New Electrolysis Plant (Cell House), Nyrstar Hobart

Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd Project Management ReportProposed Cellhouse Environment Sustainability and Community Interface

Management Environmental Impact Statement

HRT-450-00240

Rev 3

.

Construction of the Proposed Electrolysis Plant (Cellhouse) at Nyrstar Hobart

300 Risdon Road, Lutana

Environmental Impact Statement

HRT-450-00240

Proponent Representative: Dale Richards

       

2021-07-28  3 Approved for Use Z. Shelley L. Cherrie K. Veale D. Richards 

DATE  REV.  STATUS  PREPARED BY  CHECKED BY  APPROVED BY 

  Environmental Superintendent  SHEQ Manager

DocuSign Envelope ID: F2B60FB1-7F88-4248-BB4B-7C8302B55EE4



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page i

Executive Summary

Nyrstar Hobart (NH) is a large-scale zinc smelter that has operated for over 100 years and

is one of the world’s largest zinc producers. Zinc is used globally in a myriad of products

including renewable energy components, medical equipment, household items, tools,

roofing and vehicles. Significantly, over 60% of global zinc production is consumed through

galvanising to improve durability and prolong the life of steel. NH is significant to the local,

regional and national economy and contributes to the Australian local manufacturing base.

NH is proposing the replacement of its existing electrowinning ‘Cellhouse’, parts of which

have been in operation for over 100 years, with a contemporary Cellhouse considered

global best practice (the Proposal). This Proposal is an integral step in creating a

sustainable future for the site. Key benefits of the Proposal are:

the replacement of outdated infrastructure with modern, efficient and effective

technology that will provide improved safety and production, and reduced operating

costs

mitigation of groundwater contamination risk from the existing Cellhouse due to

process solutions escaping containment zones

a reduction in controlled wastes that arise from the intensive maintenance required

on the existing Cellhouse

sustaining the significant socioeconomic contribution of NH to Tasmania over the

longer term. The Proposal will also create additional temporary employment

opportunities during construction

no material additions to the operation’s current environmental aspects

construction of the proposed Cellhouse wholly within the facility’s operational

footprint and in a manner that is visually consistent with the existing operation.

Key issues were outlined by the Tasmanian Environment Protection Authority (EPA) in the

Project Specific Guidelines issued, and through early engagement with Assessment

Officers. NH have also assessed the Proposal against all other requirements of the EPA

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) General Guidelines to produce this document.

Assessment has been based on specialist studies, a review of compliance and internal

data. Assessment of net impact is provided throughout the EIS and summarised below for

key areas. Full details are provided in the referenced sections of this EIS.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page ii

Key issues assessment

Air quality – Significant improvement in net impacts are anticipated. The proposed design

includes installation of clean air technologies to capture fugitive emissions of acid mist and

acidic cooling tower waters. There is potential for dust generation from construction during

bulk earthworks, however these impacts will be minimised through the application of

standard and available construction mitigations. Refer Section 6.1

Surface water – Significant improvement in potential net impacts are anticipated. All

drainage is fully contained and reports directly to existing effluent treatment facilities.

Improved control of process liquors in the proposed facility will have a benefit to the

operation of the existing effluent treatment facility. No net impact is expected from

construction activities. Refer Section 6.2.

Groundwater – A significant reduction in groundwater contamination risk is expected

through decommissioning of the existing Cellhouse and the associated removal of a

potential source of spills outside the existing containment area. No net adverse impacts are

expected from the proposed development. The Proposal includes a sealed and fully

contained basement and associated drainage system. No net impacts arise from

construction activities. Refer Section 6.3.

Noise – Improvements in net impacts are expected from the Proposal when compared to

the existing Cellhouse. Noise modelling shows a lower acoustic impact at neighbouring

receptors. There is potential for noise during construction works, and this will be mitigated

through selection of less noisy equipment (e.g. auger piling rather than percussive piling),

noise restrictions, and community notification of noisy construction activities. This will be a

high priority during construction. Refer Section 6.4.

Waste management – Significant improvement in net impacts will be realised through the

reduction in contaminated non-process wastes that currently arise from intensive

maintenance of the existing Cellhouse. There will be no significant impact from construction

wastes, with the majority to be recycled or otherwise managed onsite. Any offsite

movement of waste will be completed in compliance with regulatory guidelines. Refer

Section 6.5.

Traffic – No adverse traffic impacts are expected from operation of the proposed

Cellhouse. There is potential for localised traffic impacts during construction due to

additional light and heavy vehicle movements. The proposed mitigations and management

measures will remain a high focus throughout construction to avoid impacts on the

community or traffic incidents. Refer Section 6.16.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page iii

With regard to the following regulatory instruments, the Proposal:

is consistent with the Resource Management and Planning System (RMPS)

objectives (as commonly reflected in the Environmental Management and Pollution

Control Act and the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act) and has a positive

impact on environmental performance, and

does not prejudice NH meeting the conditions set by the Tasmanian EPA under

permit 3314 as varied by Environment Protection Notice (EPN) 7043/5.

NH have the capacity, plans, strategies and monitoring programs to mitigate or minimise

environmental impacts through both the construction and operational phases of the

Proposal.

This development is a significant improvement both socioeconomically and

environmentally, and demonstrates Nyrstar’s commitment to safe, sustainable and long-

term production in Tasmania.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page IV

Contents

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. i

Annexures ............................................................................................................................... VII

List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 8

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 10

1.1 Proponent Details .................................................................................................... 10 1.2 Project Background.................................................................................................. 12 1.3 Legislative Framework ............................................................................................. 13

2. Proposal Description ...................................................................................................... 17

2.1 Overview of Proposal ............................................................................................... 17 2.2 Details of Proposal ................................................................................................... 19 2.3 Construction ............................................................................................................. 27 2.4 Commissioning ........................................................................................................ 33 2.5 General Location...................................................................................................... 34

3. Project Alternatives ......................................................................................................... 40

3.1 ‘Business As Usual’ Option ...................................................................................... 40 3.2 Site Selection ........................................................................................................... 40 3.3 Cellhouse Technology ............................................................................................. 42

4. Public Consultation ......................................................................................................... 43

4.1 Community Engagement ......................................................................................... 43 4.2 Future Engagement ................................................................................................. 44

5. The Existing Environment .............................................................................................. 45

5.1 Planning Aspects ..................................................................................................... 45 5.2 Environmental Aspects ............................................................................................ 50 5.3 Socio-Economic Aspects ......................................................................................... 56

6. Potential Impacts and their Management ..................................................................... 58

6.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................................ 58 6.2 Water Quality (Surface and Discharge) ................................................................... 75 6.3 Groundwater ............................................................................................................ 81 6.4 Noise emissions ....................................................................................................... 87 6.5 Waste Management ................................................................................................. 96 6.6 Dangerous Goods and Environmentally Hazardous Materials .............................. 101 6.7 Biodiversity and Natural Values ............................................................................. 103 6.8 Marine and Coastal ................................................................................................ 107 6.9 Greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances............................................ 109 6.10 Socio-economic aspects ........................................................................................ 111 6.11 Hazard analysis and risk assessment ................................................................... 114




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page V

6.12 Fire risk 121 6.13 Infrastructure and off-site ancillary facilities ........................................................... 122 6.14 Environmental Management Systems ................................................................... 122 6.15 Cumulative and interactive impacts ....................................................................... 125 6.16 Environmental Impacts of Traffic ........................................................................... 125

7. Monitoring and Review ................................................................................................. 130

7.1 Monitoring Programs.............................................................................................. 130 7.2 Review and Reporting ........................................................................................... 132 7.3 Incidents and Complaints ...................................................................................... 134

8. Decommissioning and Rehabilitation ......................................................................... 135

9. Management Measures ................................................................................................. 136

10. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 142

Appendix A - Bibliography .................................................................................................. 145

Appendix B - Population Data ............................................................................................ 147

Appendix C – List of Monitoring Locations ....................................................................... 150

List of Tables

Table 1-1: Legislation and policies applicable to the Proposal ............................................................. 15 Table 2-1: Proposed Cellhouse Equipment .......................................................................................... 20 Table 2-2: Summary of the Key Cellhouse Parameters. ...................................................................... 24 Table 2-3: Process Input Streams ........................................................................................................ 25 Table 2-4: Construction Activities and Sequence ................................................................................. 27 Table 2-5: Process Tie-ins .................................................................................................................... 29 Table 2-6: Project Schedule .................................................................................................................. 31 Table 2-7:Technical Discipline Resources on Site (excluding Project Management/ SHEQ Roles) .... 32 Table 2-8: Commissioning Phases ....................................................................................................... 33 Table 3-1: Site Selection Criteria .......................................................................................................... 41 Table 3-2 Technology Choice ............................................................................................................... 42 Table 6-1: NEPM Ambient Air Quality Standards ................................................................................. 63 Table 6-2: Stack Emission Limits .......................................................................................................... 64 Table 6-3: Maximum Ground Level Concentrations ............................................................................. 64 Table 6-4: Comparison of 2009 and 2021 Stack Emissions from #6 Spent Cooling Towers ............... 67 Table 6-5: Maximum Concentration Results at or beyond the boundary of the land for the Existing Case ...................................................................................................................................................... 70 Table 6-6: Maximum Concentration Results at or beyond the boundary of the land for the Proposed Case ...................................................................................................................................................... 70 Table 6-7: NH Stormwater Infrastructure relevant to the Proposal ....................................................... 76 Table 6-8: Discharge Point Monitoring Requirements .......................................................................... 79 Table 6-9: Discharge Monitoring Parameters ....................................................................................... 79 Table 6-10: Groundwater Monitoring Program Requirements .............................................................. 83 Table 6-11: Current Long-Term Average Community Noise Levels (dBA) .......................................... 88 Table 6-12: Proposed Cellhouse Noise Emission Design Criteria........................................................ 91 Table 6-13: Predicted Construction Noise ............................................................................................ 92 Table 6-14: Site Noise Emissions Comparison..................................................................................... 94 Table 6-15: Results from Noise Modelling ............................................................................................ 95




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page VI

Table 6-16: Waste Recycled for existing site ........................................................................................ 97 Table 6-17: 2019 Contaminated Non-Process Waste from the existing Cellhouse .............................. 97 Table 6-18: EPN 7043/5 Water Quality Requirements ....................................................................... 108 Table 6-19: ANZECC water quality guidelines for marine waters (2001) ........................................... 108 Table 6-20: GHG emissions 2019/2020 .............................................................................................. 110 Table 6-21: Risk Assessment Descriptors and Matrix ........................................................................ 116 Table 6-22: Control Effectiveness Criteria .......................................................................................... 117 Table 6-23: Authority for continued tolerance of risk .......................................................................... 117 Table 6-24 Proposed Cellhouse Operational Hazard Evaluation ....................................................... 119 Table 6-25: Estimated Existing Peak Hour Trips ................................................................................ 126 Table 6-26: Traffic Assessment against Performance Criteria ........................................................... 128 Table 7-1: Document Roadmap .......................................................................................................... 131 Table 7-2: Reporting and Review Commitments ................................................................................ 134 Table 9-1: Mitigation and Management Program ............................................................................... 138 Table 10-1: RMPS Objectives and how the Proposal included the objectives ................................... 142 Table 10-2: Environmental Management and Pollution Control System (EMPCS) objectives ........... 143

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: NH Process Flow Diagram ................................................................................................. 11 Figure 2-1: Proposal Location ............................................................................................................... 17 Figure 2-2: Proposal Layout with the proposed Cellhouse shown in purple ......................................... 18 Figure 2-3: Cellhouse Process Flow Diagram ...................................................................................... 19 Figure 2-4: Example of Basement Slab and Curb ................................................................................ 22 Figure 2-5: Example of Sump ............................................................................................................... 22 Figure 2-6: Resources on Site During Execution (excludes construction management) ..................... 32 Figure 2-7: General Location of Proposal Site ...................................................................................... 36 Figure 2-8: Location and Distance to Sensitive Receptors ................................................................... 37 Figure 2-9: Site Layout .......................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 2-10: Construction Facilities and Laydown Areas ..................................................................... 39 Figure 4-1: Invitation to the Nyrstar Hobart Community Consultant Meeting ....................................... 44 Figure 5-1: Land Use ............................................................................................................................ 47 Figure 5-2: Protected Areas and Reserves ........................................................................................... 49 Figure 5-3: Wind Rose – Ellerslie Road – 2019 .................................................................................... 51 Figure 5-4: Wind Rose – Ellerslie Road – 2020 .................................................................................... 51 Figure 5-5: Ellerslie Road Weather Station Monthly Rainfall ................................................................ 51 Figure 5-6: Ellerslie Road Weather Station Monthly Mean Temperature ............................................. 52 Figure 5-7: Ellerslie Road Weather Station Daily Temperature ............................................................ 53 Figure 5-8: Surrounding Topography .................................................................................................... 54 Figure 5-9: Number of complaints per category received for the period 2017 - 2020 .......................... 58 Figure 6-1: Regulated Point Sources of Atmospheric Emissions and Monitoring ................................ 60 Figure 6-2: Annual mean TSPM Concentrations at monitoring sites .................................................... 61 Figure 6-3: Location of Community SO2 and High Volume Air Samplers ............................................. 62 Figure 6-4: Wind Rose – TAPM Data – March 2019 to February 2020 ................................................ 66 Figure 6-5: Maximum Predicted Concentrations for Sulphuric Acid – Existing Base Case .................. 71 Figure 6-6: Maximum Predicted Concentrations for Sulphuric Acid - Project Case ............................. 72 Figure 6-7: Process and Stormwater System (recycled water flows shown as dotted lines) ............... 75 Figure 6-8: Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure and Existing Emergency Discharge Locations ......... 78 Figure 6-9: Groundwater Monitoring Locations – North ........................................................................ 84 Figure 6-10: Groundwater Monitoring Locations – South ..................................................................... 85 Figure 6-11: Noise monitoring locations ............................................................................................... 89 Figure 6-12: Noise Sources .................................................................................................................. 93 Figure 6-13: Waste Management Hierarchy ....................................................................................... 100 Figure 6-14: Vegetation and Natural Values ....................................................................................... 105




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page VII

Figure 6-15: Environmental Policy ...................................................................................................... 123 Figure 8-1: Decommissioning Strategy ............................................................................................... 136

Annexures

Air Dispersion Modelling Report

Noise Impact Memo

Traffic Impact Report

2018 – 2020 Public Environment Report




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 8

List of Abbreviations

A list of the abbreviations, acronyms and, if relevant, a glossary of terms used in the EIS

are summarised below.

Abbreviation Name or Description

AACEI Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering

ACM Asbestos Containing Material

ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council

A/m2 Amperes per square meter

CWP Contaminated Water Pond

°C Degrees Celsius

DC Direct Current

DEP Derwent Estuary Program

DPIPWE Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EMS Environment Management System

EMPCA Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EOT Electric Overhead Travelling

EPA Tasmanian Environment Protection Authority

EPBC Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

EPN Environment Protection Notice

ETP Effluent Treatment Plant

EZDA Zinc die cast alloys, galvanizing grade alloys

GCC Glenorchy City Council

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GJ Gigajoule

g/l Grams per litre

GMS Groundwater Management Strategy

ha Hectares

HDPE High Density Polyethylene

HV High Voltage

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

kA Kiloampere

kJ/kg Kilojoule per kilogram

kV Kilovolt

kWh/t CZ Kilowatt hours per tonne of cathode zinc

LUPAA Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993

LV Low Voltage

m2 Meters squared




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 9

Abbreviation Name or Description

MCC Motor control centre

mm Millimetres

m/day Metre per day

mg/l Milligram per litre

ML Megalitres

MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance

MVA Mega Volt Ampere

NEPM National Environment Protection Measures

NEPC National Environment Protection Council

NGER National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting

NH Nyrstar Hobart

NPI National Pollutant Inventory

NPV Net Present Value

OL Old Leach

PJ Petajoules

RIMS Risk Information Management System

RFA Regional Forest Agreement

RLE Roast, Leach, Electrolysis

RL AHD Relative Level Australian Height Datum

RMPS Tasmanian Resource Management and Planning System

SDS Safety Data Sheet

SHEQ Safety, Health, Environment and Quality

SWL Standing Water Level

TASVEG The Digital Vegetation Map of Tasmania

TDD Two Dogs Dam

TGS Tail Gas Scrubbing

tpa Tonnes per annum

V Volts

WBT Wet Bulb Temperature

WST Worksafe Tasmania




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 10

1. Introduction

Nyrstar Hobart (NH) is a large-scale zinc smelter, located on the western bank of the

Derwent estuary. It is situated in the suburb of Lutana in the city of Glenorchy, Tasmania.

The site has operated for over 100 years, celebrating its centenary in 2016. The site is one

of the world’s largest and most efficient zinc producers, with an annual production capacity

of approximately 280,000 tonnes of marketable metal. The site is socioeconomically

significant both locally and regionally.

The scale of operation, inherent limits on technical improvement and major resources

required for maintenance significantly impacts ongoing operability and viability of the

existing Cellhouse. In recognition of these matters, NH commissioned a Concept Study for

the replacement of the existing facility with a modern, nominal 300,000 tonnes per annum

(tpa) ‘Jumbo’ Cellhouse, from here onward described as the ‘Proposal’. This Concept Study

has now progressed to a Feasibility Study and NH have undertaken the studies required to

support this application.

This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared to:

describe the proposed Cellhouse Project

provide environmental impact assessment based on site data and specialist

consultant reports

demonstrate conformity of proposed design, construction, and operation with

relevant legislation, State Policies and standards

provide information to the general public as the basis for public consultation

provide a framework for EPA Assessment Branch staff and the EPA Board to

consider the activity, and the conditions under which approval might be given.

This EIS has been prepared with the support of Hatch Ltd.

1.1 Proponent Details

Project Title Electrolysis Plant (Cellhouse) Project

Proponent Legal Entity Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd

Registered Address 300 Risdon Road, Lutana, Tasmania 7009

Postal Address GPO Box 377, Hobart, Tasmania 7001

ABN 49 124 818 113

Contact Person Dale Richards

Safety, Health, Environment and Quality Manager

Tel: +61 3 6278 4444. [email protected]




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 11

NH is part of the international Nyrstar Group of Companies located in Australia, the United

States of America, Netherlands, Belgium and France. Collectively over one million tonnes

of refined zinc is produced annually making Nyrstar the world’s second largest producer of

zinc.

NH produces three main products for global use as follows:

Special High-Grade zinc (SHG) used for specialist galvanising and die casting

alloys

Die casting alloys (branded ‘EZDA’) that are used in a myriad of products including

renewable energy components, medical equipment, household items, tools, and

vehicles.

Galvanising grade allows used to prolong the life of steel.

NH also produces by-products of cadmium, copper sulphate and sulphuric acid that are

sold to market. Paragoethite and lead sulphate leach concentrate are produced as by-

products and are shipped to the sister smelter Nyrstar Port Pirie for processing and value

recovery.

The facility uses the Roast, Leach, Electrolysis (RLE) process for zinc production as shown

in Figure 1-1. This EIS only relates to the Electrolysis stage of the process and does not

alter up or downstream processes, and process inputs and outputs remain unchanged.

Figure 1-1: NH Process Flow Diagram




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 12

NH undertakes extensive monitoring to assure compliance with the conditions of

Environment Protection Notice (EPN) 7043/5. NH directly employs a team of environmental

specialists to undertake, oversee and review the environmental monitoring program.

Specialists are also engaged for specific monitoring programs, including stack testing,

biological monitoring, and water quality monitoring of the Derwent River. Results are

reported to the EPA and a Public Environmental Report is produced every 3 years for

community information.

There are no proceedings at hand for matters of compliance with the EMPCA or LUPA Act.

Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd has not been convicted of an offence under either of these Acts

since 1997 nor any other legislation relating to protection of the environment.

1.2 Project Background While a large portion of the site has been modernised, the existing Cellhouse dates to the

early 1900’s. Apart from periodic upgrades and increased mechanisation, the process and

operation of the existing Cellhouse has undergone little change. The facility is deteriorating

with age and lacks the efficiencies of modern cellhouses.

To support continued sustainable and safe production at the site, NH is proposing to

replace the existing facility with a modern 300,000 tpa ‘Jumbo’ Cellhouse. The existing

Cellhouse also presents a range of environmental, health and safety, economic and social

challenges that affect the long-term viability of the operation. The main environmental

issues of concern are:

Contamination of soils and groundwater below the existing Cellhouse

The existing Cellhouse was built on unsealed ground at a time before bunding of

hazardous materials was standard practice. This has resulted in significant

historical spillage of zinc sulphate to soils and groundwater below the operation.

NH have invested heavily in application of temporary impervious sealing and down-

gradient groundwater interception. However, this constitutes an ongoing

environmental risk and maintenance cost.

Emission of acid mist from electrolytic cells

Acid mist is generated from the electrolytic process and creates corrosive

conditions within and in the immediate vicinity of the existing Cellhouse. This

causes corrosion of structures and constitutes a significant respiratory hazard for

workers, and requires the use of mandatory respiratory protective equipment

(RPE) within the facility.

Emission of acidic cooling waters from cooling towers

Cooling waters can be acidic and ‘carryover’ may be discharged in the vicinity of

the existing Cellhouse.

Generation of controlled wastes arising from the intensive maintenance program

required to sustain safe conditions within the existing Cellhouse.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 13

Relevant sections discuss these aspects in more detail and provide the design and

management measures proposed to address issues of concern.

1.3 Legislative Framework The State and Federal legislative and statutory framework applicable to the Proposal and

the existing operations undertaken on site are outlined within this section. Table 1-1

provides a summary of the regulatory instruments that are directly related to the proposed

Cellhouse project.

The site operates under Permit 3314 as varied by EPN 7043/5 and completes regular

monitoring and reporting as required by the EPN. Table 1-1 highlights environmental

implications and aspects, which are specific to the Proposal, and have been evaluated in

terms of the applicability.

Relevant State Policies take precedent over planning scheme requirements should there

be a misalignment between the two.

1.3.1 Scope of this EIS

This EIS only relates to the Electrolysis stage of the process (refer Figure 1-1) and does

not alter up or downstream processes. Process inputs and outputs remain unchanged and

increased production is within current limits set in EPN 7043/5. NH are not seeking a

variance to Permit 3314 as varied by EPN 7043/5 nor any conditions therein.

The Project (as detailed in Section 2) and therefore this EIS only relates to the construction

and operation of a proposed Cellhouse. The Cellhouse integrates into existing

infrastructure that is discussed for context but does not form part of the infrastructure for

which approval is sought. Demolition of the existing Cellhouse is not within the scope of

this EIS.

1.3.2 EPA Assessment Process and EIS structure

NH is currently permitted as a Level 2 Activity and submitted a Notice of Intent (NOI) for

the Proposal in June 2020 for the determination of class of assessment and issuance of

any Project Specific Guidelines.

The Board of the EPA determined that a Class 2B assessment was required and an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared for the Proposal in accordance with the

EMPCA.

The structure and contents of this EIS have been developed based on the following EPA

guidelines:

Guidelines for Preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (March 2019)

Project Specific Guidelines (PSGs) issued in July 2020

Information and context are provided in conformance with EPN 7043/5, but noting that a

new permit with conditions would be issued should the EPA Board recommend approval.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 14

Planning permits required under the LUPAA are discussed in Section 5.1. It should be

noted that any conditions imposed by the Board of the EPA must be included as Part B of

any Planning Permit issued by Glenorchy City Council, and are enforceable.


Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd Project Management ReportProposed Cellhouse Environment Sustainability and Community Interface Management Environmental Impact Statement

HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 15

Table 1-1: Legislation and policies applicable to the Proposal

Federal Legislation Application to the Proposal

Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 Governs the management and protection of Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) and enables a coordinated approach in relation to environmental, heritage and biodiversity protection.

NH is a brownfields site, and the replacement infrastructure is located wholly within previously disturbed areas. Previous studies show that works within the terrestrial areas are unlikely to cause impact on MNES, as none are present within the site area. No referral is being completed for the Proposal.

State Legislation Application to the Proposal

Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPAA)

Provides the framework for regulating the use and planning of land and some resources within the local government areas.

This proposal will be assessed under LUPAA by the Glenorchy City Council (GCC), with referral to the Board of the EPA. Any issued permit will include conditions required by the EPA Board in it’s assessment of the proposal.

Building Act 2016

Provides the legislative framework for all building, plumbing and demolition work in Tasmania.

Building Permits under the Building Act will be submitted to GCC for relevant works within the Proposal. Examples of permits sought may include excavation works, retaining structures, buildings, demolition, etc.

Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 (EMPCA)

Environmental protection and pollution control through the prevention, reduction and remediation of environmental harm. The focus of the Act is on preventing environmental harm from pollution and waste.

Environmental impacts associated with this Proposal are assessed and managed under EMPCA. Although an EPN exists for the whole site, a separate permit will be issued by Council for the proposed Cellhouse. This will contain the Permit Part B conditions that are required by the Board of EPA. NH operates under permit 3314 as varied by EPN 7043/5, issued in 2019. The proposed production increase from 280,000 to 300,000 is achievable within current regulatory limits stipulated in EPN 7043/5.

EMPC Control (Waste Management) Regulations 2020

Regulates controlled waste and some aspects of the general waste disposal within Tasmania.

Controlled wastes will be generated as part of the Proposal due to the demolition and excavation of historically contaminated soils and materials. Onsite reuse of soils will be furthered where appropriate, and specific EPA approvals may be required for offsite movement.

EMPC (Noise) Regulations 2016

Limits noise in residential neighbourhoods by setting out prohibited hours of use for common noise sources, and noise from equipment and machinery used on building construction and demolition sites.

Construction and demolition will generate noise beyond that already characteristic of the site. NH is subject to noise limits as part of EPN 7043/5 and construction will be restricted in accordance with these and any GCC noise restrictions. Operation is likely to reduce current noise.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 16

EMPC (Underground Petroleum Storage Systems) Regulations 2020

Prevent or limit the release of petroleum product from underground petroleum storage systems (UPSS) and governs the decommissioning of facilities.

The Proposal may require the removal of a current UPSS depending on the details of final design. Removal is subject to the conditions of the EMPC (UPSS) Regulations.

EMPC (General) Regulations 2017

Prescribes the fees charged under EMPCA to recover the costs of regulation of Level 2 and 3 activities.

Existing EPN7043/5 and any future permit to be issued for the Proposal are subject to fees.

Environment Protection Policy (Water Quality Management) 1997

Outlines management of point sources of pollution, sets emission limits for discharging to surface water, sets limits for discharge to groundwater and management of diffuse sources of pollution. The Water Quality Policy also outlines the monitoring requirements

There will be no change to the permitted outfall or associated mixing zone established under the Policy, and only positive impact on site surface water quality from the removal of a potential source of soil and groundwater contamination as discussed in Section 6.3.

State Coastal Policy 1996

Ensures that the coastline shall be used and developed in a sustainable manner to protect marine and coastal values.

The Proposal will not result in changes to the existing coastline, or wharf infrastructure. Any discharge will be managed within the existing on-site drainage, detention, and treatment system. The site will continue to monitor marine health in the Derwent estuary in line with existing procedures.

Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality) 2004

Environmental protection standards with regards to ambient air quality requirements within Tasmania.

According to EPN 7043/5, detailed monitoring and compliance requirements have been set for NH. The proposed Cellhouse will change the emissions of the plant. Existing and predicted impacts have been modelled as part of the EIS.

Environment Protection Policy (Noise) 2009

Principles and objectives for reducing health risks and interference with the surrounding environment from noise.

Strict noise limits apply to current and future operations. Monitoring at three community compliance noise monitors is also required, with exceedances reportable as compliance breaches.

The Threatened Species Protection Act 1995

Framework and actions required to protect threatened species.

Not relevant to the proposal due to the extent of historical disturbance (refer 6.7 for further discussion).




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 17

2. Proposal Description

2.1 Overview of Proposal The proposed Cellhouse is a conventional design, based on modern Cellhouse design

philosophy used in similar operations. The proposed Cellhouse consists of two separate

electrical units, each providing 50% of the total 300,000 tpa capacity operating at a density

of 515 A/m2 over nominal 48-hour stripping cycles.

With the improvement in power efficiency of a jumbo proposed Cellhouse, it is estimated

that the production of 300,000 tpa of cathode zinc will require 2% more power than is

currently used to produce 280,000 tpa in the existing Cellhouse. The proposed Cellhouse

will be designed to have a minimum of a 30-year operational life span.

Figure 2-1 shows the location of the proposed Cellhouse relative to existing infrastructure.

Figure 2-2 shows a plan schematic of the proposed layout, with the proposed Cellhouse

shown in purple.

Figure 2-1: Proposal Location

EXISTING CELLHOUSE

PROPOSED CELLHOUSE




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 18

Figure 2-2: Proposal Layout with the proposed Cellhouse shown in purple




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 19

2.2 Details of Proposal The technical specifications for the facility are currently under development and will take

into account the regulatory requirements (performance requirements as per the regulations

referenced in Section 6) for the site.

2.2.1 Cellhouse Process Flow

The proposed Cellhouse falls within the Electrolysis process as indicated in Figure 1-1:

NH Process Flow Diagram.

As with the existing Cellhouse, the inputs to the proposed Cellhouse will be purified zinc

solution from the upstream Leach Purification process via the existing Pure Solution Tanks.

The pure solution is mixed with the spent electrolyte produced during Electrolysis, and is

gravity fed to the electrolysis cells where the process of electrowinning occurs. Cells contain

lead anodes and aluminium cathodes, essentially acting as large batteries.

Direct electric current is passed through the cells resulting in the zinc depositing onto the

cathode (negative electrode) through the process of electrolysis. Once the electrowinning

period is completed, the zinc is stripped from the cathode and sent to the final process of

melting and casting. The solution from the electrowinning process flows to a tank where

fresh zinc solution is added and is then pumped to the cooling towers. All solutions

produced as part of the electrolysis step are recycled as part of a closed-loop process. The

design of the proposed Cellhouse also includes a sealed basement, drains and sumps to

facilitate the return of solution to the process, and to prevent the spillage of solution to

ground.

Figure 2-3: Cellhouse Process Flow Diagram

2.2.2 Equipment

The Proposal includes the installation of buildings, equipment and systems that are

required to replace the existing Cellhouse. Proposed equipment is listed in Table 2-1.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 20

Table 2-1: Proposed Cellhouse Equipment

Area Associated Equipment and Infrastructure

Cellhouse Building

Building structure

Amenities and stairways

Sumps, pumps and agitators in the basement

Lighting

Steelwork

Control room

Electrical distribution system including panels and rooms

Structures, walkways and access

Acid mist management system

Electrolytic cells

Busbars

Electrolyte System

Electrolytic cells and pickling tanks

Cell cleaning (manganese dioxide) removal system including vacuum systems and slurry collection and disposal system

Electrolyte circulation and cooling and their control systems

Additional purified solution storage and control

Circulation tanks, pumps, pipelines and their control systems

System for return of spent electrolyte to existing spent tanks in Leach

Electrolyte cooling towers

Upgrades to existing reagent addition system and control

Electrodes

Anodes, including appropriate level of spares

Cathodes, including appropriate level of spares

Access for cathode ‘pickling’

All cell electrode supports and spacers

Electrode Handling

Cathode / anode cranes and associated hoists

All auxiliary gantry cranes

System for managing reject cathodes/anodes, and their replacement

Crane maintenance bay

Zinc Stripping

Electrode conveyors and storage racks

Cathode stripping machines

Zinc sheet stacking machines

Discharge conveyor from the cathode sheet stacking box

Cathode brushing machines

Cathode contact cleaning devices

Electrical

High Voltage (HV) transformers and Direct Currant (DC) rectifiers required for DC supply, and their control systems

Low Voltage (LV) transformers

All LV power panels apart from their HV supply

DC supply busbars from rectifiers to cells




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 21

The proposed Cellhouse will tie into existing infrastructure on site including the existing

pure and spent solution system, reagent system and some supply systems. These tie ins

are described in Section 2.3.3. The following tanks will be retained:

Pure Solution tanks

Spent Tanks

Manganese Mud Tank

The anodes used in operation will be purchased rather than cast on site, making the

current Anode Casting Plant redundant. The proposed Cellhouse layout is depicted as

Figure 2-2.

NH has partnered with an experienced Cellhouse technology provider that will be supplying

the design, supporting the procurement process and the installation of the equipment as

detailed in Table 2-1. NH will require performance guarantees to ensure that equipment

operates to the specifications provided to the technology provider. These specifications

have been based on NH’s standards, industry best practice and regulatory requirements.

2.2.3 Cellhouse Design

Cellhouse design targets focus on the containment of process solutions, capture of

emissions to air through clean air technologies, and siting to minimise negative impacts

on visual amenity and noise. The design is required to conform with relevant Australian

Standards and Tasmanian and Federal legislation. The main Cellhouse design elements

are described below.

Cellhouse Building: The structure is predominately concrete. The roof and wall cladding

will be constructed of lightweight sheeting such as UV resistant ultra-heavy-duty Polyvinyl

Chloride (PVC) or fibre-reinforced plastic (FRP). Protective coatings will be applied to

protect the building structure against corrosion, noting that corrosion will be significantly

reduced due to the proposed acid mist control system.

Cellhouse Basement: The Cellhouse basement will be concrete and lined to provide a

corrosion and impact resistant barrier between the basement floor and the building

Cell intermediate busbars and cooling system

Demineralised water system for rectifiers and intermediate busbars

Control & Instrumentation

All process control marshalling cabinets

Control Room screens

Control and Instrumentation

All required control and instrumentation to operate the Cellhouse

Services to and from the Cellhouse

Compressed air supply system

Fire-fighting systems

Stormwater and Drainage discharge system

Wastewater and Sump discharge system

Low pressure steam provision system




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 22

foundations. Indicative sections are presented in Figure 2-4 and Figure 2-5. The basement

includes contained drainage and sumps to collect and return process liquors to the circuit.

Figure 2-4: Example of Basement Slab and Curb

Figure 2-5: Example of Sump

Electrolysis Cells: Electrolytic cells will be self-supporting and designed for 120 cathodes

per cell. The design includes an integrated overflow weir and electrolyte discharge box.

The position of the cells will be adjusted to ensure the relative level of all cells are within

acceptable tolerances. The undersides of the cells are approximately 3m above the

basement floor.

Transformer/Rectifiers (Rectiformer): Rectiformers will each be designed for an

operating current of 222 kA and a maximum proposed operating current of 260 kA.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 23

The rectiformers will provide a nominal 270 V DC output however the final output voltage

will be determined by the cell voltage and the volt drop through the DC busbars at the

proposed maximum production rate.

The proposed direct current circuit will be designed for a nominal current density of 515

A/m2. By utilising the maximum output voltage from the rectiformers, the current density

can be increased to 600 A/m2 at a future date.

Rectiformers will be designed to minimise the harmonics generated. Additional combined

power factor correction and harmonic filters will be provided at the main 33 kV substation

HVSS3. It will also ensure that harmonic voltage levels, as presented to the TasNetworks

Risdon Substation, comply with the relevant Australian Standards and the requirements of

the Network Provider.

Busbars: DC busbars from the rectiformers to each electrowinning unit will be designed

for safe operation. This will include shrouding and clearance to meet the requirement of the

relevant Australian Standards and Work Health and Safety Regulations 2012.

Cooling Towers: The proposed Cellhouse is to be equipped with electrolyte cooling towers

to reduce the cell electrolyte from a maximum temperature of 40°C to 34°C. The specific

heat of the electrolyte is anticipated to be approximately 3.4 kJ/kg°C and will be confirmed

by the Technology Provider as part of the study for the cooling tower design. The cooling

towers are to be designed for an ambient wet bulb temperature (WBT) of 20.5°C; the

expected evaporation rate is 45 m3/hr.

Process Control Systems: These will measure and control all operational parameters of

the proposed Cellhouse including temperature of the hot spent electrolyte, automation of

Cooling Tower fan speed and temperature, current efficiency and flows through the system.

Anode Cleaning Facility: An anode cleaning facility will be positioned at each end of the

building. The design cleaning interval is approximately 15 days, although this is subject to

variation based on solution quality (e.g. manganese content) and current density. The

design will account for solution quality.

Stripping Machines: Two stripping machines are required at a stripping rate of

approximately 12.5 seconds per cathode. The design aims to minimise the need for manual

intervention to remove the worker interface and associated risk. The stripping process and

technology will ensure that, where possible, it will be automated.

Cell Gantry Cranes: There will be four insulated cell gantry cranes installed, each

designed to operate in a corrosive environment. Design includes a high level of automation,

including autonomous cell lifts, stripping and movement of cathode. Cranes will have a

Working Load Limit equal to 50% of the cathodes of one cell after 48 hours deposit at 600

A/m2 + 8 hours (to cover possible delays), or a third of the anodes in one cell +1 (whichever

is the greater).

Acid Mist Control: The generation of acid mist from the electrowinning process has

historically and globally created significant acute risk of irritation and respiratory distress,

and chronic risk of upper respiratory disease (noting there is no history of workers




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 24

compensation claims at NH). Acid mist is generated when bubbles of oxygen or hydrogen,

produced by the anode within the cell, reach the surface of the cell and burst to release as

a particulate mist. NH currently control this through foam blanketing and mandatory

respiratory protection.

A ventilation system will be installed to control the concentration of acid mist in the proposed

Cellhouse to minimise the impact on people and equipment. This is a significant safety and

health aspect of the project. The ventilation system is being designed so that the inhalable

fraction of acid mist in the proposed Cellhouse’s main operating zones will meet best

practice levels for zinc Cellhouses and allow for operation without the need for respiratory

protective equipment as far as practicable.

The key operational proposed Cellhouse parameters are provided in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2: Summary of the Key Cellhouse Parameters.

Cellhouse Item Specification

No. of Cells 35 in 4 rows

Cathode area 3.6 m2

Current density 500-520 A/m2

Cathode/cathode spacing 90 mm

Online time 98 % 323 days @ 231 kA 42 days @ 200 kA

Current Efficiency 92-93 %

Power Consumption 3200 kWh/t CZ

No. of electrical circuits 2

Cell voltage (nom.) 3.2 V - 3.4 V (expected)

No. of rectiformers 2 / cell unit

Rectiformer capacity 45 MVA

Stripping cycle (nom.) 48 hrs (max)

Stripping rate 12.5 – secs/cathode (max.)

Production (cathode zinc) 839.1 tonnes/day

Production (cathode zinc) 300,079 tonnes/annum

Electrolyte temperature max. 40°C at cell outlet

2.2.4 Raw Materials

The input streams required to feed the proposed Cellhouse will not change from the existing

Cellhouse and are detailed in Table 2-3.

One notable adjustment is that previously, anodes were being produced onsite whereas

the now larger anodes that are proposed will be sourced offsite.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 25

The raw material streams are detailed in a Heat and Mass Balance document 0F0F0F0F

1. Further

refinement of the raw material volumes required will be completed through detailed design

and based on the Heat and Mass Balance report.

Table 2-3: Process Input Streams

Stream Physical State

Purified solution / rich electrolyte Solution

Spent electrolyte Solution

Cooling tower feed Solution

Electrowinning feed Solution

Circulation electrolyte Solution

Manganese cell slimes Slurry / Solid

Anode scrubber slurry Slurry

Liquorice reagent for cell blanketing Liquid

Gum arabic / gelatine reagent Liquid

Strontium carbonate reagent Slurry

Electrolyte solution for cathode ‘Pickling’

Liquid

Cooling tower solids Solid

Cathode scrubber water Liquid

Wash water Liquid

Process water Liquid

Demin water Liquid

Potable water Liquid

Biocide Liquid

Corrosion and scale inhibitor Liquid

2.2.5 Power Supply

The Proposal comprises two electrical cell units which will draw power from the

TasNetworks 110 kV Risdon Substation. Energy is currently supplied from the

TasNetworks Risdon Substation through three 110/11 kV 90 MVA transformers and two 11

kV switchboards (all owned by TasNetworks); a total of eleven 11 kV feeders into the NH

plant and into three NH 11 kV switching stations (HVSS1, HVSS2 and HVSS3). The

existing Cellhouse is arranged in six cell units supplied through a total of nine rectiformers

of various ratings from 13 MVA to 33 MVA.

1 Heat and Mass Balance Report (Z2004-DAT-791-ER-0001)




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 26

For this project, TasNetworks will be required to upgrade their Risdon Substation including

three new 110/33 kV 90 MVA transformers providing four new 33 kV feeders into a new HV

switching station HVSS4 located adjacent to the Risdon substation.

Power supply to the four new 45 mVA rectiformers will be provided by the NH Switching

Station HVSS4 via an overhead gantry, a tunnel under the roadway and proceeding past

all four of the new rectiformers to the south-eastern end of the proposed Cellhouse. The

ancillary plant associated with the proposed Cellhouse (cooling towers, cathode stripping

machines, cranes, etc.) will draw power from a new LV substation (Sub No.24).

The location for this infrastructure can be found in Figure 2-9.

During commissioning of the proposed Cellhouse there will be a short-term increase in

power requirements as both commissioning and existing operations take place in parallel.

The Commissioning Plan will consider the power requirements and any restrictions posed

by the Risdon Substation.

Once the proposed Cellhouse is commissioned, and the existing Cellhouse is

decommissioned, the power requirement for the site is expected to be similar to the existing

requirement.

2.2.6 Cellhouse Operation

Operations will occur 24 hours a day, 365 days a year as per the current permitted

operational hours. This consists of an operational and maintenance team working business

hours, and operators working on a four-panel shift roster with shift mechanical,

instrumentation and electrical support staff. The operation of the proposed Cellhouse will

be continuous throughout all seasons. Shutdown works to complete widescale

maintenance will be scheduled as required.

There is no requirement for changes to operation infrastructure, such as sewerage

systems, additional parking, and worker facilities as staffing numbers associated with

proposed Cellhouse will not increase.

Operational and maintenance staffing arrangements are discussed in Section 6.10.

2.2.7 Roads and Accesses

NH has two main accesses that will remain unchanged but be supplemented by an

additional haulage way to be established to provide segregated and safe transport and

access to the construction site.

Worker site access is heavily controlled to prevent unauthorised access. This comprises

turnstiles that are only activated by an issued Site Access Card that is linked to completion

of entry requirements such as inductions, provision of insurances for contractors, health

screening, and lead in blood testing. An additional controlled turnstile will be established

adjacent to the construction site to ensure Project worker access is similarly controlled.

2.2.8 Off-site Infrastructure

This proposal does not require any changes to, or construction of, off-site and ancillary

infrastructure. There is a configuration change required in the power supply to the site,




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 27

which is detailed in Section 2.2.5 to cater for the site demand. The location for this

infrastructure has been confirmed with TasNetworks and is located within the existing

TasNetworks substation

2.3 Construction

2.3.1 Construction Strategy

Construction will be completed while operations in adjacent areas continue. To minimise

disruption to the surrounding community and operating site, the project plans to:

Limit onsite fabrication activities by preferencing pre-assembled structures or

equipment supply

Split the construction between operational and non-operational areas. The non-

operational work area will be separated from the rest of the plant thereby not affecting

the existing facility. The operational portion of the project will utilise planned plant

shutdowns and work collaboratively with production staff to minimise disruption

Use local companies and our long-term partnering contractors to boost the local

economy where possible. This includes local sourcing of plant and equipment, local

fabrication where possible, and hiring of local labour to create jobs within the State

where possible

Develop and implement a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)

Protect the amenity of the adjoining neighbourhoods by managing the impact of noise

and road traffic, and communicating key project activities.

The above elements are contained in a Project Execution Plan and associated Plans that

outline the roles, responsibilities and processes to ensure coordinated, safe and compliant

delivery without harm to the environment or surrounding community.

2.3.2 Construction Activities on Site

Table 2-4 outlines the work to be completed on site. Early works are expected to take nine

months, overlapping with the construction of the proposed Cellhouse. This is expected to

be complete by June 2023 at which time tie in and commission activities will commence.

The management of contaminated soils from excavations is a significant consideration of

the CEMP and discussed further in Section 6.5.

Coordination of oversize deliveries will be in accordance with Tasmanian Transport Safety

(Department of State Growth) requirements, and lifting operations in accordance with Work

Health and Safety Regulations 2012.

Table 2-4: Construction Activities and Sequence

Phase of Construction

Works Undertaken

Early Work




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 28


Works Undertaken

Mobilise Contractors and Site Preparation

Establish contractor and Project team site offices, crib rooms, ablution facilities, site communications, laydown yards, construction fencing, and workshop facilities as required.

Production Drive

Relocate Production Drive to divert traffic around the proposed Cellhouse and providing truck egress from the finished product loading area. This will require a 2 m excavation into unconsolidated fill. Contaminated fill to be stockpiled on site for reuse as fill where possible.

Relocate Early Work Services

Relocate existing HV cables, LV cables and piping (nitrogen, compressed air, natural gas, etc.) currently located within the proposed Cellhouse footprint.

Cooling towers Construct temporary cooling towers and associated infrastructure to allow existing Aquacool towers within the proposed construction zone to be demolished with minimal disruption to operations.

Early Works and Civil Works

Level the existing site to create the flat pad for the proposed Cellhouse. Decommission and remove an Underground Storage Facility in accordance with the EMPC (UPSS) Regulations 2020. Construct a retaining wall on the uphill portion of the proposed Cellhouse. Management of excavated materials which is likely to be contaminated. Reuse of contaminated material as approved. Early works expected to excavate 12,000 m3. Civil works during construction expected to excavate 20,000 m3.

Cellhouse Construction

Balance of existing services

After construction has commenced, there is a balance of services that need to be relocated. This will be completed when required.

Concrete Works

Install reinforcing, concrete foundations and concrete structures. Install foundations for electrolyte cooling towers. Install Cell support structure. Coat building walls and applicable structural members with acid-proof coating. Install basement impervious membrane system, which includes acid-proof tiles.

Structural Install building columns, bracing, crane rails and framework. Install purlins and cladding. Install roofing structure.

Mechanical

Install the following equipment: - Electrolytic Cells - Anodes - Cathodes - Stripping Machines - Anode Flattening Machine - Cranes - Electrolyte Cooling Towers - Busbars - Acid Mist Control System (Cellhouse Ventilation) - Cathode and Anode racks - Cathode Zinc Stacking - Heat exchangers




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 29


Works Undertaken

- Classifiers - Ball mills - Dosing Package - Various fibreglass tanks (hot spent electrolyte, electrolyte cooling

tower feed, cooling water for busbars, etc.) - Modification to system for reuse of existing spent tanks.

Piping

Install the following: - Electrolyte launders - Various pumps (electrolyte, water, etc.) - Various valves to and from the plant - Utilities and Service distribution through the Cellhouse (process

water, potable water, sewerage, manganese slurry delivery, compressed air, etc.)

- Safety Showers - Complete process, utilities and service tie ins to the rest of the

plant

Electrical and instrumentation

Install wiring throughout the structure and install the following equipment: - Transformer - Rectifiers - LV Cable - CCTV - Communication System - Lighting - Cable Tray, Conduit and Support - Control Systems - Instruments - Motor Control Centres and distribution boards - Low Voltage Switchboards - Power Transformers - Low Voltage Variable Speed Drives - Emergency Diesel Generators - Uninterruptible Power Supplies and Battery Chargers

HV Electrical work outside the Cellhouse

Install the following HV wiring and equipment: - TasNetworks 110/33 kV transformers - New 33 kV Switchyard and Harmonic Filters - HV and LV Cable - HV Switchboard - High Voltage Power Factor Correction Equipment - Reroute existing TasNetworks 33 kV power lines

Commissioning As per the Commissioning Plan that will be developed for the project.

2.3.3 Process Tie-Ins

The proposed Cellhouse will require services to be installed, integrated with existing site

services and commissioned prior to final commissioning of the proposed Cellhouse. While

the proposal will result in the rerouting of some services within the site and upgrading of

utilities, it will not result in any changes to the supply systems for the site, including potable

water or sewerage off takes. Noteworthy tie-ins are listed in Table 2-5.

Table 2-5: Process Tie-ins

System Detail




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 30

Pure Solution

Two new supply lines are required to deliver Pure Solution from the existing storage tanks to each unit of the proposed Cellhouse. Connections to the existing Cellhouse will be decommissioned. The new lines will include points for cleaning and access.

Spent Electrolyte

Spent electrolyte transferred to Spent Tanks - this process will be maintained as part of the proposed Cellhouse design. The proposed Cellhouse may include the reuse of up to four of the existing tanks for spent electrolyte storage.

Manganese Slurry Delivery The proposed Cellhouse will be equipped with supply lines for manganese slurry to be pumped from the existing Cellhouse to storage in Leaching.

Reagent Mixing A new, or repurposed, reagent mixing station will form part of the proposed Cellhouse design and will be sized to the requirements of the new design.

Contaminated Water and Sumps

Contaminated water emanating from the process will be pumped to a sump from where it will be transferred to detention ponds (noting closed drainage and recycling of process spills is included in design).

Control and Instrumentation Interface

Existing site standard is the Allen Bradley System, and all control systems will be integrated into the existing control system. This will include process control displays, remote control of equipment and all monitoring points.

Cathode Zinc Conveying and elevator system to transfer the cathode zinc to Casting.

Additional services required to be tied-in from the existing site are compressed air, potable

water, firefighting systems, stormwater and drainage discharge, wastewater and sump

discharges, sewerage and low-pressure steam.

2.3.4 Execution Schedule

The construction period is expected to be approximately 800,000 hours over a period of 28

months, with a peak workforce of approximately 200 people. Main construction works will

occur between approximately 7am and 5pm, 6 days a week. Night shift works will be

completed only as required. In the event that night shift is required, construction planning

will schedule major works to occur during day shift, with minor works to occur during the

night shift.

The high-level sequence of events driving the critical path of the project is as follows:

1. Early Works (proposed - August 2021 to March 2022):

i) Basic and detailed engineering of the Early Work scope

ii) Procurement and award of the Early Work scope packages (done in parallel to

the basic and detailed engineering)

iii) Construct the culverts and the road diversion

iv) Install piping and electrical cables while the road construction is being completed

v) Rerouting of the existing 33 kV TasNetworks powerline.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 31

2. Approval of the Execution phase by the Nyrstar Board of Directors

3. Execution of the proposed Cellhouse and Interface of the new plant with the existing

plant (proposed January 2022 – June 2023):

i) Award of the CTP and mobilisation of the NH team

ii) Detailed engineering and procurement of the civil, concrete, mechanical,

electrical and instrumentation equipment and contractors required for the project.

Engineering and procurement will be completed in parallel

iii) Mobilisation of contractors to site

iv) Civil, concrete, mechanical, piping, electrical and instrumentation work completed

(sequenced with overlapping activities where possible as work fronts become

available)

v) Installation of TasNetworks 110/33 kV transformers and construction of NH’s new

33 kV Switchyard and Harmonic Filter installation.

4. Commissioning and Ramp up (proposed January 2024 – June 2024)

i) Construction Completion

ii) Dry commissioning

iii) Wet commissioning

iv) Ramp up.

The Proposal schedule is described in Table 2-6 which is based on an April 2021

submission of the development approval request, and the changes in labour on site for

construction is detailed in Figure 2-6 and Table 2-7.

Table 2-6: Project Schedule

Activity Proposed Execution Schedule

Submission of EIS and Development Approval July 2021

Planning Approval for Early Works July 2021

Nyrstar Board Approval September 2021

Early Works Construction From September 2021 to May 2022

Development approval for Construction of Proposed Cellhouse

February 2022

Cellhouse Construction September 2022 to May 2024

Cellhouse Commissioning August 2023 to July 2024



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 32

Figure 2-6: Resources on Site During Execution (excludes construction management)

Table 2-7:Technical Discipline Resources on Site (excluding Project Management/ SHEQ Roles)

Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Resourcing

Earthworks 14 14 27 27 5 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Concrete - 14 14 57 57 86 86 72 72 29 29 29 29 - - - - - - - - - -

Steel - - 10 10 31 31 51 51 51 51 31 31 21 21 10 10 - - - - - -

Mechanical - - 16 16 33 33 33 33 49 49 49 49 49 49 33 33 33 33 25 25 8 8

Piping - - - 12 12 12 12 25 25 25 25 49 49 49 49 49 49 18 18 6 6

Electrical, Control & Instrumentation - - - 16 16 16 16 49 49 66 66 66 66 49 49 33 33 25 25 8 8

Total 14 14 41 41 89 89 179 179 185 185 203 203 199 199 185 185 142 142 115 115 68 68 23 23




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 33

2.4 Commissioning Towards the end of the construction period, pre-commissioning and commissioning

activities will begin. This will include completion of Inspection and Test Plans (ITP’s),

energising supply systems, and commissioning of the proposed Cellhouse infrastructure

and production cells. Verification of testing against specifications, handover and

acceptance by NH Operations occurs through formal and documented quality assurance

and quality control mechanisms. This is integral to ensure that all Cellhouse systems

operate as designed and integrate into the existing up- and downstream processes.

All commissioning activities, roles, responsibilities, and interfaces will specified in a

Commissioning Management Plan. Table 2-8 provides a summary of the major actions to

move the project from construction to operation. As per Table 2-6, commissioning is

expected to take place from August 2023 to July 2024.

The proposed Cellhouse will be commissioned one Cell Unit (i.e. one electrical circuit) at a

time to allow for apportionment of Purified Solution to both the existing Cellhouse and the

proposed Cellhouse. In addition, the power required by both the existing and proposed

Cellhouse’s concurrently is greater than can be supplied by the Risdon Substation,

therefore requiring sequential shifting of power.

Table 2-8: Commissioning Phases

Phase Actions

Finalisation of construction and handover to commissioning

Confirm that all required systems are correctly installed and operational as part of the Operational guarantee.

Document handover of the proposed Cellhouse from construction for commissioning, confirming all safety and access requirements are in place and commencement of shift operations.

Pre-commissioning testing, including hydrotesting or pressure testing of piping and electrolyte circulation systems. Cleaning of all vessels and pipework with water and removal of debris.

Initial testing of electrical systems, rectiformers and low voltage supply.

Pre-commissioning of all proposed Cellhouse equipment, initially individually, and then as an integrated unit to check all automatic functions and logic.

Installation of intermediate busbars

Busbars and cell ‘furniture’ placed on cell tops aligned with the gantry crane.

One third of the anodes are required to be placed in the cell to secure the busbars in place.

Filling first unit

Initial filling of cells (70) by one-third using new Pure Solution lines from the existing storage.

Only one cell unit to be filled for commissioning.

Installation of cathodes

Install a small number (maximum 40) of pre-pickled and brushed cathodes in each cell using the gantry crane.

Once cathodes are installed, fill cells is as Pure Solution becomes available.

HV power checks Final inspection and checking of the HV system and

rectiformers.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 34

Phase Actions

Confirm that the transformer cooling system is functional.

Power-on cells

Power-on the Cell Unit with an initial 15 kA, shift power from existing Cellhouse.

Initial cathode stripping after 20-24 hours. These are manually stripped and expected to be a poor deposit.

Additional 6 cathodes added to each cell after each strip.

Installation of remaining anodes and cathodes

Install all remaining anodes.

Install remaining prepared cathodes.

Increase current as additional cathodes are installed to maintain minimum density of 200 A/m2.

Increase power and deposition period further as zinc is deposited.

Increase to final power load of 222.5 kA, 515 A/m2.

Commissioning of second Cell Unit.

After first unit is operational, and zinc stripping is consistent, the second Cell Unit is commissioned.

Process is similar to that described above and repeated.

The use of cathodes from the commissioned Unit will allow accelerated commissioning and improve initial zinc deposit quality.

Final power load 222.5 kA, 515 A/m2.

The quality of the zinc deposit on randomly selected cathodes will provide an indication of

the required stripping frequency and deposition period. Generally, a Cellhouse is

considered to be operational once it reaches 85% of its name plate capacity; in this case,

189 kA.

Decommission, demolition and remediation of the existing Cellhouse will be the focus of a

standalone project and has not been covered in detail in this Proposal.

2.5 General Location The NH Smelter is located on the west bank of the Derwent estuary. The site is located in

an existing industrial area. The site is partially surrounded by neighbouring industrial

industries including BOC Gases, International Catamarans (Incat), TasWater, Impact

Fertilisers, TasNetworks and Caltex. Site neighbours also include residential areas in the

suburbs of Lutana, directly adjacent to the site, and East Risdon located on the eastern

shore of the Derwent estuary, to the north of the site. Location and zoning are provided in

Section 5.1.2, Figure 5-1.

The site shares a boundary with the NH owned Lutana Woodlands Reserve and the East

Risdon State Reserve located on the eastern shore of Derwent estuary, across from NH.

NH owns approximately 120 hectares of land on the western shore and 100 hectares on

the eastern shore of the Derwent estuary, maintaining substantial buffer zones between

the site and surrounding residential community.

Figure 2-7 shows the general location of the NH smelter site, the surrounding land and land

uses. Figure 2-8 displays the distances to the closest sensitive receptors. The sensitive

receptors have been identified as the closest residences to the boundary of the site, and




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 35

are located some 435 m from the centre of the Proposed cellhouse site. These receptors

are considered as sensitive due to the potential that they will recognise changes occurring

at the site. There are no schools, day care centres, caravan parks etc within proximity of

the site that they may be impacted, and thus defined as sensitive receptors.

The main access route to the site is along Risdon Road, which passes the New Town Bay

Golf Club before entering the site car park.

Figure 2-9 displays the NH site, highlighting the different uses of the various buildings and

significant structures. Figure 2-10 displays the proposed construction facilities and laydown

areas associated with the Proposal including the proposed traffic flow that will be

implemented during the construction of the proposed cellhouse.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 36

Figure 2-7: General Location of Proposal Site



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 37

Figure 2-8: Location and Distance to Sensitive Receptors



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 38

Figure 2-9: Site Layout



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 39

Figure 2-10: Construction Facilities and Laydown Areas




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 40

3. Project Alternatives

The project location and layout were selected after several alternatives were assessed

against a set of criteria. NH considered the following when completing its analysis:

Previous studies completed on site, including a Concept Study completed for upgrading

the facility

How the upgrade factored into the strategic plan for the site

The operations on site, and the associated process that is required to upgrade the site

to include the proposed Cellhouse

The technology available for the proposed Cellhouse

Minimising the generation of demolition and construction waste

The impact on the surrounding community.

This Section outlines project alternatives including the ‘Do Nothing’ option.

3.1 ‘Business As Usual’ Option The existing Cellhouse has exceeded its design life and is now outdated. For continued

operation of the existing Cellhouse to occur safely and without harm to people or the

environment the following actions would be required:

Intensive, ongoing and costly minor and major maintenance to ensure electrical

safety, structural integrity, and minimise process spills and leaks.

Structural remediation in areas that further degrade.

Ongoing application of polymer sealing to minimise contaminated recharge of

groundwater from solution spills. This is both costly, and requires entry to a

hazardous area by workers, and may not be fully effective if spills report to

unsealed areas.

Significant investment in operational improvements to bring the existing Cellhouse

in line with currently available technology.

The cost of the above intensive requirements for continued operation of the existing facility

would eventually exceed the site profitability. The ‘Business as Usual’ option is therefore

not considered credible or sustainable.

3.2 Site Selection The site location and layout of the Proposal are the result of a previously completed NH

Concept Study. This study reviewed four locations and associated layouts and reviewed

each option against the criteria listed in Table 3-1.

NH consider the location and site layout as shown in Figure 2-9 to be the most efficient and

advantageous location for the installation and operation of this project.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 41

Table 3-1: Site Selection Criteria

Element Criteria Chosen Option

Site Location Inside existing site boundaries, demolition works, volume of disturbance required.

All works are in brownfield locations that have been previously disturbed and are not considered to be of significant environmental value.

Process Design / building layout

Impact on upstream and downstream plant. Movement of cathode sheet to the Casting Feed Floor.

The Two Cell Unit arrangement limits the need to reconfigure significant supply systems or change pumping systems. Allows for easier integration with upstream and downstream plant. Three of the options require transport of cathode sheets to the Casting Feed Floor using trucks. The chosen location does not require human interaction for transport of cathode sheets. Use of cathodes with no stripping disk to be installed. Less new equipment required to be purchased and installed. Installation of Harmonic filters to lessen acoustic and vibration impact.

Health and Safety

Installing a facility which incorporates safety in design. Limits need for human interaction with high-risk activities.

The chosen location does not require transportation of cathode sheets using trucks, this limits the potential for spilling cathode sheets onto the site roadways. Automation of process components removes some high-risk human interaction requirements of other layouts. Installation of an acid mist capture system to provide a safe working environment and capture fugitive emissions.

Environment and Communities

Visual Impact, Harmonics, Noise impact during construction. Water management Groundwater infiltration Emission to air

Cooling towers will not be placed in an elevated position and will not change the skyline of the site significantly. Collection of all stormwater and connection with existing site drainage system. Installation of an impervious lining in basement of the building decreases the potential for process liquors and contaminants to leach into the soil and groundwater. Installation of a modern cooling tower system which will remove a higher percentage of contaminants from the point source emissions.

Existing infrastructure tie ins

Accessibility to electrolyte storages, dross collection site, power supply, and existing services. Minimising changes to internal access routes.

Requires fewer service relocations than the other options. Minimised rerouting of major internal roads.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 42

Element Criteria Chosen Option

Civil and Construction Works

Extent of civil works required. Extent of new infrastructure required. Accessibility during construction, including movement during construction. Interruption to ongoing operations

Less material required to be moved to level the chosen option. No major structures require demolition prior to construction. Smaller retaining wall required than other options. Small volume of construction interaction with ongoing operations due to locations.

Alternative locations and layouts would result in increased volumes of demolition and

construction works, extending tie-ins from existing systems, greater disruption of ongoing

operations, potential increased impacts on visual amenity and increased volumes of

construction and demolition waste. This would affect the volume of traffic entering and

leaving the site and the volumes of waste for disposal at an offsite landfill.

3.3 Cellhouse Technology Selection of technology installed for this Proposal will be based on a Multi Criteria Analysis

that balances technical suitability and economic viability whilst meeting all regulatory

requirements.

The critical environmental design targets to inform technology choices is the emission limits

specified in EPN 7043/5. The proposed Cellhouse must not prejudice the site from meeting

any current environmental conditions and facilitating continual improvement in emissions

to air, water, and the generation of controlled wastes.

Specialist design and engineering consultants have therefore identified acid mist collection,

modern cooling towers, and a fully contained cellhouse basement as the three most

significant elements in managing the potential for environmental impacts of the proposed

Cellhouse. These are described in Table 3-2, and further discussed throughout Section 6.

Table 3-2 Technology Choice

Main Infrastructure

Considerations for technology choice

Technology Choice

Cellhouse Internal Acid Mist Collection

Acid mist concentration within the Cellhouse (employee heath and comfort) Corrosion of Cellhouse building and equipment Emissions to air Total installed cost

While the use of Cooling Tower air inlets for ventilating Cellhouses has been the industry standard for several decades, NH is looking at the option of a system that uses a laminar flow of air across the cells to trap & remove the acid mist. This mist is removed by exhaust fans into scrubbing systems to capture a nominal 93% of acid mist. NH has referenced other Cellhouses using this technology and is using Computation Fluid Dynamics modelling to ensure the feasibility of the proposed system. If the technology is considered feasible, and is installed, there will be negligible fugitive emissions of acid mist from the proposed Cellhouse.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 43

Spent Cooling System

High efficiency mist elimination Location and number of cooling fans required to meet the cooling capacity Total installed cost

The conventional method for cooling electrolyte continues to be direct spent cooling using Cooling Towers, however the technology and design of these towers has improved significantly from those presently used on Unit 5 and 6 at Hobart. The efficiency of the towers has improved to the extent that only four towers are required for cooling capacity; the emission from each tower is in the order of 0.0002% of the circulating volume.

Cellhouse Basement

Solution leakage containment Impermeable layer

The sealing of the proposed Cellhouse basement is a standard feature of all modern Cellhouses. In addition, all new tanks to be installed as a part of the Proposal, will be in bunded areas that conform to AS 3780-1994 and AS/NZS 4452-1997 for the storage and handling of corrosive and toxic substances.

The Proposal evaluated the level of improvement required in terms of environmental

performance in comparison to the existing infrastructure as well as how the new

infrastructure will be installed and tied into the existing operations.

4. Public Consultation

This Section describes the engagement undertaken to date and proposed future

engagement. Throughout the concept phase of the Proposal, NH have undertaken general

community engagement with the surrounding community to identify any concerns that need

to be addressed in the design phase.

4.1 Community Engagement NH regularly engages with the local community in a number of ways that covers all aspects

of the NH site and associated operations. NH have developed a Stakeholder Map of key

stakeholders which forms the basis of an action plan used to manage the engagement

process and keep stakeholders informed of important site developments - including the

progression of this Proposal.

Communication material, including written materials, layouts, maps and presentations, will

be delivered to key stakeholders, including Government and Regulatory bodies, to keep

them informed of this Proposal throughout the project duration.

An invitation was issued for the general community meeting held on the 23rd of September

2020 (Figure 4-1). The invitation was delivered to 202 households in the area immediately

surrounding the site and was also publicised on Facebook. The event on the NH Facebook

page received 858 likes, and the page has 890 followers. The event was also shared in the

Lutana and Moonah Good Karma Network private group (412 members) and on the

Glenorchy City Council Page (3378 likes). Whilst the event was widely publicised, less than

ten people attended.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 44

Figure 4-1: Invitation to the Nyrstar Hobart Community Consultant Meeting

During the community meeting the EIS was discussed, as was the Feasibility Study for the

proposed Cellhouse and the approvals process required by EPA Tasmania. The process

for providing comment, at a later date, and during the approvals process, was also

communicated at the meeting.

4.2 Future Engagement Further community engagement will be undertaken following completion of the EIS given

that public advertising can give rise to questions or concerns. This will include distribution

of information through community meetings, articles in the local newspapers, regular

updates on the site website, social media and a dedicated email address

([email protected]). The ability for stakeholders to engage with NH will




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 45

continue during the construction phase of the project and into operation of the proposed

Cellhouse.

In addition, NH will formally respond to any representations made through the EPA

assessment and Planning Permit process.

5. The Existing Environment

5.1 Planning Aspects

5.1.1 Planning Permits

A planning permit is required under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993

(LUPAA). This was confirmed in preliminary discussion with Glenorchy City Council (GCC).

The Use Class under the LUPAA for the majority of the Project area is Manufacturing and

Processing which includes use of land for manufacturing, assembling or processing

products such as mineral processing.

NH is located within the Municipality of Glenorchy (within the City of Glenorchy). GCC

administers the statutory control of land use and development. Concurrent with this EIS,

NH are preparing a Planning Report for GCC that will accompany a Planning Permit

application for the proposal. This application is made with regards to the development

standards specified in the Glenorchy Interim Planning Scheme 2015 and any applicable

Local Special Conditions.

5.1.2 Land Tenure and Use

NH is zoned as General Industrial and Open Space under the Glenorchy Interim Planning

Scheme 2015. The surrounding areas are zoned as General Residential, Port and Marine,

Recreational (New Town Bay Golf Course), Utilities (Risdon TasNetworks Sub Station),

Open Space and Environmental Management zone (comprising the Derwent River).

The NH site is largely private freehold land; however, some parts of the wharf operation

are located on Crown Land. There is a parcel of Local Government land located on the

western boundary of the site, Crown Land to the North East (the Derwent River) and a State

Reserve under the Nature Conservation Act (East Risdon State Reserve) across the

Derwent River.

NH is surrounded by other industrial land users as described in Section 2.5, with residential

areas located to the south east of the site. Sensitive receptors surrounding the site include

residential land, sporting grounds, retail sites, woodland reserve, nature reserve across the

River and the Golf Club (Figure 5-1). Additional information on sensitive receptors is

included in Section 2.5.

All work for the proposed Cellhouse will be located within the General Industrial Zoning,

and the additional substation will be located within the existing TasNetworks yard, which is

designated as Utilities.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 46

The area affected by the Proposal is a brownfields site and no longer has any natural

features present. NH have progressively revegetated available areas of the site, but this

vegetation does not constitute habitat of significance.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 47

Figure 5-1: Land Use


Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd Project Management Report Proposed Cellhouse Environment Sustainability and Community Interface


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 48

5.1.3 Site History and Contamination

As a result of over 100 years of operation, significant soil and groundwater contamination has

occurred across the site, most notably below the existing Cellhouse with zinc, cadmium, mercury

and lead identified as contaminants of most concern. Multiple groundwater extraction systems are

currently in place in an effort to hydrogeologically isolate contaminated groundwater from the

Derwent estuary. Widespread soil surveys have occurred in recent years both on and offsite, to

measure the impact the zinc smelting operation has had on soil quality and the associated impact

it may have on human health and the environment.

5.1.4 Easements, Covenants and Protected Areas

There are no conservation covenants, easements or private reserves on or surrounding the site,

however there is a Dedicated Formal Reserve (State Reserve) over the East Risdon State

Reserve. This is an area of 87 hectares of publicly managed land. This reserve is approximately

400 m from the site, over the estuary. It is not within the NH boundary or within the area affected

by the Proposal.

Figure 5-2 shows a 74-hectare area of Indigenous Protected Reserve at Risdon Cove

approximately 1.5 km to the north-north-east across the Derwent River. There are areas of

Conservation and Nature Recreation reserves containing threatened flora species, including

Eucalyptus Morrisbyi (refer Section 6.7). However, given the distance from the site, these areas

are unlikely to experience impacts due to this Proposal. It should also be noted that NH has

undertaken a long program of site revegetation that includes planting of rare and endemic species

in buffer zones.

High quality wilderness areas identified within the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement (TRFA)

are not found within the vicinity of the site. The closest wilderness areas to the NH site are those

surrounding Mt Wellington which is over 10 km to the south west of the site. The highest quality

wilderness areas nearby are concentrated in the south west of Tasmania (over 30 km away) (GHD

2012).

Refer to Section 6.7 for more information on the biodiversity and natural value as well as Section

6.1 for more information on the ambient air quality of the proposed development.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 49

Figure 5-2: Protected Areas and Reserves




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 50

5.2 Environmental Aspects This Section provides a summary of the general physical characteristics of the site and

surrounding area which are within the Proposal’s area of influence. For this Proposal the primary

area of influence, which is directly affected, is within the existing footprint of the existing operations.

The operation of the Proposal will influence the air quality in a larger area.

5.2.1 Climate

NH is situated in Lutana, with the nearest Bureau of Meteorology station which records

temperature and rainfall located at Hobart (Ellerslie Road) located 5 km south of the plant. Rainfall

and temperature data from the Ellerslie Road weather station during 2019 and 2020 has been

extracted from the Bureau of Meteorology Climate Data Online website (BOM, 2021). Wind data

for this station has been extracted from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA, 2021).

Wind roses for 2019 and 2020 for the Ellerslie Station display dominant wind moving from inland

towards the sea and following the Derwent River (NNW and NW). The wind pattern follows the

elevation profile. Annual wind roses (2019 and 2020) are presented in Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4.

On average, spring has a higher number of rain days than winter in the NH area. This contrasts

with the rest of Tasmania, which generally receives more rainfall during the winter. Snowfall is rare

in Hobart during winter months. Snowfall is more common in elevated inland areas in Tasmania,

however snow can be seen often on the adjacent Mount Wellington. Rainfall monthly averages for

the Ellerslie Weather Station are shown Figure 5-5.

July is normally the coldest month of the year while January and February are the hottest months

of the year. During summer, temperatures can regularly reach 25°C. In winter, most of coastal

Tasmania rarely drops below freezing and daily temperature variation is often very narrow. The

historical average mean minimum and maximum temperature vary between 4 and 26 °C in the

region. Both 2019 and 2020 were hotter than the historical averages. Monthly mean minimum and

maximum temperatures recorded at the station can be seen in Figure 5-6 while daily maximum

and temperature for 2019 and 2020 can be seen in Figure 5-7.




HRT-450-00240 Rev 3Page 51

Figure 5-3: Wind Rose – Ellerslie Road – 2019

Figure 5-4: Wind Rose – Ellerslie Road – 2020

Figure 5-5: Ellerslie Road Weather Station Monthly Rainfall




HRT-450-00240 Rev 3Page 52

Figure 5-6: Ellerslie Road Weather Station Monthly Mean Temperature




HRT-450-00240 Rev 3Page 53

Figure 5-7: Ellerslie Road Weather Station Daily Temperature

5.2.2 Topography

The site is located on a slope which rises steadily from 10 metres above sea level on the eastern

side to 50 metres above sea level on the western boundary. The area immediately adjacent to the

site is relatively flat with areas on the river being less than 10 m above sea level. Lutana is 20 m

above sea level and immediately west and inland from the estuary, the terrain becomes undulating

on approach to the suburbs of Moonah and Glenorchy where elevation increases to greater than

150 m above sea level as it reaches the foothills of Wellington Park. On the Eastern shore directly

opposite the wharf, the terrain rises steadily to over 180 m above sea level in the East Risdon

State Reserve. Figure 5-8 shows the contours of the area surrounding the site.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 54

Figure 5-8: Surrounding Topography




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 55

5.2.3 Geology/ Geomorphology/ Hydrogeology

The geology of the proposed location consists of fill to varying depths, underlain by Triassic quartz

sandstone (Parmeener Supergroup).

Hydrogeological studies indicate the site is underlain by two aquifers. Standing water level data

indicates that in the vicinity of the existing Cellhouse, there is a hydraulic head difference of up to

5 m between the shallow and deep aquifer. This suggests some degree of hydraulic disconnection

between the two aquifers. However, it is also considered that the difference in hydraulic head may

be a result of variations in the lithologies resulting from differences in factors such as the

weathering profile and fracture density.

The average shallow aquifer permeability for the sandstone rock type is 0.014 m/day, with an

average permeability of 0.01 m/day in the deep aquifer.

Significant soil and groundwater contamination in the area of the proposed development is the

result of over 100 years of operations occurring in and around the site.

The existing groundwater management system installed on site is described in Section 6.3.

5.2.4 Soils

The site consists of both Jurassic dolerite and Triassic sediments. The dolerite at the site is

typically fine to medium grained, hard with variable weathering. Soils associated with the dolerite

are typically light brown sandy clays through to brown and black high plasticity clays. On the bank

of the estuary, there are Triassic sediments of sandstone and mudstone with yellow grey sands

with medium to high plasticity clays occurring at depths.

5.2.5 Surface Drainage

The site has an internal surface water drainage system which treats all stormwater generated

across the site. The site maintains Contaminated Water Ponds (CWPs), stormwater ponds, and

an Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) that treats all contaminated stormwater to remove metals prior

to discharge.

Stormwater is managed via pits, pipes, open channels, spoon drains, pumps, detention basis and

overland sheet flow. It is collected in approximately five primary catchments, pumped to the ETP

and then following treatment, discharged into the Derwent estuary. All surface water is directed to

this drainage system and captured on site. This system is described in detail in Section 6.2.

5.2.6 Flora and Fauna

Due to the industrial nature of the cleared land and the zoning of the Proposal site as General

Industrial, there is limited vegetation on and immediately surrounding the site. Low native

Eucalyptus forest is the dominant flora surrounding the site with vegetation communities as

defined by the Vegetation Map of Tasmania (TASVEG) within 1000 m of the site including:

Eucalyptus amygdalina forest and woodland on mudstone

Eucalyptus globulus dry forest and woodland

Eucalyptus amygdalina forest and woodland on dolerite

Allocasuarine verticillate forest




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 56

Eucalyptus risdonii forest and woodland (DPIPWE 2020).

The East Risdon State Reserve contains populations of Eucalyptus globulus and Eucalyptus

morrisbyi dry forest and woodland which are recognised as rare and endangered respectively

under the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSPA 1995). The Derwent House park also

contains a plantation of Eucalyptus risdonii forest and woodland which is recognised as rare under

the TSPA 1995.

The disturbed nature of the industrial area means that the site is unlikely to be suitable habitat for

threatened terrestrial fauna, however there have been five recorded sightings of threatened

species in recent years including marine migratory seabirds, a spotted tail quoll and a Tasmanian

masked owl (refer to Nyrstar Hobart Protection of Threatened Species Procedure). Threatened

marine species may be present in the Derwent estuary, however no sampling has been conducted

as part of this EIS as no additional estuarine impacts are anticipated to result from this Proposal.

Biodiversity and Natural values are described in detail in Section 6.7. Marine and Coastal aspects

are described in Section 6.8.

5.2.7 Natural Processes

The site is located on a waterway, therefore flooding, strong winds, tidal influences and storm

surges are relevant natural processes that affect the site. The most significant flood on the

Derwent estuary was recorded in April 1960 where flood water surpassed the Lyell Highway Bridge

and caused extensive damage to the surrounding areas (DPIWE 2000).

Fire is a risk on the site due to the storage of fuels and other combustible products. Refer to

Section 6.12 for further detail on fire risk.

For details on ambient air and noise monitoring for the site, refer to Section 7.

5.3 Socio-Economic Aspects NH is locally and regionally significant. This section outlines the socio-economic environment in

the area and provides a summary of the community residency in Tasmania and Hobart.

Appendix B contains the specific demographic details outlined in this section including population

summaries.

5.3.1 Socio-Economic Profile

5.3.1.1 Population

Tasmania’s population is growing. In 2016, Tasmania recorded a population of 533,532

individuals, with 48.9% male and 51.1% female. The population of Greater Hobart was 222,352

with 48.5% male and 51.5% female. In Hobart, 3.8% of residents identified as being Aboriginal

and/or Torres Strait Islander people and 4.6% of Tasmanians identify as Aboriginal and/or Torres

Strait Islander people.

The average age across Tasmania and across greater Hobart was between 40 and 42 years of

age. This census shows that Tasmania has a slightly older population, with the median age 4

years older than the median of 38 years of age in Australia.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 57

5.3.1.2 Education

Tasmania has a similar level of educational attainment on average compared to Australia as a

whole, with a slightly higher proportion of people completing tertiary education courses and

studying after high school graduation. The industries located in the Greater Hobart region have

drawn an increased level of higher education skills-based residents to the area in comparison to

the overall Tasmanian statistics.

Of the residents in the Greater Hobart Region, 45.5% have completed post high-school studies,

compared to 41.4% of Tasmanian residents. A full outline of the demographics of the area is

included in Appendix B.

5.3.1.3 Employment

Hobart has a lower unemployment rate than Tasmania and Australia; however, it has fewer full-

time workers relative to the Australian average. Key employment data from the regions of Hobart,

Tasmania and Australia is presented for comparison Appendix B. Currently NH employs 473 direct

employees and 155 contractors who are local to Hobart.

5.3.1.4 Main Industries

Across Hobart and Tasmania, the occupation breakdown is consistent with the average in

Australia. Tasmania contains a marginally higher proportion of labourers, technicians and trade

workers than the Australian average. The main employers in the areas are State and Local

government administration, hospitals, cafes and restaurants and supermarket staff.

Data provided in Appendix B represents both the occupations and industries of employment of

individuals in the Hobart, Tasmania and Australian regions.

5.3.1.5 Income

The data reflects that the median weekly income is lower in Hobart than in Australia. In comparison

to the rest of the country, the average cost of living is also lower in Tasmania. presents the median

weekly incomes from Greater Hobart, Tasmania and Australian regions.

5.3.1.6 Housing

The vacancy rate of dwellings is slightly less than the Australian average. Also, a lower proportion

of rented accommodation and a higher proportion of owned dwellings indicates that the population

is more permanent than the average in Australia.

Data provided in Appendix B introduces key housing metrics including the count, structure and

tenure of dwellings across Hobart and Tasmania.

5.3.2 Complaints

NH maintains a complaint register, within the site’s incident reporting system, where community

complaints and the NH responses and actions are recorded. The complaints which are related to

environmental issues for the period between 2017 and 2020 are shown in Figure 5-9.

All environmental complaints are reported to the EPA as per the conditions of EPN 7043/5.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 58

Figure 5-9: Number of complaints per category received for the period 2017 - 2020

The NH operations received a total of 12 complaints in 2017, 7 complaints in 2018, 3 complaints

in 2019 and 3 complaints in 2020.

6. Potential Impacts and their Management

6.1 Air Quality

6.1.1 Existing conditions

6.1.1.1 Point source process emissions

There are twelve permitted point discharges (stacks) shown in Figure 6-1 that could emit process

gases and/or particulate matter if not controlled. NH uses a range of clean air technologies on

point source emissions to prevent them from entering the environment at concentrations that could

cause environmental and human harm. These include:

Mist eliminators within processing plant to collect and condense process gases

Wet scrubbing to remove residual SO2 from tail gas and convert it to a sulphate

Electrostatic mist precipitators on the main Tail Gas Stack to remove acid mist

Baghouses for collection of dust.

Each compliance stack is tested on a frequency specified in EPN 7043/5. Stacks are subject to

strict emission limits in accordance with EPN 7043/5 (refer Table 6-2) and any breaches are

reportable to the EPA.

Ground Level Concentrations (GLC) of SO2 are also continuously monitored at community

locations (Technopark, Dowsing’s Point in Goodwood; Tennis Courts, Risdon Road, Lutana; and

NH Buffer Zone near Birch Road, Lutana as shown in Figure 6-3) with strict compliance criteria

set in the EPN 7043/5. Sitewide stack testing results and discussions are provided in the Public




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 59

Environmental Report included as an annexure to this document. GLC SO2 concentrations

remained within regulatory limits for all monitors over the 2020 reporting period.

Ambient SO2 levels are of most relevance to offsite air quality with regards to the existing EPN,

but not further discussed in this EIS because they do not emanate from the existing or proposed

Cellhouses. The Proposal will therefore not prejudice the ability of the site to meet SO2 GLC’s at

community monitoring stations.

The only point source emission of relevance to the existing Cellhouse is the spent cooling towers,

which are not an EPN compliance monitoring location. These are not a traditional stack, but rather

the open top of the cooling towers from which ‘carryover’ may emanate. Emissions from the current

spent cooling towers, and expected emissions from the proposed new spent cooling towers have

been modelled to assess the difference between the existing and the proposed. Additional

information is included in section 6.1.3.


Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd Project Management Report Proposed Cellhouse Environment Sustainability and Community Interface Management Environmental Impact Statement

HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 60

Figure 6-1: Regulated Point Sources of Atmospheric Emissions and Monitoring




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 61

6.1.1.2 Ambient Dust

Suspended particulate matter (dust) from site has the potential to cause nuisance and

environmental harm from heavy metals that may be entrained in the dust. Dust may be generated

from material handling and storage at the wharf, unsealed ground, roadways and traffic

movements. NH control this through:

Revegetation and sealing of open ground

Dust suppression by fixed sprinkler systems

Mobile water card and road sweeper

Covering or controlling dust generating stockpiles.

Dust and its composition are measured at several monitoring sites around NH and the surrounding

community to gauge the smelter’s impact on air quality and to guide ongoing improvement

strategies. This monitoring is achieved using high volume air sampling (HVAS) units to capture

total suspended particulate matter (TSPM) samples. The monitoring locations, shown in Figure

6-3, are:

Risdon Road North, NH northern exit, Lutana

Tennis Courts, Risdon Road, Lutana

NH buffer zone, near Birch Road, Lutana.

These monitoring locations have been chosen due to their proximity to the site, ability to access

them on an as required basis, and to provide a spread of monitoring in each direction, so as to

adequately assess impact under different weather conditions. Offsite TSPM levels are consistently

below accepted standards. The Risdon Road North (RRN) monitoring site receives the highest

dust load of the three compliance sites.

Whilst there are no anticipated sources of dust from the Operation of the proposed Cellhouse,

dust may be generated from construction activities and therefore contribute to TSPM loads

monitored and regulated under EPN 7043/5.

Figure 6-2: Annual mean TSPM Concentrations at monitoring sites



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 62

Figure 6-3: Location of Community SO2 and High Volume Air Samplers



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 63

6.1.2 Performance requirements

The existing site requirements for performance will be applied to the Proposal and to emissions

associated with the proposed Cellhouse. This section outlines the existing requirements enforced

at NH.

The Australian ambient air quality standards developed as part of the National Environment

Protection Measure for Ambient Air Quality (Air NEPM) provide the guidelines for the protection of

air quality in Tasmania. These quality standards are detailed in Table 6-1.

Table 6-1: NEPM Ambient Air Quality Standards

Pollutant Averaging Period

Air NEPM (ppm or µg/m3) Maximum allowable exceedance

Carbon monoxide 8 hours 9.0 ppm / 10 305 µg/m3 1 day per year

Nitrogen dioxide 1 hour 0.12 ppm / 226 µg/m3 1 day per year

1 year 0.03 ppm / 56 µg/m3 No exceedances

Sulphur dioxide

1 hour 0.20 ppm / 524 µg/m3 1 day per year

Daily 0.08 ppm / 210 µg/m3 1 day per year

Annual 0.02 ppm / 52 µg/m3 No exceedances

PM10 Daily 50 µg/m3

No exceedances1F1F1F1F

2 Annual 25 µg/m3

PM2.5 Daily 25 µg/m3

No exceedances Annual 8 µg/m3

Lead Annual 0.5 µg/m3 No exceedance

Conditions A1 to A11 of the EPN 7043/5 specify the limits applied to point source air emissions

and concentration limits at the site boundary and the surrounding airshed. Generally, air quality

criteria relate to the total burden of pollutants in the air and emission limits to point source

emissions. Stack emission limits are detailed in Table 6-2. Regulated stacks (Figure 6-1) are

monitored on a 6-monthly basis.

2 Before 2016, there was an allowance of 5 exceedances per year for the PM standards. This was replaced in 2016 by an exceptional event rule. An exceptional event is a fire or dust occurrence that adversely affects air quality at a particular location, causes an exceedance of 1-day average standards in excess of normal historical fluctuations and background levels; and is directly related to bushfire, jurisdiction-authorised hazard reduction burning or continental-scale windblown dust. The handling of exceptional events in the reporting of averages is specified in the Air NEPM.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 64

Table 6-2: Stack Emission Limits

Pollutant Emission Limits Reference Gas Value

Metals – antimony (Sb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), or any compound thereof

5 mg/m3 for combined total 1 mg/m3 for Cd or Hg

Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) 2 g/m3 as NO2 7% oxygen by volume for fuel

burning emissions sources

Particulate matter 100 mg/m3 dry gas at 0oC and 101.325 kPa

7% oxygen by volume for fuel burning emissions sources

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) 7.2 g/m3 dry gas at 0oC and 101.325 kPa

Sulphur trioxide (SO3) 100 mg/m3

In stack emissions concentrations which are to be applied to stationary sources are outlined in

Schedule 1 of the Environmental Protection Policy (Air Quality) 2004. These are applied to

chimneys and stacks.

The stack emission limits listed in Table 6-2 are the same or lower than the limits listed in the EPP

(Air Quality) 2004. These limits would be appropriate to apply to the new point source emissions

for the proposed Cellhouse and would be included in the associated EPA permitting.

Particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometres (µm) or less, PM10, and 2.6 µm or less, PM2.5,

are the main indicators of urban air pollution in Tasmania. Ambient particulate concentrations and

community sulphur dioxide concentrations must be below the maximum GLCs specified in the

permit at the fence line and beyond the land boundary. The current EPN 7043/5 describes the

limits as listed in Table 6-3. The three regulated SO2 monitors (Figure 6-3) run continuously, and

the three regulated TSPM monitors (Figure 6-3) are run every sixth day.

Table 6-3: Maximum Ground Level Concentrations

Pollutant Criterion Averaging Period

Lead (Pb) 0.0015 mg/m3 90-day average

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) 0.20 ppm 1-hour maximum

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) 0.080 ppm 24-hour maximum

Sulphuric acid (H2SO4)2F2F2F2F

3 0.033 mg/m3 3-minute average – based on toxicity

Additional requirements specified in the EPN 7043/5 relating to air emissions include:

Odour management measures shall prevent odours from causing an environmental nuisance

beyond the boundary of the site

Dust emissions shall be controlled and shall not cause an environmental nuisance beyond the

boundary of the site.

The proposed Cellhouse must not prejudice the ability for the overall site to meet these

performance requirements.

3 Schedule 2 Design Criteria, Environmental Protection Policy (Air Quality) 2004



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 65

6.1.3 Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling

Air dispersion modelling has been completed onsite for a number of years. This modelling was

repeated with additional parameters to quantify the contaminant concentrations associated with

the base case (existing operations) and the proposal case (the proposed Cellhouse) and thus

allowed for the results to be compared to applicable air quality criteria. This allows for the

quantification of the impact of the proposed Cellhouse on the airshed around the site. Modelling

was conducted across the entire site to account for all proposed infrastructure (Cellhouse, cooling

towers, substation) and this helped determine whether or not the Proposal would result in an

increase or decrease in emissions. The whole of site was modelled to determine the existing

impact profile against the proposed impact profile to quantify the emissions changes. It should be

noted that the existing and proposed Cellhouses are not a source of SO2 contributing to the

airshed.

The background concentrations used in modelling were very conservative since they were

evaluated with data that includes several events of high concentrations due to the unusual amount

and intensity of bushfires near the Hobart New Town Station in 2019.

6.1.3.1 Atmospheric Dispersion Model Inputs

The modelling was completed with CALPUFF (version 7), an EPA approved model suitable to

emulate the dispersion of the different plant emissions under the site conditions. This advanced

Gaussian non-steady-state puff dispersion model considers the complex wind patterns (three

dimensional) and the building downwash to determine the ground level concentrations at distances

up to 300 km from the emission source.

A modelling domain of 30 km x 30 km was considered for the air dispersion modelling study. This

domain was selected to include the different geographical components that can affect the

modelling such as Mount Wellington and watercourses.

Meteorological data processed by CALMET is an input for the CALPUFF model. Surface data from

multiple meteorological stations near the plant were assessed to be used with CALMET but they

were either not representative of the site conditions or did not have the available data required.

After discussion with the EPA Air Quality Representative, it was decided to prepare a synthetic

TAPM data covering the domain set to represent the site meteorological conditions in the

modelling. One year of meteorological data from March 2019 to February 2020 was processed in

CALMET. A wind rose centred on the site generated with the TAPM data is presented on Figure

6-4. The wind rose shows that dominant winds are blowing from inland towards the sea (WNW

and NW) and are following the Derwent River. This coincides with the wind data at the Ellerslie

Road weather station presented in Section 5.2.1. The calm wind proportion (1.53 %) of the

prognostic data is also similar to the calm winds proportion recorded at the Ellerslie Road weather

station for 2019 and 2020.

Calm winds are critical for air dispersion. Wind speed and wind direction have a high influence on

the impact of contaminants. A high wind speed will be favourable to dispersion as the contaminant

will be diluted more between the point of emission and the downwind neighbours. Calm winds (<

0.5 m/s) and low speed winds (between 0.5 and 2.1 m/s) are not favourable to dispersion. These

winds will result in higher contaminant concentration in the vicinity of the sources. It is expected



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 66

that a higher calm winds (< 0.5 m/s) proportion will result in more high impact events (more

complaints) of the sources of emissions on the vicinity. It is also expected that there will be a more

frequent impact downwind of the dominant low speed winds (between 0.5 and 2.1 m/s), which are

blowing from NW and WNW in the case of the TAPM data. As an example, in the case of

particulate matters, it is expected that the impact will be more frequent and higher in the Derwent

River estuary than in the neighbourhood SSW of the plant.

Figure 6-4: Wind Rose – TAPM Data – March 2019 to February 2020



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 67

The plant buildings included in the model are those in proximity to the emission sources. Smaller

buildings or buildings that are further away from the sources were excluded from the model as

they will not generate any building downwash effect at the source’s location.

The air dispersion modelling compares existing emissions with the potential emission profile from

the proposed facility to determine if the proposed Cellhouse complies with quality standards at the

nearest Air Quality Monitoring Stations (AQMS) and receptors. The air dispersion modelling was

completed for all sources on site that emit contaminants on a continuous basis.

For the base case, a total of 28 sources were included in the model. For the project case, the 10

existing spent cooling towers were replaced by the 4 proposed spent cooling towers (4 in

operation, 1 backup) and the acid mist crossflow in the model to assess the changes of the impact

associated with the project. The modelling parameters and emission rates for these sources are

included in the Air Dispersion Modelling Report, included as an Annexure to this report.

Emergency releases or maintenance related activities are not included in the model. Fugitive

emissions are generated from the operation of the existing cellhouse as the structure is open to

the surrounding environment and does not include a capture system for them. They have not been

included in the model as no characterization for this type of source is available.

The maximum measured concentrations from all the sampling results from 2019 were used to

calculate the emissions for the existing sources as a conservative approach. The exception was

that of the spent cooling towers, where the most recent data available at the time of modelling was

from monitoring conducted in 2009. When the sampling results indicated a concentration value

below the detection threshold, the threshold was used as a conservative approach. For particulate

matter, when there were no sampling results for PM10 or PM2.5, the value for Total PM was

considered as a conservative approach.

Monitoring of emissions from the spent cooling towers was completed in January 2021, for the

purposes of comparing current emissions with the 2009 data. A summary of the two data sets is

provided in Table 6-4. As the data from 2009 represents a more conservative result, the base case

was not re-modelled. This data does not account for fugitive sulphuric acid emissions.

Table 6-4: Comparison of 2009 and 2021 Stack Emissions from #6 Spent Cooling Towers

Pollutant 2009 2021 (average of 3 tests)

Concentration

(mg/m3) Mass Rate

(g/min) Concentration

(mg/m3) Mass Rate

(g/min)

Particulate matter <1 <3 <2 <5.7

Sulphuric acid 0.40 3.2 0.51 1.48

For the project case, the sulphuric acid emission rates were determined based on a conservative

efficiency for the cooling towers and the acid mist control. The proposed cooling towers will likely

be using the same technology as what is currently installed at the Nyrstar Balen plant in Belgium.

The total particulate matter measured in the cooling towers at this plant were used to evaluate the

PM10 and PM2.5 emission rates for the proposed spent cooling towers. As a conservative



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 68

approach, the PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations were set equal to the total particulate matter

concentration for the new sources.

The specific parameters modelled are included in the Air Dispersion Modelling Report, provided

as an Annexure to this document.

6.1.4 Potential impacts

Construction

During construction, earthworks and civil works are potential sources of dust generation from the

movement of heavy machinery and excavation of soil within the construction area. Air quality can

also be affected by emissions from point sources (e.g. generators) or fugitive emissions from

unsealed ground. The risk of dust emissions to air will reduce significantly after completion of civil

works.

It is expected that only a small amount of equipment, including fixed items such as generators, will

be located on the site at any one time. In addition, the works are being completed in areas which

are compact and surrounded by hardstand, with bitumen or asphalt installed as a base.

Construction dust management controls will be included in the CEMP for the project and will be

addressed in specific work package risk assessments.

Any residual emissions from construction are highly variable and short-term meaning it is unlikely

to affect the overall air quality in the surrounding area. Operational air monitoring is to continue

throughout the construction period and in line with the limits set out in the site’s existing EPN.

Operation

The proposed Cellhouse has two potential sources of air emissions: the discharge from the spent

cooling towers and the acid mist emitted from the electrolytic cells. The Cellhouse will use modern,

high efficiency cooling towers and a dedicated acid mist management system to treat acid mist

generated from within the proposed Cellhouse will be installed.

The existing Cellhouse has no means for the capture and collection of acid mist. A foaming agent

is added to the cell electrolyte to mitigate the production of acid mist; however, the level of acid

mist in the Cellhouse requires the use of respiratory protection. The acid mist in the existing

Cellhouse is ventilated through roof monitors (vents) in the Cellhouse roof and walls under natural

convection and is only measured on an internal ambient concentration basis for hygiene purposes,

thus mass emission rates are not available.

The emission rate from high efficiency spent cooling towers is 0.0002% of solution flow rate

compared to 0.001% from conventional cooling towers. This is achieved through high efficiency

heat transfer within the tower optimised against the efficiency of the mist elimination technology.

NH will install a dedicated crossflow technology which captures the acid mist as it is emitted from

the cells via a horizontal air stream. This system utilises several fans on one side of the proposed

Cellhouse to extract air while specifically designed louvres are installed on the opposite site of the

building to control the air entering the building. The acid mist in the horizontal air stream is drawn

through the extraction fans and is then treated via a scrubbing process. This is a distinct



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 69

improvement on the current cellhouse, which does not have a dedicated acid mist capture and

scrubbing system. The maximum concentration results from the air dispersion modelling for the

existing case are showing in Table 6-5 below, with the results for the proposed case shown in

Table 6-6. Isopleths for sulphuric acid for the 3 minute averaging period are shown in Figure 6-5

for the existing case, and Figure 6-6 for the proposed case. These findings indicate that the

proposed Cellhouse will result in a decrease of all nominated contaminants. A lower sulphuric acid

emission rate is expected for the proposed cooling towers when compared with the existing cooling

towers. The acid mist ’Crossflow’ system, has a 93% efficiency in removing acid mist from inside

the Cellhouse. Based on the maximum predicted concentration for H2SO4, the results will be lower

for the proposed case when compared with the existing case. No other results have been included

in this table as they were significantly under the performance requirements.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 70

Table 6-5: Maximum Concentration Results at or beyond the boundary of the land for the Existing Case

Contaminant Period Criteria (µg/m3)

Background concentration

(µg/m3)

Max. Concentration at or beyond the boundary

of the land (µg/m3)

% of Criteria

Cumulative Concentration at

or beyond the boundary of the

land (µg/m3)

% of Criteria

H2SO4 (based on SO3)

3 minutes 33 - 206 624% 206 624%

1hr - - 89.0 - 89.0 -

24hr - - 11.7 - 11.7 -

Annual - - 2.1 - 2.1 -

PM 24hr - - 30.6 - 30.6 -

Annual - - 5.77 - 5.8 -

PM10 24hr 50 18 25.4 51% 43.4 87%

Annual 25 10 4.7 19% 14.7 59%

PM2.5 24hr 25 12 24.4 98% 36.4 146%

Annual 8 5 4.5 57% 9.5 119%

Table 6-6: Maximum Concentration Results at or beyond the boundary of the land for the Proposed Case

Contaminant Period Criteria (µg/m3)

Background concentration

(µg/m3)

Max. Concentration at


land (µg/m3)

% of Criteria

Cumulative Concentration at


land (µg/m3)

% of Criteria

H2SO4 (based on SO3)3F3F3F3F

4

3 minutes 33 - 315 95% 31 95%

1hr - - 13.5 - 13.5 -

24hr - - 3.2 - 3.2 -

Annual - - 0.6 - 0.6 -

PM 24hr - - 22.7 - 22.7 -

Annual - - 2.3 - 2.3 -

PM104F4F4F4F

6* 24hr 50 18 4.9 10% 22.9 46%

Annual 25 10 0.5 2% 10.5 42%

PM2.55F5F5F5F

7* 24hr 25 12 2.4 10% 14.4 58%

Annual 8 5 0.3 3% 5.3 66%

*Relevant Air EPP criteria are applied for reference.

4 Schedule 2 Design Criteria, Environmental Protection Policy (Air Quality) 2004 5 The result presented is the maximum concentration at or beyond property limit, which is the worst case possible. Using the 99.9 percentile is to overcome the need to place reliance on a single predicted hourly value calculated using an extreme set of meteorological conditions. Since the result is compliant even when extreme meteorological conditions are met, the maximum is presented. 6 Criteria from NEPM Ambient Air Quality Standards 7 Criteria from NEPM Ambient Air Quality Standards



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 71

Figure 6-5: Maximum Predicted Concentrations for Sulphuric Acid – Existing Base Case



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 72

Figure 6-6: Maximum Predicted Concentrations for Sulphuric Acid - Project Case



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 73

Based on the results from the air dispersion modelling, the Project will decrease sulphuric acid

and particulate matter concentrations in the vicinity of the site. It should be noted that the baseline

data used to determine the base case is from 2009 as this was the only data from the spent cooling

towers available at the time that the model was built. . The input which was used for modelling the

sulphuric acid for the base case was the highest measured concentration from one tower (Unit

#6), which was then applied as the emissions for all ten towers. As it is unlikely that all ten towers

would be running at the highest concentration at any one time, or for an extended period of time,

it is considered that the modelled emission rate would be very conservative. It is anticipated to be

unlikely that the actual emission rate is as high as the modelled rate.

The Project case complies with all applicable air quality standards for maximum predicted

concentrations including background concentrations based on the reduction in particulate matter

emissions in comparison with the existing case. The Project case also complies with sulphuric

acid standards as listed in Table 6-6. Figures representing the results of the dispersion modelling

are included in the Air Dispersion Modelling Report, provided as an Annexure to this document

Based on the assumptions used in this report and on the modelling parameters, the replacement

of the spent cooling tower with the technology studied in this report will result in emissions that will

comply with the NEPM and Tasmanian Environmental Protection Policy (Air EPP) air quality

standards. Overall, this technology will lower the impact of particulate matter and sulphuric acid

on the nearby communities.

6.1.5 Avoidance and mitigation measures

Construction

Dust mitigation measures, which are to be implemented during construction, will be detailed in the

CEMP and informed by the EPA Fact Sheet 18 – Dust Control for construction sites. These

measures will include:

Planning and risk assessment of dust generating works to identifying less dusty job

methods and minimise double handling and movement of materials.

Limiting the area of disturbed or exposed soils.

Controlling dust through extraction at the tool or area level for dusty tasks.

Wetting surfaces and application of dust suppressants where required.

Maintaining good housekeeping standards.

Ensuring traffic remains on formed roads and allocated parking areas to minimise

disturbance of open ground.

Covering or sealing stockpiles of overburden or construction materials.

Plant and equipment washdown prior to movement offsite and use of the existing vehicle

wash as per current mandatory practice.

NH will treat excessive construction dust as an environmental incident to ensure issues of concern

are corrected and preventive actions implemented.

Operation



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 74

The proposed Cellhouse design includes two significant engineered clean air technology aspects

that will result in a step change improvement in containment of acidic emissions to air:

Contained spent cooling towers

Existing spent cooling towers will be replaced with towers that use an improved design

and mist eliminator technology. The more efficient design allows for the reduction in the

number of cooling towers from twelve to four, with one standby unit. This is a significant

advancement in the containment of potentially corrosive emissions.

An acid mist capture system

An acid mist management system called ‘Crossflow’ will be installed to remove acid mist

by creating the laminar movement of air across the top of the cells that will carry the acid

mist to exhaust fans for scrubbing prior to discharge. The exhaust is scrubbed in multiple

units to remove nominally 93% of the acid mist; the scrubber liquor is recycled in the zinc

process. Based on Vendor statements, it is anticipated that the Crossflow system will

greatly minimise the need for respiratory protection within the proposed Cellhouse. This

will also assist in reducing odour related to acid mist, which has been identified on

occasion, in locations outside the site.

CrossFlow will be complimented by continued addition of a foaming agent that is added

to the cell electrolyte to minimise the production of acid mist. However, based on the

effectiveness of CrossFlow, NH may seek to reduce the use of this reagent to minimise

unnecessary resource consumption. This would only be assessed through trial work post-

commissioning and be subject to strict operational and discharge criteria.

Post-commission testing for acid mist will be completed on the proposed Cellhouse and cooling

towers to further validate the model. If the acid mist emissions are greater than that used for the

initial inputs in air modelling, remodelling and adjustments will be made.

There is no proposed change to the established TSPM monitoring program as a result of this

Proposal. The location of the proposed Cellhouse does not alter the direction or loadings of dust,

and does not increase the likelihood of deportment to previously unimpacted receptors. As such,

monitoring will continue in line with requirements given in the current EPN.

Community SO2 GLC’s will not be affected and no change to the existing monitoring program is

proposed. Hence, monitoring will continue in line with requirements given in the current EPN.

6.1.6 Assessment of net impacts

With the commissioning of the proposed Cellhouse, there will be significant improvements in net

impacts from the Operation. Design includes installation of clean air technologies to capture

fugitive emissions of acid mist and acidic cooling tower waters. There is potential for dust from

construction during bulk earthworks, however impacts can be mitigated or managed through

application of standard and available construction practices.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 75

6.2 Water Quality (Surface and Discharge)


NH is required to contain all site surface water flows and ensure they are collected and treated

prior to discharge through the sites regulated outfall. Strict discharge criteria apply as per EPN

7043/5. NH has prepared and continually implements action as per the Stormwater Strategy

Report. Whilst the proposed Cellhouse will not add to surface flows, the site drainage system will

still be connected and at times utilised.

With the exception of emergency releases (discussed further in section 6.2.2), all surface water is

collected and treated in the Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) prior to discharge from compliance

outfalls. A summary of surface water flows is provided in Figure 6-7.

Figure 6-7: Process and Stormwater System (recycled water flows shown as dotted lines)

NH is divided into eight sub catchments across the site that all discharge into the Contaminated

Water Ponds (CWP). Stormwater is moved through the site via a network of pits, pipes, drains,

pumps, detention basins and overland flow. The stormwater infrastructure relevant to the existing

and proposed Cellhouses are provided in Table 6-7. A map showing the location of the stormwater

catchments, detention systems and emergency overflow collection points is provided in Figure

6-8. This system is used to prevent contaminated stormwater runoff generated on site from

reaching the Derwent estuary.

Surface water flows in the vicinity of the existing Cellhouse have the potential to be highly

contaminated and low in pH due to process spills and leaks. Flows are channelled to C drain, and

to the C drain transfer station, where they are either transferred to the CWP via gravity or pumped

to Lake Louise in the event that the CWP is under pressure from other site inputs.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 76

Table 6-7: NH Stormwater Infrastructure relevant to the Proposal

Parameter Description Function \ Treatment Process

‘C’ Drain Transfer

Transfer sump and pump station located below the existing Cellhouse

Collects a total catchment area of approximately 4.8 ha. Heavily contaminated water is directed to the ETP. Stormwater is pumped to Lake Louise during significant rainfall events to ease pressure on the CWP and ETP to reduce the risk of emergency overflows.

Lake Louise Detention pond with 15 ML capacity and antecedent storage allowance of 6 ML Flat bottomed earth fill embankment dam with HDPE liner, subsoil drainage, emergency spillway

Receives flows from C drain below the existing Cellhouse. Provides flood storage for upper C drain and quarry catchments (14 ha), designed for 10% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP), 12-hour storm event. Connected to Loogana Dam (40 ML) from where liquor is pumped to the CWP.

Loogana Dam Loogana dam (40 ML) and pump station

The dam receive surface flows from Lake Louise. Loogana Dam Liquor is pumped to the CWP for final treatment through the ETP.

Contaminated Water Ponds (CWP)

Primary (CWP1) and secondary (CWP2) concrete detention ponds, with a storage capacity of about 3.4 ML each. All sub catchments at NH report to the CWP.

Receives flows from the existing Cellhouse catchment either directly via C Drain, or indirectly via Loogana Dam Liquor return water. Moderately contaminated liquors are neutralized before overflowing into the CWP. Highly contaminated liquors are neutralized before overflowing into 2 settlers. Neutralised liquors flow to CWP1 and overflow into CWP2 when CWP1 is full.

Effluent Treatment Plant

Design capacity of 2,500 ML/annum.

Collects and treats all runoff from the CWP and some process liquors. Liquors are treated through a lime neutralization and flocculation process.

Extreme stormwater events may exceed the capacity of the sites drainage, detention and ETP

resulting in overflow of untreated contaminated water. These are notifiable events that are

reportable to the EPA. If rainfall over the site reaches or exceeds 2 mm/hr intensity for more than

30 minutes the NH Rain Event Strategy (HP-620-01221) is enacted. This procedure provides the

operating strategy for the CWPs and site drains during high intensity rain events, including the

operation of relevant pump stations and water supply and demand from the CWP. This is a well

embedded Operational procedure implemented by the ETP Operator. The NH Rain Event Log

(HF-620-03002) is used as a supplementary guide and will be completed during a storm event to

provide a timeline of event details, actions performed and consequences. Whilst the Rain Event

Strategy is designed to prevent overflows, if an emergency discharge does occur the overflow is

sampled and tested for total suspended solids, zinc, cadmium, copper, lead and hydrocarbons.

Results and discharge volumes are reported to the EPA as part of the incident notification.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 77

There is no change proposed to the existing site drainage and treatment systems as a result of

this Proposal. Rain event responses will also remain unchanged and have been proven effective.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 78

Figure 6-8: Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure and Existing Emergency Discharge Locations



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 79


The existing site requirements for performance of surface and stormwater management apply to

the Proposal. This section outlines the existing requirements enforced at NH.

The State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 provides the management framework for

the protection of water quality in Tasmania. It requires that diffuse and point sources of pollution

be controlled and reduced using best practice environmental management principles in order to

meet declared water quality objectives for the receiving waters.

Table 6-8 outlines the discharge point monitoring requirements as per EPN 7043/5, with the

discharge monitoring parameters shown in Table 6-9.

Table 6-8: Discharge Point Monitoring Requirements

Parameter Frequency

Volume of flow Daily 24 hour composite

Zinc, cadmium, lead, and mercury Daily 24 hour composite

Arsenic, copper, iron, manganese, nitrogen as

ammonia, fluoride and total suspended solids

Six monthly

Condition SW1 of EPN 7043/5 requires that site activity operates in accordance with the approved

Stormwater Strategy Report which must be amended on occasion with written approval by the

Director of the EPA. As far as reasonably practicable, the stormwater from the project area must

only be discharged from the site from the nominated discharge points. The water discharged from

these points must not exceed the limits specified in Table 6-9 unless the stormwater is discharged

under a critical duration storm event, as described in the conditions of the EPN.

Table 6-9: Discharge Monitoring Parameters

Parameter Regulatory Limit (mg/L)

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 60.00

Nitrogen (N) as ammonia) 1.50

Fluoride (F) 10.00

Arsenic (As) 0.25

Iron (Fe) 5.00

Zinc (Zn) 5.00

Cadmium (Cd) 0.03

Copper (Cu) 1.00

Lead (Pb) 0.20

Manganese (Mn) 5.00

Mercury (Hg) 0.01



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 80


Stormwater volumes are not anticipated to change as a result of the changes indicated in the

Proposal and there are no planned additional discharge points associated with this project.

Construction

During construction, earthworks will result in disturbance and exposed soil areas. There will also

be changes in the drainage paths through the work areas. Disturbance of contaminated soil during

site preparation can result in direct exposure of contaminated soils to water. This could result in

adverse impacts by way of washing of contaminated soil into the stormwater system if not

managed adequately and can place additional pressure on existing water management and

treatment facilities.

The potential impact of contaminants from the Cellhouse entering the waterways is expected to

occur during the construction period only. Any surface water flows during construction will be

captured within the existing onsite drainage system, which is a self-contained system, so there is

very limited potential for migration of contaminants into the surrounding environment due to

construction while current practises are used on site.

During construction, the increase in workforce will generate an increased volume of sewage. All

sewage will be directed to the on-site sewerage network and be sent to the TasWater Prince of

Wales Bay sewage treatment plant. Monitoring of the sewage on the site is subject to a Trade

Waste Agreement between NH and TasWater.

Operations

Once operational, the proposed Cellhouse will not result in changes to the onsite surface water

drainage paths or management system and will not result in changes to offsite discharge points.

There are no additional point sources for liquid discharges from this Proposal, and no alteration of

the existing stormwater system used during operations.

As the sub catchments across the site will not be altered, the discharge quality from site due to

the installation of the proposed Cellhouse is expected to remain unchanged. The water quality is

expected to be the same as the existing quality of surface water discharge.

There is no expected change to the volume of sewage which will be generated during operations

in comparison with the existing volumes. Currently, the existing volumes and sewage discharges

are within the operational design capacity.

6.2.4 Avoidance and Mitigation measures

Construction

Construction activities will be conducted wholly within the catchment served by the existing

drainage and stormwater system. As such, there is extremely limited potential for construction

stormwater to enter the receiving environment.

To protect the existing NH drainage and stormwater system from construction impacts, the CEMP

will include erosion and sediment control, and measures to prevent or minimise localised

hydrocarbon spills. The CEMP will include a soil and water management plan aspects informed



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 81

by the EPA Fact Sheet 1 – Soil & Water Management on Large Building and Construction Sites.

These measures will include:

Upslope diversion drains and down-slope sediment fences for general areas

Limiting the area of disturbed or exposed soil (excavations, service trenches etc) at any one

time

Stockpile management including management of location, sealing or covering where erosive

capacity and impacts are high

Tasks must be planned to identify and protect drains in the vicinity of works from excessive

water or spills entering. This may include placing bunding or temporarily blocking drains

Dust control measures (as specified in 6.1.5)

Demarcated wheel wash site to prevent sediment from being tracked off the site

Implementation of NH’s Materials Movement Procedure, including inspection and approval for

equipment to leave site to ensure cleanliness

Accidental spills of soil or other materials onto roads or drains to be removed as soon as they

are observed

Spill kits are to be located at the construction site at all times

Spillages of chemicals and hydrocarbons must be attended to and reported immediately to

prevent ingress to site drains. Site ERO’s have large spill response capabilities and should be

called to assist where required.

Operations

During operation, all stormwater will be directed into the existing stormwater system and will be

managed in line with the current Stormwater Operations Maintenance Manual (HP-821-00004).

There are no expected changes to the surface water management system, and discharge

locations, due to this project. This Proposal constitutes a significant improvement in localised

containment and process recycling of contaminated flows.


Significant improvement in potential net impacts through designed and fully contained drainage

reporting directly to existing Effluent Treatment facilities. No net impact from construction activities.

6.3 Groundwater


Significant soil and groundwater contamination has occurred across the NH site as a result of over

100 years of refinery operations. Sources include; leakage of process solutions in operational

areas, ground infiltration of contaminated surface water, infiltration through stockpiled feedstocks

and residues, and leaks from above and below ground storage tanks and pipes.

Groundwater is monitored for standing water level and water quality across the site at over 90

active monitoring bores and nine individual groundwater extraction systems. Monitoring data



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 82

indicates that the contaminants of most concern are zinc, cadmium, mercury and lead, with the

most significant areas of contamination being within the area of the tail gas scrubbers, the ‘Old

Leach’ site and downgradient of the existing Cellhouse. Results are provided to the EPA in the

Annual Environmental Review and published in the triennial Public Environment Report.

NH recognise the potential impact to the Derwent estuary from the passive discharge of

contaminated groundwater. NH currently operates nine groundwater extraction systems that

include pumping and draining from sumps, vertical and horizontal bores. This system extracts

contaminated groundwater and directs it to the ETP where the metals are recovered prior to the

water being discharged into the estuary. In 2020, a total volume of 39 ML, containing 83 t of zinc

and 1.7 t of cadmium was recovered via the groundwater extraction systems.

Construction of a tenth groundwater extraction system commenced in 2020, with commissioning

to take place in Q2 of 2021. The system is comprised of a pressure injected grout curtain, coupled

with an up-gradient groundwater collection system, thus isolating the targeted section of the site

from the Derwent estuary.

The 740 m long grout curtain was installed in early 2020 underneath Risdon Road. It was

constructed via the drilling of primary, secondary and some tertiary bore holes, with the grout mix

injected into the boreholes sealing the horizontal and vertical fractures through which groundwater

travels.

Drilling of a 760 m long horizontal bore upgradient of the curtain commenced in November 2020

and was completed in May 2021. The horizontal bore will collect and drain the groundwater to a

600 mm vertical extraction well from where the groundwater will be pumped to the CWPs, for

treatment through the ETP.

The site groundwater model indicates that the tenth extraction system will recover 30 ML of

contaminated groundwater per annum, containing an estimated 90 t of zinc.

6.3.2 Performance Requirements

A complex groundwater monitoring system has been installed on site and nominated groundwater

bores must be sampled in compliance with EPN 7043/5. The location and frequency of this

monitoring is outlined in the site Groundwater Management Plan and Table 6-10. The location of

these bores is displayed in Figure 6-9 and Figure 6-10. The groundwater monitoring network

consists of over 90 groundwater bores that are located both on and off site. There are currently

nine groundwater remediation extraction systems on the site. The results from this monitoring

system continue to inform NH on how to manage and remediate the existing levels of

contamination found in the groundwater across the site. Monitoring of these bores during

operations, once the proposed Cellhouse construction and commissioning has completed, will

also inform the NH operations of expected improvements to the sub-surface conditions following

the removal of the contaminant sources associated with the existing Cellhouse.

Table 6-10 outlines the minimum groundwater monitoring requirements for EPN nominated

groundwater bores.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 83

Table 6-10: Groundwater Monitoring Program Requirements

Parameter Frequency

Water Depth Six monthly

pH and conductivity Biennial

Zinc, cadmium, lead, mercury, copper,

manganese, sulphate

Biennial



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 84

Figure 6-9: Groundwater Monitoring Locations – North



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 85

Figure 6-10: Groundwater Monitoring Locations – South




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 86


During construction of the proposed Cellhouse, there is unlikely to be significant interaction

between construction works and the groundwater due to the depth of groundwater at the site and

proposed excavation depths. Piling and excavation work may encounter groundwater that may

require de-watering during excavation, however this will be contained within the site drainage

system and directed into the existing stormwater network towards the CWP. In the event that

hydrocarbon contaminated groundwater is intersected, the wastewater may need to be contained

in suitable vessels and removed from site for treatment. The construction works are unlikely to

further impact the quality of groundwater.

Due to the location of the proposed Cellhouse, a number of groundwater bores will be affected.

The groundwater bores that will require decommissioning were installed opportunistically following

a geotechnical assessment. As such, little concern was given to the likelihood of cross aquifer

contamination by screening across multiple aquifers. Recent scrutiny of the bore logs reveals that

many of the bores highlighted for decommissioning pose such a risk and should be

decommissioned, regardless of the necessity to do so for the Cellhouse construction. None of the

bores identified for decommissioning require regulatory sampling under EPN 7043/5.There are no

immediate plans to install any additional bores to replace those that will be decommissioned. All

bores highlighted for decommissioning are to be done so in accordance with the Minimum

Construction Requirements for Water Bores in Australia, Fourth Edition, 2020.

The site has been subject to ongoing seepage of contaminants into the groundwater as shown by

the existing conditions. The existing Cellhouse has contributed significantly to contaminants

entering the subsoil conditions, and eventually reaching the groundwater, for the duration of its

operational life.

The proposed cellhouse will result in no additional negative impacts to the existing site

groundwater quality. The modern technology which is being installed will eliminate one source of

contaminants into the groundwater by replacing the existing structure with a new and improved

design. In this regard, a source of pollution will be removed and improvements in the groundwater

quality can be expected in the long-term.


Construction

The CEMP will outline mitigation measures and procedures to be implemented during construction

to prevent spills and contaminants and to avoid any such spills from reaching the groundwater.

This will include installing designated refuelling areas, usage of impermeable bunding areas during

fuel and chemical storage and detailed spill control measures. Any dewatering required during

excavation and piling must include capture of the groundwater and either discharge into the onsite

drainage system for treatment at the ETP, or in the event that hydrocarbons are noted, retention

in a suitable vessel for off-site treatment. No drilling muds are to be used during the installation of

piles. Soil excavated during construction will be reused on site where possible, where re-use will

not result in further environmental impact. If soil material is not reused, it will be stored and

prepared for removal and disposal as per the current site process for the removal of contaminated

material, outlined in the NH Waste Management Procedure.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 87

All excavated material will be stored in designated laydown areas which are highlighted in Figure

2-10.

Operation

The proposed Cellhouse design includes inherent design features that will reduce the potential for

impacts by inclusion of impervious membranes to limit the releases of contaminants into the

groundwater. These design features include lining of the basement for the proposed Cellhouse.

This lining will be impermeable and will eliminate one source of contamination from site. These

elements have been described in Section 2.2.3.

The site will continue to implement the existing groundwater management plan throughout

construction and operations.


There is expected to be a significant improvement in groundwater quality through the removal of

a potential source of contaminated groundwater recharge from spills from the existing Cellhouse.

No net impacts from the Proposed development have been identified through design of a sealed

and fully contained basement and associated drainage system. No net impacts from construction

activities with the application of controls from the CEMP.

6.4 Noise emissions For the purposes of assessing noise emissions associated with this Project, NH commissioned an

acoustic assessment, including modelling, to quantify the impact associated with the construction

and operation of the proposed Cellhouse. It also compares the existing noise levels experienced

outside the site with the predicted noise generated during construction and operation. This section

provides a high-level summary of the acoustic assessment, an outline of the associated impacts,

and potential mitigation measures to address these impacts. The full acoustic assessment is

included as an Annexure to this document.


Sources of noise on site depend on operational activities, including but not limited to:

Vehicles including heavy vehicles and fork lift trucks.

Fans on cooling and ventilation systems.

Conveyors such as rubber belts, walking beams, and chain conveyors.

Materials handling such as stacking zinc or excavating concentrates.

Minor explosions from the cell house and roast boiler cleaning.

Power tools including grinders, impact guns, and construction equipment.

Steam emissions from heating and venting operations.

Warning alarms or PA announcements for safety or process (including from the existing

Cellhouse)

Sirens during emergencies or emergency drills.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 88

Over time, site wide noise surveys have been conducted to identify specific noise sources that

contribute to impacts around the smelter. These studies have supported work toward ameliorating

major noise sources.

NH monitors noise continuously at three locations within the neighbouring community. Long term

noise monitoring equipment is located at Birch Road (Lutana), Delwood Drive (Lutana) and

Saundersons Road (East Risdon) (Figure 6-11). NH also undertakes a three yearly site wide

comprehensive noise survey to identify noise sources and indicate the average annual noise

emission levels. This monitoring shows that the monthly median L90 noise results, due to existing

operations, are below the limits outlined in the NH EPN 7043/5 R2.

The site currently meets these criteria as shown by long term average noise emission levels in

Table 6-11.

Table 6-11: Current Long-Term Average Community Noise Levels (dBA)

Location L10 L90 Leq EPN Limit Monthly Mean L90

Delwood Drive 49 41 45 52

Birch Road 49 40 45 52

Saundersons Road 53 49 51 56

There has been a significant reduction in the number of noise complaints received by NH, from

eight complaints in 2017, to one complaint in 2019. This indicates that the current noise profile,

and associated EPN limits, are effective and not impacting the environmental values as listed in

the EPP (Noise) 2009. All noise complaints are recorded and reported to the EPA and each

complaint actioned and investigated to prevent recurrence. NH follow up directly with the

complainant where consent to contact has been given.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 89

Figure 6-11: Noise monitoring locations



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 90


The performance standards applied to the site are in line with the Environment Protection Policy

(EPP Noise) 2009. There are no specific industrial and commercial limits outlined in the EPP Noise

however it indicates that the environmental values to be protected are the qualities of the acoustic

environment that are conducive to:

the wellbeing of the community or a part of the community, including its social and economic

amenity; or

the wellbeing of an individual, including the individual's –

- health; and

- opportunity to work and study and to have sleep, relaxation and conversation without

unreasonable interference from noise.

NH EPN 7043/5 state the below limits for noise control. Note that the East Risdon Community

area referenced in the below dot points is the area in which the Saunderson’s Road noise monitor

is located, on the eastern shore of the Derwent estuary (see Figure 6-11).

Noise emissions from the activity when measured at any noise sensitive premises in other

ownership not located in the East Risdon Community area and expressed as the equivalent

continuous A-weighted sound pressure level must not exceed 52 dB(A).

Noise emissions from the activity when measured at any noise sensitive premises in other

ownership located in the East Risdon Community area and expressed as the equivalent

continuous A-weighted sound pressure level must not exceed 56 dB(A).

Noise emissions from the activity when measured at any neighbouring industrial or commercial

activity in other ownership and expressed as the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound

pressure level must not exceed 65 dB(A).

Where the combined level of noise from the activity and the normal ambient noise exceeds

the noise levels stated above, this condition will not be considered to be breached unless the

noise emissions from the activity are audible and exceed the ambient noise levels by at least

5 dB(A).

The time interval over which noise levels are averaged must be 10 minutes or an alternative

time interval specified in writing by the Director.

Measured noise levels must be adjusted for tonality, impulsiveness, modulation and low

frequency in accordance with the Tasmanian Noise Measurement Procedures Manual.

The noise emissions from the existing Cellhouse were extracted and used to develop design

performance standards for the proposed Cellhouse noise emission criteria.

As the site is compliant with its existing limits, the proposed Cellhouse will need to operate at the

same noise level or a lower noise level to maintain this level of compliance. The design criteria for

the proposed Cellhouse to make sure this is achieved are presented in Table 6-12.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 91

Table 6-12: Proposed Cellhouse Noise Emission Design Criteria

Location Road dBA Tones

Lutana Delwood Drive ≤ 43 no prominent tones

Lutana Birch Road ≤ 40 no prominent tones

East Risdon Saundersons Road ≤ 44 no prominent tones


A noise impact study was completed for the site, including the current operations and the proposed

Cellhouse to quantify the impact associated with this Proposal. The model also takes into account

the impact of construction noise. The noise emissions from the proposed Cellhouse have been

predicted using the iNoise software platform. This model implements the ISO9613 algorithms so

calculates noise levels at receiver locations assuming downwind sound propagation to the receiver

and allowing for attenuation due to:

Ground effects

Topographic screening

Distance (spherical spreading)

Atmospheric absorption

Reflections off buildings / objects

Screening by buildings / barriers

The input data to the model includes:

Source data including the location, directivity and sound power levels (A-weighted decibels

(dBA)) of equipment and infrastructure

Site building locations and geometric information

2 m topographic contours

Location of communities and associated noise logging stations (Delwood Drive, Birch Road,

Saundersons Road).

The modelling directly output detailed data at the specified receiver locations, and a noise contour

map of overall levels for the general area surrounding the site. The predictions are at a height of

1.5 m above ground, as stipulated by the TAS Noise Measurement Procedures Manual.

The model takes into account the noise generated from existing operations, and the additional

noise generated during construction which will occur concurrently over a period of 24 months.

The predicted noise emissions for the proposed Cellhouse, and the removal of the PA system in

the proposed Cellhouse, show that the noise levels will be lower than the existing Cellhouse,

thereby minimising the noise impacts from the site overall. The levels of noise experienced at the

sensitive receptors is expected to decrease.

The noise point sources are presented in Figure 6-12. The full noise impact assessment is

provided as an Annexure to this document.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 92

6.4.3.1 Construction Period Noise

The construction period will include normal operations of the existing facility, and the noise

associated with construction activities. Construction activities will include earthworks, steel

fabrication and mobile power generation for the following activities:

Removal of Unit 1 to 4 Cooling Towers and replace them with temporary units;

Early works including bulk earthworks

Excavation for the proposed Cellhouse building

Construction of the proposed Cellhouse building

Commissioning of the proposed Cellhouse building.

Assumptions relevant to the construction noise predictions are as follows:

It is assumed all sources are operating simultaneously and continuously

The internal sources have been located ‘at random’ within the footprint of the proposed

Cellhouse

The sources are typically 1.5 to 2 m above existing ground level. For the handheld items

there will be times when they are higher – for example, at the Cellhouse roof level

Most of the sources are associated with the earthworks. It is likely that once civil and

foundation works are completed, construction noise levels will be quieter than modelled.

Predicted noise from the construction period for the proposed Cellhouse is listed in Table 6-13.

Table 6-13: Predicted Construction Noise

Location Delwood Drive (dBA)

Birch Road (dBA)

Saundersons Road (dBA)

Construction of Cellhouse only 45 41 39

Existing operations & Construction of Cellhouse combined

48 47 50

The predicted noise from the construction period indicates that during this period, noise levels are

expected to be in line with existing noise levels experienced adjacent to the site. Modelling

indicates that there is no expected increase in the noise profile from the site during construction

in comparison to the existing noise emissions.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 93

Figure 6-12: Noise Sources



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 94

6.4.3.2 Operational Noise

Noise sources associated with the operation of the proposed Cellhouse are as follows:

Five spent cooling towers (4 operational, 1 on standby)

Acid mist ‘Crossflow’ extraction system

Anode cleaning high pressure water system

Cathode stripping machines

Four rectiformers.

These noise sources are presented in Figure 6-12. The model output included detailed sound

pressure levels at the receiver locations and noise contour maps of overall levels for the general

area surrounding the site (see Table 6-14).

Table 6-14: Site Noise Emissions Comparison

Location Delwood Drive (dBA)

Birch Road (dBA)

Saundersons Road (dBA)

Existing Cellhouse 43 40 44

Proposed Cellhouse 43 36 33

*These predictions are based at a height of 1.5 m above ground, as stipulated by the TAS Noise Measurement Procedures

Manual.

The decommissioning of the existing Cellhouse will result in the following changes to the noise

profile of the site:

Unit 5 and 6 spent cooling towers will be decommissioned

Anode washing and repair station decommissioned

Anode casting shop and associated scrubber fan decommissioned

Unit 1-4 cooling towers removed.

The results of the modelling and associated impact assessment indicate that the site noise profile

is unlikely to be significantly changed in the Lutana area, and the East Risdon area is likely to

experience a lower level of noise.

As the proposed Cellhouse is visible only to Delwood Drive, it will be only marginally quieter in this

location, however modelling indicates that the proposed Cellhouse will have a lower acoustic

impact at Birch Road and East Risdon than the existing Cellhouse.

6.4.3.3 Summary of Noise Impact

Based on the noise emissions assessment it was determined that the construction and operation

of the proposed Cellhouse will be below the NH EPN limits. The results from the noise modelling

are outlined in Table 6-15.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 95

Table 6-15: Results from Noise Modelling

Location Monitoring Criteria

Monitoring Period

Sound Pressure Level, dBA

Delwood Drive

Birch Road Saundersons Road

Whole Site

Measured Current Long Term 45 45 51

Predicted

Currently 46 46 50


Construction 48 47 50

Criteria Site EPN 52 52 56

Cellhouse Predicted


Construction 45 41 39

Criteria Proposed Cellhouse 43 40 44

When compared with existing criteria, the construction and operation of the proposed Cellhouse

does not result in long-term increase in noise levels due to the Proposal.


Construction

Main construction works will occur between approximately 7am and 5pm, 6 days a week. Night

shift works will be completed only as required. In the event that night shift is required, construction

planning will schedule major works to occur during day shift, with minor works to occur during the

night shift.

Noise will be generated during construction however, NH will implement controls to minimise

disturbance to residents in the surrounding area. Details of these controls will be contained within

the CEMP and will include actions such as specifying completion of certain high noise activities,

the installation of loud equipment (e.g. generators) away from the fence line, and prior notification

of works which generate short term localised noise pollution.

Operation

Operations will occur 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and consist of an operational and

maintenance team working business hours (7am to 4pm) and operators working on a four-panel

shift roster. The operation of the proposed Cellhouse will be continuous throughout all seasons.

Shutdown works to complete widescale maintenance will be scheduled as required.

During operation, the noise emissions from the proposed Cellhouse will not be greater than the

existing conditions. The following measures contribute to ensuring operational noise is in line with

the completed modelling:

Proposed Cellhouse technology is quieter than the existing equipment

The main noise sources are the electrolyte cooling towers, and these can be equipped with

noise control via inlet silencers if required



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 96

Removal of the PA system in the Cellhouse (previously the subject of nuisance noise

complaints). Communication between operators will be completed using radio or other non-

PA communications.

General

NH will continue to run community noise monitors during the construction phase. These monitors

will monitor noise both during construction and operation, enabling NH to detect nuisance noise.

Activities which generate a loud noise profile will be limited to operational daytime hours.

NH uses a database referred to as “RIMS” to track all community complaints, which provides data

on areas where the operation can make environmental improvements. A daily report is generated

from RIMS and this will enable NH to identify any noise issues that requires immediate mitigation.


No net impacts from operations, with contained processes and noise modelling identifying no new

noise sources of concern. No net impacts from the construction phase with implementation of

CEMP mitigations and management measures.

6.5 Waste Management This section outlines the changes in the waste profile associated with the Proposal. Note that while

demolition of the existing Cellhouse is not being specifically assessed in this Proposal, demolition

would be managed via the existing site EPN and requirements for other permits.

The process areas outside of the proposed Cellhouse are unchanged by the project and they are

not discussed in further detail in this section since they do not contribute to any potential impact.

NH produces three relevant categories of waste. These categories are described below.

General Waste

There is inert general waste produced during normal plant operations and is not a by-product or

associated with the operational process. This waste includes crib room waste, office waste and

materials which are recyclable from across the site. In 2019, 203 tonnes of general non-

hazardous waste were collected from across the whole site and disposed of as general waste at

the Copping Landfill.

A breakdown of site wide NH waste recycled in 2019 is provided in Table 6-16. The exact

proportion of recyclable wastes generate at the existing cellhouse is not known, however it is not

expected to change significantly with the proposed cellhouse.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 97

Table 6-16: Waste Recycled for existing site

Material type Volume (t) recycled in 2019

Cardboard and paper 7.64

Scrap metal 332.84

Clean timber and green waste 26.08

Oil 11.70

Co-mingled 0.16

E-waste 1.00

Fluorescent tubes 0.24

Oil Filters 1.02

Total (tonnes) 380.68

Contaminated Non-Process Waste

This category includes waste classified as hazardous and materials contaminated by process

liquors or solids. Significant volumes of contaminated non-process wastes are produced in the

existing Cellhouse, with the majority stockpiled on the site whilst potential outlets are explored. A

summary of the contaminated non-process waste removed from the existing Cellhouse in 2019 is

provided in Table 6-17. Current waste streams that will be significantly reduced include

contaminated timber, contaminated asphalt flooring, contaminated fibreglass and operational

consumables such as cell bearers.

Table 6-17: 2019 Contaminated Non-Process Waste from the existing Cellhouse

Waste Type Volume (t)

Bitumen 122

Concrete 20

Fibreglass 5

Timber 99

Soil 179

Rubber 5

Process Waste

Any materials which can be used reused or reprocessed in the operational process, at Nyrstar

Port Pirie or by an external third party, is designated as a by-product or residue. This material is

not considered to be a waste stream as it has a beneficial reuse. A by-product generated by

Cellhouse operations is manganese dioxide which is re-used at the NH smelter.

No process wastes are generated from the existing Cellhouse operations, and the proposed

Cellhouse is expected to have a similar waste profile.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 98


All activities must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental

Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 and regulations. Management of waste must also be

in accordance with:

Tasmanian Environmental Management and Pollution Control (Waste Management)

Regulation 2016

The Tasmanian Waste and Resource Management Strategy (Department of Environment,

Parks, Heritage and the Arts, June 2009).

Specific requirements outlined in the Environment Protection Notice (EPN 7043/5), that relate to

the Proposal include:

The site must operate in accordance with the approved Non-process Waste Management

Plan

Only waste materials collected from screens throughout the leach process, contaminated

soils, storage and process tank sludges, flake linings and garnet mixtures can be processed

via the Roasters.

Wastes are reused or recycled in accordance with the following NH internal processes:

Non-process Waste Management Plan HM-825-00003

Waste Management Procedure HP-825-03612

Materials Movement Authorisation Procedure HP-825-00875.

Where possible, waste is recycled and reused. HP-825-03612 Waste Management Procedure

outlines the management of each of these waste types, and HP-825-00874 Materials Movement

Procedure for details of waste movements on and off-site.


Construction

During the construction phase of this project, general waste as well as construction and minor

amounts of demolition waste will be generated. This waste will include, but is not limited to:

General and construction office waste

Sewage

Packaging, delivery boxes and offcuts

Waste concrete, metal from reinforcing and wire ties

Demolition material, including contaminated soil which is excavated from the project area.

Expected volumes of soil and rock to be excavated from the project area are discussed in

Table 2-4.

Flagging, and temporary barricading



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 99

Empty chemical containers

Contaminated washdown water

Potential for hydrocarbon contaminated material

Potential for minor volumes of asbestos.

Material which has been contaminated by hydrocarbons, process liquors or solids, including

excavated material or concrete removed from process areas, will be designated as contaminated

non-process waste.

The volumes and types of waste generated over the 2-year construction period will vary

significantly and be dependent on the types of work which are being undertaken at the time.

All wastes will be managed in accordance with the site’s existing processes and procedures and

will also be included in the CEMP that will be developed for the Project.

Proposed Cellhouse Operation

During operation of the proposed Cellhouse, a significant reduction in the volume of contaminated

non-process wastes is expected. Ongoing maintenance works to the existing Cellhouse results in

large volumes of contaminated timber, soils, and bitumen. The waste volumes of contaminated

non process waste listed in Table 6-17 will no longer be generated. The elimination of continuous

maintenance required to keep the existing Cellhouse operational will remove the associated

activities that produce this waste.

Additionally, existing operational wastes such as redundant fibreglass cells and cell bearers are

also expected to reduce. The proposed Cellhouse will also result in a considerable improvement

to the general visual amenity of the site, with housekeeping improved via a reduced need to

stockpile waste.


As a part of the CEMP, waste management measures for demolition and construction waste will

be developed. These will follow the waste management hierarchy (Figure 6-13) and will include

measures to avoid and minimise the generation of waste during this phase.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 100

Figure 6-13: Waste Management Hierarchy

These measures include:

Fabrication, or partial fabrication, to be completed off-site where possible, minimising the

need for onsite workshops and generation of scrap materials

Reuse of contaminated soil in fill material where possible, and where no detrimental impact

to the environment will result from the re-use

Returning packaging to suppliers where possible

Planning works, orders of materials and only purchasing the volume required. Specify

requirements to avoid over consumption of materials

Ensure materials are delivered only when required, to avoid being damaged by site climatic

conditions, and not being usable

Establish waste segregation and storage areas to ensure that different types of waste and

construction materials are not mixed at any point.

Where waste cannot be avoided, reduced or reused, separate areas for recyclable material will

be established. Recycled material will be removed from site using a licensed waste services

provider.

During operation, waste management will be in compliance with the site Waste Management

Procedure HP-825-03612. It is not anticipated that there will be any new waste streams,

associated with this Proposal,

Waste volumes will be recorded and reported in the Annual Environmental Report.


Significant improvement in net impacts due to the reduction in contaminated non-process wastes

that currently arise from intensive maintenance of the existing Cellhouse. There will be no net



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 101

impact from construction wastes of the proposed Cellhouse, with the majority to be recycled or

otherwise managed onsite, and any offsite movements done in compliance with regulatory

guidelines.

6.6 Dangerous Goods and Environmentally Hazardous Materials

6.6.1 Existing Environment

The NH site is designated as a ‘Major Hazard Facility’ due to the nature of their operations, and

the hazardous chemicals which are stored in significant volumes on site. This designation is made

under the Tasmanian Work, Health and Safety Act 2012. NH has identified five potentially major

risks which would cause a major event or failure which results in loss of containment of these

chemicals. These events are associated with different processing areas on site. Of the five

potentially major risks on site, the one potential event associated with the Cellhouse is the potential

for a Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) explosion or fire. LPG use is primarily related to vehicle use

in the existing facility. Elimination of the use of mobile equipment as the primary means of

transporting electrodes in the existing facility will materially reduce LPG use.

Control systems are in place to ensure that these risks are being managed effectively and prevent

any type of safety and environmental incident from occurring. These systems are regularly

reviewed and updated.

During construction, chemicals which are needed on site will be primarily sealants, paints,

compressed gases for welding, concrete and associated additives. The volume and composition

of these chemicals will change throughout construction. During earthworks and civil works,

hydrocarbons to support machinery, concrete, grouting materials and chemical markers will be

prominent. As the construction moves in to structural, electrical and mechanical works, chemicals

on site will be sealants, gases for welding, paints and corrosion resistant coatings.

During commissioning of the proposed Cellhouse, pure and spent solution will be moved from the

existing storage tanks into the proposed units through a new pumping system.

For the operation of the proposed Cellhouse, the same Dangerous Goods and Environmentally

Hazardous Materials which are currently on site will be required.

NH keeps an inventory of all environmentally hazardous materials stored on site, which specifies

the location of storage facilities and the maximum quantities of each environmentally hazardous

material likely to be kept in storage.

All chemicals are required to have up-to-date Safety Data Sheets (SDS) that is compliant with the

Global Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) and are stored in

ChemAlert.


The main performance requirement is ensuring that all goods and materials are managed in line

with the existing approved site standards and procedures. These storage areas should be in line

with Australian standards and regulatory requirements for management of Dangerous Goods and

Chemical handling and storage. All proposed permanent tanks will be designed and installed in

line with the following Australian standards as applicable.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 102

AS 1940-1993 The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids

AS 4326-1995 The storage and handling of oxidising agents

AS/NZS 4452-1997 The storage and handling of toxic substances

Dangerous Goods and Environmentally Hazardous Materials held must be located within

impervious bunded areas, spill trays or other containment systems. They must be managed to

prevent unauthorised discharge, emission, or deposition of pollutants into the surrounding

environment.

These materials must be stored, handled and disposed of, in line with the requirements outlined

in their SDS and this includes ensuring that spill kits appropriate for the types and volumes of

materials handled on site are available.

These requirements will be applied to the proposed storage areas which are associated with the

Proposal.


During construction a wider range of hazardous substances will be present on the site, however

they should be in small volumes and only required for short periods. Hydrocarbons, including fuel

and hydraulic fluid used for heavy equipment, will be stored in laydown areas in small bunded

volumes. Construction laydowns, where these will be stored, are shown in Figure 2-10.

Construction requirements are unlikely to require volumes which would cause migration of material

outside the construction and laydown areas.

There is no change to the Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Substances which are used during

operation. The profile of the site and associated ‘Major Hazard Facility’ designation will not change

because the Proposal does not introduce any new Schedule 15 substances nor add to the

inventory of existing Schedule 15 substances.


There are a number of measures which will be in place during construction and operation which

are aimed at the containment of the small volumes of chemicals and hydrocarbons. These

measures will ensure that materials do not migrate outside the areas in which they are stored and

used.

Construction

During construction, all contractors will be required to comply with a CEMP. This plan will detail

the requirements for handling, storage and disposal of chemicals, and also the management of

spills in the event that there is a loss of containment. This will be verified through construction site

inspections and the associated reporting.

The CEMP will also stipulate the requirements for training in chemical handling and spill

management, Work Area Safety Inspections, and the implementation of Standard Operating

Procedures, which detail the risk and requirements of specific tasks. Job Safety and Environmental

Analysis which focus on specific jobs and the risk associated with their executions will be used

and these will outline any goods and materials used in the process of that task.



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 103

Operation

Minor changes to chemical storage will be required in the proposed Cellhouse. The changes will

be captured in ChemAlert, with existing storage locations removed, and proposed storage

locations added to that database. Larger chemical storage areas, which service the whole site,

are unlikely to change. The site’s Underground Petroleum Storage System (UPSS) will be

removed from operation. Aboveground tanks which are designed in line with Australian standards

will replace the existing tanks. The removal of the underground tanks will be managed separately

to this Proposal and will be completed in accordance with the applicable UPSS regulations.


There are no net impacts from operation of the proposed Cellhouse in regards to Dangerous

Goods and Environmentally Hazardous Substances. There are no changes to the existing

inventory and usage of hazardous substances or dangerous goods. No net impact from

hazardous substances and dangerous goods used during construction, with standard and

available management measures and mitigations to be implemented as per the CEMP.

6.7 Biodiversity and Natural Values


The majority of the NH site has been previously cleared and converted to hard surfaces. There is

a 90-ha buffer zone between the smelter and the surrounding community residencies where some

areas of natural vegetation occur. The proposed development is within the existing brownfields

area of the NH smelter. All infrastructures will be placed within already significantly disturbed areas

of the NH boundary or designated utilities areas as seen in Figure 2-9.

A search of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) Protected

Matters Database Tool was conducted in 2019. Based on this search, it was concluded that a

large number of threatened fauna species and threatened flora could potentially be found in habitat

within a 1 km radius of NH. However, because the operations areas have been transformed to

hard surfaces it is unlikely that listed threatened ecological communities exist within the NH site

other than in the buffer zone.

A review of the Commonwealth threatened species database is undertaken by NH on a yearly

basis. In addition to this, a Natural Atlas Report was generated for the NH boundary on the 7

October 2020.

The Natural Atlas Report found that the buffer zone of the NH site comprises dry vegetation types

with four native vegetation communities and a small area of exotic pastureland. The dry forest is

mostly regrowth trees, as a result of past farming activities and wildlife. Few trees with hollows

were noted and little fallen timber. Thus, due to the paucity of nesting and shelter sites for hollow

dwelling fauna and little fallen timber to provide habitat for ground dwelling species, the fauna

habitat value of the site is considered low to moderate. Lowland grassland areas provide foraging

habitat for some species, where the dry forest would not be suitable due to the thin soils associated

with them.

Based on the Tasmanian Geoconservation Database, the closest geo-conservation area is the

Bedlam Walls Scarp, on the eastern banks of the Derwent estuary just over 500 m away from the



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 104

proposed development. The buffer zone is not connected to the estuary through any natural

corridors and only species capable of flight would be able to move between these areas.

Existing conservation reserves within a 500 m buffer of the project area include the East Risdon

State Reserve which is situated across the Derwent River from NH. This reserve is an IUCN

Category II protected area and harbours threatened communities of Eucalyputs risdonii and

endangered Eucalyptus morrisbyi.

No high-quality wilderness areas were identified within the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement

(RFA) within the vicinity of the site. The closest wilderness areas would be found in smaller pockets

surrounding Mount Field National Park and Hartz Mountains National Park which are over 50 km

west of the site.

The closest Ramsar listed wetland is the Pittwater-Orielton Lagoon (coordinates: 42°47'00''S

147°30'00''E) approximately 12 km East of NH. The Pittwater-Orielton Lagoon is a wetland of

international significance, recognised as both a Tasmanian Nature Reserve and an international

Ramsar site. The lagoon was registered as a Ramsar Wetland as it provides a habitat for migratory

shorebirds as well as having regionally significant flora and fauna such as endemic sea-star

(Patiriella vivipara). A Natural Values Atlas Report was generated using a 500 m and 1000 m

buffer around the NH boundary with biodiversity and natural values of note presented in Figure

6-14.



HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 105

Figure 6-14: Vegetation and Natural Values




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 106


The construction and operation of the proposed Cellhouse will be expected to comply with the

following requirements:

No unauthorised removal of vegetation within previously disturbed area

No vegetation removal outside previously disturbed areas

No animal injuries or deaths resulting from construction and operational works.

NH maintains an operating procedure to provide guidance on the protection of known threatened

species and habitat associated with their occurrence. The document describes actions to be taken

in the event of the following:

A new species suspected to be of threatened status is identified on land owned by NH

A species known to occur on the site is elevated to threatened status, or the status of a

known threatened species changes.


The location of the proposed Cellhouse is within the existing boundary of NH, on existing

infrastructure and disturbed surfaces. Some existing auxiliary infrastructure will be required to be

moved as well as some internal access roads redirected. In preparing the area, and executing the

site works, minor clearing activities are required. This means the removal of minor stands of

vegetation from within previously replanted areas during the realignment of the access roads

around the existing Cellhouse. There will be minor to no impact on vegetation communities which

are in the surrounding environment.

The proposed development will be within the existing NH boundaries and is not expected to have

an impact on the East Risdon State Reserve.

Given the distance of the proposed project site from the Pittwater-Orielton Lagoon, no significant

impacts are anticipated as there is no ecological connectivity between the site and the Lagoon.

NH is situated on the western bank of the Derwent estuary, which has been classified as a highly

degraded estuary due to numerous historical emissions discharged into the river. There is the

possibility of marine animals coming close to the site, however, it is unlikely that the proposed

development of the Cellhouse will cause additional impacts on these species. Refer to Section 6.8

for the marine and coastal impacts.


Management requirements for flora and fauna will be addressed in the CEMP. This will include

actions to be taken during construction to ensure that there are no animal injuries or death due to

works, such as checking excavations for fauna at the beginning of every shift and ensuring that

the environment team is notified in the event of finding fauna in the work areas.

It will also clearly outline the process which must be undertaken if vegetation is to be removed

from the construction site.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 107


No net impacts anticipated to the biodiversity and natural values of NH. Activities are to be

conducted wholly within the current operational footprint, and neither construction nor operation

will not threaten on or off site biodiversity or natural values.

6.8 Marine and Coastal


The Derwent estuary is relatively deep and microtidal with large and relatively steady freshwater

inputs from the Derwent River. The middle to lower reaches of the Derwent estuary is dominated

by wind-driven, tidal mixing and is partially- to well-mixed. This section of the estuary has been

described as having relatively large vertical mass movement within the water column. The Derwent

estuary is a highly degraded estuary, however numerous efforts to reduce end of pipe emissions

have resulted in an improvement in water quality.

The site’s closed drainage system ensures that flows within the process area are routed through

the CWPs to the ETP as discussed in Section 6.2.1. All flows are treated prior to discharge into

the Derwent estuary. Flows exceeding the capacity of the ETP and interim storages must only be

discharged from the seven emergency overflow points to the Derwent estuary as shown in Figure

6-6.

NH impacts the Derwent estuary in a number of ways, including:

Estuarine water extraction for tail gas scrubbing

Effluent discharged from the tail gas scrubbers and ETP

Passive discharge of contaminated groundwater

Back-flushing water from the saltwater strainers discharged via the Strainer Backwash

Outfall.

Routine sampling since 2002 has shown elevated concentrations of zinc, cadmium and mercury

in New Town Bay (NTB) sediments which are substantially higher than the Australian and New

Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) guidelines. In a recent report

published in 2020 by DEP6F6F6F6F

8 , it was notably reported that sediment coring and surface sediment

sampling from a site adjacent to NH found decreased zinc concentrations to 13% of the recorded

historical maximum for this location. Overall, the testing gave evidence that zinc and lead

concentrations were steadily decreasing, indicating the successful reduction efforts in reducing

metal-contaminated effluent entering the estuary since the 1970s. This could likely be contributed

to the gradual burial of metal-contaminated sediments along with other NH actions to reduce metal

input loads. It should be noted that heavy metals are typically chemically bound to sediment or

other organic materials and therefore less bioavailable.

The monthly surface water quality monitoring across the 2019 reporting period showed typically

higher heavy metal concentrations in surface waters in comparison to benthic samples at certain

8 State of the Derwent Estuary 2020 Update




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 108

sites with less stratification evident in the estuary proper. This pattern of metal concentration has

been evident since monitoring began.

Biota data collected in 2019 suggest that the majority of the metals accumulated by the oysters at

the NH wharf are a result of stormwater from the wharf apron which, until 2020, was not captured

and treated with the site stormwater runoff.

The State of the Derwent Estuary 2020 Update, provides an update and review of environmental

data and activities. The report indicated that since NH have embarked on significant remediation

projects, there has been a reduction in the level of metals found in the ambient water and surface

sediments. The report details the significant amount of work which has been conducted by NH to

reduce sources of contamination and remediate onsite legacy contamination.


NH monitors the potential impact of site operations by sampling estuarine water quality and

estuarine benthic sediments in accordance with EPN 7043/5.The receiving water quality and

sediment sampling program is integrally linked with the NH Estuarine Biota Monitoring Program.

NH also uses this sampling program to ensure that the Tasmanian State Water Quality Objectives

are met. The water quality performance requirements as outlined in the EPN are detailed in Table

6-18.

Table 6-18: EPN 7043/5 Water Quality Requirements

Emission point / monitoring location

Monitoring and sampling frequency

Monitoring parameters

Regulatory limits that must not be exceeded

Derwent estuary interim mixing zone boundary

Monthly minimum of four samples at boundary locations likely to be impacted by mixing plume.

pH

Not less than pH 7 under any degree of influence of NH treated wastewater

Water quality: U3, U4, U5, U7, PWB, NTB1, NTB2, NTB5

Monthly Zn, Cd, Hg, TSS

None specified

New Town Bay sediments: NTB01, NTB02, NTB08, NTB10, NTB12

Annually Zn, Cd, Hg None specified

Results of site sediment samples are compared to the ANZECC guidelines described in Table

6-19.

Table 6-19: ANZECC water quality guidelines for marine waters (2001)

Analyte

Sediments Water

Effects range low (adverse effects 10% of the time) mg/kg

Effects range high (adverse effects 50% of the time) mg/kg

80% protection level µg/L

Total zinc 200 410 43

Total cadmium 1.5 10 36

Total mercury 0.15 1 1.4




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 109


The proposed Cellhouse construction and operation will not result in an increase of discharge

volume and quality at discharge locations. As these are the factors which influence marine water

and sediment quality and metals accumulation in biota, there are no potential additional impacts

associated with the proposed Cellhouse.

The marine and coastal impact profile of the site is likely to remain the same as the current profile.


NH plays a key role in the Derwent Estuary Program (DEP) and their involvement includes

collaborative monthly monitoring, collection of data to inform seafood safety advice, attendance at

regular taskforce meetings and commitment of resources and funding.

Substantial resources have been allocated to address contaminant sources and improve estuarine

health. These have included the construction of the ETP to address point sources and major

stormwater and groundwater projects to address diffuse sources.

All stormwater from the site is captured and directed to the on-site ETP for treatment. This aims

to capture any metals which may otherwise be discharged into the marine environment.


No net impacts of the Proposal to the surrounding marine and coastal environments have been

identified. Stormwater and groundwater arising from the Proposal are appropriately controlled

(refer Sections 6.2 and 6.3 respectively) to prevent impacts on marine and coastal values.

6.9 Greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances


Greenhouse gases (GHG) and ozone depleting substances include the following chemicals:

carbon dioxide (CO2) (associated with power generation)

nitrous oxide (N2O)

methane (CH4).

Handling and refining processes used at NH may release airborne particles and gases carrying

these chemicals into the atmosphere.

The electricity usage for the site is the main contributor to GHG emissions from the site, and this

is a Scope 2 emission or indirect emission generated by the energy producer rather than the

operations on the site.

NH currently conforms to the requirements of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act

(NGER, 2007), which requires annual reporting of greenhouse gases s emitted from the site.

NH reported the following GHG emissions in 2019/2020 reporting year (Table 6-20).




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 110

Table 6-20: GHG emissions 2019/2020

Substance Total (t)

Nitrogen Dioxide N2O 58

Methane CH4 32

Carbon Dioxide Equivalents Scope 1 Emissions

14,663

Carbon Dioxide Equivalents Scope 2 Emissions

209,035


Legislative and policy responses to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions are outlined

in Tasmania’s Climate Change Action Plan 2017-2021. The plan aims to address energy usage

and greenhouse gas emissions and energy efficiency. Tasmania has legislated a greenhouse gas

emissions reduction target of at least 60% below 1990 levels by 2050.

NH’s Environment Policy aims to minimize the use of natural resources, such as the energy

required to treat effluent. NH’s Climate Change and Energy Statement acknowledges that they

are an energy intensive industry and therefore energy efficiency is key to reducing GHG emissions

which is imperative to the sustainability of their business.


GHG generation (predominantly CO2) is associated with the energy use required for the operation

of the proposed Cellhouse, however, by replacing the existing Cellhouse with modern technology,

the site will see a more efficient use of input resources such as electricity. Tasmania is also a

hydro power generator.

With the improvement in power efficiency of the proposed Cellhouse, it is estimated that an

increased production of 300 ktpa will have a similar power demand as the existing production of

270 ktpa.

The proposed Cellhouse is a ‘conventional’ design, based on typical modern design philosophy

used in similar operations globally. The Cellhouse consists of two separate electrical units, each

providing 50% of the total 300,000 tpa capacity, operating at a density of 515 A/m2 over nominal

48-hour stripping cycles. With the improvement in power efficiency associated with the modern

installation, it is estimated that the production of 300,000 tpa of cathode zinc will require 2% more

power than is currently used to produce 280,000 tpa in the existing Cellhouse.

It is unlikely that there will be additional impacts during operation of the proposed Cellhouse

compared to the existing GHG profile.


Sourcing of hydro generated power (as per existing).

The design of this Proposal will use modern systems that that are more energy efficient than the

existing Cellhouse.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 111

NH reports its energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions to the Commonwealth

Government annually under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGER) Act 2007. It

also identifies areas for improvement through their Annual Environmental Report and triennially in

the Public Environmental Report.

NH estimates their emissions and waste transfers through the National Pollutant Inventory (NPI)

under the National Environment Protection (National Pollutant Inventory) Measure 1998.

GHG Scope 1 (direct) emissions relating to construction activities (fuel) will be calculated and

reported in the NH NGER report.


No net impacts identified with the Proposal in terms of greenhouse gases and ozone depleting

substances. Operation and maintenance are unlikely to increase direct and indirect greenhouse

gas emissions. Electricity is sourced from renewable sources, hydro-generated power. In addition,

the increase in production will be offsite by the decrease in voltage resulting in only a 2% increase

in power usage.

6.10 Socio-economic aspects


NH is locally and regionally significant and is integrally linked with its sister smelter Nyrstar Port

Pirie. Economically and socially the two sites need to be considered together because each would

be significantly challenged without the co-treatment of smelter by-products that occurs (refer 1.1).

NH spend $125 million annually in wages and $30 million in capital expenditure. It is estimated to

contribute 2.5% of the Gross State Product for Tasmania each year.

NH currently employs 473 employees and 155 contractors. Past analysis indicates that NH

generates five Tasmanian jobs for every full-time employee at the site. Once the proposed

Cellhouse is operational, the associated annual capital expenditure associated is expected to

decrease as no structural recovery works will be required.

The Hobart site was the original base-load consumer for the development of hydroelectricity in

Tasmania and it continues to be an energy-intensive business today.

NH has been part of the fabric of Tasmania since 1916, when it was identified that the site could

contribute to war efforts through the availability of mineral resources, a deep water port, and

access to hydro-electric power. NH indeed, ‘grew up’ with the hydro-electric schemes. In the

1920’s as demand and production increased, so did the workforce, and the expanding community

became an extension of site as the smelter’s housing scheme was constructed. The smelter

founded a co-operative council that provided supplies including firewood and meat at low cost to

employees along with an insurance scheme.

Whilst the workforce has decreased and smelter housing transferred to private ownership, NH

continues to contribute to the community and forged strong relationships through meetings, grants

and partnerships (refer 6.10.4).




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 112

Capital expenditure for the project is approximately $285 million. The construction workforce is

expected to peak at 200 people and the overall construction period is two years. During this period

there will be an increase in activity on site and an increase in demand for labour, accommodation

and associated socio-economic needs. At this this time NH is expecting to use local residential

labour for the construction period and limited use of Fly In Fly Out workers where specialist skills

or construction capacity cannot be resourced from within Tasmania.


There are no legislated performance requirements in relation to socioeconomic aspects, however

the following guidance and state strategies apply:

The Tasmanian mining and minerals sector is a key focus of the Tasmanian

Government’s strategy to drive economic growth and create sustainable jobs

(Department of Economic Development)

Mineral Resources Tasmania policies and principles of sustainable development of

mineral resources.

Premiers Economic and Social Recovery Advisory Panel that is seeking to consult

broadly on the ideas and strategies needed to grow from COVID-19 related economic

downturn.


There will be a significant temporary increase in indirect employment through the construction

period, which will require a workforce of 200 temporary construction jobs over the 24-30-month

construction period. There will also be additional temporary employment within the Project team

and during the period of commissioning where both the existing and proposed Cellhouses will be

operating concurrently.

Due to automation and reduction in maintenance and cleaning, the proposed Cellhouse would

result in a decrease in direct employment and contracted labour. The proposed Cellhouse is

expected to require eight dedicated staff on day shift and seven dedicated staff on night shift.

Cellhouse management is expected to be three staff. The proposed team comprises:

Operators for the control room, stripping machine / anode cleaning, cell cleaning and the

crane

Metallurgist

Team Leader

General relief staff as required.

The maintenance team is expected to be eight day shift staff and will utilise the existing shift

maintenance team for out of hours work.

Operations and maintenance will continue to require contracted and specialist staff but at a

reduced volume from the existing Cellhouse.

The primary impact the Proposal will have on local, State and National economies is through the

ongoing viability and sustainability of the operation, i.e. avoiding an otherwise adverse impact.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 113

The output of the proposed Cellhouse will increase production by 11%, resulting in an increase in

revenue over the long term.


To manage any future reduction in directly employed workers, Workforce Transition and Change

Management processes will be followed in accordance with relevant Enterprise Agreements to

minimise the impact on personnel. It should be noted that this reduction is significantly offset by

the extended safe and sustainable life of NH operations as a result of the proposed Cellhouse.

Where possible, NH will locally source raw materials and fabrication, creating indirect local

investment in plant, equipment, skills and training. This will be outlined in the Procurement Policy

for the execution of construction. NH will communicate and celebrate successful local partners

when procurement decisions have been made.

NH is committed to the continuation of community programs to provide education and training

opportunities which help to upskill resources from the local community including:

The Traineeships and Apprenticeships program, in several technical areas including

operators, electrical and mechanical trades

NH Graduate and Vacation Student programs to University leavers in mechanical and

electrical engineering, environmental management, metallurgy and business systems.

These programs have a focus on increasing the percentage of women and diversity within the

workforce.

NH is committed to the continued membership with the Derwent Estuary Program (DEP), of which

NH is a founding partner. The DEP is a highly successful and award winning 7F7F7F 7F

9 partnership between

state, and local government and industry to make the Derwent a world class asset by sharing

science for the benefit of nature, the economy and community. The State of the Derwent 2020

Update report summarised the many management actions taken over the past fifteen years which

include the implementation of major groundwater remediation and stormwater treatment projects

at NH8F8F8F8F

10. The report noted that metals continue to decline in water and surface sediments in the

middle of the estuary.

Continuation of community partnerships, including:

Naming rights sponsor for the Moonah Taste of the World festival since its inception over

10 years ago. The festival is outhern Tasmania’s largest multicultural event, celebrating the

rich cultural diversity of Southern Tasmania.

Stage sponsor for The Mind Games 2021, raising money for Menzies Centre mental health

research.

Charity campaign sponsorships. In 2020, NH raised over $7,500 for Movember, supporting

mens’ health and over $8,400 for Stay Chatty, that supports mental health and suicide

prevention.

9 National River Prize 2010. 10 https://www.derwentestuary.org.au/news/state-of-the-derwent-2020-update/




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 114

Partnership with Big hART (Australia’s leading Social Change and Arts organisation) and

North West Support Services to create ‘The Acoustic Life of Zinc’ that was shown in

Launceston, Hobart and onsite at NH as part of MONA Mona Foma festival in January

20219F9F9F9F

11. This work captures the hidden world and social value of the Nyrstar Zinc Works

resulting in an exhibition of sound and image. The partnership has engaged artists and

mentors to develop creative materials in response to the site. North West Support Services

acts as the conduit to project artists living with disabilities who are central to the artistic

development.

School Programs; NH engage with local high school, college and university students

through plant tours and visits to schools. In addition, in 2020 large amounts of glassware

from the science labs was donated to schools for students.

NH is nothing without our community. They are our employees, our contractors, and our customers

through the zinc bearing products they buy. We will continue to give back to the community

throughout the construction and operational phase of the proposed Cellhouse.


Positive net socio-economic impacts are expected from the construction and operation of the

proposed Cellhouse. This extends the safe and sustainable life of a site that is locally and

Regionally significant, and has supported the Tasmanian community through employment, local

manufacturing and sourcing, and social partnerships. The positive socio-economic impacts are

further enhanced by the improvements in environmental management of current site impacts.

6.11 Hazard analysis and risk assessment This section of the EIS relates to the hazards associated with operation of the proposed Cellhouse,

and potential for a major event that may cause impacts to the environment and the proposed

mitigations and recovery strategies should this occur. Construction hazards are included in the

CEMP.

Current emergency preparedness and response capabilities are detailed to demonstrate the NH

capacity to mitigate on or offsite environmental harm should an incident occur. Non-emergency

environmental emissions, their risks, and control measures are discussed throughout Section 6.

6.11.1 Current Emergency Preparedness and Response capabilities

NH have mature Emergency and Crisis Management Systems to ensure preparedness and

response capabilities. This includes:

Dedicated Emergency Response Officers (ERO) rostered 24 hours a day 7 days per week

Fire detection, deluge systems and fire extinguishers throughout the plant

Spill response capabilities throughout the plant and an additional mobile Spill Kit Trailor

Emergency Management Plan

11 . https://mofo.net.au/program/launceston/zinc-at-duckreach https://mofo.net.au/program/hobart/zinc




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 115

Crisis Management Plan and associated Incident Control Centre that can be activated in

the event that an emergency constitutes a crisis

MHF Safety Case and Major Incident controls and response plans for major release of

Schedule 15 substances

Duty Manager and Incident Controllers trained and on shift

Incident Response Scenarios that outline the actions to address plausible scenarios

Critical controls throughout the plant to prevent or detect emissions to air or stormwater

systems (e.g. drain monitoring to detect contaminated flows to CWP, continuous SO2

monitoring with automated actuation of valves)

Site drainage and stormwater treatment system to contain flows, and NH Storm Event

Strategy for major rainfall events to prevent discharge of untreated site stormwaters.

NH is a licensed Major Hazard Facility (MHF) under Regulation 535 of the Work Health and Safety

Regulations 2012 and this requires ongoing demonstration of emergency and major incident

response capabilities.

6.11.2 Evaluation of hazards

Table 6-24 summarises the anticipated hazards associated with proposed Cellhouse once

commissioned. A risk assessment relating to the construction will be included within a CEMP or

similar.

This assessment has been conducted in accordance with the NH Safety, Health and Environment

Risk Standard, which aligns with the Group’s ISO14001:2015 requirements. Risk rating has been

conducted using the matrix and descriptors shown in Table 6-21.


Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd Project Management ReportProposed Cellhouse Environment Sustainability and Community Interface Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 116

Table 6-21: Risk Assessment Descriptors and Matrix



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 117

Hazard assessment is made for the inherent (uncontrolled) risk, and residual (controlled) risk. Importantly

NH assess control effectiveness to ensure risk is managed to As Low As Reasonably Practicable.

Controls are selected based on the Hierarchy of Controls and residual Control Effectiveness (CE) is rated

using the guide in Table 6-22.

Table 6-22: Control Effectiveness Criteria

Descriptor Guide

Fully effective Nothing more to be done except review and monitor the existing controls. Controls are well designed for the risk, address the root causes and Management believes that they are effective and reliable at all times.

Substantially effective

Most controls are designed correctly and are in place and effective. Some more work to be done to improve operating effectiveness or Management has doubts about operational effectiveness and reliability.

Partially effective While the design of controls may be largely correct in that they treat most of the root causes of the risk, they are not currently very effective.

or

Some of the controls do not seem correctly designed in that they do not treat root causes, those that are correctly designed are operating effectively.

Largely ineffective Significant control gaps. Either controls do not treat root causes, or they do not operate at all effectively.

None or totally ineffective

Virtually no credible control. Management has no confidence that any degree of control is being achieved due to poor control design and / or very limited operational effectiveness.

Based on Control Effectiveness, the risk is prioritised and the seniority of management sign-off for

continued tolerance of risks is shown in Table 6-23. Authority is required if the action is not taken within

the time suggested.

Table 6-23: Authority for continued tolerance of risk

The assessment of environmental risks associated with the project has been informed by a review of

the existing, documented risks associated with the operational electrolysis plant as well as an

assessment of the risks projected to be present following the development and commissioning of the

proposed plant.

Priority Suggested action Suggested timing Authority for continued

tolerance of residual risk

Very High

Where CE not as high as ‘fully effective’, take action to reduce residual risk to “high” or below.

Short term. Normally within 1 month.

Plant Manager

High Plan to deal with in keeping with the business plan.

Medium term. Normally within 3 months.

Plant Manager

Medium Plan in keeping with all other priorities.

Normally within 1 year. Manager

Low Attend to when there is an opportunity to.

Ongoing control as part of a management system.

Superintendent



Management


HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 118

Environmental hazards related to atmospheric and noise emissions from the proposed Cellhouse

have been evaluated using modelling, and the impact and associated controls are outlined in

Sections 6.1 and 6.4.

Contaminated soil or groundwater posing an unacceptable level of risk to human health or the

surrounding environment during the construction phase of the project is an identified construction

hazard. The controls for this hazard will be detailed and managed through the development and

implementation of a CEMP.

Based on the assessment in Table 6-24 of potential scenarios and the suitability of existing

emergency preparedness and response, no additional avoidance or mitigation measures are

proposed. Specific Emergency Management Plans will be added to the Emergency Management

Plan for scenarios rated High and above.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 119

Table 6-24 Proposed Cellhouse Operational Hazard Evaluation

Risk What could happen How could it happen Initial Con.

Initial L/Hood

Initial Risk

Control Title Cont. Eff.

Res Cons.

Res L/Hood

Res Risk

Spills of feed or spent process liquors within the Cellhouse, resulting in groundwater contamination

Spilt solution infiltrates to groundwater. There is the potential for off-site migration of contaminated stormwater/groundwater to the adjacent Derwent Estuary.

Spill of process liquors from the Cellhouse operating floor, falling through the open grated flooring. Flooring must be grated to prevent liquid pooling within cell room, which may present as an electrical arcing hazard

4 F VH

Cathodes/Anodes handled with care to prevent splashing PE

3 D Medium

Electrodes to drip over cell to reduce drips falling off during handling, Cell cranes will have drip-trays to capture any liquor losses from anodes and cathodes

PE

Basement sealed with purpose-built solution/acid resistant materials to prevent penetration of spills to ground

FE

Collection sump within basement bunding to provide effective drainage FE

Sumps to be plumbed into site drainage system for resource recovery FE

Sumps to contain dedicated automated pumps to maintain optimal capacity with sump/bunds. FE

Site monitoring well network to be scrutinised for contaminant trends PE

Basement of newly constructed cell room to be maintained to ensure accumulation of process liquors is minimised. Cellhouse to be fully bunded.

SE

Standard Operating Procedures utilised to identify and manage leaks and spills PE Work Area Safety Inspections (WASI) to be performed monthly to identify potential improvements or areas requiring attention.

PE

Ongoing maintenance of cells to reduce likelihood of spills PE

Closed site drainage system to capture any overflow from basement bunding, and provide diversion to the Effluent Treatment Plant, via the Contaminated Water Ponds

PE

Catastrophic failure of spent/feed solution storage tanks

Solution tanks may catastrophically fail, allowing solution to report to the Derwent estuary via surface flows or via groundwater movement. Contaminants may reach groundwater via soaking into unsealed ground. During the transit to the water table, the spilt solution will contaminate soil within both the vadose and saturated zone.

Operational nature of use may lead to eventual: - Corrosion; or UV Degradation Accidental or unplanned mechanical failure may result in: - Vehicle impact on storage tank - Dropped objects on tanks

3 D Medium

Tank constructed with material suitable for the storage of spent solution SE

3 B Medium

Scheduled non-destructive testing conducted to determine storage tank wall thickness. Testing results will assist with the ongoing monitoring of vessel integrity

SE

Feed solution tanks bunded SE

Tank reinforcement banding/mesh webbing, aiding structural integrity of primary containment vessel

PE

Closed site drainage system to capture surge flows and divert to Effluent Treatment Plant, via the Contaminated Water Ponds

PE

Scheduled tank cleaning to ensure inner surfaces of tanks are capable of being assessed for integrity without sulphate build-up obscuring view

PE

Work Area Safety Inspections (WASI) to intermittently check condition of storage tanks to identify indicators of imminent tank failure

PE

Emergency response procedure HP-858-03694 DSE 9 - LOC of Zinc Sulphate Solution PE

Spent solution tanks up topographical gradient of roadways containing collection points for the site closed drainage system

LI

Automated alarms to operate in the event of catastrophic failure. LI

Failure of spent/feed solution plumbing, including pipework and launders.

Liquid overflows or drains from primary containment (plumbing) and spills to ground, allowing solution to report to the Derwent estuary via surface flows or via groundwater movement. Contaminants may reach groundwater via soaking into unsealed ground.

Operational nature of use may lead to eventual: - Corrosion; - Accumulation of precipitant; or - UV Degradation Accidental or unplanned mechanical failure may result in:

3 E High

Launders and pipework constructed of material compatible with process liquors SE

2 D Medium

Traffic barriers in place between some plumbing and trafficable areas SE

Where possible, plumbing to be located in areas isolated from traffic flows, such as above/below floor level.

SE

Automatic pump shut-off function to prevent continual overflow SE

Closed site drainage system to capture bund overflows and divert to Effluent Treatment Plant, via the Contaminated Water Ponds

PE

Pressure drop activates automated text message alert system, ensuring prompt response to failure

PE




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 120

Risk What could happen How could it happen Initial Con.

Initial L/Hood

Initial Risk

Control Title Cont. Eff.

Res Cons.

Res L/Hood

Res Risk

During the transit to the water table, the spilt solution will contaminate soil within both the vadose and saturated zone.

- Vehicle impact on containment lines - Dropped objects on containment lines - Pump overpressure - Joint failure (Incorrect maintenance) - Instrument failure

Work Area Safety Inspections (WASI) to intermittently check condition of plumbing to identify indicators of imminent line failure

PE

Planned monitoring and maintenance PE

Bunding below and surrounding some plumbing assets PE/ LI

Surrounding area predominantly sealed, diverting some spillage to the site closed drainage system

PE/ LI

Structural failure causing loss of spent/feed solution

Failure would lead to the loss of primary containment within solution plumbing network. Such a spill will allow solution to report to the Derwent estuary via surface flows or via groundwater movement. Contaminants may reach groundwater via soaking into unsealed ground. During the transit to the water table, the spilt solution will contaminate soil within both the vadose and saturated zone.

Failure would most likely be initiated by corrosion of structure, perpetuated by leaks of process liquors

3 D Medium

Structural design to conform to Australian Standards to ensure stability and integrity FE

1 A Low

Preventative maintenance work undertaken by dedicated Electrolysis Maintenance team. SE

Building to be constructed from materials suitable for operating environment SE

Sealed and bunded basement below cell room will act as primary containment, should major loss occur

SE

Closed site drainage system to capture solution overflows and divert to Effluent Treatment Plant, via the Contaminated Water Ponds

PE

Work Area Safety Inspections (WASI) completed monthly to intermittently check condition of asset to identify indicators of imminent failure

PE/ LI

Spills and leaks of solution to be minimised PE/ LI

Storage of cathode zinc leading to ground contamination

Storage of cathode zinc on open ground could lead to contamination of the soil profile or the Derwent estuary via surface flows or via groundwater movement.

Spent solution could wash from cathode zinc stored on unsealed ground.

3 D Medium

Ensure continual operation of Casting Plant to prevent excessive cathode zinc stockpiling SE

1 C Low

Cathodes will be spray washed when removed from cells for stripping SE

Second preference storage within enclosed areas to minimise rainfall onto cathode zinc PE

Closed site drainage system to capture dilute spent solution and divert to Effluent Treatment Plant, via the Contaminated Water Ponds

PE

Loss of lead anode h.p. cleaning water to ground

Water used in the cleaning of lead anodes leading to contamination of the soil profile or the Derwent estuary via surface flows or via groundwater movement.

Blasting (cleaning/scrubbing) of anodes in uncontrolled area, or loss of containment within dedicated area.

3 D Medium

Blasting of anodes only to occur within dedicated area, within the containment sump FE

1 C Low

Controlled use of anodes to minimise the number of anodes needing to be blasted, or reduce the amount of blasting required

PE

Sump drains to closed site drainage system, leading to the Effluent Treatment Plant, via the Contaminated Water Ponds.

PE

Bunded area contains a sump FE

Sump maintained in good condition FE

Sump intermittently pumped out to remove solids PE

Spillage of biocide used for Electrolysis Cooling Tower dosing resulting in impact to surface water and soil

Rupture of storage vessel Degradation of plastic vessel wall, or via vehicle impact

2 C Low

Storage to container in non-trafficable area SE

2 B Low Periodic servicing of dosing system by GE Betz SE

Bunded chemical storage SE

Chemical stored in suitable container SE




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 121

6.12 Fire risk As the site is surrounded by residential and other heavy industrial sites on one side, and a

waterway on the other, the associated fire risk consequence is low. According to the

Tasmanian publicly available fire mapping, the last recorded planned burn was in 2018 in

Porter Bay (the reserve area across the Derwent River from the site), which successfully

burnt 75% of fuels in the reserve.

The proposed Cellhouse is a fully enclosed concrete framed, with steel polymer resign

coated purlins (fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) purlins are being considered) and metal

resign coated cladding, building. The floor between the cell floor and the basement is

concrete, and walkways within the building will be FRP.

The main potential fire scenarios associated with the proposed Cellhouse are:

Fire resulting from an ignition source coming in contact with the dry polymer coating of

cells or structural components or the FRP walkways and piping. This is most likely to

occur during maintenance activities when the system is offline, dry and hot work is

being conducted within the building.

An electrical component / wiring fire could occur due to the malfunctioning of the

electrical equipment such as overloading, short circuit or electric arc.

Grouped HV electrical cables within the cable tunnel or on a cable tray could ignite due

to a cable fault, electrical overload, or the loss of insulation cause by mechanical impact

or wear.

A small hole or loose fitting in the high pressure hydraulic lines from the hydraulic oil

units for the cathode stripping machines, cranes and anode cleaning may result in the

loss of containment of the hydraulic oil and form an oil mist. Depending upon the time

until ignition and the droplet size of the mist, this could result in a flash fire or mist

explosion.

A loss of containment of the hydraulic oil could result in a combustible oil pool. If the

pool comes in contact with an ignition source a pool fire will result.

Electrical fire associated with the overhead cranes.

Should a fire occur, it would be responded to using existing NH emergency preparedness

and response capabilities are outlined in 6.11.1.


Improvement is expected in net impacts from fire due to the installation of enclosed and

modern rectiformers, use of modern fire resistant components that are compliant with

current fire standards, and by relocation of operations into a steel and concrete structure

thereby reducing the consequence of fires. There are no additional fire risks created by the

construction or operation of the proposed Cellhouse. All construction fire risks associated

with hot works are controllable through the existing site DHW processes.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 122

6.13 Infrastructure and off-site ancillary facilities This proposal does not require any changes to, or construction of, offsite and ancillary

infrastructure.

The existing site is connected to an external power supply, potable water supply, and town

sewage removal system. Rubbish removal from site is completed by licenced waste

removal companies and disposed of in a licensed landfill.

There is a configuration change required in the power supply to the site, which is detailed

in Section 2.2.5 to cater for the site demand. This will be located within the NH and

TasNetworks site and be constructed as a part of this project. Discussions with

TasNetworks have commenced in relation to this change.

There will be an increased volume of traffic during construction, however this will not result

in changes to offsite infrastructure and will be within the capabilities of the existing

infrastructure.

6.14 Environmental Management Systems NH’s key environmental objective is to ‘operate our business in an environmentally

responsible way by preventing harm to the environment and the community’. NH has an

integrated management system which ensures all levels of the organisation are aware of

and accountable for safety, health, environment and quality management. NH has achieved

accreditation to the international standards ISO 14001:2015 – Environmental Management

Systems and has a site-specific EMS that is applicable to all areas of the organisation.

Nyrstar (Global) has an environmental policy that applies to the NH site. The policy includes

the business context, what NH hopes to achieve with the policy, and outlines how NH plans

to fulfil commitments made in the policy. A copy of this policy is included as Figure 6-15.

NH maintains an environmental aspects and impacts register which relates to all existing

and historical activities on site. The register fulfils requirements for identification of aspects

and impacts as well as risk and has been verified through external audit as part of

ISO14001:2015 certification. This register is continuously reviewed, updated and new risks

are added as they are identified. The risk register is held in the site’s Risk Information

Management System (RIMS) database, which is routinely reviewed to ensure the currency

of information. During the construction and operation of the proposed Cellhouse, the

aspects and impacts register will be updated and revised to account for new risks.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 123

Figure 6-15: Environmental Policy




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 124

NH also maintains a site business plan which includes details of NH’s environmental

objectives and targets and monitors progress towards these. In addition, environmental

performance is reported to the EPA each year in the form of the Annual Environment Report

and triennially in the Public Environmental Report. A CEMP will be developed to support

the Project.

Top management at Nyrstar demonstrate leadership and commitment with respect to the

environmental management system through a number of channels. These include but are

not limited to:

The implementation of the Environmental Policy (Figure 6-15)

Establishing environmental objectives and tracking of those objectives through weekly

and monthly internal NH reporting, and monthly reporting to the Nyrstar Corporate

group

Establishment of a specialist environment team, whose responsibility includes the

continual improvement of the environmental management system

Ensuring the integration of the environmental management system requirements into

the business process through the implementation of tools, systems, equipment, training

etc. Examples include; risk assessment tools, emergency management tools,

environmental incident and hazard reporting tools, a document management system

Enabling open discussion on environmental issues at a fortnightly extended leadership

team meeting

Assigning the responsibility and authority for the EMS to the SHEQ Manager and the

Environment Principal through specific position descriptions.

NH uses a number of tools to ensure competence, training and awareness of their staff and

contractors. This includes:

A site induction, to familiarise all employees with plant, site policies and environmental

responsibilities (including environmental incident management)

Departmental inductions, to cover environmental aspects and impacts specific to

operating departments

Contractor site work conditions, to outline contractor obligations in relation to the

Environmental policy, EMS, waste management, materials movement, emissions and

incident reporting

Emergency response officers, personnel trained in responding to incidents that may

have an environmental impact

Training and assessment guides, to ensure competency of all employees and

contractors

Standard operating procedures, to include environmental aspects and potential impacts

from operating parts of the plant




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 125

Job Safety and Environment Analysis, to assess environmental risk to all tasks.

The operation of the proposed Cellhouse will be managed under the existing EMS and

operating procedures, and all contractors and new employees will be inducted and

familiarised with the EMS as part of the onboarding process.

6.15 Cumulative and interactive impacts All elements of this Proposal are located within the NH site, in areas which have been

previously disturbed.

The impact profile associated with this proposal are well known to NH and are the same as

the existing development on the site. They will be managed using the existing

environmental management and monitoring systems on site.

There is no other proposal or approved developments within the site which would

compound the existing impact profile. There is no other known developments in the

surrounding area which would result in cumulative or interactive impacts on the proposal.

6.16 Environmental Impacts of Traffic The Project site will be accessible via public roads, and deliveries during construction and

operation will be made along these routes. This section describes the volume and nature

of traffic flows and the indirect impacts on public roads. The internal NH roads within the

proposal area are within the site boundaries and will also be amended as a part of this

Proposal. This relocation will be completed as a part of early works. The full traffic

assessment has been provided as an annexure to this document.

The main route for the majority of vehicles accessing NH is via Risdon Road. As the Brooker

Highway is the closest most accessible state road, the route along Risdon Road from the

Brooker Highway traffic signals is the most efficient and principal route to NH. Some heavy

vehicles, such as the trucks carting zinc utilise the Derwent Park Road entrance to the site.

The use of the NH wharf as a First Point of Entry (FPoE) for the delivery of construction

materials and equipment is currently under consideration and has not been finalised.

Additional biosecurity measures and subsequent authorisation as per the Commonwealth

Biosecurity Act 2015, and the Tasmanian Plant Quarantine Act 1997 will be put in place if

international deliveries are to be accepted through this facility.

6.16.1 Current Traffic Conditions

NH operates a 24 hour, 7 days a week operation with two 12-hour shifts that commence at

7am and 7pm. The base case which has been used for this assessment is as follows:

The site employs 473 permanent employees

155 contractors are employed on a part time basis

286 permanent employees are shift workers working a four-day roster. As a result of

the shift workers 140 trips are due to shift changeover which occurs twice a day

187 non-shift employees (day work) commute within the periods between 7am to 9am,

and 3pm to 5pm.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 126

A trip is defined as a one-way vehicular movement from one point to another excluding the

return journey. Therefore, a return trip to and from a land use is counted as two trips. This

data is presented in Table 6-25.

Table 6-25: Estimated Existing Peak Hour Trips

Employee Total

Weekday

Trips

Morning Period Afternoon Period

6-7 am 7-8 am 8-9 am 3-4 pm 4-5 pm 5-6 pm 6-7 pm

Shift workers

280 70 70 70 70

Day workers

370 90 95 135 30 20

Contractors 310 30 80 45 120 35

Cleaners 60 10 10 10 10 10 10

Total 1020 110 250 150 265 75 100 70

A traffic survey of the existing flows on Risdon Road was undertaken on 22 September

2020 to quantify the existing traffic flows operating along Risdon Road. Results indicated

two peaks, both associated with the change in shift at NH, occurring between 6:45am to

7:45am and a second between 7:45 am to 8:45am.

During the first peak period, 297 traffic movements were recorded north of Lennox Avenue.

The second peak period was a result of residential traffic on the daily work commute. On

average, 60% of traffic went along Risdon Road and accessed Brooker Highway, and the

remaining 40% use Lennox Avenue to access the highway.

The traffic survey confirmed that trips generated by the existing NH site occurs over multiple

hours and peaks at 250 to 280 trips per hour. The survey revealed most of these trips used

Risdon Road as their preferred route.

The residential catchment of Lutana results in commuter traffic at the second peak at the

junction of Risdon Road and Lennox Avenue between 7:45am and 8:45am. The afternoon

survey also found the volume of traffic north of Lennox Avenue along Risdon Road was

considerably higher from 3pm to 4pm.

The level of traffic efficiency was determined to identify the current level of service for road

users. Level of service is a quantitative measurement that considers volume of traffic,

geometric features, traffic interruptions, delays, and freedom to manoeuvre. Based on the

assessment, it is apparent that Risdon Road operates at an efficiency level of service B

and C at peak periods. This identifies that the route has ample capacity and the capacity to

accommodate additional traffic flows.

Construction materials and equipment for the Cellhouse construction will be transported to

the site by road and potentially river. The expected transportation loads are projected to

include 140 light vehicle morning and afternoon trips and 350 heavy vehicle movements.

The Derwent Park Road from the Brooker Highway to the NH property is gazetted and is

identified as a B-Double route. Therefore, this route will be used for heavy vehicle loads




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 127

during this construction phase of the Proposal. Expected traffic will include approximately

350 equipment loads, 450 truck deliveries (including concrete trucks, cranes and frannas),

and any over-mass or over-dimensional load. Should the wharf be approved as a FPoE for

containerised cargo, that majority of the construction equipment will arrive via ship in 40 ft

shipping containers. These transportation movements are expected to occur over an 18 to

24-month period

Once operational, traffic volumes are expected to be similar to levels which are currently

seen in the area and there are no expected changes to traffic movements.

6.16.2 Construction Traffic Conditions

For analysis purposes, the worst case has been assumed where all the additional building

contractors could arrive and leave within a single one-hour period. It is expected that the

trips generated by additional building contractors will occur between 7am and 4pm

weekdays. The additional 140 morning and afternoon trips have been assigned to the

Risdon Road and Lennox Avenue junction and modelled using Sidra software. It was

assumed that 90% of the traffic using Risdon Road originated from Brooker Highway route.

The traffic modelling indicated the additional trips will have no adverse impact to the traffic

flow or the performance of the Lennox Avenue junction. Motorists using the Lennox Avenue

junction will continue to receive the highest level of performance possible for a controlled

junction.

The development site has 394 parking spaces available for existing employees. During

weekdays most of these spaces are occupied. Additional construction contractors will

generate the requirement for an additional 180 vehicles during the peak construction

period.

During operations, traffic volumes are expected to be similar to levels which are currently

seen in the area and there are no expected material changes to traffic movements. Some

reductions in routine movements are anticipated following commissioning due to the

significant reduction in maintenance works currently required for the existing facility.


The Traffic Impact Assessment undertaken in December 2020 was prepared ensuring the

requirements of the following documents were satisfied:

Austroads, Guide to Traffic Management Part 12: Traffic Impacts of Developments

(2019)

Glenorchy City Council Interim Planning Scheme

Australian Standards 2890

Road Traffic Authority NSW (RTA) Guide to Traffic Generating Developments.

The Glenorchy City Council Interim Planning Scheme specifies that ‘the intensification of

use to create additional traffic movements that exceed 20% or 40 traffic movements per

day, whichever is the greater, must be addressed and further management provided.’ The

traffic performance assessment against the performance criteria is listed in Table 6-26.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 128

Table 6-26: Traffic Assessment against Performance Criteria

Performance Criteria

Assessment

To ensure that the safety of road and rail infrastructure is not reduced by the creation of new accesses and junctions or increased use of existing accesses and junctions.

The increase in traffic caused by the use.

The Cellhouse Proposal is expected to generate an additional 200 building contractors at peak construction, that could generate an additional 340 weekday traffic movements. This represents a 27 percent increase in the number of traffic movements per weekday, with the Proposal’s timeframe anticipated at 18 to 24 months.

The nature of the traffic generated by the use.

The majority of additional traffic movements are expected to be construction vehicles, such as utes and small vans using Risdon Road. These types of vehicles are compatible with the vehicles currently using this road.

The nature and efficiency of the access or the junction.

The access into NH is a large radius roundabout and provides for very-efficient traffic flow. The additional traffic movements from the Proposal will not cause any congestion, traffic, or operational deficiencies.

The nature and category of the Road.

Risdon Road connects the development site with the Brooker Highway, and within the surrounding road network operates as an urban collector road, carrying both residential and commercial traffic. The type of additional traffic will be suitable for the current function and role of Risdon Road.

The speed limit and traffic flow of the road.

Majority of the route is signed with a 50 km/h speed limit, with one short section posted with a 60 km/h speed limit. The existing and predicted traffic flow has been modelled using a highly recognise software package (SIDRA 8 Intersection), and the additional traffic movements is not expected to create any adverse safety or transport efficiencies.

Any alternative access.

Risdon Road is the preferred route for the temporary building contractor employees, while the Derwent Park Road route will be used for heavy vehicle tasks. This split of transport tasks between the two routes is considered the most effective approach.

Heavy vehicle access requirements, as outlined by the Tasmanian Government Transport

Services section, will be applied to all relevant traffic movements.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 129

6.16.4 Potential Impacts

This Proposal is expected to create a temporary increase in traffic movements along Risdon

Road, and create a short-term parking demand during the construction period. Additional

traffic generated from this Proposal is not expected to create any adverse safety, amenity,

or traffic efficiency problems to the wider area. This is due to:

The amount of traffic generated being relatively low in relation to road capacity and

existing use, and there is sufficient capacity within the existing road network to absorb

the extra traffic movements

All traffic movements to and from site will be on established roads, and no unpaved

roads

Traffic modelling of the expected increase in traffic movements identified no adverse

traffic efficiency impacts to existing road users

Heavy vehicle movements will be along Derwent Park Road, with an average increase

of four daily trips

Most additional building contractor traffic movements are expected to occur on

weekdays between 7am and 4pm and are not expected to create any adverse amenity

to residential properties

The roundabout located at the NH entrance to allow vehicles to turn around safely with

sufficient road width ensuring the parked vehicles will not impede traffic efficiency.

This Traffic Impact Assessment, including traffic modelling, identified no detrimental short

or long-term impacts on traffic movements, parking or other related traffic effects to the

surrounding area.

As detailed in the impact assessment, there will be changed traffic movements during the

execution of the proposal which include:

Requirement for additional parking

Increased heavy vehicle movement

Changes to peak hour traffic due to early start of construction contractors.

These will be managed through the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)

which will outline management measures for traffic, and this will be regularly reviewed to

check for compliance and efficacy during the construction period.

During operations, there will be a decrease in vehicles, such as cranes, which are required

for the ongoing maintenance works required for the existing Cellhouse.


Taking in to account the existing traffic loading, a CEMP will outline the management

measures for traffic and will be developed to ensure that construction traffic does not

impede movement on the public roads around the site.

Measures which will be outlined in this plan will include the following:




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 130

Installing additional temporary parking spaces to meet the expected peak demand and

cause no overspill to the council public street network

Install temporary short-term parking spaces

Using Derwent Park Road for heavy vehicle deliveries and installing an entry system to

ensure that workers are not waiting to enter site on public roads.


There are no net traffic impacts anticipated during operation of the proposed Cellhouse.

There is potential for localised traffic impacts during construction due to additional light and

heavy vehicle movements. The proposed mitigations and management measures will

remain a high focus throughout construction to avoid community complaints or traffic

incidents.

7. Monitoring and Review

7.1 Monitoring Programs Details of the monitoring programs in place at the site have been included throughout this

document. A map to the relevant sections of the document, for each identified

environmental aspect is included in Table 7-1. It is important to note that the existing

operational monitoring completed on site will continue through the construction period.

Once commissioned, the proposed facility will be included in the existing monitoring

programs where required, and the associated operational management plans and

strategies will be updated to reflect this operational change. The locations of monitoring

points across the site, and surrounding suburbs, are detailed in Figure 6-1, Figure 6-3,

Figure 6-9, Figure 6-10 and Figure 6-11.

During construction, the effectiveness of environmental protection measures shall be

assessed periodically by the construction contractors during their regular inspections. The

purpose of the inspections is to:

Provide an observation tool to ensure that environmental mitigation measures are

being implemented

Identify where non-compliance may occur

Identify where sound environmental practices are not being implemented

Facilitate the identification and early resolution of non-compliances.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 131

Ver: 04.03

Table 7-1: Document Roadmap

Aspect Performance Standard Section Reference Monitoring During Construction only Ongoing Monitoring

Air Quality Refer to section 6.1.2

Refer to sections 6.1.4 and 6.1.5. Refer to section 6.1.2

Water Quality Refer to section 6.2.2. Refer to sections 6.2.3 and 6.2.4. Refer to section 6.2.2.

Groundwater Refer to section 6.3.2 Refer to sections 6.3.3 and 6.3.4. Refer to section 6.3.2

Noise Refer to section 6.4.2. Refer to sections 6.4.3 and 6.4.4. Refer to section 6.4.2.

Waste Refer to section 6.5.1.

Refer to sections 6.5.2 and 6.5.3. Refer to section 6.5.1.

Dangerous Goods Refer to section 6.6.2. Refer to sections 6.6.3 and 6.6.4. Inspections of dangerous goods and hazardous chemical storage areas.

Review of groundwater monitoring data.

Flora and Fauna Refer to section 6.7.2. Refer to sections 6.7.3 and 6.7.4. Inspections of areas and removal of fauna as required and reported to the environmental department.

Marine and Coastal Refer to section 6.8.2. Refer section 6.8.2.

Greenhouse Gases and Ozone Depleting Substances

Requirements for reporting under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act.

Annual reporting submitted for the NGER and National Pollutant Inventory requirements

Traffic Limit, or avoid where possible, adverse safety, amenity, or traffic efficiency problems to the wider area

Monitoring program to be detailed in the CEMP. This should include the development of a documented traffic management plan, and regular inspection to confirm its implementation.

No change to the existing infrastructure, which is in place, no ongoing monitoring.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 132

A full list of monitoring locations including their ID, geographic coordinates and the type of

monitoring completed in these locations can be found in Appendix C.

7.2 Review and Reporting

7.2.1 Construction

The CEMP for the construction of the Proposal will describe the monitoring and reporting

requirements for the execution of the Proposal.

Generally, this will require the documentation of visual inspections which are undertaken

as per Section 7.1. These would be prepared by the construction contractors and provided

to NH monthly in the form of monthly environmental reports.

At a minimum, the structure of the CEMP structure will include the following:

EMP Objectives;

Regulatory and Corporate Framework;

Project Activities;

Environmental Management Framework;

Environmental Aspects and Impacts;

i. Air quality

ii. Erosion and sediment Control

iii. Groundwater

iv. Surface water

v. Noise

vi. Flora and Fauna

vii. Traffic Management

viii. Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Goods

ix. Waste Management

Environmental Management Requirements, and

Roles & Responsibilities.

Training

Any potential for non-compliance and the associated corrective actions will be reported via

the existing RIMS software platform for daily review.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 133

7.2.2 Operations

As the site will be operational during the construction period, the following review and

reporting obligations will be ongoing throughout the Proposal and will include details from

the construction works.

The main reporting and review document which is completed is the Annual Environmental

Review. This report is developed in the first quarter of each calendar year and describes

the environmental performance of the site during the previous year.

As a new permit will be issued for the proposed Cellhouse, reporting under the proposed

permit will be limited to the proposed Cellhouse operations only. Based on the conditions

within the existing permit, it is expected that the reporting will cover the following items:

A list of all complaints received during the year associated with the proposed

Cellhouse, and the actions to address these complaints. All community consultation

relating to the proposed Cellhouse will be is documented.

Details of any environmentally related changes in process or procedures.

A detailed summary of the solid and liquid wastes generated during the year,

including the management and disposal of these waste materials.

Details of environmental incidents which occurred, and the associated corrective

actions which were taken.

A summary of all monitoring data which was gathered during the year, including

interpretation and explanation of the data, and corrective actions which are being

undertaken should the data indicate that action is required.

Lists of any breaches of the permit or significant variations from predicted results,

including the cause of the variation.

Other environmental issues which have not been previously discussed in the review

Details around how NH fulfilled their environmental commitments over the reporting

period.

Table 7-2 below details those reporting commitments specified within the current permit

(EPN 7043/5) that are expected to encompass aspects of the proposed Cellhouse




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 134

Table 7-2: Reporting and Review Commitments

Report Description Evidence

Complaints Register This is held within the RIMS database, and records the details of each complaint, and the associated actions which were undertaken to investigation and resolve the complaint.

RIMS records, kept for at least three years

Assessment of Site Contamination Report (ASCR)

This report describes the results of a detailed contaminated site assessment in accordance with NEPM requirements. It indicates if there has been a change in the contamination profile over the previous 3 years.

ASCR completed every three years

Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Scope of Works (DRSCW)

After the ASCR is completed, the findings of the assessment as used to review and update the scope of works. This is to make sure that the DRSCW addresses the existing contamination profile of the site.

DRSCW update after the completion of an ASCR

Groundwater Management Plan Includes details of the previous 3 years of groundwater management works and sets out a plan for the subsequent 3 years.

Groundwater Management Plan completed every three years

Inventory of Hazardous Material The location and maximum quantities of these materials must be listed in an inventory. This must also include current Safety Data Sheets for each material.

ChemAlert Database

Noise Survey Report

This describes the method used to complete a noise survey across the site. It outlines the areas where noise measurements were obtained, how they were obtained and the associated results.

Noise Survey Report every three years.

Notification of Incidents In the event of a notifiable environmental incident, NH is required to communicate with the Director of the EPA via a 24-hour emergency notification telephone number.

Email confirmation

Emergency Release report

In the event of a storm event resulting in a discharge of potential contaminated stormwater from the site, NH is required to complete a reporting outlining the event, the time and date of the discharge, and the results of the grab samples which was taken. This report should include any corrective actions which will be implemented in relation to stormwater management.

Emergency Release Report when required

7.3 Incidents and Complaints In the event of an incident, serious non-compliance or complaint, the existing NH system

for incident investigation, management and complaints will be followed. NH will take all

reasonable and practicable action to minimise any adverse environmental effects from the

incident.

The existing Safety, Health, Environmental and Community Management Framework

outlines the minimum requirements which are applied to all Nyrstar sites, and ensures that

all events are recorded, investigated, and corrective actions are developed and

implemented where required.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 135

8. Decommissioning and Rehabilitation

Currently the site has a Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan consistent with the

Strategic Framework for Mine Closure (ANZMEC/MCA 2000). This plan relates to the

ultimate closure of the NH site. Some revisions to this plan may be required following

demolition of the existing Cellhouse. Demolition of the existing Cellhouse will follow

establishment of the proposed facility and will be the subject of a subsequent demolition

permit application to GCC and consultation with EPA when it reaches the end of its

operational life.

This section outlines the relevant steps which will be applied to the decommissioning and

rehabilitation of the overall site, which will include the proposed Cellhouse. NH takes an

ongoing and staged approach towards decommissioning and rehabilitation, and

progressive rehabilitation works such as revegetation or remediation occurs throughout the

operational life of the Proposal over the entire site.

In order to determine the rehabilitation needs prior to closure, NH maintains their

Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Plan by updating the following:

Heritage Assessment

It should be noted that the proposed Cellhouse is unlikely to be a designated as a heritage

building, as its operational life span is 30 years, and it will be significantly younger than

some off the other infrastructure on the site.

OHS Requirements

NH consults with service providers on decommissioning of infrastructure (including gas,

electricity, sewerage and water) to ensure services are available to safely facilitate this

process. Safety of the public and future users is considered in decommissioning, to ensure

the site is free of contaminants such as heavy metal contamination and asbestos. The

structures being installed as a part of the proposed Cellhouse will not contain asbestos,

however there may be asbestos in adjacent historical structures.

According to NH’s Decommissioning and Rehabilitation Scope of Works,

“Decommissioning will require the removal of many structures comprising asbestos

containing material (ACM), which will be removed by licenced contractors under approval

from Worksafe Tasmania (WST) and disposed of such at an appropriately accredited

controlled waste facility. Preventing exposure to heavy metal contamination will be

achieved through a combination of removal, treatment and encapsulation remediation

approaches in accordance with NEPM 1999”.

Site Contamination Assessment

NH will conduct remediation and/or management of contaminated land in accordance with

the National Environmental Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999

(NEPM 1999). The current assumption, which is used for planning purposes, is that an

average of one metre depth of soil over the 50 hectares will be removed for treatment and

disposal.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 136

NH has completed a NEPM 1999-based Assessment of Site Contamination, as submitted

in fulfilment of EPN 7043/5 Condition DC1 in October 2018. This document collates findings

of extensive soil and groundwater investigations completed.

Figure 8-1 outlines the existing NH decommissioning strategy which is applicable to the

site as a whole.

Figure 8-1: Decommissioning Strategy

In accordance with NH’s Environment Protection Notice 7043/5, a Decommissioning and

Rehabilitation Scope of Works is required to address any changes in activities that have

the potential to alter the liabilities for the decommissioning of the activity and the

rehabilitation of the Land. The addition of the proposed Cellhouse is unlikely to result in a

significant change to the existing decommissioning and rehabilitation liabilities.

9. Management Measures

Table 9-1 outlines the mitigation and management activities that are required during the

construction and operational phases of this Proposal. The monitoring and compliance

program as listed in Section 7.1 identifies the process that is to be undertaken and action

is to be determined as a result of these outcomes. Mitigation and management activities

for each aspect of the construction and operation of the Proposal is required to ensure the




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 137

performance criteria is consistently achieved. Once commissioned, the existing mitigation

and management program will be modified to reflect the operational change where relevant.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 138

Table 9-1: Mitigation and Management Program

Aspect Management Measures

Air Quality Construction

Plan works to avoid double handling and movement of material;

Limiting the area of disturbed/exposed soil at any one time where possible;

Covering of any aggregate or dusty material storage piles where possible;

Maintenance of equipment, machinery and vehicles;

Use dust suppression methods where applicable, such as unpaved construction access roads, and pre-wet the working area prior to moving the excavated material; and

Complete visual inspections and amend control measure if they are not sufficient. Operation

Installation of proposed cooling towers, and acid mist management system, which has a 93% efficiency in removing acid mist from inside the Cellhouse.

Post commissioning testing of the proposed Cellhouse and cooling towers for acid mist to confirm accuracy of the Air Dispersion Model. Should acid mist emissions be higher than those used for input into the original model, the model shall be re-run using the measured acid mist results to confirm the Proposal is still within the air quality limits outlined within section 6.1.2.

General

Community air quality monitoring to be completed

Community complaints register in place

Water Quality

Construction

Limiting the area of disturbed/exposed soil at any one time. Avoid exposure of large areas, or stockpiling of soil, during months where high rainfall is typically expected. Where this is not practical, emergency response measures should be enacted and on standby to ensure material can be contained within the existing system;

Sediment control measures to protect stormwater pits;

Dust control measures;

Service trenching kept open for a limited time only;

Install diversion drains up-slope or sediment fences down-slope;

Demarcated wheel wash site to prevent sediment from being tracked off the site;

Implementation of NH’s Materials Movement Procedure, including inspection and approval for equipment to leave site to ensure cleanliness; and




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 139

Accidental spills of soil or other materials onto roads or drains should be removed as soon as they are observed; and

Erosion and sediment control measures as identified within the CEMP.

Contaminated spoil will be stored in such a way that it doesn’t not enter the drainage system on site. Operation:

Contain all surface water within the onsite drainage system;

Maintenance requirements of the Stormwater system in line with the existing Stormwater Operations Maintenance Manual (HP-821-00004); and

Rain Event Strategy (HP-620-01221) to be implemented during rain events.

Groundwater Construction:

Identification of designated areas specific to activities with high risk of contamination such as refuelling;

Appropriate set up of high-risk areas to include bunding, impermeable hardstand area, appropriate drainage infrastructure from this area to the appropriate treatment location.

No drilling muds used in installation of piles

Appropriate handling of excavated material and disposal methods

Management of any extracted groundwater from piling and excavation work via pumps, drainage system and redirection into the onsite CWP, or a suitable vessel for treatment.

Infrastructure provided to direct the collected groundwater discharge to appropriate treatment location Operation

Basement system will capture process liquors and prevent them from seeping into the groundwater system.

Implement the existing groundwater management plan

Noise Construction

Management of construction and operation hours within reasonable timeframes (see Section 2.3.4);

Placement of loud equipment (e.g., generators) away from sensitive noise receptors; and

Prior notification of works which generate short term localised noise pollution. Operations

Install equipment which has a quieter noise profile than existing equipment;

Equip main noise sources on proposed Cellhouse with silencers where required; and

No requirement for PA system for operational communications. At all times

Community noise monitoring to be completed




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 140

Community complaints register in place

Restriction of significant noise generating activities to operational hours.

Waste Construction

Fabrication, or partial fabrication, to be completed off site where possible, minimising the need for onsite workshops and generation of scrap materials;

Reuse of contaminated soil in fill material where possible and where it will not result in further environmental impact;

Returning packaging to suppliers where possible;

Planning works, orders of materials and only purchasing the volume required. Specify requirements to avoid over consumption of materials;

Ensure materials are delivered only when required, to avoid being damaged by site climatic conditions, and not being usable;

Establish waste segregation and storage areas to ensure that different types of waste and construction materials are not mixed at any point; and

Ensure waste disposal areas are identified clearly around site for general waste, recycling, contaminated non-process waste and process waste. Operations

Waste management to comply with the site Waste Management Procedure HP-825-03612, which covers management of contaminated soil.

All volumes of waste will be monitored and recorded in Annual Environmental Review.

Dangerous Goods

At all times

Appropriate handling, storage and disposal of chemicals and hydrocarbons;

Ensure all workers are trained in chemical handling and spill management;

Undertake work area safety inspections;

All handling of materials in line with the requirements outlined in the SDS;

Ensure SDS are up to date and available for all personnel;

Undertake job safety and environmental analysis on specific jobs and risks associated with job execution;

Ensure standard operating procedures are implemented across site;and

Ensure all dangerous goods and environmental hazardous materials are located at the appropriate storage areas. Management of the storage of this material to prevent unauthorised discharge, emission or deposition of pollutants to the surrounding environment.

Flora and Fauna

At all times

During construction, excavations will be checked for fauna at the beginning of every shift;

The environment team is to be notified in the event of finding fauna in the work areas;

Appropriate rodent and pest management practices in place;

Appropriate reporting to be undertaken if fauna are caught or killed as a result of construction or operational activities and




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 141

Marine and Coastal

At all times

All stormwater from the site is captured and directed to the on-site Effluent Treatment Plant for treatment.

Greenhouse Gases

Update to the existing Cellhouse technology to increase efficiency and reduce use of natural resources and energy.

Include construction related Scope 1 GHG emissions to NGERS reports for relevant years.

Traffic Construction

Installation of additional temporary parking spaces within the development site to meet the expected peak demand and cause no overspill to the Council public street network;

Install temporary short-term parking spaces if required;

Planning heavy vehicle deliveries, and install an entry system to ensure that they are not waiting to enter site on public roads;

All traffic movements to and from site to be on established roads;

If required, parking inspector to ensure all personnel are abiding by the road rules and parking requirements when parking on site; and

Reduction to site road limits where appropriate, around construction areas and during peak site traffic conditions.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 142

10. Conclusion

The Proposal presented in this report will result in the replacement of the existing outdated

Cellhouse and associated infrastructure. The newer infrastructure will be more efficient,

effective and reduce operating costs while increasing the production capacity of the NH

site.

This existing economic contribution of the facility will therefore not only be maintained but

improved and result in a net positive effect maintaining existing employment and creating

additional temporary employment opportunities during construction in addition to the

increased revenue generated by the facility.

The proposed Cellhouse will also contribute positively to the site by means of the following:

The impermeable basement of the proposed Cellhouse will result in removal of a

source of pollution from the existing Cellhouse once fully operational

Noise will be reduced by installation of equipment running at lower noise levels

New cooling towers and acid mist management system will capture fugitive emission,

and have a higher efficiency rate for contaminant removal

Reduction in the volume of contaminated non-process waste generated from the

ongoing maintenance of the existing Cellhouse.

Changes to the existing impacts generated by activities on site are directly related to short-

term construction activities and are mainly restricted to the construction area.

The Resource Management and Planning System (RMPS) and Environmental

Management and Pollution Control System (EMPCS) objectives have been met as

detailed in Table 10-1 and Table 10-2.

Table 10-1: RMPS Objectives and how the Proposal included the objectives

RMPS Objective Proposal

(a) To promote the sustainable development of natural and physical resources and the maintenance of ecological processes and genetic diversity

The Proposal alternatives considered various options and site locations. The final alternative remained within the site footprint and general location thereby ensuring no disturbance to natural areas.

(b) To provide for the fair, orderly and sustainable use and development of air, land and water

The proposed Cellhouse will improve the existing situation in terms of groundwater and noise. Additional air impacts are mitigated by way of an improved modern design.

(c) To encourage public involvement in resource management and planning

The NH stakeholders have been informed of the development since the commencement of earlier studies and were afforded an opportunity to comment the Proposal. The Planning Permit process will provide further opportunity for stakeholder feedback on the Proposal.

(d) To facilitate economic development in accordance with the objectives set out in the above paragraphs (a-c)

The Proposal results in additional economic development via the boost of activity during construction phase. Further, the increased efficiency and production of the upgraded facility will maintain existing




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 143

RMPS Objective Proposal

economic activity and assist in the reduction of environmental costs in future.

(e) To promote the sharing of responsibility for resource management and planning between the different spheres of government, the community and industry in the State

The Proposal will involve consultation between NH, the GCC and the EPA during the proposal approval process. It will also enable NH to better meet their responsibility of reducing the environmental impact on the surrounding environment through the installation of modern operating infrastructure manage their impact

Table 10-2: Environmental Management and Pollution Control System (EMPCS) objectives

Objective Proposal

(a) To protect and enhance the quality of the Tasmanian environment.

The Proposal will result in the removal of a pollution source which will enhance aspects of the environment and lead to improved conditions in time.

(b) To prevent environmental degradation and adverse risks to human and ecosystem health by promoting pollution prevention, clean production technology, reuse and recycling of materials and waste minimization programmes.

The Proposal involves replacement of ageing infrastructure with enhanced technology that will remove mitigate groundwater contamination, air emissions and waste generation.

(c) To regulate, reduce or eliminate the discharge of pollutants and hazardous substances to air, land or water consistent with maintaining environmental quality.

The Cellhouse technology will include improved technologies for control of air emissions, water contamination and noise reduction that have been included in the design.

(d) To allocate the costs of environmental protection and restoration equitably and in a manner that encourages responsible use of, and reduces harm to, the environment, with polluters bearing the appropriate share of the costs that arise from their activities; and

The environmental costs associated with the mitigation measures discussed in this EIS are carried by NH. Further, the Proposal allows for progressive decommissioning of historically contaminating infrastructure by the operator.

(e) To require persons engaging in polluting activities to make progressive environmental improvements, including reductions of pollution at source, as such improvements become practicable through technological and economic development; and

The site will see an improvement due to the elimination of current pollution sources and future projects will include further removal of pollution from decommissioned facilities.

(f) To provide for the monitoring and reporting of environmental quality on a regular basis; and

The monitoring programmes in place will be maintained and reporting of the monitoring results will continue as per the current practices.

(g) To control the generation, storage, collection, transportation, treatment and disposal of waste with a view to reducing, minimizing and, where practicable, eliminating harm to the environment; and

Generation of contaminated non-process waste will be significantly reduced.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 144

(h) To adopt a precautionary approach when assessing environmental risk to ensure that all aspects of environmental quality, including ecosystem sustainability and integrity and beneficial uses of the environment, are considered in assessing, and making decisions in relation to, the environment.

A precautionary approach was utilised in that all air dispersion modelling and noise modelling assumed worst case scenario’s as inputs into the assessment of impacts.

(i) To facilitate the adoption and implementation of standards agreed upon by the State under inter-governmental arrangements for greater uniformity in environmental regulation.

The design basis of the infrastructure included design criteria to meet regulatory standards and exceed them in many instances.

(j)

To promote public education about the protection, restoration and enhancement of the environment.

Stakeholders have been involved in the study to date and the Planning Permit process will provide further opportunity for stakeholder feedback on the Proposal. NH will continue to work with the members of the surrounding communities to promote sound environmental management through activities such as school visits.

(k) To co-ordinate all activities as are necessary to protect, restore or improve the Tasmanian environment.

This objective is fulfilled via broad consultation with relevant approval authorities to ensure the coordination of activity to meet RMPS objectives.




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 145

Appendix A - Bibliography Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). 2016 Census Quick Stats Greater Hobart. Retrieved

September 2020, from https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/6GHOB?opendocument#:~:text=In%20the%202016%20Census%2C%20there,up%203.8%25%20of%20the%20population.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). 2016 Census Quick Stats Lutana. Retrieved September 2020, from https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/SSC60370#:~:text=In%20the%202016%20Census%2C%20there,up%203.7%25%20of%20the%20population.&text=The%20median%20age%20of%20people,State%20Suburbs)%20was%2037%20years.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). 2016 Census Quick Stats Tasmania. Retrieved September 2020, from https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/6?opendocument

Australian Governemnt. (2019). Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Australian Government. (2019, March 29). National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) Data for 2017-2018.

Retrieved September 2020, from Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment: https://www.environment.gov.au/news/2019/03/29/national-pollutant-inventory-npi-data-2017%E2%80%9318-now-available

Australian Government. (2020, March). Corporate Emissions and Energy Data 2018-2019. Retrieved September 2020, from Clean Energy Regulator: http://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/NGER/National%20greenhouse%20and%20energy%20reporting%20data/Corporate%20emissions%20and%20energy%20data/corporate-emission-and-energy-data-2018-19

Australian Government. (2020, June 25). Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment. Retrieved September 17, 2020, from http://www.environment.gov.au/webgis-framework/apps/pmst/pmst.jsf

Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) - Australian Government. (2021). Climate Data Online. Retrieved from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/

Commonwealth of Australia. (2007, January). World Heritage Committee Decision WHC-06/30.COM/7B State Party Report. Retrieved September 2020, from Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area: https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/63307db8-6b28-44d8-807b-6979eeab9a41/files/tas-wilderness.pdf

Coughanowr, C. (1997). State of the Derwent Estuary: A review of environmental quality data 1997. Retrieved September 2020, from Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment: https://www.environment.gov.au/science/supervising-scientist/publications/ssr/state-derwent-estuary-review-environmental-quality-data-1997

Derwent Estuary Program. (2019, January). State of the Derwent Report Card 2018. Retrieved September 2020, from Derwent Estuary Program: https://reportcard.derwentestuary.org.au/2018/

DPIPWE Tasmania. (2019, November 5). Tasmanian Geoconservation Database. Retrieved September 2020, from Tasmanian Government Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment: https://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/conservation/geoconservation/tasmanian-geoconservation-database

DPIPWE Tasmania. (2020). Protected Matters Database Tool - Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act (1995). Retrieved September 2020, from LISTmap Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment: https://maps.thelist.tas.gov.au/listmap/app/list/map

DPIPWE Tasmania. (2020). Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. Retrieved September 2020, from https://parks.tas.gov.au/explore-our-parks/tasmanian-wilderness-world-heritage-area-(twwha)




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 146

EPA Tasmania. (2010, December). State Stormwater Strategy. Retrieved September 2020, from Department of Primary Industires, Parks, Water and Environment: https://epa.tas.gov.au/epa/water/stormwater/state-stormwater-strategy

EPA Tasmania. (2012, December). Nyrstar Hobart Wharf Structural Upgrade - Development Proposal & Environmental Management Plan. Retrieved September 2020, from Environment Protection Authority Tasmania: https://epa.tas.gov.au/Documents/Nyrstar%20Hobart%20Wharf%20Structural%20Upgrade%20DPEMP.pdf

EPA Tasmania. (2018, November 6). ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION MODELLING GUIDELINES. Retrieved from Environment Protection Authority, Tasmania: https://epa.tas.gov.au/Documents/Tasmanian_Atmospheric_Dispersion_Modelling_Guidelines_November2018.pdf

Holmes Air Sciences. (2009). Air Quality Modelling Study. Hobart: Nyrstar Hobarty Pty Ltd. Holmes Air Sciences. (2011). Climate Change Position Statement: Climate Change & Energy.

Retrieved September 2020, from Nyrstar: https://www.nyrstar.com/~/media/Files/N/Nyrstar/documents/climate-change2010.pdf

NOAA. (2021). Integrated Surface Hourly Data Base. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/noaa

Nyrstar. (2011, April 4). Nyrstar Climate Change and Energy. Retrieved September 2020, from Nyrstar: https://www.nyrstar.com/~/media/Files/N/Nyrstar/documents/climate-change2010.pdf

Nyrstar. (2018). 2018 Sustainability Statements. Retrieved September 2020, from Nyrstar: https://www.nyrstar.com/~/media/Files/N/Nyrstar/sustainability/sustainability-reports/2018%20Nyrstar%20Sustainability%20Statements.pdf

Nyrstar. (2018, May 21). Nyrstar Hobart Triennial Public Environment Report 2015 - 2017. Retrieved September 2020, from Nyrstar: https://nyrstarhobart.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Nyrstar-Hobart-Public-Environment-Report-2015-2017.pdf

Nyrstar Hobart. (2018). Environmental Report (2015 - 2017) - Version 2. Hobart: Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd.

Nyrstar Hobart. (2020). 2019 Annual Environmental Review, Version 2. Hobart: Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd.

Nyrstar Hobart. (2020). Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Manual. Hobart: Nyrstar Hobart Pty Ltd.

Tasmanian Government. (2017). Climate Action 21: Tasmania's Climate Change Action Plan 2017-2021. Retrieved September 2020, from Department of Premier and Cabinet: http://www.dpac.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/332106/Climate_Action_21_Tasmanias_Climate_Action_Plan_20172021_-_October_2019_web.pdf

Threatened Species Section . (2006). Flora Recovery Plan 2006 - 2010: Morrisby's Gum. Hobart: DPIPWE (formerly Department of Primary Inustries and Water).




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 147

Appendix B - Population Data Key Demographics (2016 Census)

Demographic Tasmania Hobart Lutana

Population 50,965 222,356 2,353

Male 48.90% 48.50% 48.80%

Female 51.10% 51.50% 51.20%

Median Age 42 40 37

Families 134,343 58,276 609

Average children per family for all families 0.7 0.7 0.6

Average children per family for families with children 1.8 1.8 1.8

All private dwellings 241,744 99,009 1,128

Average people per household 2.3 2.4 2.2

Median weekly household income $1,100 $1,234 $1,071

Median monthly mortgage repayments $1,300 $1,402 $1,300

Median weekly rent $230 $260 $270

Average motor vehicles per dwelling 1.8 1.7 1.5

Education Statistics (2016 Census)

Level of highest educational attainment

People aged 15 years and over

Greater Hobart

% Tasmania % Australia %

Bachelor Degree level and above 38,755 21.3 67,863 16.2 4,181,406 22.0

Advanced Diploma and Diploma level 14,376 7.9 31,487 7.5 1,687,893 8.9

Certificate level IV 5,458 3.0 12,132 2.9 551,767 2.9

Certificate level III 24,319 13.3 62,121 14.8 2,442,203 12.8

Year 12 25,017 13.7 50,460 12.0 2,994,097 15.7

Year 11 8,247 4.5 19,697 4.7 941,531 4.9

Year 10 26,992 14.8 73,242 17.4 2,054,331 10.8

Certificate level II 135 0.1 384 0.1 13,454 0.1

Certificate level I 28 0.0 48 0.0 2,176 0.0

Year 9 or below 15,514 8.5 43,314 10.3 1,529,897 8.0

No educational attainment 749 0.4 1,641 0.4 145,844 0.8

Not stated 17,888 9.8 46,190 11.0 1,974,794 10.4




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 148

Employment Statistics (2016 Census)

Employment People who reported being in the labour force, aged 15 years and

over

Greater Hobart


Worked full-time 56,178 53.2 121,822 52.3 6,623,065 57.7

Worked part-time 37,186 35.2 81,601 35.0 3,491,503 30.4

Away from work 5,523 5.2 13,162 5.7 569,276 5.0

Unemployed 6,784 6.4 16,365 7.0 787,452 6.9

Industry of Employment (2016 Census)

Industry of Employment Greater Hobart


Occupation

Employed people aged 15 years and over

Professionals 22,388 22.6 40,772 18.8 2,370,966 22.2

Clerical and Administrative Workers

14,567 14.7 28,194 13.0 1,449,681 13.6

Technicians and Trades Workers

13,110 13.3 30,243 14.0 1,447,414 13.5

Community and Personal Service Workers

12,690 12.8 26,754 12.4 1,157,003 10.8

Managers 11,212 11.3 26,467 12.2 1,390,047 13.0

Sales Workers 9,641 9.7 21,402 9.9 1,000,955 9.4

Labourers 9,097 9.2 25,183 11.6 1,011,520 9.5

Machinery Operators and Drivers

4,487 4.5 13,800 6.4 670,106 6.3

Industry of employment, top responses Employed people aged 15 years and over

State Government Administration

3,933 4.0 5,929 2.7 158,980 1.5

Hospitals (except Psychiatric Hospitals)

3,854 3.9 7,767 3.6 411,808 3.9

Cafes and Restaurants

2,767 2.8 5,275 2.4 253,385 2.4

Supermarket and Grocery Stores

2,741 2.8 6,511 3.0 254,275 2.4

Central Government Administration

2,589 2.6 3,419 1.6 127,598 1.2




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 149

Income Statistics (2016 Census)

Median weekly incomes People aged 15 years and over

Greater Hobart


Personal 637 -- 573 -- 662 --

Family 1,569 -- 1,399 -- 1,734 --

Household 1,234 -- 1,100 -- 1,438 --

Housing Statistics (2016 Census)

Dwellings (occupied private dwellings)

Greater Hobart


Dwelling Count

Occupied private dwellings

85,611 90.7 197,575 86.0 8,286,073 88.8

Unoccupied private dwellings

8,800 9.3 32,135 14.0 1,039,874 11.2

Dwelling Structure

Separate house 72,613 84.8 172,998 87.6 6,041,788 72.9

Tenure

Semi-detached, row or terrace house, townhouse etc

5,099 6.0 11,376 5.8 1,055,016 12.7

Flat or apartment 7,324 8.6 11,267 5.7 1,087,434 13.1

Other dwelling 351 0.4 1,202 0.6 64,425 0.8

Owned outright 28,213 32.9 70,444 35.7 2,565,695 31.0

Owned with a mortgage 30,136 35.2 66,218 33.5 2,855,222 34.5

Rented 24,448 28.5 54,034 27.3 2,561,302 30.9

Other tenure type 744 0.9 1,676 0.8 78,994 1.0

Tenure type not stated 2,092 2.4 5,201 2.6 224,869 2.7




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 150

Appendix C – List of Monitoring Locations

Type of Monitoring Location ID Easting Northing

Groundwater MB05 525370 5258025 Groundwater MB06 525480 5258076 Groundwater MB07 525528 5257598 Groundwater MB08 525537 5257738 Groundwater MB09 525675 5257872 Groundwater MB100 525982 5257875 Groundwater MB101 526087 5257843 Groundwater MB102 526150 5257796 Groundwater MB103 526184 5257762 Groundwater MB104 526006 5257861 Groundwater MB105 525907 5258001 Groundwater MB106 525912 5257997 Groundwater MB107 525907 5257998 Groundwater MB108 525925 5257970 Groundwater MB109 525939 5257962 Groundwater MB11 525707 5258086 Groundwater MB110 525856 5258016 Groundwater MB111 525876 5257998 Groundwater MB112 525789 5257456 Groundwater MB113 525789 5257526 Groundwater MB114 525724 5257933 Groundwater MB115 525723 5257934 Groundwater MB116 525854 5257980 Groundwater MB117 525907 5258000 Groundwater MB118 525933 5257863 Groundwater MB119 525935 5257861 Groundwater MB12 525788 5258032 Groundwater MB120 525935 5257913 Groundwater MB121 525936 5257911 Groundwater MB122 526093 5257842 Groundwater MB123 526186 5257765 Groundwater MB124 525982 5257873 Groundwater MB125 525744 5258090 Groundwater MB126 525790 5258056 Groundwater MB127 526060 5257789 Groundwater MB128 526094 5257889




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 151


Groundwater MB129 526021 5257834 Groundwater MB13 525787 5257804 Groundwater MB130 525733 5258042 Groundwater MB131 525830 5258034 Groundwater MB15 525843 5257934 Groundwater MB17 525754 5257658 Groundwater MB19 525853 5257768 Groundwater MB22 525951 5257651 Groundwater MB23 526064 5257834 Groundwater MB26 525996 5257209 Groundwater MB28 526270 5257389 Groundwater MB29 526364 5257600 Groundwater MB31 525613 5258019 Groundwater MB32 525611 5258153 Groundwater MB33 526265 5257717 Groundwater MB35 526406 5257109 Groundwater MB36 526271 5256964 Groundwater MB38 526414 5257226 Groundwater MB39 526104 5256941 Groundwater MB41 525748 5257331 Groundwater MB42 525690 5257836 Groundwater MB43 525696 5257865 Groundwater MB45 526149 5257154 Groundwater MB46 526037 5257033 Groundwater MB47 526169 5256909 Groundwater MB48 526202 5257005 Groundwater MB49 526319 5257091 Groundwater MB50 526317 5257019 Groundwater MB51 526329 5257003 Groundwater MB52 525787 5257413 Groundwater MB53 525855 5257975 Groundwater MB54 525769 5258025 Groundwater MB55 525783 5258024 Groundwater MB56 525762 5258025 Groundwater MB57 525759 5258012 Groundwater MB58 525747 5258002 Groundwater MB59 525734 5257988 Groundwater MB60 525733 5258027




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 152


Groundwater MB61 525761 5258017 Groundwater MB62 525761 5258021 Groundwater MB63 525760 5258021 Groundwater MB65 526257 5257778 Groundwater MB68 526316 5257734 Groundwater MB71 526339 5257678 Groundwater MB72 526347 5257659 Groundwater MB74 526376 5257601 Groundwater MB75 526320 5257643 Groundwater MB76 525277 5258014 Groundwater MB77 525809 5257852 Groundwater MB78 525856 5257858 Groundwater MB79 525858 5257856 Groundwater MB80 525789 5257803 Groundwater MB81 525789 5258033 Groundwater MB83 525877 5257959 Groundwater MB84 525942 5257650 Groundwater MB85 525826 5257797 Groundwater MB86 525787 5257798 Groundwater MB87 525693 5258084 Groundwater MB88 525666 5258116 Groundwater MB89 525663 5258118 Groundwater MB90 525660 5258120 Groundwater MB91 525657 5258122 Groundwater MB92 525613 5258152 Groundwater MB93 525534 5258114 Groundwater MB94 525531 5258111 Groundwater MB95 525631 5258108 Groundwater MB96 525633 5258109 Groundwater MB97 525634 5258110 Groundwater MB98 525935 5257912 Groundwater MB99 525934 5257862

Surface Water TGS Foreshore Outfall

525898 5258047

Point Source Emission Monitoring ZP3 525902 5257581 Point Source Emission Monitoring ZP1 525879 5257575 Point Source Emission Monitoring V2 525882 5257569 Point Source Emission Monitoring V1 525886 5257567




HRT-450-00240

Rev 3Page 153


Point Source Emission Monitoring SS 525622 5257914 Point Source Emission Monitoring RB 525680 5257933 Point Source Emission Monitoring PG 525926 5257879 Point Source Emission Monitoring PB2 525660 5257887 Point Source Emission Monitoring PB1 525656 5257890 Point Source Emission Monitoring FSS 525885 5257990 Point Source Emission Monitoring CS 525836 5257831 Point Source Emission Monitoring CD 525993 5257869 Point Source Emission Monitoring AC 525817 5257537 TSPM Monitoring Birch Road 525549 5257356 TSPM Monitoring Risdon Road 525608 5258155 TSPM Monitoring Tennis Courts 525900 5256636 SO2 Ground Level Concentration Birch Road 525549 5257357 SO2 Ground Level Concentration Technopark 524810 5258766 SO2 Ground Level Concentration Tennis Courts 525901 5256626 Noise Monitoring Birch Road 525443 5257398 Noise Monitoring Delwood Drive 525564 5256991

Noise Monitoring Saundersons Road

526213 5258414


New Electrolysis Plant (Cell House), Nyrstar Hobart

Documents

Transcript of New Electrolysis Plant (Cell House), Nyrstar Hobart