promote details about the project via the local media (free or paid advertising) and ensure local media have the most up to date information about This will be carried out through individual meetings and the employment networks will be invited to the workshop on employment. MSF is developing a list of jobs required to build and operate a solar farm. This information will then be used to carry out a skills gap analysis. Aim to complete analysis by end of Media are an important stakeholder however it is important that we seek to liaise with stakeholders directly first, and through the media afterwards. Therefore, timings for media coverage the project, and contact details forwill be dependent on stakeholder MSF. meetings Media queries to be actioned All communication will be in line with within 2 hours. communications protocol.. Ensure local media have accurate information about the project and are given regular briefings and updates. When RFP s are sent to potential EPC Work proactively with MSF to contractors. ensure collaborative engagement with stakeholders is built into EPC contract requirements. Specific workshops with neighbours to collaboratively design project areas that could potentially have an impact on water flow and also to collaboratively design a fence and visual screening program. An external facilitator will need to be employed to manage this process with the MSF community liaison person and November, depending on harvest 9

244 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Meetings with neighbours re individual concerns Review against CRG key criteria of how we are tracking - if applicable Workshops representatives from the shortlisted EPC contractors. Work proactively with the project s neighbours to ensure Ongoing any individual concerns are addressed. Review against CRG key criteria to determine how we are tracking. This may be part of external audit This will depend on what the criteria are to evaluate consultation and engagement strategy. After meetings held in early August 2013, stakeholders seemed of the view that while the CRG would be useful, a number of workshops around the themes would be more suitable in engaging the broader community and especially in engaging local contractors. Workshops around employment will likely be the most popular. An external facilitator will need to be employed to manage this process with the MSF community liaison person and representatives from the shortlisted EPC contractors. First workshops will be held in February. 10

245 Community Consultation Plan October Phase two: Construction Construction is likely to start in mid-2014 at which time the EPC contractor will write a detailed community consultation plan in collaboration with the MSF community liaison contact. The below activities will need to be fed into the construction community consultation plan. Activity Details Timing Start of construction celebration Event to celebrate the start of construction. Opportunity to thank the local community, invite local dignitaries and stakeholders to participate. Adhere to planning permit, CEFC and ARENA conditions Ensure all relevant planning permit conditions related to community engagement and communications are adhered to. Local Community Liaison Officer A Community Liaison Officer (CLO) will ensure the community has an easily accessible and responsive first point of contact for queries, information and complaints. The CLO will proactively develop relationships with key stakeholders, mange complaints register and work proactively to address potential issues and minimise construction impacts on residents in partnership with MSF s community liaison contact. Update marketing materials Regular newsletter/construction update Set up and maintain Twitter/Facebook/Linkedin accounts Celebrate key milestones Participate in local events Update project materials to detail construction timeline and activities and FAQ. Website should also be updated. Develop and distribute regular newsletters for distribution to stakeholders. The newsletter will provide details about current construction activities and a timeline of construction. It will also include contact details of the website and CLO. Newsletters would be additional to updates provided via the Community Reference Group. All newsletters would form the basis of updates to website and social media (twitter, Facebook or linked in) Opportunity to engage, share information or images and promote job opportunities and the project via social media to support knowledge sharing objectives, engagement and ensuring regular updates to stakeholders. Celebration activities could include tours for stakeholders, media and schools, ARENA, Banks, Council etc or media stories, special presentations to stakeholder groups etc. Hold an information stand(s)/market stall at appropriate community events as another way to share information with the community. Ongoing presentations and meetings Strategic media placement, briefings and updates Ongoing presentations and meetings with CRG and other key stakeholders to share information and updates about project construction.. Proactively seek out appropriate opportunities to provide details about the project and construction via the local media (free or paid advertising) and ensure local media have the most up to date information about the project, and contact details for MSF. Media queries to be actioning within 2 hours. 11

246 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Regular meetings between CLO and construction manager during construction Review against CRG key criteria of how we are tracking Maintain complaints/comments register Neighbour meetings Visual screening program Ensure local media have accurate information about the project and are given regular briefings and updates. CLO should be part of any toolbox or relevant weekly meetings regarding construction to ensure most up to date information is available for community and to inform any changes to construction timelines. Review against CRG key criteria to determine how we are tracking. This may be part of external audit to evaluate consultation and engagement strategy. May do this at the start of construction and part way through depending on criteria set by CRG This is to be managed by the Community Liaison This carries over from team phase 1 Ensure the project s neighbours are kept Throughout informed about construction activities and that construction any complaints, queries or concerns are addressed in a timely and collaborative manner Deliver a visual screening program to neighbours Start program at the as agreed upon during visual amenity workshops beginning of construction. To remain open 12 months after completion of project. Initial maintenance of the plants will be carried out by MSF until plants are established. 12

247 Community Consultation Plan October Phase three: Operations Action Ensure compliance with all relevant legislation and adhere to planning permit, CEFC/ARENA conditions Dedicated Community Liaison Officer Ongoing participation in the community Direct notification Celebrate completion of construction One-on-one meetings and presentations as requested or required Strategic media placement, briefings and updates Presentations and meetings Review with CRG on how we are tracking Maintain complaints/comments register Details Ensure all planning permit conditions are adhered to. Conditions include: Ongoing engagement of Environmental operative for at least 6 months after commencement of operation Advertising the contact details every two years during operation MSF will appoint, and make contact details known, a first point of contact for the community. This may take many forms but will include MSF being involved with local events and activities. Direct notification (letter or ) to all recorded stakeholders on our contact list updating them with the relevant contact details. Celebrate the completion of the project with the community. Be available for one-on-one meetings with stakeholders throughout the project s operation. Be responsive to the local media and maintain relationships by keeping them up to date with important information and milestones Respond to media queries within 2 hours. Regular presentations about the project. This may include tours or other inhouse presentations as part of our commitment to knowledge sharing. Review against key criteria of how we are tracking against community expectations/criteria. This is to be managed by the Community Liaison team 13

248 Community Consultation Plan October Phase four: End of operational life MSF acknowledges that with the end of the operational life of the project, the project will either need to be decommissioned or the technology replaced. In any event, MSF will develop a comprehensive Community Consultation Plan with at least months lead. Importantly MSF remains committed to community consultation throughout the lifecycle of the Moree Solar Farm, including the end of the operational life of the project. 14

249 Community Consultation Plan October Engagement techniques In line with best practice, this CCP uses the IAP2 spectrum when developing techniques. The aim is to move along the spectrum as far as practicable for each individual stakeholder group and each decision to be made. Level on IAP2 spectrum Examples of techniques Inform Progress report Fact sheet Website Information stand / open house Consult Public meetings Comment forms Interviews Involve Tours and field trips Collaborate Ongoing advisory groups (Community Reference Group) Focused conversation Workshops 10.1 Engagement techniques Advertising Technique Comment form Community Liaison Community Reference Group Focused conversation Information stand / open house Target Notify target Details audience audience Advertise all public meetings, where to All stakeholders Advertisement gather information, contact details A comment form will be available at all All stakeholders Website meetings and on our website to ensure stakeholders have an opportunity to provide feedback to MSF about how we are engaging with them, what they think of the project and where we can improve our processes. Appoint an MSF Community Liaison person Set up a CRG to determine the criteria by which the community will evaluate the project s success, help facilitate the distribution of information, set up guidelines for a grant program and be the key voice of the community to MSF. A focused conversation with key stakeholders to identify what job skills exist in the communities and what training is needed to fill the gaps. (Also suggest a comprehensive skills gap analysis is done by an external consultant) IAP2 spectrum Inform Consult All stakeholders Contact details ton/a be included on all communication All stakeholders TAFE Local Council Indigenous groups Employment network Information stall at the local markets or All stakeholders similar as well as an information booth at the local library or council chambers once per month. Project and MSF partner information will be available as well as the ability for Advertisement Letters Media release Presentations Letter consultant Letters Advertisements Media release Collaborate Collaborate Inform / Consult 15

250 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Media releases attendees to leave comments. Issue media releases as relevant such as advising that MSF re-engaging with the community, Partners will be available to discuss project at an information session etc. All stakeholders Media release Community groups Letters Inform Consult Council Indigenous Groups Meetings / Presentations / Tours Meetings with stakeholders to inform them on the updated project, introduce the MSF partners, discuss their concerns, questions, issues of importance. Knowledge sharing Education and work force facilities Media outlets Neighbours Solar champions Tourism Project progress reports Site tour Static display Telephone hotline / address Website Send project progress reports to each stakeholder in the contact database whenever there is news about the project. Also provide updates/progress reports at CRG meetings. Arrange regular tours of the Moree Solar Farm site Have project information available at local council office, local library and other suitable venues. A dedicated 1800 free call phone line and address for people to enquire about the project, leave comments or lodge a complaint. To be listed on all communication. Update the website with project information as relevant. Ensure contact details and complaints procedure available. All stakeholders All stakeholders including: Council Indigenous groups Neighbours Media Solar champions Visitors to Moree Letter In person In person Inform Involve Project summary Inform All stakeholders All stakeholders Listed on all communications All stakeholders List on all communications Inform / Consult Inform 16

251 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Focus Groups Workshops Focus groups where the general community is invited to participate in discussions about a particular theme Workshops where the project s neighbours are invited to work collaboratively on particular issues important to them. All stakeholders Letters Local advertisements Local media release Project neighbours Letters Phone calls Involve Collaborate 10.2 Community Reference Group Purpose To design criteria by which the community will evaluate the project s success (criteria to be determined against key themes identified in previous consultation), To design the guidelines, funding and allocation criteria for a grant that will be made available during the project s operation To provide a vehicle for all stakeholders to have regular access and updates from MSF, and Participants Ideally a member from each stakeholder group will be represented on the CRG; however the CRG will be open to any stakeholder group who feel they should be represented Participants will be identified via consultation with stakeholders to ensure it is an inclusive group. The CRG participants must have a clear role Participants that have been confirmed as of 9 October 2013 include: Tourism Moree Chamber of commerce TAFE Employment networks Timing The first meeting will be held in November Meetings must be planned and announced in advance. Suggest a monthly meeting starting November Materials need to be distributed in advance Terms of reference / charter See Appendix G Implementation A trained facilitator will run the CRG process. The person should not be from MSF. A quote from Invigor Consulting is in Appendix I. 17

252 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 The CRG must always know how their input will be used and MSF commits to informing the CRG on how their input will be used. MSF must commit to work with CRG in a constructive, open and transparent manner Documentation Resources Meetings will be minuted. MSF will display agenda and minutes on website Community Engagement team will advise CRG on how their recommendations have been implemented Local Community Liaison Officer employed by the EPC contractor will be involved in this process MSF staff EPC contractor staff Facilitator Administration support Venue/equipment Tea/Coffee will be provided 10.3 Marketing materials Item Website Project summary Information sheet on MSF partners Business cards Brand guidelines Maps including project layout and traffic routes Comment / feedback form 11. Complaint and feedback management During Phase 1, Pacific Hydro s Communication and HSE teams will handle any complaints and feedback from the community in liaison with FRV. A complaints procedure can be found in Appendix E. The complaints procedure will be updated during phases 2 in collaboration with the EPC contractor and during phases 3 and 4 by MSF. 12. Evaluation An audit of the community engagement plan will establish if the plan meets best practise requirements and regular reviews of the plan will allow for adjustments to the activities proposed, as required. Evidence of the success of the Community Consultation Plan will be sought by collecting feedback from stakeholders either anecdotally or through a survey/s. Ultimately the Community Consultation Plan will be deemed a success if all objectives have been achieved. 18

253 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 However the project s success will be measured against the criteria determined by the Community Reference Group and the satisfaction of the project s neighbours with the engagement process. The CRG and workshops are the primary tools by which engagement will take place with stakeholders. The CRG and neighbour workshops are designed to provide a very empowering opportunity for stakeholders to work in collaboration with MSF. 13. Certification MSF will engage an independent, responsible and qualified person to review the CCP and ensure it is in line with best practice for a project of this nature. 19

254 Community Consultation Plan October Appendix A: Stakeholder database Not for public distribution 20

255 Community Consultation Plan October Appendix B: ARENA funding deed - Clause 15 compliance Clause 15 requirement (a) The Recipient must, within 40 Business Days from the Commencement Date, develop a Community Consultation Plan for the Project to be agreed with ARENA and, thereafter during the Agreement Period, the Recipient must implement and update the Community Consultation Plan. Compliance with Clause requirement CCP s have been developed for the Moree Solar Farm since the project applied for funding through the Solar Flagships Program. These are attached in Appendix E. (b) The Community Consultation Plan must include the following features: (i) identification of all key A stakeholder database was created stakeholder groups, including in early 2010 and now holds around local communities that are 300 contacts. potentially affected by the Project; Section of CCP Proposed on-going compliance All An initial CCP will be developed by 14 May 2013 in consultation with ARENA and the MSF partners in line with this requirement. MSF will continue to develop this CCP throughout the full lifecycle of the project. A resource will be appointed to manage and maintain the plan. 6 This database will continue to be updated with stakeholder information throughout the life of the project. Key task in initial consultation will be to review the stakeholder list, update where appropriate and ensure all stakeholders have been included (ii) an outline of the past and proposed community consultation processes to be undertaken that includes the following: (A) public notification of meetings; Historically, meetings were advertised in the local papers, the website was updated, newsletters distributed and posters were displayed in prominent window locations in town. (B) itinerary of meetings to be conducted, groups involved and agenda for meetings; (C) provision of information at meetings and local information sites; Our stakeholder database contains information on previous meeting dates and actions/outcomes of meetings. Historically project information sheets and business cards have been made available at meetings. The website has also been updated when relevant. 11 MSF will continue to advertise meetings in local newspapers, directly notify stakeholders through letters/ s and update the Moree Solar Farm website when appropriate. There may also be opportunities to provide information via Moree Tourism or Council newsletters. 11 Section 11 of the CCP outlines planned activities for the next six months. This activity plan will be updated and provided to ARENA every 6 months. All meetings will comply with the requirements such as 11 agendas and details of who is involved. Project information sheets will be updated and distributed as the project develops, The website will be updated as the project develops, Information sheets about the project partners will be developed; maps and other information about the project will be made available as appropriate. 21

256 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 (D) documentation of attendees, questions and answers and follow-up issues required arising from meetings; and (E) an outline for stakeholders on how to access the latest information in respect of community consultation matters; Attendance, enquiries and feedback has been registered via the stakeholder database. The previous Community Relations Manager from BP Solar managed all correspondence and tracked actions and feedback. A meeting minute template was available to ensure actions were noted and responses tracked using the database. Website 1800 number 11 Attendance sheets will be captured in all meetings along with the agenda and minutes. Specific enquiries will be tracked via the stakeholder database. Minutes will be taken at each meeting using a template to be developed. Consultation committee/focus groups etc.? 11 As per the activity plan, stakeholders will be directly notified at appropriate points during the project development. Initially this will be through letters advising that MSF is re-engaging with the community about the project. The website will continually be updated through the life of the project and it will be the best avenue for up-todate information. Stakeholders can register for updates via the website thereby receiving news straight to the stakeholder s inbox. Updated project information sheets will be available at meetings and through the local council offices. (iii) an outline of how community consultation activities align with Project Milestones; TBA Stakeholders will be asked how they want to be kept informed. Phone number? The CCP is designed to support the project activities and will be updated as the project develops. [ During phase 1, the key project milestones that affect how we engage with the community are financial close and the beginning of construction. Once a detailed construction plan is available, the CCP will be updated to reflect the relevant project 22

257 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 (iv) a process for maintaining an up-to-date record of submissions, complaints and questions arising from community consultations and the responses provided to these submissions complaints and questions; (v) a process for regularly: (A) monitoring and updating the Community Consultation Plan and the community consultations undertaken; and (B) reporting to the Recipient's management, consortium members (if applicable) and other key groups (whether government or nongovernment) as required by ARENA to ensure the ongoing improvement of community engagement, that is consistent with relevant industry standards and best practice for a project of this nature and the types of community consultation to be undertaken; (vi) a process for regularly providing to ARENA, during the 12 and Appendix D[ milestones. A complaints procedure has been created for ongoing management of complaints. The complaints procedure will be updated for each relevant project phase and a copy provided to ARENA. All enquiries, complaints and feedback will be stored in the stakeholder database. A feedback form will be developed. The website will have a feedback function. 10 The Community Liaison will continue to manage and track consultation in conjunction with the MSF partners and local representatives. The EPBC Contractor will be requested to demonstrate compliance with Clause 15 and MSF s commitment to best practice community consultation. MSF will include updates on community consultation and any updates to the CCP in the monthly progress reports provided to ARENA as required in Schedule 3, item 1 (b) (viii) (F). MSF will provide a certificate that the CCP is up to date and is being implemented in each month s project 23

258 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Agreement Period, evidence that the Recipient has engaged in community consultation in relation to the Project; and (vii) a timeframe within which the Recipient must provide to ARENA notification of all submissions, complaints and questions arising from community consultation and responses provided by the Recipient to any submissions, complaints or questions arising from the community consultation. Appendix D review report as required under Schedule 3, item 1 (b)(x). A complaints procedure has been created for ongoing management of complaints including timeframes required for close out of submissions. (c) On or before Financial Close, the Recipient must provide to ARENA certification from an independent, responsible and qualified person that the Community Consultation Plan is, in the reasonable opinion of that person, appropriate and consistent with best practice for a project of this nature and the types of community consultation to be undertaken, and that, based on reasonable enquiries, it appears it is being implemented. (d) The person appointed to provide the certification under clause 15(c) must not be a Recipient Shareholder, an employee, director, other officeholder or Related Entity of the Recipient, or any other person 13 An independent certification of this CCP will be provided to ARENA by 30 June An independent certification of this CCP will be provided to ARENA by 30 June MSF will seek agreement with ARENA on who the independent certifier is. At this stage, it is likely to be AECOM. 24

259 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 having (or having had) a significant involvement in the Project, the initial application by the Recipient for funding from ARENA, or any Report submitted under this Agreement. (e) The Recipient must make the Community Consultation Plan available to any person from Financial Close to the End Date. The Recipient may make the Community Consultation Plan available by publishing it on its website. A copy of the CCP will be available on the Moree Solar Farm website once approved by ARENA and the MSF partners and will be made available by other means if required. 25

260 Community Consultation Plan October Appendix C: CEFC compliance The CEFC requires that MSF comply with the ARENA guidelines including Clause 15 (stakeholder engagement). These are detailed in Appendix B. 26

261 Community Consultation Plan October 2013 Appendix D: Planning permit compliance Clause C8 requirement Proposed on-going compliance Prior to the commencement of construction, the Proponent shall prepare andongoing reviews and updates of the CCP. implement a Community information Plan which sets out the community communication and consultation processes to be implemented during construction and operation of the project. The Plan shall include but not be limited to: (a) procedures to inform the local community of planned investigations and construction activities, including blasting works (if any); A detailed construction CCP will be written once a more definitive timeline is available. (b) procedures to inform the relevant community of construction traffic routes During the activities outlined in this CCP, stakeholders will be asked how and any potential disruptions to traffic flows and amenity impacts; they would like to be kept informed about construction issues. (c) procedures to consult with local landowners with regard to construction traffic to ensure the safety of livestock and to limit disruption to livestock movements; (d) procedures to inform the community where work outside the construction hours specified in condition D5, in particular noisy activities, has been approved; and (e) procedures to inform and consult with affected landowners to rehabilitate impacted land A detailed construction CCP will be written once a more definitive timeline is available. During meetings with stakeholders construction issues will be raised and feedback will be sought. A detailed construction CCP will be written once a more definitive timeline is available. A detailed construction CCP will be written once a more definitive timeline is available. A detailed construction CCP will be written once a more definitive timeline is available. Further a detailed land rehabilitation plan will be included with the construction CCP. 27

262 Community Consultation Plan October Appendix E: Complaints Procedure To be supplied by end of October. 28

263 Community Consultation Plan October Appendix F: Previous Community Consultation Plan 29

264 Community Consultation Plan October Appendix G Community Reference Group Terms of Reference 30

265 Community Consultation Plan October Appendix H: CCP accreditation/certification - FutureEye proposal Not for public distribution 21. Appendix I: Meeting facilitation proposal Invigor Consulting Not for public distribution 31

266 Appendix D EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN

267 EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN Current Revision Revision: Reason for Revision: Date of Issue: 00 First release to client 26/11/2014 Prepared By: Reviewed By: Approved By: Engineer Project Engineer Project Manager Date: Date: Date:

268 Revision History Rev Reason for Revision Date Prepared Reviewed Approved 00 Initial Draft (MSF-GLC PLN-005-R00) 26/11/2014 CATCON GLC

269 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm CATCON SITE EMERGENCY PLAN SF-38 Moree Solar Farm Document No. J839-Plan-02 REVISION STATUS Rev Date Revision Details Reviewed By Senior Manager Signature Approved by Project Manager Signature A 21 Aug 14 First draft QSEM B 10 Nov 14 Second draft CHSEM (KO) Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 1 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

270 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 The Site Emergency Plan is prepared to describe the procedures that have been implemented to allow personnel to plan for and to respond to emergency situations at the site PREPAREDNESS 3 2. SITE COMMUNICATIONS 3 3. EMERGENCY RESPONSE 4 4. PLANT and VEHICLE EMERGENCY 5 5. TRENCH COLLAPSE 5 6. FIRE AND BUSHFIRE 6 7. CONFINED SPACE (SEWER MANHOLE) 6 8. DANGEROUS GOODS 7 9. CYCLONE RESPONSE 8 10 MEDICAL (INJURY) EMERGENCY 8 11 ENVIRONMENTAL EMERGENCY THREATENING PHONE CALL / BOMB THREAT EVACUATION PHYSICAL THREAT CRITICAL INCIDENT RECOVERY EMERGENCY EVACUATION DRILLS INVESTIGATING AND REPORTING 10 Attachment 1 11 EMERGENCY POSTER 11 CONTACT PHONE NUMBERS 13 Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 2 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

271 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm INTRODUCTION The Site Emergency Plan is prepared to describe the procedures that have been implemented to allow personnel to plan for and to respond to emergency situations at the site. See CATCON Procedure SPS-07 Emergency Procedures. The CATCON project manager shall review the plan at 6 month intervals, when significant changes occur (e.g. access and egress changes) and after major emergencies, to evaluate its effectiveness. 1. PREPAREDNESS CATCON shall arrange that: Personnel are advised of this plan at the site induction, with periodic reminders at toolbox meetings and 3 monthly briefings on the plan and responsibilities A First Aid Risk Assessment (Form SF-44) has been completed and implemented A Fire Risk Assessment has been completed and implemented Personnel declare medical conditions at the time of their inductions PCBU have enough trained first aid personnel on site (as determined in the First Aid Risk Assessment) PCBU have provided the necessary resources to respond to emergencies e.g.: o Rescue equipment is available(especially during confined space work) o A stretcher is available, if applicable o A chemical response kit is available o Firefighting equipment is available PCBU have emergency response personnel are skilled in their tasks; arrange training as necessary PCBU hazardous chemical registers are up to date MSDS are available for the chemicals that are in use on the site Emergency posters and site contact details are displayed, with current information (example in Attachment 1) Responses to major plant incidents (rollover etc) and collapse of ground incidents have been considered in the risk assessments (SWMS) for such tasks An emergency assembly point is signposted The local area is considered to determine the availability and capability of emergency services, and to assess the impact of site emergencies on nearby properties 2. SITE COMMUNICATIONS In the event of an emergency, site communications are at least one of the following means: 1. Mobile phone 2. Two Way radios located in machines or hand held Project 2-way radio channel CHANNEL:. During an emergency, personnel are alerted by the call EMERGENCY, EMERGENCY, EMERGENCY Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 3 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

272 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm The supervisor or site manager responds. Other personnel maintain radio silence, unless they are invited to join the discussion on the radio and all machinery and vehicles must park up safe to do so until the all clear is given. 3. EMERGENCY RESPONSE Emergency becomes known Assess the situation Ensure your own safety Notify your Supervisor (Emergency Response Person) Call for assistance Make the site safe Assess the situation Ensure your own safety Stop the situation becoming worse ensure your own safety Advise Project Manager & Head Office Evacuate if necessary OR Control the situation Direct the response, rescue, recovery Call Emergency Services if necessary Ensure access route is known and clear Account for all personnel Advise neighbours if necessary Declare ALL CLEAR Arrange critical incident de-brief if necessary Incident Report Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 4 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

273 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm In the event of an emergency, the initial response is critical to ensure that the necessary assistance is provided in a timely manner to safeguard life. The initial response process comprises the following critical steps: 1. Notification of an emergency and recording of facts, 2. Organising emergency assistance to the incident scene, and 3. Maintaining contact with scene and seeking external response if appropriate It is important to note that any site personnel may be called upon to assist with the internal emergency response and assume a role for which they hold the relevant skills / competencies / experience. For example, qualified first aid personnel may be required to render first aid, competent operators to assist with vehicle recovery etc. The main objective of the site emergency response will be to: stabilise the situation to the extent of resource capability take steps to prevent escalation in severity until external emergency services arrive No person is to provide assistance if doing so places that person or others at risk. Wait for external assistance to arrive where required. 4. PLANT and VEHICLE EMERGENCY Emergency Call on the site radio Notify Supervisor Call Emergency Services DO NOT ENDANGER YOURSELF OR OTHERS Assess the area and make it safe (pedestrians, traffic, collapsing ground, no sparks or flames) Help the injured Rescue trapped personnel, under the direction of the Supervisor or a competent person Contain any spills Head Office notifies Regulatory Authority DO NOT RESTORE THE SITE UNTIL REGULATORY AUTHORITIES HAVE INSPECTED THE SITE 5. TRENCH COLLAPSE Emergency Call on the site radio Notify Supervisor Call Emergency Services DO NOT ENDANGER YOURSELF OR OTHERS Assess the area and make it safe (pedestrians, traffic, collapsing ground, gas leaks, electricity, no sparks or flames) Help the injured Shut down nearby plant and equipment to minimise ground vibration Assist or rescue trapped personnel, under the direction of the supervisor or a competent person; give priority to clearing the person s airway and to removing soil from around the chest Use only hands and hand tools, unless you are absolutely certain that machine digging is safe Head Office notifies Regulatory Authority DO NOT RESTORE THE SITE UNTIL REGULATORY AUTHORITIES HAVE INSPECTED THE SITE Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 5 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

274 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm 6. FIRE AND BUSHFIRE In case of fire, personnel should Emergency call on the site radio Notify others in the immediate area Notify Project Manager or Supervisor If safe to do so: Use a fire extinguisher or water cart to extinguish the fire Prevent the fire from spreading Remove combustible materials from path of fire Ensure the fire is completely extinguished do not leave the area unattended If fire cannot be extinguished: RING Emergency Response (Fire Brigade 000) OR the Local Brigade Keep the area clear of bystanders, maintain a safe distance from the fire Tyre Fire: Burning tyres can explode violently Ensure that any equipment used in extinguishing the fire is checked and replaced as necessary Vehicle Tyre Fires: STOP driving ASAP (do not spread burning rubber) Emergency call on site radio Driver to exit cab on opposite side of tyre fire Keep clear of burning vehicle Earthmoving Equipment Tyre Fire: Establish a 300m radius NO GO ZONE Call the Fire Brigade Only vehicles are to approach the plant and it must be from the rear or opposite side to the tyre fire, water carts may reverse up to the tire to use back sprays ONLY 7. CONFINED SPACE (e.g. SEWER MANHOLE) Emergency Call on the site radio Call for assistance to ensure that there are at least 2 people on the ground at the chamber Advise emergency services (noted on the entry permit form) if there appears to be a serious injury. Fire Brigade and Ambulance have specialist rescue teams (Phone 000). Give precise details of your location; arrange to escort emergency services, if necessary. Raise the person on the winch, unless a serious injury is suspected. DO NOT ENTER THE CHAMBER / CONFINED SPACE Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 6 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

275 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm 8. DANGEROUS GOODS A dangerous goods event would involve a spill or leakage, or coming into contact with or swallowing, of a hazardous substance during transport, handling or storage. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for chemicals used on site are available at the site office. A register of chemicals held on site is available at the site office. As a minimum, a 170L Spill Response Kit will be maintained permanently on site. Emergency call on the site radio Notify others in the immediate area Notify Project Manager or Supervisor Determine the danger posed by the substance (refer to MSDS), is it: Toxic? Flammable? Explosive? If safe to do so: Control flow by turning off valves or create earth bunds Prevent the substance from spreading or entering waterways Use the Spill Response Kit to contain and absorb spills Advise Emergency Services and EPA (Head Office will do this) Dispose of the waste to a licensed site If the product is unsafe contact: Emergency Response (Fire Brigade 000) Keep the area clear of bystanders Maintain a safe distance from the spill Ensure safe passage for emergency vehicles If swallowed, breathed or has entered the eye or irritating the skin: Refer to the MSDS Emergency Response (Ambulance 000) Poisons Information ( ) Take the person and the MSDS to the local medical facility Send the chemical container o the clinic with the patient Ensure any equipment used for the response is checked and replaced as necessary Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 7 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

276 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm 9. CYCLONE RESPONSE Not used 10. MEDICAL (INJURY) EMERGENCY Call 000 for a serious injury that may require immediate external medical assistance Emergency Call on the site radio Notify Supervisor and Designated First Aider DO NOT ENDANGER YOURSELF OR OTHERS Assess the injury; report the condition of the injured to the Designated First Aider; help the injured within your abilities Assess the area and make it safe (pedestrians, traffic, collapsing ground, gas leaks, electricity, no sparks or flames) Designated First Aider treats the injured, and assesses if further treatment or Ambulance, is necessary Head Office notifies regulatory authority, if necessary (do not restore the site until regulatory authorities have inspected the site) 11. ENVIRONMENTAL EMERGENCY Examples: Major contamination (by erosion, sedimentation or chemical spill) of waterways or stormwater; major fire in a chemical store Notify Supervisor DO NOT ENDANGER YOURSELF OR OTHERS Assess the area and make it safe (pedestrians, traffic, collapsing ground, gas leaks, electricity, no sparks or flames) Help any injured person Stabilise the situation, if possible (divert water to a suitable site, stop any leaks, build a bund around a spill) Head Office notifies Regulatory Authority DO NOT RESTORE THE SITE UNTIL REGULATORY AUTHORITIES HAVE INSPECTED THE SITE 12. THREATENING PHONE CALL / BOMB THREAT Threatening phone calls are likely to be received by the office staff. This may include a Bomb Threat. In the event of threatening phone call, the following should be followed: The person receiving the call should: Keep the caller on the line as long as possible. Get as many details as possible and any information that might establish the caller s identity. If possible, transfer the call to the Project Manager, or Department Head. If this is not possible, notify these persons when the call is completed. NEVER HANG UP UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, EVEN IF/AFTER THE CALLER HANGS UP. Telstra may still be able to trace the call. Use a different telephone to notify others. Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 8 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

277 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm 13. EVACUATION In rare circumstances, it might be necessary to evacuate the whole site. The decision to evacuate will be made by the senior person on the site in consultation with the person who is at the site of the event. The order to evacuate will be given to all personnel on site by word of mouth, two-way radio or by mobile phone. On some sites, a siren might be appropriate. When the instruction to evacuate is received, personnel move to the designated assembly point. During the evacuation, personnel will check that all personnel in the vicinity are joining the evacuation, including subcontractors, visitors, client s personnel etc. At the assembly point, a head count is taken to verify that all personnel are accounted for. Personnel do not leave the assembly point unless they have been instructed to do so by a supervisor. The senior person on the site will declare when the site is clear for a return to work. 14. PHYSICAL THREAT Remain calm speak calmly Call for assistance Do not aggravate the situation keep a distance away from the aggressor, if possible Remember details of the event that might help us to identify the aggressor 15. CRITICAL INCIDENT RECOVERY After the conclusion of an emergency situation, the Project Manager may arrange for a Critical Incident Debriefing for all affected personnel. This may be appropriate in any situation on the site resulting in death or traumatic injury leading to hospitalisation. Debriefing may also be desirable following any other incident involving threat to health or life, where employees may be adversely affected. The Project Manager will liaise with the provider regarding the type and timing of treatment. Counseling should be considered for all parties involved in an emergency including casualties, families, witnesses, workmates and response personnel. Any person experiencing on-going distress from the incident should be referred for counselling and a return to work programme in accordance with SPS 18 Return to Work. Further debriefing involving appropriate representatives of the site response personnel, emergency services and others should occur after the emergency to evaluate the effectiveness of each aspect of the company s response and subsequent management. For CATCON, the provider of the debriefing service is the ACCESS Programs Phone Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 9 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

278 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm 16. EMERGENCY EVACUATION DRILLS CATCON may conduct an evacuation drill in addition to any conducted by the Principal Contractor. The drill should be notified in advance to the Principal Contractor, other site contractors and neighbours as appropriate, but not necessarily to CATCON personnel. The announcement at the start of the drill should clearly identify the event as a drill. The drill should be conducted by all personnel as a genuine emergency. During the drill, the Site Manager and HSE Advisor should observe the conduct of personnel and on completion, conduct a debriefing with all participants as a group. Any deficiencies must be identified and the plan, information and training amended as appropriate. On some projects, an evacuation drill may be inappropriate. On all sites, CATCON will ensure that personnel are briefed in the contents and requirements of the Emergency Plan every 3 months. 17. INVESTIGATING AND REPORTING The site of any emergency incident should be barricaded, and entry restricted, in accordance with requirements of the Project Manager or external authority. An investigation is initiated as soon possible after the emergency. However, data collection and the identification of witnesses should be initiated as soon as possible. Those personnel with appropriate investigation expertise and experience should carry out an investigation in accordance with the Accident and Incident Reporting procedure. Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 10 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

279 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm Attachment 1 EMERGENCY POSTER FIRE POLICE 000 AMBULANCE - IN THE CASE OF ACCIDENT OR EMERGENCY - Use site Radio Channel " " to make emergency call as follows 1. EMERGENCY - EMERGENCY - EMERGENCY When this call is heard over the radio all other personnel are to maintain radio silence and park up all machinery and light vehicles where safe to do so. Supervisor or Site Manager now takes control of the situation 2. Person making the Emergency call is to be ready to provide the following information: a) Your name and location b) Nature of the emergency c) Number of people injured/involved (No names over the radio to be given) d) What assistance is required? e) What hazards exist? GAS N/A WATER / SEWER Moree Shire Council ELECTRICAL Essential Energy TELSTRA POLICE ATTENDANCE Moree Station: (02) POISONS INFORMATION NSW WORKCOVER INCIDENT NOTIFICATION NSW ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AGENCY (If above number unavailable call) DESIGNATED FIRST AID PERSONNEL: Kyle O Donoghue Phone: Phone:.... Phone:.. FIRST AID KITS LOCATED AT SITE HUTS & SUPERVISORS VEHICLES NOMINATED EMERGENCY PERSONNEL: Kyle O Donoghue Phone: Geoff West Phone: Phone:.. Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 11 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

280 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm NEAREST DOCTORS: Hospital: Moree Hospital: 66 Alice Street Moree Ph: (02) Fauna: Snakes: Peter Spilsbury Wires: Critical Incident Debriefing: ACCESS Programs Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 12 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

281 Site Emergency Plan for: Moree Solar Farm CONTACT PHONE NUMBERS CATCON Head Office: Ph Fax Site Office: Ph. To be advised Fax. Construction Manager: Ph. mob HSEQ Manager: Ph. mob Project Manager: Ph. To be advised mob. Site Manager: Ph. To be advised mob. Site Engineer: Ph. To be advised mob. HSE Advisor: Ph. To be advised mob. Supervisor: Ph. To be advised mob. Green Light Contractors Project Manager: Pedro Fernandez Assistant Project Manager: Shaun Curran Construction Manager: Geoff West NJ Construction Project Manager: Richard Brookes Construction Manager: to be advised Form No: SF-38 Rev: 5 Rev Date: Sep 2013 Authorised by: QSE Manager Page 13 of 13 C:\Users\Paula\Google Drive\AUSTRALIA - Moree\ MOREE\25. HEALTH AND SAFETY\EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN\J839-Site Emergency Plan- Moree Solar Farm - RevB.docx

282 Appendix E NOXIOUS WEEDS

283 This document was originally published on the website of the CRC for Australian Weed Management, which was wound up in To preserve the technical information it contains, the department is republishing this document. Due to limitations in the CRC s production process, however, its content may not be accessible for all users. Please contact the department s Weed Management Unit if you require more assistance.

284 M a n a g i n g w e e d s f o r b i o d i v e r s i t y African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum) Recorded distribution The problem African boxthorn (commonly known as boxthorn) is a widespread weed in regional Australia. It is considered a major problem because it invades native vegetation, alters habitat and overruns pastures and other areas. It forms dense, impenetrable thickets that exclude other plants, can provide shelter and food for feral animals such as foxes, rabbits, starlings and sparrows and reduce access for stock, native animals, people and vehicles. Its large thorns can also injure livestock and puncture vehicle tyres and several pest insect species breed in its fruit. Native fauna requirements should be taken into account during management of boxthorn infestations. For example, boxthorn in coastal regions can interfere with seabird breeding and displace native shrubs such as nitre bush. However, in some situations where much or all of the original native vegetation cover has been removed, boxthorn s dense foliage may be used as habitat by native fauna such as fairy wrens and the fruit may be a food source for native animals. Many agencies, community groups and individuals expend considerable resources each year on planning and undertaking boxthorn control. While not among the 20 Weeds of National Significance, boxthorn was ranked a close 24th in the assessment of Australia s worst weeds. However, very little research has been done on its ecology. The weed African boxthorn is an intricately branched shrub with large thorns. Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell African boxthorn is a much branched, perennial shrub, commonly 2 3 m tall, but may grow up to 6 m tall. Branches are hairless and stiff and end in sturdy thorns. Numerous thorns also occur at right angles along the branches. The leaves are generally mm long, 4 10 mm wide, bright green, smooth and rather fleshy. They are oval in shape with a rounded tip and occur in clusters along branchlets and at the base of thorns. Boxthorn mainly flowers in spring and summer but flowers may be present any time of year. Flowers hang on stalks, singly or in pairs. They are white to mauve with a tubular base, usually fivelobed and about 12 mm in diameter. Fruit is a smooth round berry, 5 12 mm long, green ripening to bright orangered, containing more than 20 seeds. The deep, woody taproot is branched and re-sprouts vigorously if broken or cut. Key points Boxthorn is spread into natural areas and pasture by birds and foxes. Boxthorn re-sprouts readily from roots left in the ground if not poisoned or removed completely. Correct weed identification is essential. Australian native species that may resemble boxthorn occur within its current range. Prevention is the most cost-effective form of weed control. For established infestations in native vegetation, a carefully planned, long-term program is needed to eliminate boxthorn with minimum disturbance. Mature boxthorn plants may provide habitat for some native fauna. African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum

285 2 Weed identification and similar native species One native and three weedy boxthorns (Lycium spp.) occur in Australia. All are thorny shrubs which produce berries, with white or purple flowers and petals joined in a tube at the base. The native species, Australian boxthorn (Lycium australe) grows across southern mainland Australia, mainly in drier areas west of the Great Dividing Range. How to identify boxthorns (Lycium spp.) in Australia African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum Status Plant habit Lateral branches Leaves Flowers Fruits Current distribution in Australia Australian boxthorn (Lycium australe) NATIVE Shrub commonly to 1.5 m tall, rarely grows to 2.5 m Leafy, often ending in a spine Usually less than 5 times as long as broad, thick, mostly mm wide 8 12 mm long Orange-red berry, 2 5 mm diameter, 5 20 seeds NSW, Vic., SA, WA Other spiny native shrubs African boxthorn (L. ferocissimum) WEED Shrub commonly to 3 m tall, may grow to 6 m Leafy, mostly longer than 10 mm, ending in a stout spine Usually less than 5 times as long as broad, 4 10 mm wide mm long Orange-red berry, 5 10 mm diameter, seeds All states and territories Chinese boxthorn or wolfberry (L. barbarum) WEED Shrub to 2.5 m tall, arching branches, often with few laterals Leafless, mostly 2 10 mm long, may end in a spine Usually less than 5 times as long as broad, angular tip, single leaves 5 15 mm wide mm long Orange-red berry, 3 4 mm diameter, approx. 20 seeds All states and territories except WA and NT Kaffir boxthorn (L. afrum) WEED Shrub to 2 m tall Leafy, ending in a stout spine At least 5 times as long as broad, up to 24 mm long mm long Purplish berry, 10 mm diameter, approx. 20 seeds Do not confuse African boxthorn with spiny native shrubs that may look similar and occupy similar types of habitat. None have spines as large and rigid as those on mature African boxthorn, which may be up to 15 cm long on main stems. Key features of native species that may look like boxthorn: 1. Leaves fleshy, fruit a berry: Nitre bush or dillon bush (Nitraria billardierei) is a spreading, rounded shrub that grows in drier areas and coastal regions of mainland Australia and on many islands off Western Australia and South Australia. Leaves and flower parts may be felted. Flower petals are hooded. Fruit is a purple, red or golden oblong berry with only one seed. Photo: Peri Coleman Vic. 2. Leaves not fleshy: Spiny fanflower or currant bush (Scaevola spinescens) is widespread in the drier regions of mainland Australia. Flowers are fan-shaped. Fruit is a round, fleshy berry, dark-purplish and 5 7 mm long. Photo: Peter Tucker Tree violet (Hymenanthera dentata or Melicytus dentatus) is found in the ranges of southeastern Australia to the Flinders Ranges. Leaf margins are often slightly toothed. Fruit is a purpleblack berry. Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell Christmas bush or blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa) occurs in all states except Western Australia and the Northern Territory and can grow as a tree. Spines are needle-like, flowers in clusters at the end of branches. Fruit is a dry, brown capsule. Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e A f r i c a n b o x t h o r n L y c i u m f e r o c i s s i m u m

286 3 10 mm Australian boxthorn (Lycium australe), native. Photo: Dr Tony Robinson (DEH) African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum). Photo: Colin Wilson Chinese boxthorn (Lycium barbarum). Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell How it spreads African boxthorn was originally introduced to Australia from South Africa and planted as hedges for fencing and windbreaks. It spread from the initial plantings and by 1904 was proclaimed noxious in parts of Victoria. Boxthorn produces large numbers of orange-red berries that are eaten by native and non-native birds and other animals. The seeds pass through the gut and are thus spread into native vegetation. Some of the birds can travel distances of many kilometres. Infestation is common under trees, shrubs, posts, fences or powerlines where birds perch. Where it grows Boxthorn is a hardy, drought-tolerant plant that has been recorded in all states and territories from temperate, subtropical and semi-arid regions. Its current distribution includes inland and coastal areas in southern Australia and extends into sub-coastal Queensland. It generally occurs where the average annual rainfall is greater than 200 mm. It is also a major weed in New Zealand. Boxthorn is mainly a weed of open areas such as woodlands, rangelands, coastal areas including offshore islands, watercourses, roadsides, rail reserves and pastures that are not cultivated. It grows on all soil types but prefers lighter (sandy or loamy) soils. Fleshy-fruited weeds such as boxthorn often appear first under trees where birds perch but boxthorn is not restricted to such areas. Photo: Les Tanner Potential distribution Without effective control programs, boxthorn has the potential to become more abundant within its current range and to spread into new areas. Climate matching indicates that it could spread through much of Australia other than forests and the tropics. However, in arid regions it generally grows near watercourses. Growth cycle Boxthorn grows in regions having maximum rainfall in summer or winter, or uniform throughout the year. Active growth is mainly in autumn through to spring, but its growth cycle may vary. Plants sometimes lose their leaves temporarily under moisture stress or in winter. Boxthorn generally flowers and seeds in spring to summer but may do so at any time of year depending on local conditions (eg availability of moisture). Seeds may germinate at any time of year and seedlings take two or more years to commence fruiting. There is no evidence that seeds are long-lived in the soil. What to do about it In most regions where boxthorn is widespread, total eradication may not be a realistic goal. However, at the local or property scale a long-term management program can reduce the weed s harmful effects, help to contain its spread and encourage native vegetation to recover. A planned, strategic approach is essential to ensure that after treatment, boxthorn is replaced by desirable plant cover rather than new boxthorn seedlings, regrowth or other weeds. As well as the information presented in this guide on boxthorn biology and African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e A f r i c a n b o x t h o r n L y c i u m f e r o c i s s i m u m

287 4 Strategic weeding in native vegetation Native vegetation Weeds Weed from the least weed infested bush towards weed-dominated areas African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum control methods, a plan needs to be based on specific knowledge about the site including the distribution of other major weeds. The general strategy and methods described below are useful for native vegetation and introduced pasture. However, a broader range of strategies may be needed for removing boxthorn from pasture or other cleared land. Prevent boxthorn spreading Identify locations where boxthorn occurs as isolated plants or sparse populations. Remove seedlings and treat isolated plants or clumps first and follow up. Keep uninfested areas free of boxthorn. Reduce established infestations Develop and implement a long-term weed management plan. 1. Investigate the site Identify all plant species: weeds and native plants. Map boxthorn infestations: indicate weed density throughout the site, identify major sources of fruit from which re-invasion can occur. Map native vegetation condition: assess its capacity for recovery after boxthorn is removed and identify sites of high biodiversity value, such as rare flora. Values and risks: identify native fauna habitat values and high risk sites for erosion potential and other factors. 2. Develop the site action plan Identify goals and priorities based on the site information. Define priority areas for control by overlaying maps of boxthorn density, native vegetation, site values and risks. Plan to weed strategically: protect the better quality native vegetation first and consider the needs of rare fauna and flora work from isolated boxthorn plants towards core infestations control plants from upstream to downstream. The size of the area targeted at each stage should be manageable enough to follow up thoroughly. Boxthorn control that is not followed up is wasteful and can cause a bigger problem. Include control of other weeds so that they do not establish where boxthorn has been removed. Select the most suitable control method for each weed growth stage in each area to avoid damage to native vegetation. Plan appropriate disposal of weed material. Prepare a weed management calendar to maximise the effectiveness of control activities and avoid the breeding seasons of key native species. Boxthorn sometimes loses its leaves temporarily under moisture stress. Photo: Colin Wilson 3. Implement the action plan Remove boxthorn from the least infested areas first, then move into the more infested areas. Ensure that activities do not spread the fruit or disturb ground cover. Adapt to local seasonal conditions. Follow up weed regrowth each year in areas previously treated before moving to new areas of infestation. Coordinate control programs with neighbouring landholders to maximise effectiveness and reduce ongoing spread by animals. 4. Monitor and evaluate outcomes and adapt the plan accordingly Include monitoring of native plant regeneration. In weed management programs there is often a tendency to focus on the removal of weeds as a goal, but at the site level the ultimate goal is restoration of native vegetation or productive pastures for grazing properties. Control methods Mature boxthorn is difficult to destroy because of its large size, thorns and capacity to regrow vigorously from roots or stumps. All but the smallest plants are difficult to pull out completely without breaking off at the root or disturbing W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e A f r i c a n b o x t h o r n L y c i u m f e r o c i s s i m u m

288 5 surrounding vegetation. Cut stems can As heavy machinery is involved, the ground and the cut surface painted also take root if left in contact with the soil. No biological control agents have been identified for this species. In selecting the most suitable control techniques it is essential to minimise adverse impacts on native vegetation and to encourage its subsequent recovery. Different methods may be appropriate for sparse boxthorn plants amongst native vegetation, compared with areas dominated by the weed. Where boxthorn infests a pasture, other methods may be available, so consult weed control contacts and existing fact sheets for more detailed advice. plucker method is unsuitable in native vegetation where off-target damage would be unavoidable. Chemical control Herbicide can be highly effective, providing it is carefully chosen and selectively applied to minimise regrowth, off-target damage and disturbance. The main herbicide treatments for boxthorn are foliage spray, cut-stump, stem injection and basal bark application. All of these methods are only effective if the plants are actively growing at the time of application. immediately (within 10 seconds) with herbicide, using a hand held spray bottle or a brush. For large plants, the first cut stems may need to be treated before the remainder are cut and a team of two or more people need to work together. Use a dye in the mixture to show that stems have been treated. Gaining access to the base of large thorny bushes can be difficult. Several people working together can use a cable to pull the bush out of the way, cut the stems and paint immediately with herbicide. Or the top of the plant can be cut away first, then the stems cut lower and herbicide applied To prevent injuries from thorns, protective clothing including thick gloves, long pants, boots, long-sleeved shirt and eye protection must be worn. Physical weed removal Seedlings can be hand pulled if the ground is not too hard. For extensive infestations in pastures, mechanical equipment such as a Boxthorn Plucker may be used on individual plants. It is essential that the work be followed up over several years to treat regrowth from root fragments left behind, but less follow-up should be needed after a few years of concerted effort. Regrowth can be treated with herbicide. Preferably pull plants when not in fruit. Foliar spray For spraying to be effective, all boxthorn foliage must be wetted and the equipment suited to the size of the plants. In native vegetation, careful spot spraying using hand held equipment (handgun and hose or knapsack) would be required to avoid off-target damage. In this situation, foliar spraying is generally limited to small plants and regrowth under conditions when spray drift will not occur. Cut-stump application Suitable for all basal stem sizes All stems are cut horizontally with secateurs, bush saw or a chainsaw no higher than 15 cm from the immediately. Stem injection For basal stem diameter larger than 5 cm Drill holes at approximately 5 cm intervals around the stem, angled downwards and sideways. Use a drill bit of 6 mm or more in diameter. Holes need only be as deep as the living wood just under the bark. Fill immediately with herbicide using a squirt bottle or plastic syringe. African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum Stem injection. Side view of trunk showing 45 -angled holes in wood. Basal bark application For basal stem diameter up to 5 cm Once stems are cut, herbicide must be applied immediately to stumps: North Pasco Island, Tas. Photo: Karen Ziegler Bark of all stems needs to be sprayed or painted with herbicide around the entire circumference to a height of at least 30 cm from ground level. This method may be impractical for large multi-stemmed plants due to the difficulty of applying herbicide to all sides of all stems. W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e A f r i c a n b o x t h o r n L y c i u m f e r o c i s s i m u m

289 6 Registered herbicides for boxthorn The table below includes a limited selection of the chemical applications registered for boxthorn. These non-residual, systemic chemicals can be applied to individual boxthorn plants in native vegetation by community groups, landholders and public land managers. When using herbicides always read the label and follow instructions carefully. At least one member of a group should have formal training in the safe storage, handling, preparation and use of the chosen herbicides. Particular care should be taken when using herbicides near waterways because rainfall runoff can carry herbicides. Use special formulations for such environments where appropriate. African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum Active constituent Glyphosate 360 g/l as isopropylamine salt* Registered label use Triclopyr 600 g/l as butoxyethyl ester Registered label use Triclopyr 600 g/l as butoxyethyl ester Registered label use for Tasmania only Off-target risk Any type of plant when foliage, green stems or exposed non-woody roots are in contact with the chemical Any plants other than grasses when exposed parts are in contact with the chemical Any plants other than grasses when exposed parts are in contact with chemical Boxthorn target Foliage # 1. Basal bark (stems up to 5 cm diameter) 2. Cut-stump (basal stems > 5 cm diameter or difficult to access) Foliage of plants less than 2 m tall # Mixture 7 10 ml / 1 L water Follow label advice on adding surfactant 2 L / 60 L diesel 170 ml / 100 L water Method of application Handgun or knapsack spray 1. Spray or paint basal bark all sides 2. Paint all stumps immediately after cutting Knapsack spray Details / timing: see label Lower rate for young bushes, higher rate for mature bushes Do not spray during hot dry periods or windy or wet conditions When plants actively growing (Tasmania: do not treat during winter) Boxthorn plants not stressed by drought *Glyphosate-only herbicide products containing other concentrations and forms of the active chemical are also registered for spraying African boxthorn. Follow label advice for rates. #Avoid spray drift refer to label. Alternative methods of applying glyphosate Cut-stump application and stem injection of glyphosate for boxthorn are not included on registered labels. A Permit to allow minor use of an AGVET chemical product may be issued to allow registered products to be used for a purpose or in a manner that is not included on the approved label. Permits that include stem treatment of woody weeds with glyphosate in some situations exist in Tas., WA, Qld, SA, NSW and the ACT. Refer to the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority website to find the relevant permit for your state or territory and obtain advice on local conditions from the permit holder. Refer to the fact sheet Off label chemical use in Victoria for sources of advice in that state. Examples of treatments that may be included in a permit are summarised below. The herbicides listed in this guide are both systemic and non-residual, defined as follows: Systemic or translocated herbicides are transported throughout the plant and within the plant to the roots, storage organs, stems and foliage. Through this means they can be effective on perennial plants. Non-residual herbicides are not herbicide-active in the soil for any length of time. Therefore they do not prevent subsequent regeneration of weeds or other plants. Active constituent Off-target risk Method and stem size Mixture Details / timing Various registered glyphosate-only products Any type of plant when foliage, green stems or exposed non-woody roots are in contact with the chemical Cut-stump (basal stems of any size) Stem injection (stems 5 cm or more in diameter) Undiluted or diluted in water Add dye See label for advice on safety, weather conditions and timing Refer to permit and seek advice on a suitable dilution rate W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e A f r i c a n b o x t h o r n L y c i u m f e r o c i s s i m u m

290 Boxthorn on offshore islands Islands play an important role in conserving seabirds, marine mammals, coastal vegetation and other wildlife. Many also have a colourful and varied human history, during which non-native plants and animals became established. Due to their relative isolation, islands often present opportunities to attempt local eradication of feral animals and weeds, for the benefit of wildlife in the long term. 7...case study African boxthorn was planted in harsh island environments to provide windbreaks and fences, and with the assistance of birds has since spread widely. It can displace native vegetation and has a range of impacts on wildlife habitat. Eradication of any established infestation presents an enormous challenge, one that is being met by a sustained effort in some key coastal locations. Althorpe Islands Conservation Park is located off Yorke Peninsula in South Australia, under the management of the SA Department for Environment and Heritage. The park is important habitat for native species including large numbers of short-tailed shearwaters (Puffinus tenuirostris) which breed on the island, digging nesting burrows in the sandy soil. For more than 100 years the island was inhabited and non-native species including boxthorn were introduced. The weed proliferated after feral goat removal was completed in It is considered a threat to the shearwaters because they are apparently unable to burrow through its dense root mass. Friends of Althorpe Islands Conservation Park actively assist with management, including research and weed removal and in 1998, a major effort commenced to eradicate boxthorn from the island. Community service volunteers and the Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers were also involved. About Boxthorn emerging through native succulent shrubs: Althorpe Island, SA, Photo: Erika Lawley mature boxthorn were cut and painted, and over six years thousands of seedlings were removed. Activity within seabird colonies was timed to avoid the critical breeding seasons, but it was also essential to treat boxthorn plants with herbicide when they were actively growing. The Friends group found that the most efficient and effective method for Regrowth after primary treatment cut and killing mature boxthorn is to cut stems paint to avoid damage to native plants: horizontally near ground level and Althorpe Island, SA. Photo: Erica Lawley immediately apply glyphosate (diluted in clean water) to the stumps. To follow up, they cut and painted regrowth. It was important to assess the impact Site conditions affected the amount of boxthorn removal on shearwater of regrowth after initial treatment, with breeding and on native vegetation. To plants in sheltered, sandy locations being do this, regeneration of native plants the most persistent. Young plants are and density of shearwater burrows in often detected when they emerge the vicinity of dead boxthorn stumps through native shrubs and follow-up were monitored. Bare ground around work continues. In 2006, almost 700 boxthorn stumps was initially colonised boxthorn seedlings were removed. by weedy annual plants, then generally Once the island is free of mature and replaced by native plants. While initial regrowth boxthorn, regular maintenance monitoring of burrows was encouraging, will be needed case to remove seedlings, further study monitoring will show whether seeds may be dispersed to the island shearwaters are benefiting from weed by birds. eradication. African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e A f r i c a n b o x t h o r n L y c i u m f e r o c i s s i m u m

291 8 Contacts State / Territory Department Phone Website African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum ACT NSW NT Qld SA Tas. Vic. WA Australia-wide Environment ACT NSW Department of Primary Industries Dept of Environment and Climate Change Dept of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts Dept of Natural Resources and Water Dept of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation Dept of Primary Industries and Water Dept of Primary Industries / Dept of Sustainability and Environment Dept of Agriculture and Food Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) (02) or (08) (07) (08) (cost of a local call) (08) (02) Fax: (02) EnvironmentACT@act.gov.au weeds@dpi.nsw.gov.au weedinfo.nreta@nt.gov.au enquiries@nrw.qld.gov.au N/A Weeds.Enquiries@dpiw. tas.gov.au customer.service@dpi.vic.gov.au enquiries@agric.wa.gov.au EnquiryLine@apvma.gov.au yourenvironmenthwp/pests npws.nsf/content/weeds resources/weeds/index.html index.html PubcrisWebClient (search on African boxthorn to find current registrations) Contact details for state and territory agencies with responsibility for weeds are listed above, along with the APVMA. The APVMA website hosts the PUBCRIS database which contains information on all herbicides that are registered for use on weeds in each Australian state and territory, including minor use permits. Consult the natural resource management organisation for your region or local council to find local contacts on managing weeds for biodiversity, including community groups working on boxthorn. Refer to the CRC for Australian Weed Management website ( for weed management guides in this series, as well as guides for Weeds of National Significance and alert list species. The Introductory Weed Management Manual (also available from this website) may assist in developing a plan tailored to your situation. Legislation African boxthorn is a declared plant in NSW, Qld, SA, Tas., Vic., ACT, NT and at the local level in WA. Declared plants are often prohibited from sale and accidental or deliberate movement, and control by landholders is required (see the contacts table for further details relevant to your location). In most states where boxthorn is widespread, legislation encourages involvement of all landholders in coordinated, long-term programs to reduce the weed s impacts and minimise spread into uninfested areas. Weed control that could significantly damage native vegetation may be regulated by legislation. Acknowledgments Information and guide revision: Qld, NSW, Vic. and Tas. government factsheets on African boxthorn. John Virtue (SA DWLBC / Weeds CRC), Deb Agnew (Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Board). Australian Bureau of Flora and Fauna (1982) Flora of Australia: Volume 29. Australian Government Publishing Service. Map: Australia's Virtual Herbarium, (Lycium ferocissimum), via Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne, Council of Heads of Australian Herbaria. gov.au/cgi-bin/avhpublic/avh.cgi. Case study: Erica Lawley (Friends of Althorpe Islands CP) and Caroline Paterson (Department for Environment and Heritage SA). African boxthorn flower and leaves. Photo: Colin Wilson W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e A f r i c a n b o x t h o r n L y c i u m f e r o c i s s i m u m

292 Q u i c k r e f e r e n c e g u i d e Vegetation management or weed control? Apply herbicides during periods of active growth The ultimate success of a boxthorn removal program is measured by the type of vegetation that replaces it. Adopt a strategic, integrated, longterm approach to maximise restoration of native vegetation or pasture and minimise reinvasion by boxthorn or other weeds. Natural regeneration of native plants is the best form of revegetation, but in sites dominated by boxthorn over many years, there may be no native plants or seed remaining. Where this is the case, establish locally collected indigenous plants, including ground covers. In rural landscapes, where the original native understorey vegetation has been removed and boxthorn provides the only cover for native fauna, plant suitable local native shrubs before removing it. Adapt the control method to the situation Boxthorn occurs in a wide range of environmental conditions and land uses. Mechanical removal may be appropriate in introduced pasture but would result in off-target damage in native vegetation. Herbicide should only be applied when plants are leafy and actively growing, preferably before the main fruiting season. Avoid hot or wet conditions, or periods when plants are under stress, as specified on the herbicide labels. Consider disposal options In paddock situations, it is generally recommended that bushes be stacked and burnt to remove harbour for pests such as rabbits. However, if mature boxthorn provide scarce habitat for native fauna, cut bushes (preferably without numerous fruit) may be best left on site as temporary cover. Piles of cut boxthorn should not be left on top of native vegetation. Check that cut stems are not in contact with the soil where they may take root. Follow up It is essential to monitor for regrowth from root fragments and stumps after physical or chemical treatment and follow up thoroughly. Wait until regrowth is 50 cm tall, then cut and paint or spot spray. The amount of regrowth will depend on season and site conditions. Plants that appear dead can sprout new growth three years after treatment. Bird nest in boxthorn. Dense foliage can provide habitat for native and introduced fauna. Photo: Peri Coleman Prevent boxthorn re-establishment Once fruiting plants have been killed, the focus is on preventing re-establishment from seeds in the soil or brought in by animals. There is no evidence that boxthorn seeds are long-lived in the soil. 1. Avoid large-scale disturbance that would create extensive areas of bare soil, such as too-frequent fire in native vegetation or overgrazing in pasture. 2. Identify likely boxthorn fruit sources, dispersal agents and patterns of invasion such as bird roosting sites. 3. Monitor boxthorn-free areas every two years to detect and remove seedlings before they fruit. African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum 2007 Information which appears in this guide may be reproduced without written permission provided the source of the information is acknowledged. Disclaimer While every care is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information in this publication, the CRC for Australian Weed Management takes no responsibility for its contents, or for any loss, damage or consequence for any person or body relying on the information, or for any error or omission in this publication.

293 PRIMEFACT African lovegrass management Luke Pope District Agronomist, Cooma Linda Ayres, District Agronomist, Orange Introduction African lovegrass (Eragrostis curvula) is a hardy, drought tolerant perennial grass species which thrives on sandy soils with low fertility. In some countries it is regarded as valuable for animal production and soil conservation but in others, such as Australia, it is regarded as a weed due to its low feed quality and acceptance by livestock. In Australia, seven agronomic types of African lovegrass are recognised. Its weed status depends on the environment in which it grows, the agronomic type and the land management being practised. Figure 1. A heavy African lovegrass infestation. (M. Campbell) Origins and distribution African lovegrass is a native of southern Africa. It can also be found in Argentina and the United States where it is used as a forage plant. It was thought to have been accidentally introduced into Australia prior to 1900 and has since been deliberately introduced for experimental assessment. African lovegrass can be found throughout New South Wales (NSW) on roadsides and is a major weed of grazing lands. It is distributed throughout mainland Australia. Figure 2. African lovegrass on the coast. (L. Pope) The problem African lovegrass readily colonises overgrazed and disturbed sites such as roadsides and railway lines. Without management it will invade adjoining lands. Its ability to produce a large volume of seed means it can quickly form dense monocultures. African lovegrass produces a limited quantity of green feed during the frost-free periods. In tableland environments, animal utilisation of the plant is limited to the spring and summer months when the plant is green and actively growing. Overall carrying capacity is reduced with dense infestations. Forage quality declines with maturity and also with the commencement of frosts. Dry matter digestibility of the green leaf (the amount utilised by the animal) is at best 65% in early spring and 50% in early summer. Digestibility of the dead material is only 38% in winter. Crude protein of the dead leaf in winter is only 3.6%. Trials have shown that sheep will lose weight dramatically when forced to graze African lovegrass on the northern tablelands in winter but can gain weight in summer. A stocking rate of 20 wethers per hectare was necessary to force animals to eat the plant. Other more desirable pasture species such as phalaris, cocksfoot, fescue, ryegrass, kikuyu and many native species are more palatable to stock than African lovegrass. May for updates Invasive Species Unit, Biosecurity NSW

294 Description and habitat African lovegrass is a perennial grass that can grow from 30 cm to 120 cm tall. The stems are slender, erect and robust and are sometimes bent at the nodes. Leaf colour can vary from dark green to blue-green. The leaf blade is narrow (3 mm wide) and the margins often rolled. The ligule has a ring of white hairs. The seed head is described as a loose panicle (6 30 cm long). The root system is fibrous. It is a highly persistent, summer-growing warm season (or C4) grass, which makes it more suited to subtropical areas. ( Warm season means it has a reduced transpiration rate and high temperature tolerance, as well as having a greater efficiency of photosynthesis.) As a warm season plant it also means it is a more efficient weed in temperate areas and has the ability to survive under low and erratic rainfall conditions. African lovegrass prefers low fertility acidic or sandy soil types. have the weedy characteristics of other agronomic types of African lovegrass. It is sown on light sandy soils on the slopes and plains of NSW. However Consol lovegrass is not permitted to be grown in local government areas where African lovegrass is declared noxious. For more information on Consol lovegrass see Primefact 121 (2006) Consol lovegrass. Figure 4. African lovegrass plant. (M. Campbell) Figure 5. Consol lovegrass (left) and African lovegrass (right). (L. Pope) Figure 3. African lovegrass seed head. (M. Campbell) African lovegrass can be easily confused with other tussock-like grasses such as Poa tussock (Poa labillardieri). Ensure correct identification before undertaking a control program. Consol lovegrass Consol lovegrass has been selected from African lovegrass for sowing as a pasture plant, and is known as Eragrostis curvula cv. Consol. It does not Lifecycle African lovegrass can germinate at any time of the year but typically it will germinate in autumn or spring when moisture is sufficient and temperatures exceed 10 C. Growth of seedlings is relatively slow for the first six weeks. Flowering can occur from early summer and ripe seeds may be present from January to March. In coastal regions the plant can flower all year, but this occurs predominantly in the warmer months. Seed has an inherent dormancy, which is broken after 5 6 months. Seed germination declines with age; however some seed can remain viable for up to 17 years. Seeds germinate slowly and the plants have poor seedling vigour, making them susceptible to competition from other pastures species. Plant growth slows when temperatures decline in autumn and winter. Although the plant is susceptible to frosting it remains alive and will regrow again as temperatures increase. p 2 African lovegrass management

295 Figure 6. African lovegrass readily invades bare ground. (L. Pope) Spread The seed may be dispersed by grazing animals, slashing, vehicles, water, fodder and short distances by wind. Spread is enhanced by drought conditions and over-grazing. Paddocks with low ground cover are more susceptible to invasion. If this occurs, quarantine new stock in a small paddock for a minimum of 10 days to limit ingested seed being spread through manure. Inspect new livestock purchases for any evidence of weed seeds. Boundary spraying infested paddocks with a m strip will also help to prevent seed movement to clean areas and neighbouring properties. Weed seeds are easily transported in hay and fodder purchases. If purchasing hay from a known African lovegrass area then check it for any obvious signs of weed seed contamination. Supplementary feeding in a smaller sacrifice paddock is also a good idea to minimise weed seed spread. Control methods Control of African lovegrass is not an easy task and requires an integrated approach to be effective. The best option is to prevent establishment in the first place. In clean areas, be vigilant and control any small infestations. Management should aim to maintain the vigour, persistence and competitiveness of desirable pasture species. Re-sowing pastures is expensive so appropriate management to maintain them over the long term needs to be employed. For effective long-term control of larger areas of African lovegrass, an integrated program of spraying, sowing and pasture management must be used. Spraying alone is effective only where African lovegrass is selectively removed from a strong phalaris or kikuyu pasture. The main control principle is to ensure the weed is replaced by better species. Farm hygiene Preventing the spread of African lovegrass onto clean areas by physical means is the best method of control. Movement and spread of African lovegrass along roads is due to contaminated vehicles and machinery such as graders and slashers. Ensure that contractors have cleaned their vehicles and machinery of weed seeds before coming onto your property. Livestock are largely responsible for the movement and establishment of African lovegrass within paddocks. If possible avoid moving livestock from infested to clean areas on the property. Figure 7. Lovegrass will often be found along farm tracks (L. Pope) Prevention Prevent small infestations from becoming large ones by chipping or spot spraying. Soil disturbance should be minimised if possible. Consider if it is a better option to spot spray rather than disturb a large patch. If possible broadcast other suitable pasture species with fertiliser in any disturbed areas. Continue to monitor your property for signs of any new infestations. Being vigilant and making a commitment to treat small infestations before they become out of control is one of the best investments you can make. Pastures are at greater risk of weed invasion when perennial ground cover is less than 70%. African lovegrass seedlings struggle to establish when ground cover is high. Ground cover is greatly influenced by grazing and nutrient management. Appropriate grazing management allows for periods of rest for desirable pasture species. A weed resilient pasture will also be a more productive pasture. African lovegrass management p 3

296 Herbicides The most effective herbicide to kill African lovegrass is the residual herbicide flupropanate. It enters the plant through the leaves and roots but may take three months to have a noticeable effect and up to 18 months to kill the plant. Although effective at any time of the year it is best to avoid spraying in winter on the tablelands. Herbicides applied in a wet winter may leach beyond the root zone before a period of active growth allows uptake. Glyphosate will also kill African lovegrass when applied to actively growing plants in spring and summer. If spot spraying, ensure that the equipment and operator are calibrated correctly. Poor calibration can lead to over-application of herbicide that is costly and may pose dangers to the environment. Conversely, under-spraying may be ineffective. For assistance on how to calibrate your spot spraying contact Industry & Investment NSW or see the Noxious and Environmental Weed Control Handbook at Withholding periods fluproponate Areas receiving blanket treatment of flupropanate (that is, treatment other than spot spraying) are not to be grazed or cut for stock food for at least 4 months after spraying. Areas receiving spot spray treatment are not to be grazed or cut for stock food for at least 14 days after spraying. Stock cannot be grazed in treated areas for at least 14 days prior to slaughter. Lactating cows or goats must not be grazed in treated areas. Pasture establishment African lovegrass can be controlled on arable land by establishing a new pasture. Initial preparation starting with sowing a cereal crop for one or two years first is preferable. This will provide opportunities to reduce the weed seed bank in the soil. Winter cereal crops such as oats, winter wheat, triticale or cereal rye can all be considered. Spring sown forage Brassica crops can also be used where summer/autumn feed is required. Seek advice from your local agronomist for suitable crops and varieties. If the infestation is large, dead material should be removed first by burning the African lovegrass in winter, followed by thorough ploughing. A depth of 10 cm is ideal (chisel ploughs are not the most effective in removing large plant clumps). The fallow may be enhanced by a second cultivation in summer to remove any remaining plant remnants. Avoid excessive soil cultivation as soil structure may be damaged. Careful thought should be given to paddock slope to avoid potential erosion by wind and water prior to sowing. Inaccessible areas such as rocky outcrops should be spot-sprayed in summer and surface-sown and top dressed with seed and fertiliser in autumn. Vermin such as rabbits should also be eradicated prior to sowing. Autumn sowing of pastures is preferred if including annual legumes in a pasture mix. Only commence sowing when soil moisture is adequate and high temperatures have subsided. Cold temperatures and frosts will slow pasture establishment so every effort should be made to sow before the onset of the coldest winter months. Pasture species such as cocksfoot, phalaris, fescue, digit grass, Rhodes grass and kikuyu on the coast should be used as a pasture base in addition to legumes such as subterranean and white clovers. Legumes will help smother any lovegrass seedlings and will also improve soil fertility. Good establishment of the perennial grass species is essential to success as these will be the major deterrent to lovegrass reinvasion in the long term. Crop and variety choice will depend on sowing time, location, soil ph and existing soil fertility status. Consult your local agronomist for variety recommendations for your soil type and area. If direct drilling, aim to remove plant material by heavy grazing. Where a large bulk of material is present, burning may be necessary before spraying. A glyphosate-based herbicide can then be used to kill any re-growth once sufficient green leaf and active growth is occurring. This should occur in the spring prior to a planned sowing in autumn. A repeat application of glyphosate or other suitable herbicide may be necessary on the autumn break prior to sowing to kill any other weeds and new seedlings. Figure 8. African lovegrass recovery following fire. (D. Alcock) For further information on establishing pastures speak to your agronomist or go to p 4 African lovegrass management

297 Non-arable land While there are herbicides available for the control of heavy infestations of African lovegrass on nonarable land, they can have adverse effects on nontarget species and some native vegetation. It is also difficult using aerial pasture establishment techniques to sufficiently improve the low fertility soils on which African lovegrass generally occurs. Attempts to spray out and re-sow using aerial techniques require the application of large amounts of lime and fertiliser. Pasture establishment is risky and expensive, and returns on such an investment are not feasible. New pasture management Grazing Newly sown pastures should be spelled for 12 months to help smother any germinating African lovegrass seedlings. If the pasture is sown in autumn, lenient grazing can commence in spring when the pasture is green, leafy and actively growing. Only graze new pastures when they are 10 cm tall and soil moisture is not limiting. This will assist tillering of shoots and encourage root development. Avoid grazing if the paddock is extremely wet to prevent pugging of soils and damage to plants. Initial light grazing can commence once plants are not easily pulled out. It is essential that new pastures be allowed to set seed in the first spring/ summer following any initial spring grazing. For a temperate pasture graze the pasture down to cm in early autumn after the seed heads mature. Topdressing with fertiliser at this point will encourage legume growth prior to the onset of winter. Graze intermittently through the winter months and spell in October/ November of the second year to allow grasses to become strong. Remove animals for a second summer rest period. Summer rest periods are critical to developing strong perennial grasses. Strategic rotational grazing can commence to avoid overgrazing or under-utilisation of pasture. Some examples of the impact of strategic grazing include the following. Using heavy stocking rates for short periods of time to force stock to eat plants they might otherwise ignore can prevent weeds taking over. Heavy grazing in spring can prevent grass dominance, reduce seed set of annual grasses (e.g. barley grass and brome grasses) and at the same time favour clover seed production. Conversely, lenient grazing in spring and summer can promote grass seeding and reduce clover seeding and dominance which may lead to bloat problems. Summer rests can help to promote desirable perennial grasses. If necessary, sub clover germination can be reduced by maintaining a bulk of material from summer into the autumn. Never cut a new or very young pasture for hay or silage. Fertilisers All sown pastures will require on-going fertiliser to maintain vigorous healthy plants. The best way to determine what type and rate of fertiliser to apply is to use paddock history and soil tests. Moderate to heavy rates of fertiliser may be required in the early years to build soil fertility (if it is low) and maintain plant vigour. Rates thereafter will depend on stocking rate and rate of product removal. Re-treatment Monitor sown paddocks for signs of any new African lovegrass plants. Quick action to remove these by either spot spraying or chipping will ensure the new pasture and your investment are not lost. Making the most of African lovegrass In areas where African lovegrass is not declared noxious and in some local control authorities (LCAs) where it is declared noxious it may be unrealistic to control the African lovegrass. In these situations African lovegrass should be used as a pasture species (in areas where it is declared noxious, check the LCA s class 4 management plans for feasibility of this strategy). Its grazing value depends on the environment and the agronomic type present. In coastal areas it can supply significant quantities of low quality feed. However, in tablelands situations where the growing period is limited due to frosts it is important to make use of the leaf when it is young and green. Heavy grazing can assist in controlling the maturity and resulting loss of quality of this grass. This may extend the growing season by several weeks. It should not be used as a control strategy to remove African lovegrass. Burning of lovegrass can assist in reducing the bulk of old growth and allow the germination of other plants, but it can also have the effect of reducing the litter layer and drying soils. If this occurs in a dry season the resulting grass growth will be much less and the plants will mature faster. For nutritional advice contact your local Livestock Officer. African lovegrass management p 5

298 Figure 9. Declaration status of African lovegrass in NSW in (A. Maguire) Legislation African lovegrass is a declared noxious weed in many areas of NSW (see Figure 9). See for a complete list of declared noxious weeds for each control area in NSW. It is declared a class 4 weed in many areas of NSW which means the growth of the plant must be managed in a manner that reduces its numbers, spread and incidence, and continuously inhibits its reproduction. The responsibility for control of noxious plants and appropriate disposal of weed plant material on private land rests with the owner or occupier of the land. Failure to do so could result in the local control authority issuing a weed control notice, court action and a fine. Local control authorities must control noxious weeds on public land adequately to prevent the infestation of adjoining land. Community members can assist the control of this weed by notifying the local control authority of any known infestation of African lovegrass on public land. Further information For further information on African lovegrass control, consult your local agronomist or weeds specialist for individual advice. References Campbell, M (2002) Effects of age on the germination of African lovegrass seed, Grasslands Society Newsletter, Vol. 17, No. 1, Parsons & Cuthbertson (2001) Noxious Weeds of Australia. Always read the label Users of agricultural or veterinary chemical products must always read the label and any permit, before using the product, and strictly comply with the directions on the label and the conditions of any permit. Users are not absolved from compliance with the directions on the label or the conditions of the permit by reason of any statement made or not made in this publication. State of New South Wales through Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services You may copy, distribute and otherwise freely deal with this publication for any purpose, provided that you attribute the Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services as the owner. ISSN Disclaimer: The information contained in this publication is based on knowledge and understanding at the time of writing (May 2012). However, because of advances in knowledge, users are reminded of the need to ensure that information upon which they rely is up to date and to check currency of the information with the appropriate officer of the Department of Primary Industries or the user s independent adviser. Published by the Department of Primary Industries, a part of the Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services. Primefact 927 (replaces Agfact P7.6.37) PUB09/118 First published February 2010 p 6 African lovegrass management

299 This document was originally published on the website of the CRC for Australian Weed Management, which was wound up in To preserve the technical information it contains, the department is republishing this document. Due to limitations in the CRC s production process, however, its content may not be accessible for all users. Please contact the department s Weed Management Unit if you require more assistance.

300 M a n a g i n g w e e d s f o r b i o d i v e r s i t y Coolatai grass (Hyparrhenia hirta) Recorded distribution The problem Coolatai grass is a tall, bulky, introduced grass invading grassy woodlands and grasslands that represent some of southern Australia s rarest native plant communities, including the white box yellow box Blakely s red gum grassy woodlands and derived native grasslands. This community is listed nationally as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act Coolatai grass forms densely tufted tussocks that can become the dominant ground cover, reducing native plant diversity and affecting native fauna populations. It also dominates extensive areas of pasture. It is becoming conspicuous along roadsides in agricultural regions and is of concern to fire authorities due to the abundance and flammability of its dry leaves and stalks. Coolatai grass was introduced for pasture and is very persistent under grazing, but not generally preferred as feed for livestock. Once established, it is very difficult to control and requires a sustained control program, integrating various methods. It is rapidly becoming more widespread. Coolatai grass is just one of many perennial grass weeds invading Australia s native vegetation, particularly grassy plant communities, rangelands and coastal areas. Invasive grasses displace native plants and can also contribute to changed fire regimes Coolatai grass can replace diverse native understorey in grassy box woodlands: Travelling Stock Reserve, Manilla, NSW. Photo: V. Chejara that affect native vegetation structure and biodiversity. They include needlegrasses (Nassella spp.), feather-grasses (Pennisetum spp.), veldt grasses (Ehrharta spp.), buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris), wheat-grasses (Thinopyrum spp.), Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana) and African lovegrass (Eragrostis curvula). Several of these are also sown as pastures. Non-native grass weeds, such as gamba grass (Andropogon gayanus), are a particular threat to tropical savannas in northern Australia. Key points Remnant grassy box woodlands in southern Australia are threatened by Coolatai grass. Coolatai grass spreads by seed and is commonly dispersed by mowing and water movement. It rapidly regrows after it is burnt, grazed or slashed, with maximum growth rates in warm to hot conditions. Stock will graze fresh leaf growth but avoid older growth, assisting Coolatai grass to become dominant in pastures. Accurate identification of grasses is essential before control. Small infestations can be grubbed. A single dose of herbicide may not kill mature Coolatai grass tussocks, but combining physical and chemical treatment can be effective. Correct timing is essential. Coolatai grass could become established in new regions unless preventive measures are applied. In regions where Coolatai grass is widespread, sites of high biodiversity value should be a priority for control measures. Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta

301 2 Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta The weed Grasses in the genus Hyparrhenia are often known as thatching grass because in Africa the tough dry stalks are commonly used for roof thatch. In Australia, H. hirta is generally known as Coolatai grass, after a property in northern NSW where it was introduced in the 1890s. Sometimes (especially in WA) it is known as Tambookie grass, but this is the name of the related grass H. filipendula, native to coastal Queensland and NSW. Coolatai grass is a perennial tussock grass, up to 1.5 m tall, that spreads by seed. Its main growth period is in late spring to summer, but where winters are not severe it can remain green all How to identify Hyparrhenia species in Australia STATUS Plant habit Tambookie grass (H. filipendula) NATIVE Tufted grass to 1.5 m tall Flower racemes In pairs, mm long, upper raceme on a thin stalk, 7 8 mm long Spikelets / racemes Smooth or hairy No. of awns 1 3 per raceme Awn mm long Current distribution NSW, Qld in Australia year. It is deep-rooted (up to 3 m) and drought-resistant. It readily resprouts from its tough basal crown after defoliation or seasonal dormancy and can respond rapidly to summer rainfall. Leaves are pale greyish-green, hairless or nearly so; older leaves are rough to the touch. The leaf blade is flat, 1 5 mm wide, with a prominent midvein and a long membranous ligule at its base where it adjoins the sheath. The inflorescence is long and much branched; each branch ends in a pair of racemes made up of grey-white, hairy flowers along a stalk. At the base of each branch is a floral leaf that may turn reddish in colour. Five to eight pairs of spikelets are closely packed along each raceme; one in each pair Coolatai grass (H. hirta) WEED Dense tussocks to 1.5 m tall In pairs, mm long White hairs 5 7, rarely mm long ACT, NSW, Qld, SA, Vic., WA has an awn. The tiny (approximately 2 mm long) grain is dispersed inside an awned, hairy husk. Weed identification and similar species Related species In addition to Coolatai grass, one native and one introduced species of Hyparrhenia occur in the wild in Australia. Tambookie grass (H. filipendula) is the native species. Jaragua grass (H. rufa) is a tropical pasture species introduced from Africa. Coolatai grass is the only one that currently occurs in southern Australia. Jaragua grass (H. rufa) (2 subspecies) WEED (tropical) Tussocks to 2 m tall; annual or perennial In pairs, mm long Rust-coloured hairs 9 or mm long NT, NSW, Qld Note: illustrations on page 3 Coolatai grass (Hyparrhenia hirta): NSW. Photo: V. Chejara Jaragua grass (Hyparrhenia rufa): Hawaii. Photo: Forest and Kim Starr W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

302 3 Distinguishing between native and Coolatai grasses A range of tall, native perennial grasses occur in habitats invaded by Coolatai grass. A combination of key features distinguish the weed from these species: it has floral leaves at branching points of flowering stems Awn the paired, grey white, hairy flower racemes form a V at the end of the branches, each raceme has 5 7 brown awns Floral leaf Pair of spikelets Raceme leaves are flat or folded with a prominent midrib, not aromatic the ligule at the leaf stem junction is a membrane, 2 4 mm long. It is often difficult to distinguish different species of grasses when not in flower, especially as seedlings and it is useful to preserve an identified, dried specimen of the weed grass, which can serve as a reference for comparison with local native grass species in the field. As well as the fertile parts, include young and mature leaves, showing the leaf sheath, leaf blade and the ligule where they join, the base of stems and stem nodes. Mount the sample on card with a plastic protective covering. Coolatai grass flower racemes form a V at the ends of the branches. Photo: S. Warner The ligule is at the base of the leaf blade. Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell Racemes are approximately cm long with 5 7 awned spikelets. Photo: Andrew Storrie leaf blade ligule 3 mm leaf sheath Coolatai grass leaves have a membranous ligule, 2 4 mm long. Drawing: Andrew Craigie Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta Summer-active native grasses that may be confused with Coolatai grass Barbed wire grass (Cymbopogon refractus) and other lemon-scented grasses (Cymbopogon spp.) have linear, paired (or sometimes three) racemes and floral leaves, but the leaves smell like lemon when crushed. Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell Kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra) seedlings may look similar to Coolatai grass. Ligule is a membrane, up to 1 mm long. Inflorescence has floral leaves but is otherwise distinctive flower heads are triangular in shape, rust-coloured when mature and not hairy. Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell Red-leg grass (Bothriochloa macra) is widespread in eastern Australia. It may look similar to Coolatai grass when young. Stems are reddish and flower heads have more than two racemes. Photo: Jackie Miles and Max Campbell Other native grasses with finger-like racemes (generally more than 2) occur in the genera Eulalia, Dichanthium and Chloris. Note: Chloris also includes some introduced species. W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

303 4 in open habitats such as woodlands and grasslands, not in closed forests or dense shrub understorey. In Australia, most large populations currently occur in areas with annual average rainfall of mm, but the species occurs in arid regions elsewhere. H. hirta forms adapted to low rainfall may already be present in Australia as sleeper populations, be stored in Australia s germplasm collections (in SA and Qld) or be introduced in the future. Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta Coolatai grass often spreads along roadsides: Bingara to Narrabri Rd, NSW. Photo: Les Tanner How it spreads Coolatai grass spreads by means of tiny seeds with hairy, awned husks that adhere to clothing, animals, vehicles and tools, especially when wet. Human activities such as slashing or traffic assist in spreading the weed, especially along roadsides. It spreads along drainage lines, indicating that water can also transport the seeds. In pastures and stock routes livestock can spread seeds. Coolatai grass is self-fertile, enabling new populations to arise from a single plant. Large populations can produce sufficient seed to spread rapidly, in spite of the apparently low proportion of florets that set viable seed. Seed can germinate readily in different light regimes, over a wide range of temperatures, ph levels and under marginal water stress. Seedlings can emerge from a depth of up to 9 cm. Seedling recruitment can occur within established stands and in soil with a plant litter layer. Where it grows The original range of Coolatai grass is extensive, including Mediterranean Europe, southern and northern Africa and into west Asia. It includes areas receiving low to relatively high rainfall, with maxima in summer or winter. In southern Africa, Coolatai grass occurs in undisturbed ecosystems and is widespread in native pastures, but also colonises degraded grasslands. It is naturalised in America but is not currently reported as a significant weed there. Coolatai grass was introduced into Australia as a potential pasture plant. Before its negative aspects had become apparent it had escaped cultivation and become naturalised, firstly in Qld or northern NSW. It now also grows wild in a range of climatic conditions in WA, SA, Vic. and the ACT. Introduced for light soils, it has been recorded on a wide range of soil types including hard rocky soils and deep sands. Potential distribution Coolatai grass is spreading in the agricultural and near-urban regions of WA and SA, near the Murray River in Vic., and in NSW and Qld. Without effective detection, prevention and containment programs, it has the potential to become more abundant within its current range and to spread into new areas. Like most other grass weeds, it tends to become dominant Growth cycle Coolatai grass mainly grows and flowers during late spring to autumn, depending on adequate moisture being available. It grows rapidly after summer rains and if the winter is relatively mild the plant may be green all year. With low temperatures the leaves may dry off, but generally the plant survives and will regrow from the base. Plants may produce seed in their first growth season. Seed is produced over an extended period and shed as it matures. The fast germinating character of Coolatai grass in relatively warm conditions provides a competitive advantage in rapidly capturing soil moisture from summer rainfall, especially in sandy soils. Coolatai grass may remain green and flower during mild wet winters. Flowering tussock, 0.9 m tall: Mount Lofty Ranges, SA. Photo: S. Warner W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

304 5 Strategic weeding in native vegetation Native vegetation Weed from the least weed infested bush towards weed-dominated areas What to do about it There are many locations where Coolatai grass has not yet become established although conditions may be suitable. Through coordinated and consistent action, its spread can be prevented. In those regions where the weed is already widespread, total eradication is not a realistic goal. However, at the local scale a long-term management program can help to contain it, reduce its harmful effects and encourage native vegetation to recover. In parts of NSW and Qld, pastures require intensive management to graze young Coolatai grass leaf growth and minimise the accumulation of unpalatable mature growth including seed heads. Prevent Coolatai grass spreading Learn to recognise Coolatai grass and report new populations to your local council or natural resource management authority if you find it. Accurate weed identification is essential in some cases, the grass was initially thought to be native when first detected. Ensure that Coolatai grass is not planted. More suitable, non-weedy species are available for pasture, landscaping and soil stabilisation. Remove small, isolated infestations before they seed. Weeds Contain existing infestations monitor areas to which the weed may spread. Particular vigilance is needed along dispersal routes such as roadsides and drainage lines. Practise weed hygiene in areas that need to be slashed such as roadsides: where possible, slash before seeds develop slash into rather than away from patches of Coolatai grass always clean vehicles and clothing before moving to uninfested areas. Reduce established infestations Where large infestations of Coolatai grass occur in native vegetation a planned, strategic approach is essential to ensure that after treatment, it is replaced by plant cover other than new Coolatai grass seedlings, regrowth or other weeds. Sites of high biodiversity value should be identified and targeted first. As well as the information presented in this guide on Coolatai grass biology and control methods, a plan needs to be based on specific knowledge about the site including the distribution of other major weeds. Develop and implement a long-term weed management plan. 1. Investigate the site Identify all plant species: weeds and native plants, including grasses. Map Coolatai grass infestations: indicate weed density throughout the site, identify sections where the weed is just beginning to invade, the main dispersal agents and pathways. Map native vegetation condition: assess its capacity for recovery after Coolatai grass is removed. Identify sites of high biodiversity value: such as rare flora or fauna habitat or threatened plant communities. Define buffer zones around waterways. 2. Develop the site action plan Identify goals and priorities based on the site information. Define priority areas for control, by overlaying maps of Coolatai grass density, native vegetation, site values and risks. Plan to weed strategically: work from isolated Coolatai grass plants towards core infestations protect the healthier native vegetation and habitats of rare fauna and flora first work down the slope so that seeds are not being washed down into previously weeded areas. Work in stages. The size of the area targeted at each stage should be manageable enough to follow up thoroughly. Include control of other weeds so that they do not establish where Coolatai grass has been removed. Plan your monitoring and restoration before you begin to weed. Select the most suitable control method in each area, to avoid damage to native vegetation and waterways. Plan appropriate disposal of weed material. Prepare a weed management calendar to maximise the effectiveness of control activities and protect native species. Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

305 6 3. Implement the action plan would favour Coolatai grass and other Physical removal of small or Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta Remove Coolatai grass from the least infested and high biodiversity value areas first. Ensure that activities do not spread weed seeds or disturb ground cover. Adapt to local seasonal conditions so that herbicide is applied when Coolatai grass is actively growing. Each year, follow-up weed regrowth in areas previously treated before moving to new areas of infestation. Coordinate control programs with neighbouring landholders to maximise effectiveness and reduce ongoing spread. 4. Monitor and evaluate outcomes and adapt the plan accordingly Include monitoring of native plant regeneration. In weed management programs there is often a tendency to focus on the removal of weeds as a goal, but at the site level the ultimate goal is restoration of native vegetation. Recovery of local native grasses and other species may require active restoration following removal of Coolatai grass. The rate of recovery sets the pace of weeding. Manage pastures containing Coolatai grass For further detail, refer to the guideline on Management for Coolatai grass on the North West Slopes of NSW weeds. This is more practical if paddocks are small and stock can be removed when they have consumed the green feed. The use of supplements also allows continued grazing to reduce the bulk of low quality material. Burning of pastures before the growing season may remove dry matter and temporarily encourage fresh Coolatai grass leaf growth, but such management will not reduce its dominance without other control measures. Herbicide treatment of small patchy infestations in pastures may assist in reducing their rate of spread. Control methods Mature Coolatai grass tussocks are difficult to destroy because old, dry growth can shield growing leaves from contact with herbicide and a single application may not be sufficient to kill the plant. Small infestations can be removed manually, while a combination of physical and chemical treatment can be successful for extensive infestations. Spot spraying or grubbing enables tussocks to be treated individually, minimising risk of damage to other species. No biological control methods are available for Coolatai grass. sparse infestations While it is labour intensive, physical removal has the advantage that each plant can be grubbed in one visit. Remove the weeds before seeding if possible. Bag flower heads and then grub all individual plants with a mattock, removing the base of the tussock with minimal disturbance to soil and native plants. Contain whole plants in bags and dispose of them safely. Follow up to check for regrowth and for seedlings. Combined treatment of extensive infestations Herbicide treatment is only effective if applied when the weed is actively growing. Efficient application of herbicide to mature Coolatai grass is difficult unless accumulated dry leaf material is removed first (by slashing or burning). In some situations, where permitted, it may be practical to burn rather than slash old growth prior to herbicide treatment. Deciding if and when to burn requires careful consideration of a range of issues and consultation with fire authorities. Stands of Coolatai grass should only be burnt as a component of a comprehensive vegetation management plan. Burning may stimulate germination of native or weed species so these would need to be managed when targeting regrowth of Coolatai grass. (McCormick et al 2002). The grazing value of pastures dominated by Coolatai grass is maximised if plants are kept in the vegetative, actively growing phase as long as possible, through intensive grazing in early summer. In some situations, fertiliser and legumes have been added to maintain productivity. It is important to ensure that more palatable pasture species are not disadvantaged and to avoid extensive areas of bare soil that Old, dry stalks and leaves of Coolatai grass are persistent and prevent efficient herbicide application to actively growing leaves: Mount Lofty Ranges, SA. Photo: S. Warner Infestations can be grubbed when they are small: Cobbler Creek Recreation Park, SA. Photo: S. Warner W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

306 7 Registered herbicides for Coolatai grass Current herbicide label registration for Coolatai grass is limited in application to small patchy infestations in perennial pastures, only in NSW. The active constituent (flupropanate) has some residual herbicide action in the soil that would have an impact on associated vegetation and subsequent regeneration. A Permit to allow minor use of an AGVET chemical product may be issued to allow registered products to be used for a purpose or in a manner that is not included on the approved label. Permits may include use of glyphosate as a spot spray by trained community groups, landowners and conservation managers for treatment of Coolatai grass in native vegetation, perennial pastures and other non-crop situations. Refer to the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority website to find the relevant permit for your state or territory and obtain advice on local conditions from the permit holder (see table below). Also consult community groups working on Coolatai grass in your region. Glyphosate is non-selective and care is needed to prevent contact with off-target species. The following treatment has been developed for Coolatai grass: 1. Mow / slash or burn in spring at start of growing season, before flowering. Contain or destroy the slashings if they contain seeds. 2. Wait for regrowth (4 6 weeks). 3. Check for native plants in the vicinity of the tussocks and protect them from spray. 4. Spot spray glyphosate diluted in water plus surfactant*. 5. Wait for regrowth and check for native plants. 6. Repeat spot spray with glyphosate mixture. 7. Follow up after the next significant rainfall grub survivors and seedlings, or repeat the treatment cycle when the weeds are actively growing. When using herbicides always read the label and follow instructions carefully. At least one member of a group should have formal training in the safe storage, handling, preparation and use of the herbicide that is being used. Particular care should be taken when using herbicides near waterways because rainfall runoff can carry herbicides. Check with local authorities on the width of buffer zone required around water bodies. *Use appropriate glyphosate formulations near waterways and follow label advice on surfactants. Contacts State / Territory Department Phone Website ACT NSW Qld SA Vic. WA Australia-wide Dept of Territory and Municipal Services Dept of Primary Industries Dept of Environment and Climate Change Dept of Primary Industries and Fisheries Dept of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation Dept of Primary Industries Dept of Agriculture and Food Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) (02) or or (08) (08) (02) N/A weeds@dpi.nsw.gov.au info@environment.nsw.gov.au callweb@dpi.qld.gov.au N/A customer.service@dpi.vic.gov.au enquiries@agric.wa.gov.au N/A environment pestsweeds/aboutweeds.htm Contact details for state and territory agencies with responsibility for weeds are listed above, along with the APVMA. Note: Coolatai grass is not naturalised in NT or Tas. The APVMA website hosts the PUBCRIS database which contains information on all herbicides that are registered for use on weeds in each Australian state and territory, including minor use permits. Refer to the fact sheet Off label chemical use in Victoria (AG1214) at for sources of advice in that state. Consult the natural resource management organisation for your region or local council to find local contacts on managing weeds for biodiversity, including community groups working on Coolatai grass. Refer to the CRC for Australian Weed Management website ( for weed management guides in this series, as well as guides for Weeds of National Significance and Alert List species. The Introductory Weed Management Manual (also available from this website) may assist in developing a plan tailored to your situation. W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

307 8 Mature Coolatai grass growth is of low palatability: paddock between Warialda and Coolatai, NSW. Photo: Andrew Storrie Legislation Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses has been listed as a key threatening process under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act In fact, Coolatai grass is a species of special concern. In some local government areas in NSW, Coolatai grass is declared a Class 3 weed and the plant must be fully and continuously suppressed and destroyed. Coolatai grass is a declared Class 2 plant in SA, requiring notification and control in specified parts of the state. Trade and movement are restricted throughout the state. The AQIS Permitted Seeds List includes species of Hyparrhenia including H. hirta. Several other species of Hyparrhenia, not yet in Australia are not on the permitted list. Knowledge gaps Coolatai grass seed was imported to Australia on a number of occasions from various parts of the world but it is not known how many (or even which) of these introductions became established. There are thought to be numerous different forms of the grass in its native range and investigation is needed into which forms are present in Australia that could become future weed problems. Research is also needed into methods for controlling Coolatai grass, for site recovery post- Coolatai grass on travelling stock reserve (foreground) and in paddocks (background): NSW. Photo: V. Chejara control and for managing pastures sustainably to utilise Coolatai grass while maintaining other valued species and soil condition in the long term. Acknowledgments Information and review: C. Nadolny, NSW DECC; V. Chejara and P. Kristiansen, University of New England; L. McCormick and A. Storrie, NSW DPI; J. Virtue, SA DWLBC. Case study: P. Spark. Map: Australia's Virtual Herbarium, (Hyparrhenia hirta), via Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne, Council of Heads of Australian Herbaria. gov.au/cgi-bin/avhpublic/avh.cgi. (Outlier records of doubtful or noncurrent status omitted.) Diagram of Hyparrhenia hirta ligule reproduced with permission from Robertson, M. (2006). Stop Bushland Weeds, 2nd edn. The Nature Conservation Society of SA Inc. References Chejara, V.K., Nadolny, C., Kristiansen, P., Whalley, R.D.B. and Sindel, B.M. (2006). Impacts of Hyparrhenia hirta (L.) Stapf (Coolatai grass) on native vegetation in a travelling stock route in northern New South Wales. In: C. Preston, J.H. Watts and N.D. Crossman (eds). 15th Australian Weeds Conference Proceedings: managing weeds in a changing climate. Adelaide, SA, pp Clayton, W.D., Harman, K.T. and Williamson, H. (2006 onwards). GrassBase The Online World Grass Flora. [accessed 08 November 2006]. Harden, G.J. (1993). Flora of NSW. Volume 4. NSW University Press. Hunt, S. (2006). Utilisation of pastures dominated by Coolatai grass (Hyparrhenia hirta) in northern NSW. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Annual Conference of the Grassland Society of NSW. Pp (Reprinted in Stipa newsletter number 37, December 2006). McCormick, L., Lodge, G. and McGufficke, R. (2002). Management for Coolatai grass on the North West Slopes of NSW. NSW Department of Agriculture factsheet. coolatai-grass.pdf. North West Weeds website: Warner, S. Ecological Studies of Coolatai grass (Hyparrhenia hirta (L.) Stapf.): An invasive weed on the Adelaide Plains. Unpublished Honours thesis, The University of Adelaide, Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

308 9...case study Threatened grassy box woodlands: working at the invasion front Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta Native grassy woodlands and grasslands were formerly widespread in Australia s agricultural regions. As these vegetation communities contained useful pasture and timber and occurred on the more fertile land, most have been cleared or greatly modified. The few high quality examples that remain are generally small or narrow and are mainly found on travelling stock reserves, roadsides, cemetery reserves and in a few paddocks that have been lightly grazed. They provide habitat for a wide range of native flora and fauna species, many of which are rare. Most occur within rural landscapes, largely surrounded by crops or improved pastures and are vulnerable to a range of threats including invasion by non-native grasses. In native woodlands, the natural diversity of plant species and forms, including grasses, broad-leaved herbs, mosses, lichens, shrubs and trees of various sizes create complex vegetation structure (vertical layers and horizontal patchiness) and habitat for a range of native fauna. If the vegetation becomes dominated by a few non-native species, this complexity with its natural openings and patches may be lost. Such an effect is apparent in areas that have become dominated by Coolatai grass. Coolatai grass dominates large areas of pasture, roadsides, travelling stock routes and areas of remnant vegetation on the North Western Slopes of NSW, especially in the Manilla area north of Tamworth. Members of the Manilla Landcare Group noticed that there was some high quality remnant vegetation on the travelling stock reserves near Manilla, areas that would provide important habitat for woodland birds. These reserves have a history of intermittent grazing, and in many areas the vegetation retains much of its diversity and structure. However, in past decades Coolatai grass has been rapidly invading, replacing the native understorey. Fewer native plant species were recorded in woodland densely infested with Coolatai grass: travelling stock reserve, Manilla, NSW. Photo: V. Chejara The landcare group implemented a management program to maintain and improve the condition of native vegetation in travelling stock reserves near Manilla, in cooperation with the Rural Lands Protection Board and with support from the Natural Heritage Trust Their objective was to prevent small patches and isolated Coolatai grass plants from becoming thick stands, allowing native grasses and other nativ plants growing in adjoining areas of native vegetation to recolonise the treated areas. They tackled the Coolata grass at the invasion front. Tussocks were spot sprayed with glyphosate when actively growing, in accordance with the relevant permit, and repeat spraying was conducted where needed The group visited their sites up to four times per year to follow up regrowth and seedlings. One site is now being cared for by the Friends of Klori. Coolatai grass is common in pastures and on roadsides in the district and wil continue to colonise from surrounding lands. Ongoing, intensive efforts will be needed to protect and restore threatened woodland habitats. The impact of Coolatai grass on native flora and fauna has been studied in infested and non-infested native box woodlands on the travelling stock reserves near Manilla. Recent research at these sites indicated that areas dominated by Coolatai grass had lower diversity and abundance of native flora. Monitoring of native fauna at those sites indicated that in areas dominated by Coolatai grass, the abundance of ground active invertebrates was reduced. From early results, so too were the diversity and abundance of reptiles and frogs. Expert ornithologist Stephen Debus believes that Coolatai grass invasion will also lead to further decline of the ground-feeding vulnerable woodland birds Hooded Robin, Brown Treecreeper, Turquoise Parrot, Speckled Warbler and Diamond Firetail. W e e d M a n a g e m e n t G u i d e C o o l a t a i g r a s s H y p a r r h e n i a h i r t a

309 Q u i c k r e f e r e n c e g u i d e Regional / local status of Coolatai grass Not yet established Small, isolated outbreaks Widely established Management goals Strategies required Vegetation management or weed control? Prevent establishment Eradicate Contain infestations and mitigate threats Practise weed hygiene Monitor, detect and identify possible new infestations A weed removal program can be judged successful if the weeds are ultimately replaced by vegetation that is valued. Adopt a strategic, integrated, long-term approach to restore native vegetation that is self-sustaining and minimise reinvasion by Coolatai grass or other weeds. Natural regeneration of native plants is the best form of restoration, but in sites dominated by weeds over many years, there may be no native plants or seed remaining. In such cases, revegetation will be needed. Natural regeneration (passive restoration) Where sparse Coolatai grass tussocks are removed and remnant native species are present, passive restoration may be possible. To assist the process, scatter locally collected native grass hay or seed. Recruitment of native grasses may be episodic and it may take years Manual or herbicide treatment with follow up Prevent re-establishment or invasion by other weeds through passive or active site restoration of consistent management for native species to replace weeds. Revegetation (active restoration) Areas cleared of dense infestations may require active restoration of the plant community, including its original structure. For example, to restore grassy woodland an understorey dominated by native grasses may be the primary objective, but planting of local trees and shrubs at a variable, sparse to moderate density may also be needed. Consider whether the natives are summer or winter active and take into account local seasonal conditions. As with passive restoration, active restoration may take many years to achieve. Prevent Coolatai grass re-establishment 1. Follow-up physical or chemical treatment after the next significant rainfall because some plants may have been missed and seedlings may regenerate from the seedbank. Native vegetation: Identify high priority biodiversity assets under threat from Coolatai grass and protect them through implementing long-term site management plans Pasture: Manage paddock by paddock to utilise pasture, minimise spread and promote competitive, non-weed species Roadsides: Map infestations and practise weed hygiene to prevent spread 2. Restore ground cover vegetation to areas from which Coolatai grass has been removed. 3. Avoid large-scale disturbance that would create extensive areas of bare soil, such as too-frequent fire in native vegetation or overgrazing in pasture. 4. Identify and manage major seed sources and dispersal pathways. 5. Monitor weed-free areas regularly to detect and remove young plants before they seed. Coolatai grass plants can seed in their first season of growth. Hyparrhenia hirta may grow to more than 1.5 m tall. Dense stands create a fuel hazard and hinder restoration in a previously cultivated area: Cobbler Creek Recreation Park, SA. Photo S. Warner Coolatai grass Hyparrhenia hirta 2007 Information which appears in this guide may be reproduced without written permission provided the source of the information is acknowledged. ISBN: Disclaimer While every care is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information in this publication, the CRC for Australian Weed Management takes no responsibility for its contents or for any loss, damage or consequence for any person or body relying on the information, or for any error or omission in this publication.

310 PRIMEFACT Lippia Invasive Species Unit Introduction Lippia (Phyla canescens) is a serious environmental and pastoral weed of the inland river systems of New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland. It is a major threat to watercourses, floodplains and pastoral areas but it is not considered a major threat to farming and cultivated lands. It is estimated 5.3 million hectares of floodplain grazing country in the Murray Darling Basin is affected by lippia. Lippia is one of eleven species in the genus Phyla and belongs to the Verbenaceae family. In Australia, there are two closely related species of Phyla: lippia (Phyla canescens) and phyla weed (P. nodiflora). The species of major concern to subtropical and temperate inland NSW is lippia. Phyla weed is less widespread and restricted to the higher rainfall and more humid coastal areas of NSW and tropical Australia. This Primefact only deals with lippia. Distribution Lippia is widely distributed in tropical and subtropical areas of the world. It is believed to be native to the Americas. In central NSW, lippia poses a major threat along the Lachlan River and floodplain system west of Forbes. Winter floods and good summer rainfall in the late 1990s resulted in the rapid spread of the weed. Lippia is now considered a major environmental threat in this area. In southern NSW, lippia is of increasing concern on the Murrumbidgee River floodplains around Narrandera and Hay. Figure 1. Lippia is a prostrate, mat-forming environmental and agricultural weed. May for updates Invasive Species Unit, Biosecurity NSW

311 In northern NSW, lippia is well established in the Macquarie Marshes, throughout the lower Gwydir Valley, the lower McIntyre Valley and the Namoi Valley. Lippia is rapidly spreading within these floodplain regions and into adjacent higher areas. Lippia s prostrate mat-like growth habit has made it a popular low-maintenance turf species in some areas, but lippia must not be sold in NSW. P. nodiflora is available for sale in NSW and there have been cases where lippia (P. canescens) has been sold incorrectly labelled as P. nodiflora. Habitat Lippia is well adapted to the floodplain environments of river systems in temperate to subtropical areas. The plant tolerates frost and drought and established plants can survive inundation by floodwater for at least three months. Lippia will grow in heavy clay soils, as well as lighter clays and sandy soils. Figure 3. The Lachlan River (west of Forbes) is severely eroded due to lippia infestations. Figure 4. Lippia forms a solid mat-like groundcover, particularly in areas that are over-grazed. Description Lippia is a prostrate perennial broadleaf herb, with numerous branched stems up to 1 m long. It has the ability to root at nodes along the stems, providing a solid mat-like groundcover. The stout central taproot (80 cm long) has fibrous secondary roots. Fibrous roots also arise from the stem nodes. Leaves arise in pairs from stem nodes. They are 2 5 cm long, covered in minute hairs, and have a greyish-green appearance. Flowers appear any time from spring to autumn when soil moisture is favourable. The flowers are small, 5 10 mm in diameter, lilac or pinkish in colour and form a dense rounded flower. Figure 2. Lippia destabilises river banks, leaving them prone to erosion. Impact In Australia lippia is a major pastoral and environmental weed. It has little to no grazing value and causes major environmental impacts in terms of increasing soil erosion and decreasing stream bank stability due to loss of perennial grasses and the reduction of plant diversity. Lippia can be difficult to control as it is an aggressive plant that dominates pastures where ground cover has been reduced by overgrazing. Figure 5. Lippia flowers are small, 5 10 mm across, lilac or pink in colour. Leaves occur in pairs. p 2 Lippia

312 Lifecycle and spread Lippia spreads both vegetatively and by seed. Plants break up during flooding and can quickly reestablish in moist soil as floodwater subsides. Fragments and seed can also be spread by vehicles, machinery and animals but most spread occurs in response to flood events. Seed can remain viable for many years (probably well over 10) and seed banks under infestations can contain up to seeds per square metre. Seeds must be covered with water for a short period in order to germinate. Any area where water may sit for a week or more (including cattle hoof prints or wheel ruts) provides opportunity for lippia seed to germinate. Lippia seeds also require light and fluctuating temperatures (daily temperature fluctuations of 10 degrees or more) in order to germinate. Control and management Cropping enterprises Use of herbicides, cultivation and cropping generally controls lippia infestations if the land is cropped for several years. Even in frequently flooded areas there may be an opportunity in certain seasons to crop as a once-off strategy to suppress lippia prior to establishing a perennial grass pasture. Due to erosion risks on floodplain soils, it is not recommended that large areas be cultivated simultaneously for lippia control. Risk of erosion can be minimised by cultivating strips across the direction of water flow. Uncultivated strips can be cultivated and sown to pasture in subsequent years. Due to its ability to re-invade from seed and plant fragments, lippia can quickly recover from short periods of cropping, especially following floods or wet summers. Landowner experience has shown that areas cropped for 2 years can have lippia reinvade to previous levels within one wet summer if further control measures are not used. Careful management is needed to keep lippia from invading the pasture phase of a crop rotation. Pasture and grazing enterprises Lippia control on arable pasture land requires an integrated approach of suppression, pasture improvement and pasture maintenance. It is a long-term program and requires dedication and continued management. There is some evidence that lippia residues can have allelopathic (toxic) effects on establishing pastures. Where possible, it is recommended that control with herbicides be carried out to maintain a lippia-free period of several months prior to planting pastures. This will also help reduce the seedbank of annual summer grass species like Figure 6. Lippia can easily become dominant in overgrazed, unmanaged pastures. Lippia p 3

313 stinkgrass (Eragrostis cilianensis), barnyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galli) and liverseed grass (Urochloa panicoides) which compete strongly with newly sown pastures. Competitive and productive pastures are an essential part of long-term control, preventing rapid re-invasion. Grazing should be managed to maintain a minimum of 70% ground cover. Lippia suppression Cultivation and herbicides can be used to provide short-term lippia suppression while establishing a pasture. Cultivation will often be more practical due to the variable age and moisture stress levels of the plants present. Cultivate a number of times until the areas of lippia are visibly declining. Landholder experience has shown that cultivation of dry soil in hot weather prevents lippia fragments from transplanting and gives the best lippia kill. In northern NSW, however, this is the period of highest erosion and flood risk. Blade ploughs and chisel ploughs with sweeps can give a better initial lippia kill. With good soil moisture and actively growing lippia, applying herbicide prior to cultivation will give reliable control. Spot spraying is suitable for treating small infestations (see Chemical control below). Lippia can re-invade very quickly so regular monitoring and follow-up control is needed, especially after floods. Managing pastures Competitive and productive pastures are vital for long-term lippia control. Pastures that have a high percentage of ground cover prevent rapid lippia reinvasion. In degraded native pastures, suppression of lippia can be achieved with the use of: selective herbicides, and strategic grazing to allow the better native grasses to increase in size and density (if there are sufficient numbers of productive native grass species present). Sowing introduced pastures is generally required where lippia dominates degraded pastures. Pasture mixtures should not be sown with a cover crop. Quick and even pasture establishment is vital. Good paddock preparation, adequate fertiliser and high grass pasture sowing rates will help to ensure adequate pasture density in the first year. High quality pasture seed is essential. Pastures must include perennial grasses and annual legume species tolerant of waterlogging. Legume sowing time should correspond with the species and variety used. Well-adapted perennial grasses provide good competition against lippia while the annual legumes supply nitrogen for the grasses and improve pasture quality. Phosphorus and sulfur are particularly important for good legume growth. Pasture maintenance and lippia suppression are vital to keep the pasture productive. Pastures degrade quickly if lippia is allowed to compete through over-grazing. When selecting pasture species, consider persistence, competition between the grass species, which legume to include and what mixes are going to give good quality feed. Remember the chosen species may need to tolerate waterlogging and frequent flooding. Perennial grasses for southern NSW Phalaris is the best adapted perennial grass for southern NSW floodplain soils (greater than 400 mm of annual rainfall). Extensive areas of phalaris have been established on floodplains west of Forbes and with good management have proven to be persistent. Phalaris is tolerant of flooding but will not persist in areas that experience water inundation periods greater than 6 weeks. Winter-active phalaris varieties such as Holdfast, Atlas PG, Sirolan and Sirosa have been widely sown on floodplains around Forbes. These winteractive varieties are more erect and susceptible to overgrazing than the more summer-active varieties such as Australian. Winter-active varieties generally have better seedling vigour than the Australian variety however careful grazing management will be needed to ensure persistence. Phalaris should be sown in pasture mixes at 2 to 3 kg/ha. Phalaris is only moderately drought-tolerant and is unlikely to persist in western floodplain areas with less than 400 mm annual rainfall. Introduced perennial grass options in these lower rainfall areas are very limited. A program of lippia suppression using selective broadleaf herbicides will encourage native grass re-establishment, and the introduction of annual legumes is the best option in low rainfall areas. Further information on establishing and managing pastures and pasture species selection is available at or by contacting your nearest NSW DPI NSW office or agronomic advisor. Annual legumes for southern NSW Adding a legume to the pasture mix limits the herbicide options for managing lippia compared with a grass-based pasture. The hard-seeded Persian clover varieties Nitro Plus and Prolific have performed well in trials on p 4 Lippia

314 the floodplain soils west of Forbes. Trials have shown Persian clovers are more productive in the spring and provide better competition for lippia than balansa clover. Persian clovers are very small-seeded and should be sown at 2 3 kg/ha in pasture mixes. Balansa and strawberry clovers are well adapted to poorly drained areas. Trials have shown strawberry clover can be very productive but it is a perennial and is unlikely to persist in dry summer environments. The yaninnicum sub clovers such as Riverina can also tolerate some waterlogging. The brachycalycinum sub clovers such as Clare are useful species to include in pasture mixes in well drained areas. Barrel medic species such as Sephi and Caliph are well adapted to floodplain soils but are not as tolerant of waterlogging as Persian and balansa clovers. Perennial grasses for northern NSW Bambatsi panic and Floren bluegrass are the main introduced perennial grasses ideally used for pasture improvement in lippia-infested summer rainfall regions. They are well adapted to floodplain soils and can tolerate 2 to 3 months of flooding. Bambatsi panic has been grown commercially in northern NSW for over 30 years. Once established, it has proven to be the most widely adapted exotic perennial grass available. Floren bluegrass has proven particularly useful due to its ability to form a dense mat on the ground and impede lippia growth. Floren bluegrass is a very late maturing grass and does not seed readily in northern NSW. These grasses can be slow to establish. Rhodes grass establishes very easily and can be used as a pioneer species to hold back lippia in the pasture establishment year. It is not tolerant of flooding, will not persist and can be competitive to other sown grass so limit it to 10 to 15% of the grass mix. Annual legumes for northern NSW Naturalised burr medic, if well-seeded in an area, may be the best of the annual legumes. Landholder experience suggests that burr medic competes well with lippia in spring. Other options for northern areas are barrel and snail medics, arrowleaf clover and sub clovers but these are not tolerant of waterlogging. Strawberry clover will persist better in very wet locations. Grazing management As a general rule, do not graze new pasture grasses until they have become well established and are producing tillers. Sensible grazing in the establishment year can promote tillering and increased seed production. Grazing management should always address ground cover and preferably allow grasses to flower and set seed in the first season. Recent research on grazing management of lippia-infested pastures has shown that giving the pasture periods free of grazing pressure improves pasture growth, increases the number of species present and reduces the proportion of lippia in the pasture. Field experience also shows that grazing management needs to ensure that good ground cover is maintained when conditions favour rapid lippia growth. Good rainfall and mild to warm weather can create ideal conditions for lippia growth for up to 10 months in northern NSW. In southern NSW, lippia s ability to grow and spread is mainly limited to the period between October and April. Graze to maintain a pasture bulk which shades lippia and competes for moisture. If pastures become too tall and rank for grazing under good seasonal conditions, slashing will promote new growth and may provide a mulch layer which covers and impedes lippia growth. Alternatively, the tall rank pasture can be used to shade lippia and become a source of winter feed for livestock. Biological control Efforts are currently under way by the National Lippia Working Group based in northern NSW to investigate biological control options. Biological control of weeds is a long-term approach often taking 10 to 30 years to achieve results. A number of pathogens and insects have already been identified that may have the potential to assist in lippia control, but the outcome will not be known for 3 to 5 years. The management techniques recommended here should not be stopped in the hope of a successful biological control agent being found. Chemical control Herbicides are an important component of lippia management and should be used in conjunction with cropping, pasture improvement and grazing management where appropriate. When seasonal conditions allow, two herbicide applications within a growing season have been shown to give significantly better control of lippia than single applications. A late spring or early summer application combined with a late summer application is recommended. Single applications can leave small amounts of viable rhizome/root tissue, allowing rapid re-infestation of treated areas. Lippia p 5

315 Herbicide application timing is critical herbicides should only be applied when lippia is actively growing and starting to flower prolifically. Table 1 (below) lists the herbicides registered or permitted for lippia control in NSW. Table 1. Herbicides for lippia control in NSW Situation Herbicide Rate PER10917 (Expires 31 July 2013) Fallow Pastoral land (Max. of 2 applications) Glyphosate ipa (450g/L) plus 2,4- D ipa (475g/L)* and 1% crop oil. Glyphosate ipa (450g/L) plus metsulfuron (600g/kg) and 1% crop oil Glyphosate ipa (450g/L) plus Metsulfuron (600g/kg) plus 2,4-D ipa (475g/L)* and 1% crop oil 2,4-D amine (625g/L)** and 1% crop oil 2.6L to 5.4L of glyphosate plus 1.15 L of 2,4-D amine and 1% crop oil. 2.6L to 5.4L glyphosate plus 15 to 30 g metsulfuron and 1% crop oil. 2.4 L to 5.4 L of glyphosate plus 15 to 30 g metsulfuron plus 1.15 L of 2,4- D amine and 1% crop oil. 1.7 to 3.1 L/ha 2,4- D amine plus 1% crop oil. * Other registered products containing 2,4-D present as ISOPROPYLAMINE SALT as its only active constituent (with different concentration of active constituent) may be used at the equivalent rate of active ingredient per hectare. ** Other registered products containing 2,4-D present as DIMETHYLAMINE AND DIETHANOLAMINE SALTS as its only active constituent (with different concentration of active constituent) may be used at the equivalent rate of active ingredient per hectare. Lantana 600 (label registration for lippia) Noncrop/Rights of way Dichlorprop 600g/L 1 L per 200 L water 5 7 L/ha Generally the first application of herbicide will kill a high percentage of lippia plants. However, the small number of plants that survive need to be controlled or they will rapidly re-invade the following season. At least 50 mm of rainfall (over one or two days) is needed before spraying to provide adequate subsoil moisture for good growth and to allow the lippia to flower. However, herbicides should not be applied within 4 days of heavy rainfall nor if heavy rainfall is forecast to prevent pollution of streams and aquatic environments with the herbicide. In pastures a summer spray program will need to be repeated every 2-3 years. This interval will be dictated by seasonal conditions and pasture competitiveness. Wet summers will favour rapid lippia re-invasion, but these conditions are also ideal for achieving good lippia suppression using timely herbicide applications. Two applications of 2,4-D amine (625 g/l) at least three months apart give the best control of lippia in pastures. The second application should be carried out when the regrowth lippia begins to flower, and should be made even if a high kill rate has been achieved with the first application. In fallow situations ensure the minimum cropping interval for metsulfuron-methyl is observed. Do not use metsulfuron-methyl if sowing susceptible crops or pastures within the minimum cropping interval (nine months for most pulse crops, pasture legumes and oats and 14 months for summer crops such as sorghum, maize, millet, sunflowers and soybeans). Extended dry periods, such as drought, may lead to longer plant back periods for metsulfuron-methyl. Using herbicides near waterways Great care should be taken to avoid contaminating waterways and standing water bodies with herbicides. For application within 20 m of waterways use only glyphosate products that are approved for use in aquatic situations. (Trials have shown Roundup Biactive to have lower efficacy on lippia than other glyphosate formulations. The maximum label rate of glyphosate should be used when using Roundup Biactive or equivalent formulations). Even when using a glyphosate product that is approved for use in aquatic situations, care must be taken to ensure that the herbicide mixtures as specified in permit PER10917 are prevented from entering the waterway. The user must not apply any of the herbicides specified in permit PER10917 immediately after rain or if rain is forecast within 4 days of the proposed application. This is to prevent chemical run-off and possible contamination of local streams. Glyphosate formulations with added wetting agents should not be used for lippia control within 20 m of a waterway or standing water body. If control using p 6 Lippia

316 glyphosate is needed within this distance, only the formulations registered for use in water must be used. Control on non-arable land Options for the control of lippia on non-arable land are more limited. Spot spraying with selective herbicides using vehicle-mounted hose-reel and hand-gun sprayers can control lippia in areas where access for cultivation is limited and cultivation is not possible. If pasture establishment is feasible, clovers and fertiliser can be broadcast into lippia areas and may provide some extra winter and spring feed for livestock. Initial spot spraying with herbicide will provide a fallow for pasture establishment. If access is possible, small machinery can be used to direct drill perennial grasses and annual legumes. Once established the pasture will need on-going maintenance to remain productive and suppress lippia. Legislation Lippia is a Class 4 noxious weed across NSW. The plant must not be sold, propagated or knowingly distributed except by people involved in hay or lucerne production, and the growth of the plant must be managed in a manner that reduces its spread and continuously inhibits its reproduction. The responsibility for control of noxious plants and appropriate disposal of weed plant material on private land rests with the owner or occupier of the land. Failure to do so could result in the local control authority issuing a weed control notice, court action and a fine. Local control authorities must control noxious weeds on public land adequately to prevent the infestation of adjoining land. Community members can assist the control of this weed by notifying the local control authority of any known infestation on public land. See for a complete list of declared noxious weeds for each control area in NSW. Acknowledgements Authors: J. Dellow, K. Motley, A. Storrie, J. Spenceley Technical reviewers: Lester McCormick, Birgitte Verbeek, Tony Cook Editors: Elissa van Oosterhout, Penny Wheeler Production coordinated by Annette McCaffery and Elissa van Oosterhout Images Figures 1 and 5 J. Dellow Figure 2, 3, 4 and 6 K. Motley References David Illing (2000) Managing Lippia The crucial points. Information management worksheet. Munir A A (1993) A taxonomic revision of the Genus Phyla Lour (Verbenacae) in Australia. J Adelaide Bot. Gard. 15 (2): Lucy M, Powell E, McCosker R, Inglis G and Richardson R (1995) Lippia (Phyla canescens) A review of its economic and environmental impact on the floodplain ecosystems in the Murray-Darling Basin. Queensland Government, Department of Primary Industries. Earl J (2003) The distribution and impacts of lippia (Phyla canescens) in the Murray Darling system. Final Report to the National Lippia Working Group October, Crawford P et al. (2008) Lippia Management Challenges, Opportunities and Strategies. Queensland Murray Darling Committee (QMDC), trading as Swift NRM, for the National Lippia Working Group. Publications available Lippia Management Challenges, opportunities and strategies (2008), National Lippia Working Group. For copies contact the NSW DPI Bookshop on Pastures in cropping rotations North West NSW Agfact P2.3.10, NSW Department of Primary Industries. Phalaris pastures, 2 nd edition Agfact P2.5.1, NSW Department of Primary Industries. Persian Clover. Agfact P2.5.26, NSW Department of Primary Industries. Balansa clover. Primefact 385 Department of Primary Industries. Successful establishment of tropical perennial grasses in north-western NSW, Agnote DPI-156, NSW Department of Primary Industries. A complete list of I&I NSW weed publications can be found at Printed copies are available by contacting the NSW DPI Lippia p 7

317 bookshop on or visit State of New South Wales through Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services You may copy, distribute and otherwise freely deal with this publication for any purpose, provided that you attribute the Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services as the owner. ISSN Disclaimer: The information contained in this publication is based on knowledge and understanding at the time of writing (May 2012). However, because of advances in knowledge, users are reminded of the need to ensure that information upon which they rely is up to date and to check currency of the information with the appropriate officer of the Department of Primary Industries or the user s independent adviser. Published by the Department of Primary Industries, a part of the Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services. Always read the label Users of agricultural or veterinary chemical products must always read the label and any permit, before using the product, and strictly comply with the directions on the label and the conditions of any permit. Users are not absolved from compliance with the directions on the label or the conditions of the permit by reason of any statement made or not made in this publication. Lippia management permits Note: The usage described in this publication is permitted under Permit (in force until 30 September 2013). This permit applies to NSW only. The Permit is issued by the Agricultural Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) and is in force at the time this publication was prepared. Persons wishing to use a chemical in a manner approved under Permit must obtain a copy of the relevant Permit from the APVMA, must read all details, conditions and limitations relevant to that Permit and must comply with the details, conditions and limitations before use. Pasture improvement cautions Pasture improvement may be associated with an increase in the incidence of certain livestock health disorders. Livestock and production losses from some disorders are possible. Management may need to be modified to minimise risk. Consult your veterinarian or adviser when planning pasture improvement. The Native Vegetation Act 2003 restricts some pasture improvement practices where existing pasture contains native species. Contact your local Catchment Management Authority office for further details. Primefact 959 (replaces Agfact P7.6.52) Job number 9672 PUB10/88 First published May 2010 p 8 Lippia

318 Invasive plants and animals Mimosa bush Acacia farnesiana Description Mimosa bush (Acacia farnesiana) is a rounded shrub or small tree generally growing 3 m tall, occasionally to 5 m. It often forms thorny thickets, and is nearly always multi-stemmed. The branches grow in a zigzag shape and are usually a grey-brown colour with prominent white spots. Leaves are a ferny type, with 1 6 pairs of leaf "branches" each with 5 20 pairs of narrow, rounded leaflets 4 8 mm long. Leaves are sometimes more of a yellowish green than a pure green. Thorns are found in pairs at the base of each leaf and can grow up to 10 cm long. Golden yellow to orangeish flowers are bailshaped, about 1 cm across, and grow on stalks, usually two stalks at the base of each leaf. Flowers develop into clusters of cigar-shaped pods, slightly curved and up to 6 cm long. The pods are dark brown or black and woody at maturity, with seeds embedded in the pith. Pods do no split open and tend to stay on the plant for a length of time. Mimosa can be confused with the declared weeds mesquite (Prosopis spp.) and prickly acacia (Acacia nilotica), particularly when young (see DPI&F Pest Fact 'Identification of Prickly Bushes' PP33). PP35 September 2007 Produced by: Land Protection (Invasive Plants and Animals) Queensland the Smart State

319 Distribution Mimosa bush, a native of central and south America, is naturalised in Australia. It is very widespread in Queensland, and found in all but the wettest and driest parts of the State. Seeds sprout readily and plants grow rapidly. It does well in dry localities and on loamy or sandy soils, forming thickets along watercourses. Mimosa bush withstands drought well, is readily eaten by stock, and has good regrowth after grazing. It is not a long-lived plant. In some parts of the world this bush is cultivated for perfume production. The problem Mimosa bush can spread readily and grow quickly. As it often forms thorny thickets, it can be a considerable nuisance during mustering and can also hinder stock access to water. Mimosa does offer shade in open downs country and can be useful as a supplement to grass during the dry season. It may therefore be a useful plant in some areas if its spread can be controlled to prevent thicket formation. The maintenance of healthy pasture competition is the best mechanism to achieve this. Herbicide control Basal bark spray For stems up to 15 cm diameter, carefully spray completely around base of plant to a height of 30 cm above ground level. Thoroughly spray into all crevices. Larger trees may be controlled by spraying to a greater height, up to 100 cm above ground level. The best time for treatment is during autumn when plants are actively growing and soil moisture is good. Cut stump treatment At any time of year, cut stems off horizontally as close to the ground as possible. Immediately (within 15 seconds) swab cut surface with herbicide mixture. Bore drains Channels and drains must be empty of water. Spray a one metre strip into the mud in channel or drain. Wait at least three days for diuron to bond to mud before slowly allowing water in again. Water must not be used in domestic water supply or supplied to desirable shade trees for 7 14 days after re-opening the drain. Further information Further information is available from the vegetation management/weed control/environmental staff at our local government. 5 cm TABLE 1 HERBICIDES REGISTERED FOR THE CONTROL OF MIMOSA BUSH Situation Herbicide Rate Optimum time Remarks (also see text) Basal bark/cut stump Fluroxypr eg. Starane 200, Tomigan 200 EC, Flagship L/100 L diesel Basal bark: for plants up to 5cm basal diameter. Triclpyr + picloram eg. Access 1 L/60L diesel Basal bark: for plants up to 5cm basal diameter. Ensure all stems on multi-stemmed plants are treated. Bore drains Diuron 500 SC 64 L/ha 3 day withholding period Diuron 900DF 35.5 kg/ha Diuron 900WG 35.5 kg/ha Fact sheets are available from DPI&F service centres and the DPI&F Information Centre phone ( ). Check our web site < to ensure you have the latest version of this fact sheet. The control methods referred to in this Pest Fact should be used in accordance with the restrictions (federal and state legislation and local government laws) directly or indirectly related to each control method. These restrictions may prevent the utilisation of one or more of the methods referred to, depending on individual circumstances. While every care is taken to ensure the accuracy of this information, the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries does not invite reliance upon it, nor accept responsibility for any loss or damage caused by actions based on it. The State of Queensland (Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries) 2007

320 Appendix F CONDITION OF CARBEEN TREES

321 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 DSC02753 DSC02748 DSC02747 DSC02749 DSC02750 DSC02751 DSC02752 DSC02754 DSC02755 DSC02756 Figure F1: Health of Trees PAGE F _CEMP_001A.DOCX

322 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 Plate 1: DSC02749 Plate 2: DSC02750 Plate 3: DSC02751 Plate 4: DSC02752 PAGE F _CEMP_001A.DOCX

323 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 Plate 5: DSC02753 Plate 6: DSC02754 Plate 7: DSC02755 Plate 8: DSC02756 PAGE F _CEMP_001A.DOCX

324 MOREE SOLAR FARM CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN VERSION: FINAL(3) DATE: 11/12/14 Plate 9: DSC02748 Plate 10: DSC02747 (Whitewood) PAGE F _CEMP_001A.DOCX

325 Appendix G ROAD UPGRADES LIMIT OF WORKS

326 MOREE SOLAR FARM MOREE, NSW GREENLIGHT CONTRACTORS PTY. LTD. BARTON PLAINS ROAD UPGRADE LIMIT OF WORKS SHEET SCHEDULE OF DRAWINGS TITLE REV. DATE EV01 EV02 EV03 EV04 EV05 EV06 TITLE SHEET, DRAWING LIST, AND SITE LOCALITY INTERSECTION LAYOUT ROAD LAYOUT SHEET 1 OF 4 ROAD LAYOUT SHEET 2 OF 4 ROAD LAYOUT SHEET 3 OF 4 ROAD LAYOUT SHEET 4 OF 4 A A A A A A 18/11/ /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/2014 SITE LOCALITY SITE LOCALITY NOT TO SCALE ORANGE orange@geolyse.com PEISLEY STREET P.O. BOX 1963 ORANGE, NSW 2800 Ph. (02) Fx. (02) DRAFTING APPROVED No DATE DETAILS CHECK BY A 18/11/14 AJD AGB ISSUED FOR REVIEW PROJECT APPROVAL AUTHORITY CLIENT FILE REFERENCE: MOREE SOLAR FARM _03A_EV01-EV06.dwg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT GREENLIGHT CONTRACTORS PTY. LTD. DRAWING PROJECT NUMBER: SOURCE: TITLE SHEET, DRAWING LIST, AND SITE LOCALITY DRAWING NUMBER: 03A_ EV01 REV. A