201001-00367-00-EN-REP-0005 Rev 2 30 April FINAL · ndertake det r bores to en e constructi o...

Proposed Katherine to Gove Gas Pipeline Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Water Resources Assessment

Appendix B

PACIFIC ALUMINIUM

Katherine to Gove Gas Pipeline Water Resources Assessments

201001-00367 – 00-EN-REP-0005

29-April-13

Level 3, 60 Albert Street Brisbane QLD 4000 Australia Telephone: +61 7 3239 7400 Facsimile: +61 7 3221 7791 www.worleyparsons.com ABN 61 001 279 812 © Copyright 2013 WorleyParsons

WorleyParsonsresources & energy

KATHERINE TO GOVE GAS PIPELINE

WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS

Disclaimer

This repoft has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Pacific Aluminium, and issubject to and nsued in accordance with the agreement betvveen Pacific Aluminium andWorleyParsons. WorleyParsons accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for it in respect ofany use of or reliance upon this repoft by any third pafty.

Copying this repoñ without the permission of Pacific Aluminium or WorleyParsons r's nofpermitted.

PROJECT 2OIOO1-00367 - KATHERINE TO GOVE GAS PIPELINE

REV DESCRIPTION ORIG REVIEW DATE CLIENTAPPROVAL

DATE

2 lssued for Use a- N/A

A

Document No : 201001 EN-REP-OOOs

S 29April-13

Page ii

K

W

C

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO

Document NoRevision: 2

CONTEN

INT

Purp1.1

ABB

AVA

Data3.1

PRO

REL

SUR

Rain6.1

Soil6.2

Surf6.3

6.3.

6.3.

Was6.4

Imp6.5

Con6.6

6.6.

Cros6.7

6.7.

6.7.

6.7.

6.7.

Stor6.8

Man6.9

P6.10

C6.11

HYD

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

TS

RODUCTION

pose of Repo

BREVIATION

AILABLE DA

a Limitations

OJECT WAT

LEVANT LEG

RFACE WAT

nfall .............

s and Topog

face Runoff .

1 Water st

2 Hydrote

stewater man

acts on Hydr

nstruction Im

1 Constru

ssing Constr

1 Horizont

2 Alternat

3 Trenche

4 Potentia

rmwater Man

nagement of

Proposed Mit

Conclusions .

DROGEOLO

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

N .................

ort ................

NS ................

ATA ...............

s ...................

TER SUPPLY

GISLATION .

TER ASSESS

....................

graphy ..........

....................

torages and

st water .......

nagement ....

rologic Regim

pacts – Strea

ction Progra

ruction Techn

tal Directiona

ives to HDD

ed Crossings

al Impacts on

nagement ....

Surface Wa

tigation Meas

....................

OGY ASSESS

REP-0005

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

Y STRATEG

....................

SMENT .......

....................

....................

....................

drains .........

....................

....................

me of Waterc

am Crossing

am ................

niques .........

al Drilling .....

...................

s ...................

n Stream Hyd

....................

ater ...............

sures ...........

....................

SMENT .......

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

Y ................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

courses ......

gs ................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

draulics .......

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

Page

.................. 1

.................. 1

.................. 4

.................. 5

.................. 5

.................. 6

.................. 8

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

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

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

................ 11

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

................ 16

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

................ 24

................ 24

................ 25

................ 26

................ 27

................ 29

e iii

4

5

5

6

8

0

0

0

5

6

9

9

2

2

2

2

2

3

4

4

5

6

7

9

K

W

8

A

A

A

A

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


Reg7.1

Gro7.2

7.2.

7.2.

7.2.

7.2.

Wat7.3

7.3.grou

Pote7.4

7.4.

7.4.

Reg7.5

CON7.6

7.6.

FUR7.7

REF

Appendice

APPENDIX 1

APPENDIX 2

APPENDIX 3

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

gional Hydrog

undwater Ma

1 Daly Riv

2 Daly Riv

3 Proteroz

4 McArthu

ter supplies f

1 Water reundwater .....

ential environ

1 Acid Su

2 Potentia

gulatory requ

NCLUSIONS

1 Identifie

RTHER INVE

FERENCES

es

- SURFACE

- EXISITING

- ACID SUL

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

geology .......

anagement U

ver Basin –T

ver Basin – J

zoic Sedimen

ur Basin........

for proposed

equirements ....................

nmental risks

lfate Soils (A

al environme

irements for

S ...................

d Risks ........

ESTIGATION

....................

E WATER MA

G GROUNDW

LFATE SOILS

REP-0005

....................

Units (GMUs

indall Limest

Jinduckin For

ntary GMUs

....................

d KGGP cons

for KGGP p....................

s from KGGP

ASS) ............

ntal receptor

r the Take, U

....................

....................

NS ...............

....................

APS

WATER BOR

S RISK MAP

...................

s) .................

tone ............

rmation .......

(North East

...................

struction ......

ipeline infras...................

P developme

...................

rs ................

se or Dispos

...................

...................

...................

...................

RES ALONG

P RESULTS

....................

....................

....................

....................

NT, Bulman

....................

....................

structure: Pot....................

ent ...............

....................

....................

sal of ground

....................

....................

....................

....................

G THE KGGP

...................

...................

...................

...................

& Adelaide

...................

...................

otential sourc...................

...................

...................

...................

dwater .........

...................

...................

...................

...................

P

Page

................ 29

................ 32

................ 32

................ 33

River) ...... 33

................ 33

................ 34

ce of ................ 35

................ 38

................ 38

................ 39

................ 39

................ 40

................ 41

................ 43

................ 46

e iv

9

2

2

3

3

3

4

5

8

8

9

9

0

3

6

K

W

1

PreTlo

Pfupg

TAK3locopcoe

1

Tre

B

Im

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


INT

Pacific Aluminefinery at Go

Territory. Theocations for s

Power and steuel oil. In ordroposed to pas will help u

The KatherineAmadeus GasKGGP would

00mm and aocations alonompressor srocessing ofonstruction cquipment ac

Pu.1

This report haequirements

Baseline

mpacts

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

TRODUC

nium (a businove, 650 kilome Gove minesmelting and

eam for the Gder to reduceprovide the faunderpin the

e to Gove Gas Pipeline atbe a high pr

a design openg the route station. The f gas would bcorridor and wccess tracks

urpose o

as been prepof the EIS g

Provide a bartificial, epimpacted bdrainage pa

Provide a daffected by

Provide detand bank plocations. Inpipeline, in work.

Describe hodescribed a

Detail the eDescribe th

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

TION

ness unit of Rmetres (km)

e and refinery further proc

Gove Refinee fuel oil conacility with nalong term op

as Pipeline (a point appr

ressure, steerating life of such as metsupplied gasbe required. would includto facilitate c

f Report

pared to Paciuidelines:

broad descripphemeral or py the projectatterns, flow,

description ofy the undergr

tails of the poprofiles and dnclude informparticular th

ow the pipeliabove.

extent of de-whe potential im

REP-0005

Rio Tinto) oweast of Darwy produce higcessing.

ery and mininsumption anatural gas asperating viab

KGGP) is prroximately 20el pipeline ap50 years. It tering facilities from the AmThe pipeline

de supportingconstruction

t

ific Aluminium

ption of any wpermanent, it. Include a d, likelihood o

f relevant groround pipes a

otential locatdescribe selemation on thehe timing (and

ine might imp

watering thatimpacts inclu

wns and opewin in north egh grade alu

ng operationsnd improve os an alternatibility of the R

oposed to de0 km south o

pproximately will also incl

es, scraper smadeus Pipee would be cg infrastructuactivities.

m to support

waterways oincluding sprdescription ofof flooding an

oundwater reand excavati

tions of pipelection criteriae flow regimed volume) of

pact on the s

t may be requding the effe

rates a bauxeast Arnhem mina which i

s are currentperating costve fuel sourc

Refinery.

eliver naturalof Katherine, 603 km longude above g

stations, maineline is sales onstructed wre such as te

t the draft EIS

r other wetlarings and mof catchment s

nd present wa

esources in aion.

line waterwaa for determine of the watef flows in rela

surface and g

quired for instects of localis

xite mine andLand, Northis then shipp

tly generatedts at the Refce. The lowe

l gas from thto the Gove

g with a nomground facilitnline valves quality so n

within a 30 memporary wo

S and addres

and habitat, nound springssystems, exi

water uses.

any areas lik

ay crossings ning the finalerways in theation to any c

ground wate

tallation of thsed lowering

Pag

d alumina ern

ped to other

d from importfinery, it is er cost natur

he existing NT Refinery. Tinal diameteries at specifiand a o additional

m wide ork camps an

ss the releva

natural or , that may beisting surface

kely to be

including bel crossing

e vicinity of thconstruction

r features

he pipeline. g of

e 1

ted

ral

T The r of ic

nd

ant

e e

d

he



Document No.: 201001-00367-00-EN-REP-0005 Page 2 Revision: 2

groundwater tables (ie, zone of influence), associated disturbance to wetland and aquatic flora and fauna (if any).

Provide details of typical waterway crossings that would be constructed and likely

impacts associated with crossing at each intended location. Consider and discuss the

risks associated with the proximity of the proposed condensate pipeline to borefields or aquifer recharge zones that may supply potable water.

Detail the potential impacts from wastewater generated by construction/operational water use including translocation or introduction of non-endemic aquatic fauna and flora.

Management Detail safeguards and management strategies used to minimise the impacts of pipeline

construction and operation on the hydrological features described above. In particular, provide details on the following:

o Measures to safeguard surface and groundwater resources including options for the

appropriate treatment and disposal of construction and operational wastewater, and discharge of abstracted water. Identify the preferred option and the selection criteria use.;

o Measures to ensure the beds and banks of water courses remain stable and protected from the natural forces of erosion as required, incorporating preferred methodologies of DLRM (Department of Land and Resource Management) where

practicable particularly where there has been any disturbance to the bank or to the bed.

o Measures to safeguard downstream water quality including appropriate

management of any acid sulphate soils excavated and wetland crossings.

This report discusses the potential risks (if any) caused to surface water systems (major and minor watercourses) and groundwater assets as a result of the construction and operation of the KGGP. The risks and mitigation measures discussed in this report include:

Land clearing for the right of way and topsoil stockpiling;

Disturbances to waterways due to construction activities where the pipelines cross water courses;

Negative changes to the hydrologic regime of watercourses as a result of surface water abstraction to meet construction water requirements (e.g. to supply water for potable water for camps, dust suppression, hydrostatic pressure testing of pipeline infrastructure);

Increased erosion and sediment generation due to construction activities;

Impact on water quality due to discharge of pressure test water and sewerage effluent from construction camps; and

Fuel and chemical storage and waste disposal during pipeline construction and operation.




This report is structured to address the assessment of surface water and groundwater issues of the draft EIS.

1. Section 6 Surface Water Assessment and 2. Section 7 Hydrogeology Assessment.




2 ABBREVIATIONS

ASS Acid Sulfate Soils

BoM Bureau of Meteorology

DLRM Department of Land and Resource Management

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

ESCP Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

GDE Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems

GL Gigalitres

GMU Groundwater Management Units

HDD Horizontal Directional Drilling

KGGP Katherine to Gove Gas Pipeline

RoW Right of Way

SWMP Stormwater Management Plan

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

UA Unincorporated Area

WAP Water Allocation Plan

WCD Water Control District

K

W

3

T

3

ABwuoth

Nres2se

It a

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


3 AV

The assessm

Climati

Stream

Report

Report

Trans T(TTP, 2

Impactsof Draft

Report

Report

Report

Da3.1

Available streBoM databaswater and gro

ndertake detr bores to en

he constructi

No detailed sueport, so deturface water0km of the Reason surve

t is proposednd data colle

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

VAILABLE

ent of surfac

c data obtain

mflow data fro

‘North Austr

‘North Austr

Territory Und2004).

s on Hydrolot EIS (EWLS

‘Water Reso

‘Jawoyn wa

‘Water Reso

ta Limita

eamflow dataes. The data

oundwater retailed assessnable quantiton period.

urvey of the ailed descriprs were not aRoW with a vy during 201

d that appropection.

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

E DATA

ce water and

ned from the

om the Depa

ralian Sustain

ralian Sustain

derground Pi

ogy & Water S, 2004).

ources of We

ter study’ (D

ources of Ea

ations

a has been soa available wesources. It wsments of thetative guideli

pipeline RoWptions of wateable to be proview to identif

3.

riate manage

REP-0005

groundwate

Bureau of M

rtment of La

nable Yields

nable Yields

peline Wade

Quality from

est Arnhem L

. George, 20

st Arnhem L

ourced from was sufficient was not posse volumes ofnes to be de

W (Right of Werway crossiovided. It is hfying which o

ement plans

er issues has

Meteorology

nd and Reso

’ (CSIRO, 20

’ (CSIRO, 20

eye to Gove

the Trans T

Land’ (U. Zaa

001).

and’ (U. Zaa

DLRM and rto derive a g

sible during thf water that c

eveloped for

Way) has beeings and locahowever, inteof these may

will be prep

s been based

(BoM, 2013)

ource Manag

009).

009).

in the Northe

erritory Pipe

ar, 2003).

ar, G. Prowse

rainfall data hgeneral undehe design phcan be obtainmanagemen

en undertakeations of propended to ideny be suitable

ared followin

d on the follo

).

gement (DLR

ern Territory

eline Project –

e and I. Matt

has been soerstanding ofhase of the pned from indnt of water re

en at the timeposed extracntify all boresfor use durin

ng additional

Pag

wing:

RM, 2013).

– Draft EIS,

– Appendix G

hews, 1999)

urced from f the surface

project to ividual streasources duri

e of writing thctions from s drilled withng the dry

investigation

e 5

G

).

ms ing

his

in

n




4 PROJECT WATER SUPPLY STRATEGY

Construction of the gas pipeline has the potential to impact on surface water and groundwater resources due to:

Extractions of water required for construction activities; and

Physical changes to waterways and topography along the right of way (ROW).

Water is required for the following construction activities:

Potable water for construction camps;

Hydrotesting of pipeline;

HDD (Horizontal Directional Drilling) creek crossings;

Dust suppression;

Compaction of trench backfill; and

Washdown of vehicles and other miscellaneous purposes.

The projected water usage for the construction period is summarized in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1 Projected Water Usage During Construction Period

Activity Volume (ML) Daily Demand (kL/d)

Camps Potable Water 50 300

Hydrotesting 24-46 variable

HDD 0.77 23

Dust suppression 132 800

Miscellaneous uses Minor <2

In order to satisfy the projected water usage, it is proposed to extract water from surface water sources where practicable and sustainable, with minor supplementary extraction from groundwater via existing or new bores, where practicable and sustainable.

The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG, 1996) states that good drinking water has a TDS of less than 500mg/L, and that a TDS of 500 – 1000 mg/L is acceptable according to taste, while TDS greater than 1000mg/L may be associated with excessive scaling, corrosion and unsatisfactory taste.

The limited water quality data available for surface waters in the Roper River Basin and other river basins in West Arnhem Land indicate TDS generally less than 500mg/L, total alkalinity less than 300 mg/L and pH of 6.1-8.2. Therefore, it is anticipated that water extracted from surface water resources will require sterilisation and minimal treatment for potable use.




In general, the groundwater naturally has a low pH, caused by high levels of dissolved carbon dioxide and can be treated by aeration as is done for the Nhulunbuy water supply (U. Zaar et. al., 1999). Additionally groundwater in West Arnhem Land, which represents approximately half of the pipeline route, has been assessed as suitable for potable use without treatment (U. Zaar, 2003). It is anticipated that water extracted from groundwater bores will require sterilisation and minimal treatment for potable use. Section 6.3.2 of the hydrogeological assessment provides further details of groundwater quality.

The projected construction and camp, non-potable water use includes dust suppression, access track maintenance, vehicle wash-down and other ancillary purposes. It is anticipated that water extracted for non-potable uses, excluding hydrotest water, will not require any treatment. Hydrotest water use and disposal is discussed below in 6.3.2.

If an adequate supply of water cannot be obtained locally from surface water or groundwater, it will be necessary to transport water from other sources. In particular, it may be necessary to transport potable water from Katherine and Gove if the extracted surface water or groundwater quality is not able to be easily treated to potable quality.

The strategy for water supply during the construction period has not been finalised at this time due to insufficient information on flows and water quality available from surface water and groundwater resources, as discussed in 3.1.

Additional investigations of the ‘dry’ season flow behaviour of the surface watercourses and baseflow from groundwater are to be undertaken in order to derive trigger and threshold criteria for appropriate management of extractions from surface water or groundwater sources. The additional investigations may include hydrologic and hydrogeologic modelling and the installation of temporary stream and borehole monitoring equipment to record water levels and selected quality parameters.




5 RELEVANT LEGISLATION

The management and protection of water resources in the Northern Territory is controlled under the Water Act 2011 (hereafter The Water Act). The Water Act governs the extent to which both surface and groundwater can be used, and for what purpose. For example, waste discharge to natural waters is prohibited unless licensed under the Water Act. Waste Discharge Licences are only available in areas where Beneficial Uses have been declared. If waste is to be discharged to a waterway in areas where no such declaration has been made, the Beneficial Uses must be determined and declared prior to licence issue. This process is normally done in full consultation with the community and as such, may be prohibitive from a timing perspective. With reference to Subsection (3) of the Water Act, Beneficial Uses mean the uses of water. The following are Beneficial Uses of water:

Agriculture – to provide irrigation water for primary production including related research;

Aquaculture – to provide water for commercial production of aquatic animals including related research;

Public water supply – to provide source water for drinking purposes delivered through community water supply systems;

Environment – to provide water to maintain the health of aquatic ecosystems;

Cultural – to provide water to meet aesthetic, recreational and cultural needs;

Industry – to provide water for industry, including secondary industry and a mining or petroleum activity, and for other industry uses not referred to elsewhere in this subsection; and

Rural stock and domestic – to provide water for the purposes permitted under sections 10, 11 and 14.

Under Part 3, Division 1 of the Water Act, various stipulations are made for the control, protection and management of water resources. For example, under Section 22A and 22B of the Water Act, Beneficial uses within Water Control Districts (WCD) are described. At present the only WAP present on the KGGP route is in the Daly River Basin; forming the Daly-Roper WCD.

The Northern Territory Water Act (2011) prohibits the unauthorised taking or use of surface water and unlicensed extraction of groundwater. Under the Act, the Administrator may, on the recommendation of the Minister, by notice in the Gazette, declare that a licence is not required for the taking or use of surface water of a class, kind, description or volume, or at a rate or for a purpose, specified in the notice. Additionally, the Administrator may, on the recommendation of the Minister, by notice in the Gazette, declare that a provision of the Act does not apply to or in relation to a bore, or to drainage water or waste, of a class or description specified in the notice.




Section 7 of the Water Act, however states that:

7 Application of Act to mining or petroleum activity

(1) Section 15 does not apply to an interference with, or the obstruction of, a waterway if the interference or obstruction occurs in the course of a mining or petroleum activity.

(2) Section 16 does not apply to waste that comes into contact with water, or water that is polluted, if:

(a) the contact or pollution occurs in the course of carrying out a mining or petroleum activity; and

(b) the waste or polluted water is confined within the mining site or petroleum site on which the activity is being carried out.

(3) Subject to subsection (4), Parts 5 and 6 do not apply to an action or omission by a person, or to an action or omission caused, suffered or permitted by a person to be done, or to be omitted to be done, by another person, if the action or omission occurs in the course of carrying out a mining or petroleum activity.

(4) Part 6, Division 5 applies to the disposal underground of waste in the course of carrying out a mining or petroleum activity on a mining site or petroleum site if the waste is not confined within the mining site or petroleum site.

Section 15 refers to the obstruction or interference with a waterway; Section 16 refers to the prohibition of pollution; Part 5 refers to surface water works and extraction and Part 6 refers to Groundwater works and extraction.

Consequently, no licenses for extraction of surface or groundwater will be required. It should be noted; however, that this exemption does NOT extend to Section 16 which requires that a waste discharge licence be obtained prior to the discharge of any contaminated water directly into surface or groundwater.

K

W

6

6

TAMsoa

T

P

A

6

Tgd

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


6 SU

Ra6.1

The area encAustralia, withMarch. Annuaouthern sectre summariz

Table 6-1 An

Period

Ra

(mm

Jan 426

Feb 374

Mar 321

Apr 101

May 21.

Jun 1.9

Jul 1.2

Aug 5.0

Sep 15.

Oct 70.

Nov 139

Dec 251

Annual 1729

So6.2

The region coranitic in origeposited on

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

URFACE W

infall

ompassing th approximatal rainfall vartion. Rainfall zed in Table

nual Rainfa

Darwin

in

m)

Pot. E

(mm

6.6 186

4.3 159

.3 176

.2 189

.2 210

9 204

2 210

0 223

.7 228

.2 248

9.3 222

.3 204

9.3 2462

ils and T

ontains rocksgin and undetop of these

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

WATER A

he KGGP rotely 90% of aries from up tand evapora6-1.

ll and Poten

Evap.

m)

Rai

(mm

6.0 275

9.6 283

6.7 274

9.0 228

0.8 89.

4.0 31.

0.8 18.

3.2 5.5

8.0 5.8

8.0 11.

2.0 44.

4.6 181

2.7 1461

Topograp

s from the Mcerlie most of t

granites to f

REP-0005

ASSESS

oute is locateall rain fallingto 1,800mm ation data re

ntial Evapor

Gove

in

m)

Pot. Ev

(mm

5.0 176

.2 156

.5 155

.8 159

7 167

1 156

4 161

5 189

8 201

4 223

4 219

.2 207

1.7 2171

phy

cArthur Basinthe region. Sform the Arn

MENT

d within the g during the win the northecorded at Bu

ration

vap.

m)

Rai

(mm

.7 261.

.0 246.

.0 204.

.0 44.3

.4 5.1

.0 0.4

.2 1.1

.1 1.7

.0 6.8

.2 33.2

.0 88.0

.7 223.

1.3 1133

n and the ArStrata of the hem Land P

tropical monwet season bern section toureau of Met

Katherine

n

m)

Pot. Ev

(mm

.9 161.

.0 156.

.2 173.

3 183.

173.

4 147.

170.

7 201.

8 228.

2 244.

0 222.

.9 189.

3.0 2250

afura Basin. Kombolgie Slateau; this fe

nsoonal belt obetween Novo less than 9teorology (Bo

vap.

m)

Rain

(mm

.2 182.8

.0 176.5

.6 174.8

.0 55.9

.6 10.7

.0 5.1

.5 1.1

.5 0.7

.0 1.8

.9 13.5

.0 42.4

.1 131.6

0.4 815.5

The oldest rSandstone hafeature domin

Page

of northern vember and 900mm in theoM) stations

Ngukurr

n

m)

Pot. Ev

(mm)

8 182.9

5 170.8

8 173.6

9 183.0

7 173.6

159.0

170.5

207.7

231.0

5 272.8

4 255.0

6 226.3

5 2406.2

rocks are ave been nates the

10

e

ap.

)

9

8

6

0

6

0

5

7

0

8

0

3

2

K

W

reu

Sa

6

TRbRb(DRra1ing

TDDs

T

Smlagflop

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


egional landsndermining e

Soils are mosnd alluvial so

Su6.3

The pipeline pRiver basin, th

etween KathRoper River d

asins drain nDwg 201001

River basin arainfall (appro800mm) (Bo

n Table 6-1. Preater than a

The streamfloDepartment oDLRM are shhown on Fig

Table 6-2 Str

Gauge ID

G8250002

G8260053

G8260219

G9030003

G9030088/9

Surface runofmost watercoarger rivers aroundwater. ow) of the murposes alon

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

scape. The seffect of wav

stly skeletal ooils on the flo

rface Ru

passes throuhe central poherine and Gdrains eastwanorthwards to-00367-GIS-re located soox. 800-1100oM, 2013), wPotential evaannual rainfa

ow characterof Land Resoown in Tableure 6-2 (Dwg

reamflow Da

Stream

Goyder Rive

Latram Rive

Giddy River

Wilton River

WaterhouseRiver

ff is generallyurses ceasin

are ‘permaneSection 7.3.

major river sysng the KGGP

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

sandstone clive erosion at

or stony on thoodplains. A

unoff

ugh the uppeortion of the Gove. The Daards to the Go the Arafura-SKT-019 incouth of the A0mm) than thith the bulk oaporation is aall.

istics of the wource Manage 6-2, with gag 201001-00

ata Summar

Period oRecord

er 1/9/67 –1/9/02

er 1/11/63 –1/11/85

1/9/71 –1/11/86

r 1/9/67 –1/6/78

e 1/12/60 –1/8/04

y limited to thng to flow duent’ streams, 1 and Table stems whereP route.

REP-0005

iffs of the Arntheir base d

he hills and ppproximately

er section of tGoyder Rive

aly River basGulf of Carpea Sea. The mcluded in App

Arnhem Land he northern bof the rainfallapprox. 2200

watercoursegement (DLRauging statio0367-GIS-SK

ry

of d

Mean ADisch(ML/y

– 788

– 5

25,2

– 6

44,

– 505

– 239

he wet summring the mid with dry sea 6-1 discuss

e surface wat

nhem Land eduring a perio

plateau, withy one-third of

the Daly Riveer basin and in drains wes

entaria and thmajor drainagpendix 1).ThPlateau and

basins draininl occurring be0-2500mm/ye

s traversed dRM) gauging ons that are loKT-017 includ

Annual harge year)

A(

,940 5

230

150

,000 4

,760 3

mer monsoonto late dry se

ason flow beis the basefloter is propos

escarpment wod of high oc

shallow siltyf the Arnhem

er basin, the the upper Bustwards to thhe Goyder Rge basins aree upper Daly

d receive signng to the Araetween Octoear over the

derive from sstations. Sumocated closeded in Appen

Area km2)

Ru(mm

5,440 1

85 2

111 5

4,480 1

3,110

n season (Deeason (July tng basefloww characteried to be extr

were formedcean levels.

y soils, somem Plateau is b

northern pauckingham Rhe Timor Sea

River and Buce presented y River basinnificantly low

afura Sea (apober and Apr

region and i

streamflow remmarised ree to the pipelndix 1).

unoff m/year)

MF(m

136 1

293

552

112 2

73 1

ecember to Mto Novembe

w supplied froistics (estimaracted for co

Page

d by the

e deep sandsbare rock.

rt of the RopRiver basin a, while the ckingham Rivon Figure 6-n and Roper wer annual pprox. 1500-ril, as presens significantl

ecords at thesults from thine route

Max. Flow m3/s)

MiFlo(L/

,413 183

142 65

617 18

2,253 14

,771 <1

March), with r). Only the

om ated minimumonstruction

11

s

per

ver 1

ted ly

e he

n. ow /s)

30

5

8

4

10

m




Figure 6-1 Major Drainage Basins




Figure 6-2 DLRM Gauging Stations and HDD Crossing Sites




The average monthly runoff depths for the gauging stations are shown on Figure 6-3. Records indicate that 70-85% of the annual runoff of the coastal rivers occurs over the December to April period, while approximately 95% of the annual runoff of the inland rivers occurs over the same period.

It is noted that the average runoff at station G9030003 for January is dominated by the January 1976 flood period that contributed approximately 80% of the total January runoff over the period of records. Similarly, the average runoff at G260219 for March is dominated by the March 1980 flood period that yielded 50% of the total March runoff over the period of records. It is noted that runoff for any month in any particular year may be significantly different from the average runoff, due to the variability in rainfall from year to year and also due to the relatively short period of recorded data.

Figure 6-3 Average Monthly Runoff

The lag between the onset of the ‘wet’ season rainfall in November and the rise in streamflow in December is due to the build-up of soil moisture prior to catchment saturation and resultant surface runoff. Similarly, the recession of streamflow through May and June reflects the baseflow from groundwater as the soils drain.

The ‘Australian Water Resources 2005’ (NWC, 2005) mapping series shows most of the watercourses in the Arnhem Land region as ephemeral streams, with only the lower reaches of the rivers being mapped as perennial streams. It is considered that the extent of perennial streams is significantly under-estimated, based on the information derived from streamflow records and described ‘dry’ season flow characteristics for a number of locations.

The map, ‘Water Resources of the Roper River Region’ (NTG, 2009), shows streams classified by their flow at the end of the ‘dry’ seasonand indicates that streams within the Roper River basin having catchment areas less than about 1500km2 are likely to be dry at the end of the ‘dry’ season.

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Ru

no

ff (

mm)

Month

Average Runoff

G9030089

G9030003

G8260219

G8260053

G8250002




The identified ‘permanent’ rivers crossed by pipeline are listed in Table 6-3 and shown on Figure 6-2. The ‘dry’ season flows listed in Table 6-3 are average flow rates based on the minimum monthly runoff depths plotted on Figure 6-3 and the catchment areas above the crossing site.

Table 6-3 ‘Permanent’ Watercourse Crossings

Stream KP* (km) Catchment Area (km2) Minimum ‘Dry’ Season Flow (L/s)

King River 29.5

365 5

Waterhouse River 83.7

3280 50

Mainoru River 209.5

1865 185

Wilton River 259.5

4505 445

Goyder River 360.5

995 560

Boggy Creek 511.5

135 130

Cato River 539.7

80 75

Giddy River 571.7

80 75

Latram River 581.0 85 220 * KP: Kilometre point or chainage along the pipeline route. Measured from Katherine moving towards Gove

The eastern river basins are underlain by porous sandstone aquifers that have a much higher yield than the fractured rock aquifers underlying the central and western sections of the route. The higher yielding aquifers and slightly higher winter rainfall around Gove provide relatively higher ‘dry’ season flows in the coastal rivers.

It is proposed to construct the watercourse crossings during the ‘dry’ season between June and November when the majority of streams will not be flowing.

6.3.1 Water storages and drains

It is considered that a number of temporary small turkey nest dams may be constructed adjacent to watercourses for storage of water extracted from watercourses for construction water supply purposes.

All holding ponds, surface drains and other structures that are intended to store or convey water should be designed to minimise the potential for mosquito breeding. This can be achieved by incorporating a steep slope into the water, preferably greater than 30° or a 3:1 horizontal to vertical.

The dams and ponds will also require geomembrane liners to prevent seepage and potential local impacts to groundwater quality, levels and flow dynamics.




6.3.2 Hydrotest water

Hydrostatic pressure testing (hydrotesting) of the pipeline will be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of Pipelines - Gas and Liquid Petroleum Field Pressure Testing (AS2885.5:2012). Australian Standards 2885.5:2012 focuses on assessing the structural integrity of the pipeline and does not address the potential issues with the release of poor quality hydrotest water to environmental receptors (i.e. groundwater). For example, biocides and oxygen scavengers are often required to be added to the hydrotest water to prevent corrosion of the pipeline. Disposal of hydrotest water is recommended to be in accordance with Australian Pipeline Industry Association (APIA) Code of Environmental Practice (APIA, 2009).

6.3.2.1 VOLUMES

The pipeline has a nominal diameter DN300 with an outer diameter of 323.9mm and a wall thickness of 6.7mm; this is reduced from the original DN400 nominal diameter adopted in the EIS, yielding a volume of 76kL/km for hydrotest water. The hydrotesting of the HDD sections of the pipeline prior to installation will require relatively small, additional volumes of water (21kL) for crossings up to 300m in length.

The water required for hydrotesting may be extracted from ‘permanent’ watercourses as summarised below in Table 6-4. The volumes listed represent the maximum volumes without re-use, excluding allowance for evaporation and other losses.

Hydrotest water will be stored where required in a ‘turkey nest’ dam that may be lined with a HDPE membrane. The number and locations of the ‘turkey nests’ is not known at this time. It is anticipated that the ‘turkey nests’ will be removed following hydrotesting.

The water may require pre-treatment with bio-degradable chemicals such as biocides and oxygen scavengers to prevent the growth of algae in the pipeline and corrosion inside the pipeline.

Table 6-4 Hydrotest Water Volumes and Potential Sources

Date Stream Pipeline Section Length (km) Volume (ML)

Jul 2014 King River 0 – 24 24 2.0

Aug 2014 24 – 79 55 4.2

Aug-Sep 2014 Waterhouse River 79 – 144 65 4.9

Latram River 592 – 603 11 0.8

Sep 2014 Giddy R / Latram River 574 – 592 18 1.4

Mainoru River 144 – 192 48 3.7

Oct 2014 Mainoru River / Wilton River 192 – 297 105 8.0

Boggy Creek / Cato River 457 – 574 117 9.0

Oct-Nov 2014 Goyder River 398 – 457 59 4.5

Nov 2014 297 – 398 101 7.7




It is proposed to hydrotest the pipeline in 11 sections, varying in length from 11km up to 117km. Therefore, the volumes of water required for hydrotesting range from approximately 0.8ML up to 8.9ML. It is anticipated that hydrotest water may be re-used to test successive sections of pipeline, thereby reducing the volume of water required for hydrotesting from approximately 46ML without re-use to 24ML with maximum re-use.

It is noted that the hydrotest water volumes listed in Table 6-4 represent the volumes required with no re-use plus 20% allowance for evaporation losses.

The proposed re-use of hydrotest water may result in the transfer of relatively minor volumes of water, generally less than 5ML, from one local catchment to another local catchment. The small volumes of water transferred and short durations of released hydrotest water are considered unlikely to impact local hydrologic behaviour significantly.

6.3.2.2 DISPOSAL

It is proposed to dispose of hydrotest water by land application to stable (rocky) vegetated areas to minimise direct impacts on surface water quality and wetland environments. If a suitable site for land disposal cannot be located within an acceptable distance of the pipeline or with negotiated access, the hydrotest water may be disposed via evaporation pond.

It is noted that potential evaporation over the July to November period is approximately 1150mm and average rainfall for the same period is approximately 100mm. Therefore, evaporation ponds should not exceed 1.0m in depth in order to maximise the opportunity for hydrotest water to evaporate before the onset of the monsoon rainfall season. Therefore, the surface area of any evaporation pond is expected to be less than 1 ha, based on a maximum 9ML volume of hydrotest water to be disposed from any section of pipeline, as listed in Table 6-4. As stated above in Section 5.3.1, the evaporation ponds will require geomembrane or clay liners to prevent seepage and potential local impacts to groundwater quality, levels and flow dynamics.

Research undertaken on the disposal of water used for hydrostatic testing of pipelines has revealed the following:

The hydro-test water contains contaminants that may require treatment prior to disposal;

The contaminants for new pipelines are mainly due to mill scale breakdown and unreacted; additives and their reaction products;

The contaminant levels are generally not toxic;

The characteristics of the disposal site play a role in determining the treatment required;

Special planning is required when biocides are used and when the source water itself presents a disposal problem; and

The discharge of hydrotest water is a one-off event and this should be considered when evaluating the potential environmental impact.




Treatment of hydrotest water for disposal may comprise one or more of the following:

Discharge onto geofabric to trap sediment and minimise erosion;

Holding ponds for settling of sediments; and

Chemical treatment and absorption of organic pollutants with activated carbon.

The complexity of the treatment process depends on the characteristics of the hydrotest water, with simpler treatment generally being required for new pipelines.

The release of water to land should be carried out in a manner that ensures:

Vegetation is not damaged;

Soil erosion and soil structure damage is avoided;

No surface ponding of released water occurs;

The quality of groundwater is not adversely affected; and

No release of water to any surface waters occurs.

Table 6-5 Limits for the application of hydrostatic test water to land (CMIT, 2005)

Parameter Limit

pH 6.5 – 8.5 (Range)

Arsenic 2.0mg/L (Maximum)

Cadmium 0.05mg/L (Maximum)

Chromium VI 1.0mg/L (Maximum)

Copper 5.0mg/L (Maximum)

Iron 10mg/L (Maximum)

Lead 5.0mg/L (Maximum)

Manganese 10.0mg/L (Average)

Zinc 5.0mg/L (Maximum)

Nitrogen 35mg/L (Maximum)

Phosphorus 10mg/L (Maximum)

Electrical Conductivity 2000S/cm (Maximum)

The hydrotest water will be released to land for disposal in accordance with a Hydrotest Water Management Plan. The land disposal area should be located more than 100m from the nearest watercourse and the hydrotest water quality for release to land is required to comply with the limits set out in Table 6-5. The disposal of hydro-test water, if undertaken in compliance of comparable conditions is not anticipated to result in adverse impacts to groundwater or surface water resources.

The areas required for storage and disposal of hydrotest water are to be located within the pipeline RoW and will be located to minimise impacts on the local environments.

K

W

6

Tssi

waro

Tind

V

6

WrepaTw

Tsoalothaest

Testhreh‘p

HCSath

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


Wa6.4

The sanitary wite and dispoite sewage a

wastewater mppropriate seoad transpor

Trade waste in accordanceisposal.

Vehicle wash

Im6.5

Water for conesources whrogrammed dequate wat

The anticipatewater for cons

The estimatedources for exverage depth

ocations on ehe project eas well as thextractions artreamflows b

The estimatedquivalent to urface waterhat not less tequirementsave no signif

permanent’ w

However, it isCreek represeSeptember. T

dditional invehe western e

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

astewate

wastewater sosed of in acand sullage tr

may be recycetbacks fromrted and disp

including oil e with ‘Guide

-down water

pacts on

nstruction purere practicabfor the ‘dry’ ster supply maed demands struction pur

d flows listedxtraction of whs of runoff leach watercoach month due correspondre ‘one off’ ocbeyond the 2

d total volumless than 1%rcourses durthan 80% of . Therefore, ficant negati

watercourses

s noted that tent 25-50% o

The planned estigation is

end of the pip

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

r manag

stream will cocordance witreatment sys

led for laundm constructioposed of at se

and grease felines for On-

r will be direc

n Hydrolo

rposes and pble and sustaseason from ay not be avafor potable wposes and th

d in Table 6-6water during isted in Tabl

ourse. The dauring the coning monthly ccurrences th

2014 ‘dry’ sea

me of water re% of the estiming the constthe natural flit is considerve impacts o

s.

he projectedof the total floextractions mrecommend

peline from a

REP-0005

ement

omprise bothth statutory rstems and th

dry and toilet n camps andewage plants

from worksh-site Pre-trea

cted to holdin

ogic Reg

potable suppainable. It is July to Noveailable from water for thehe potential s

6 for each ofthe construcle 6-2 and thata presente

nstruction pevolume dischat last for leason.

equired for thmated total fltruction periolow in surfacred that the pon the hydrol

d demands toow in the strmay have siged for those

alternative str

h grey water regulations, ihe disposal a

use. Effluend watercourss such as at

ops will be tratment’ prior

ng tanks for r

gime of W

ply to the camnoted that cember 2014.some stream temporary csurface wate

f the surface ction period he catchment

ed in Table 6riod, based oharged in theess than six

he project is ow past the od. NT goverce watercoursproposed extlogic regimes

o be sourcedeams for ‘avgnificant impastreams. It m

reams or from

and seweragncluding ‘Co

and reuse of

t disposal arses. The settKatherine, D

reated in dedto transport

removal of w

Watercou

mps will be exonstruction o Therefore, i

ms for some oconstruction er sources ar

watercoursehave been det areas above-6 lists projecon the currene watercoursmonths and

approximateproposed exrnment policyses is availatraction froms and riverine

from the Kinerage’ condiacts on the rmay be necem groundwat

ge which wilode of Practisewage efflu

reas will be lotled solids or Darwin and N

dicated treatmoff-site and

weed seed pr

urses

xtracted fromof the pipelinit is possible of the constrcamps and n

re presented

es considereerived from te the pipelincted volument constructiose. It is notedare unlikely

ely 207ML, wxtraction locay generally able for enviro

m surface wate ecology fo

ng River anditions during river ecosystessary to obtater.

Page

l be treated oce for small o

uent’. Treatedocated with sludge will b

Nhulunbuy.

ment facilitieapproved

rior to release

m surface wane is

that an ruction periodnon-potable in Table 6-6

d as potentiathe monthly e crossing s required byon programmd that the to affect

which is ations on the aims to ensuonmental flowtercourses wr most of the

d Beswick August and ems and ain water for

19

on on-

d

be

s

e.

ater

d.

6.

al

y me,

re w

will e

r




It is also noted that the planned extraction from the Cato River in October 2014 exceeds 13% of the estimated discharge. It may be necessary to obtain some of the water from Boggy Creek in order to minimize impacts on hydrologic regime and river ecosystems.

It will be necessary to develop appropriate management plans for the extraction of water from surface water in order to minimize potential impacts on hydrologic regime and river ecosystems. The management plans may require the installation of temporary stream gauges to facilitate monitoring of flows in the streams.

Additional investigation of ‘dry’ season flow behavior of surface water resources and baseflow from groundwater is required to be undertaken in order to develop appropriate operating rules for sustainable extraction of water from surface water and groundwater resources. The adaptive management of water extractions is also discussed in 6.9.




Table 6-6 Anticipated Water Demand and Surface Water Sources (ML)

Month Stream Total Demand Estimated Flow

Jul-14 King River

7.51 70 Aug-14 8.08 33 May-14

Beswick Ck

2 177 Jun-14 2 66 Jul-14 2 33 Aug-14 8.11 16 Sep-14 2 7 Jun-14

Waterhouse River 0.08

1250 Jul-14 625 Aug-14 17.12 295 Aug-14

Latram River 7.32 730

Sep-14 630 Jul-14

Giddy River 0.08

700 Aug-14 450 Sep-14 5.01 300 Jun-14

Mainoru River

2 1750 Jul-14

4.08 950

Aug-14 580 Sep-14 20.59 500 Oct-14 2 480 Jul-14

Wilton River

2.5 2300 Aug-14 2.58 1400 Sep-14 2.5 1220 Oct-14 24.74 1170 May-14

Cato River

2 5680 Jun-14 2 1130 Jul-14

4.08 725

Aug-14 470 Sep-14 2 310 Oct-14 34.20 250 Jul-14

Boggy Ck

2.5 1190 Aug-14

5.08 770

Sep-14 510 Oct-14 2.5 405 Sep-14

Goyder River 0.11 1470

Oct-14 13.13 1580 Nov-14 13.13 1860 Totals 206.8 32083

K

W

6

6

T2u

Tse

Dp

6

6

TDb

Tthe

H

It b

6

If o

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


Co6.6

6.6.1 Co

The construct014 at Govendertaken pr

Thus, the pipeeason when

Detailed descrovided in th

Cro6.7

6.7.1 Ho

The crossingsDrilling (HDD)

elow particu

The risks asshose of a tradliminated:

Mainten

Exposu

Damag

However, incr

Pipe is

Corrosi

Subsid

Visual l

t is understooeen underta

6.7.2 Alt

f the detailedther conditio

Reloca

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

nstructi

nstructio

tion programe and be comrogressively,

e laying activthe minor st

criptions of thhe Project De

ossing C

rizontal D

s at the ident) constructiolar geograph

ociated with ditional trenc

nance of dist

ure of pipe du

ge of pipe du

reased risks

inaccessible

ion due to un

ence at entry

leak detectio

od that limiteken.

ernatives

d geotechnicaons that indic

tion of the cr

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

on Impac

on Progra

m proposes thmpleted in Oc, within 3-4 w

vities, includitreams are e

he proposed escription cha

Construc

Direction

tified ‘permann. HDD mini

hical features

an HDD instched crossing

turbed banks

uring peak flo

e to anchors

associated w

e for repairs d

ndetected da

y and exit po

on is not poss

ed geotechnic

s to HDD

al investigatiocate HDD is n

rossing and d

REP-0005

cts – Str

am

hat trench exctober 2014, weeks of tren

ing watercouexpected to h

constructionapter of the E

tion Tec

al Drill in

nent’ rivers wmises the riss.

tallation during. In particul

s or stream b

ow events; a

s or other thir

with HDD cro

due to depth

amage to pip

oints; and

sible.

cal investiga

on of the HDnot practicab

deviation of t

ream Cro

xcavation begwith pipe lay

nch excavatio

urse crossinghave minimal

n methods to EIS.

hniques

g

will be constrsk of environ

ng operationar, the risk o

bed;

and

rd party activ

ossings durin

h of cover;

e coating;

tions of the p

DD sites reveble, the follow

the pipeline r

ossings

gin in June 2ying, backfillion.

gs, are to be flow or to be

be used for

ructed using mental harm

s are generaof the followin

vities.

ng operation

proposed HD

eals the existewing options

route; or

2014 at Katheing and resto

undertaken e dry.

stream cros

Horizontal Dm by sending

ally considerng problems

include:

DD crossing

tence of a rocmay be asse

Page

erine and Juoration being

during the ‘d

sings are

Directional the pipeline

able less thais minimized

sites have

ck shelf or essed:

22

ly g

dry’

an d or




Construction of an open trenched crossing.

The relocation of the HDD crossing and deviation of the adjoining pipeline sections may be feasible where the unsuitable geotechnical conditions are localised and a suitable alternative crossing site can be located within a short distance. This option may require negotiation of an amended RoW and approvals from the administering authorities.

It is considered that construction of an open trenched crossing is the most appropriate option where a minor deviation of the pipeline is not possible. The construction of trenched crossings is described below.

6.7.3 Trenched Crossings

Trenched crossings will be constructed at ephemeral stream crossing sites and where site geotechnical investigations indicate that HDD crossing of a ‘permanent’ watercourse is not considered practicable.

Trenching across waterways involves in-stream excavation and pipe laying conducted within a temporarily dewatered section of the waterway. Protection of the works from stream flows is achieved by installing temporary dams upstream and downstream with a bypass channel or pump.

Strategically located sumps allow dewatering in the ‘dry’ area where the water table is exposed. Water resulting from dewatering may be directed to on-site sedimentation ponds or carted to alternative water storage ponds to separate sediment before discharge back into the stream when deemed appropriate, or may be used for dust suppression or other construction purposes.

In the event that HDD cannot be carried out at watercourse crossings with significant flow, flow diversion will be required. This is a modification to the standard open cut method. The technique involves construction of temporary dams, upstream and downstream of the crossing, and diversion of water around the crossing point. This creates a dry construction area between the dams.

The two possible flow diversion techniques are:

Bypass flume, where flow is diverted through flume pipes to prevent siltation, which would arise during trenching, lowering in and backfilling. This technique is less suitable for watercourses with significant flows, broad channels, low gradients or permeable substrates; and

Dam and pump, where coffer dams or head walls are constructed above and below the trenched area and the work area is pumped dry. This is appropriate for low gradient streams with discharges of less than about 1m3/s during construction.

Either technique could be used during periods of very low water flow if practicable, with consideration of short-term weather forecasting to avoid any potential for flooding during the open trench phase of the crossing.

Rehabilitation will be undertaken in accordance with the Code of Environmental Practice (APIA, 2009) and re-contoured to match the surrounding land as soon as practicable after pipe laying and backfilling and bank erosion controls will be constructed or installed, where necessary. An effective

K

W

sein

6

Acopd

It opbthb

Tatrth

Tim

6

Timst

Tcthcin

Tcotr

Td

Tsto

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


ediment andn runoff durin

6.7.4 Pot

As stated aboonditions. Lolant and ancuring the ‘dry

t is anticipatef the plannederiod possibackfilling of t

he very unlike open for u

The excavate bund for tem

rench crossinhe open sect

The short durmpact on stre

Sto6.8

The stormwatmplemented tormwater ru

The managemhanges in thhe watercourhanges in ch

ncreased flow

The managemontaminatedreatment of b

The potentiallisposal or is

The minimisatormwater. Tf the activitie

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

d erosion conng the constr

tential Im

ove, HDD avoocalised eroscillary works dy’ season, it

ed that the md pipe layingle. Typical pthe trench. Lely event of p to six days

ed material frmporary storang may be untion of the cro

rations requireamflow beh

ormwate

ter managemin order to m

unoff dischar

ment of the qe locations arses. The sohannel alignmws or other c

ment of stormd areas withinboth streams

ly contaminato be treated

tion of sedimThe managemes undertake

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

ntrol programruction period

mpacts on

oids impactssion of riverbduring flood is considere

minor streamsg period. Trenractice wouldarger crossinhaving to bla

s.

om the trencage of very lndertaken in ossing.

red for any dhaviour.

r Manage

ment strategyminimize the ged to water

quantity of stoand magnitudils along the ment and crochanges in flo

mwater qualitn the camps s.

ated stormwad on-site prio

ments in runoment of nutrin and polluta

REP-0005

m will be impld and long-te

n Stream

s on streamflbank areas mevents. As p

ed that stream

s will be dry onches in the d be a maximngs would reast the trench

ch will be plaow streamflo two stages w

diversion or te

ement

y comprises wimpact of thercourses.

ormwater rundes of flows pipeline rou

oss-section mow behaviou

ty is focusseand facilities

ater is to be cor to discharg

off dischargeents is not cants normally

emented to merm operatio

Hydraulic

ow behavioumay be inducepipeline consmflow at the

or will have mwaterway cr

mum of two dequire the treh due to the

ced on the uow. Where thwith flow div

emporary sto

works to be e pipeline pro

noff dischargin order to pte are susce

may result frour.

d on separats from ‘clean

captured andge.

d from the sionsidered toy contained

mitigate poten.

cs

ur, under nored by flow co

struction is plHDD crossin

minimal grourossings will days from staench to be oppresence of

upstream sidehis is not conerted via cha

orage of stre

carried out aoject on the q

ged is focuserevent erosioptible to eros

om concentra

tion of runoff’ stormwater

d transported

te is the primo be a significin stormwate

ential impacts

rmal dry weaonditions arolanned to be ngs is unlikel

undwater fed be open for art of trenchipen for up to hard rock, th

e of the crosnsidered pracannels const

amflow will m

and measurequantity and

ed on minimizon and sedimsion and signation of over

f from potentr runoff and a

d off-site for t

mary focus focant issue duer runoff.

Page

s from turbid

ther flow ound the HDD

undertaken y to be altere

flow for mosthe minimumng until four days. In

he trench ma

ssing to creatcticable, the tructed aroun

minimise the

es to be quality of

zation of mentation alonificant land flows,

tially appropriate

treatment an

or ‘clean’ ue to the natu

24

dity

D

ed.

st m

n ay

te

nd

ong

d

ure

K

W

Rflodcoa

Strre

Sinin

Rcoabtoa

6

Tp

T

A

W

W

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


Runoff from eows to be coevices, wheroncentrationreas and is t

Surface runofreatment devetention basi

Stormwater runcrease the lncluding ene

Refuelling andoncentrated ny contaminunded areas

o be directedpproved loca

Ma6.9

The proposederiod are sum

Table 6-7 Ma

Activity/Situatio

Water Extraction

Watercourse cro

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

external areaonveyed in thre practicable

n of flows, scoto avoid or m

ff from withinvices that mains or other d

unoff discharevel or velocrgy dissipate

d storage areloads of hydated runoff o

s will be draind to an approation.

anageme

d strategies fmmarized be

anagement S

on

n

ossings

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

s is to be divhe internal dre and appropouring or sed

minimise remo

n the camps iay include dedevices for p

rged is not tocity of flow orers and erosi

eas that havedrocarbons oor spills and tned to internopriate treatm

nt of Sur

for managemelow.

Strategies fo

Issu

Exc

Adv

Flow

Chased

REP-0005

verted arounrainage systepriate. The ddimentation oval of vege

is to be colleetention basipollutant remo

o result in incr erosion/sedion preventio

e potential toor process chto prevent inal sumps fro

ment process

rface Wa

ment of surfac

or Surface W

ues

cessive streamf

verse river ecos

w disruption or

annel scour, baimentation

d the campsem and to mdiversion of ein natural dratation.

ected and conns for flow moval.

creased flow dimentation ron treatments

o generate cohemicals will ngress of ‘cleom which thes/device or re

ater

ce water qua

Water

flow reduction

system impacts

diversion

ank erosion and

and facility sinimise hydra

external runoainage lines

nveyed via smanagement,

rates or conrisk downstres, will be inst

ontaminatedbe enclosedan’ runoff fro captured co

emoved for tr

ality and qua

Mana

Monitoflows

Ceasestream

Ceaseexceslocatio

d

Appro

Erosiomeasu

Appro

sites in ordeaulic loading

off is not to reor erosion of

swale drains , sediment ba

ncentration oeam. Mitigatitalled where

d stormwater d within bundom other areontaminated reatment and

ntity during t

agement Strate

or upstream an and extractions

e extraction if remflow is excess

e extraction if wssively at criticaon

opriate bypass w

on and sedimenures

opriate rehabilita

Page

r to minimiseg of treatmenesult in f overbank

or pipes to asins, bio-

f flow likely tion works, required.

containing ds to contain as. The stormwater id disposal at

the construct

egy

nd downstream s

eduction in sive

water level dropal downstream

works

nt control

ation

25

e nt

o

is t an

tion

ps

K

W

P

H

San

W

C

Tcow

6

T

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


ipeline construc

ydrotesting

tormwater discnd temporary fa

Wastewater disp

Contaminated w

The following onstruction a

watercourses

Stormw

Hydrote

Wastew

Water E

Waterc

Pro6.10

The following

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

ction

harged from caacilities

posal

wastewater

managemenand will be im:

water Manag

est Water Ma

water Dispos

Extraction M

course Cross

oposed M

activities are

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

Erosstoc

Eros

Wat

amps Con

Eros

Wat

Hyd

nt plans will bmplemented

ement Plan (

anagement P

sal Managem

anagement

sings Manage

Mitigatio

e to be comp

REP-0005

sion of exposedckpiles

sion of backfille

ter quality in rec

ncentrated flows

sion and sedim

ter quality in rec

drocarbons

be prepared during the co

(including Er

Plan;

ment Plan;

Plan; and

ement Plan.

on Measu

pleted during

d areas and

ed trench

ceiving waterco

s

mentation

ceiving waterco

prior to the construction p

rosion and S

ures

g the design

Erosiomeasudrains

Rock

Comp

ourses Qualit

Maxim

Land rates

Approand o

Erosiomeasu

ourses Approareas

Collec

commencemperiod to min

ediment Con

phase:

on and sedimenures – silt fences, sediment bas

check dams in

paction of backf

ty criteria

mize re-use

disposal only –

opriate surface outlets

on and sedimenures – sedimen

opriate treatmens

ction and appro

ment of the pnimise impac

ntrol Plan);

Page

nt control es, diversion sins

trenches

fill

– area, applicati

drainage works

nt control nt basins

nt and disposal

opriate treatmen

ipeline ts on surface

26

on

s

nt

e

K

W

T

T

6

RopNcaa

It

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


Concepcross-sareas;

Prepara

Prepara

The following

Implem

Mainten

Maintenareas f

All fuelsminimis

Construamend

Implem

Implem

The work to b

Implem

Implem

Co6.11

Rainfall and rccurring oveeriod betwee

November anatchment sand June refle

t is considere

It is probetwee

The crothat avo

Trenchgeotech

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

ptual design section and p

ation of conc

ation of Stor

actions are

mentation, rev

nance and re

nance and cfrom where th

s and chemicse the potent

uction of storments requir

mentation of m

mentation of s

be undertake

mentation, rev

mentation of a

nclusion

esultant runoer the six monen Decembend the rise in turation and ects the base

ed that the pr

oposed to coen June and

ossings at thoids impacts

ed crossingshnical invest

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

of sedimentaprofile and in

ceptual Erosi

mwater Man

to be undert

view and upd

epair of ESC

leaning of vehe resultant

cals to be stotial for conta

rmwater manred due to ch

management

surface wate

n during the

view and upd

a litter and so

ns

off in the regnth period fro

er and May. Tstreamflow iresultant su

eflow from gr

roject will no

nstruct the pNovember w

e identified ‘ps on streamflo

s will be constigations indic

REP-0005

ation/detentiternal site dr

ion and Sedi

nagement Pla

taken during

dating, if nec

CP devices;

ehicles and acontaminant

ored and hanmination of s

nagement wohanges in fac

t measures s

er extraction

operations p

dating, if nec

olids manage

ional is highom NovembeThe lag betwin Decemberrface runoff. roundwater a

t impact surf

pipeline and wwhen the maj

permanent’ row behaviou

structed at ecate that HD

on basins forainage, inclu

iment Contro

an (SWMP).

the construc

cessary, of th

any other equts cannot be

ndled in accostormwater r

orks in accorcility design o

specified in t

managemen

phase compr

cessary, of th

ement plan t

ly seasonal, er to April an

ween the onser is due to thSimilarly, th

as the soils d

face water re

watercourse jority of strea

rivers will be ur, under nor

phemeral strDD crossing o

r flow attenuuding bundin

ol Plan (ESC

ction phase:

he ESCP;

uipment or preleased to

ordance withunoff from th

rdance with Sor other facto

he SWMP; a

t measures.

rises:

he SWMP; an

o minimise g

with approxind streamflowet of the ‘wete build-up ofe recession drain.

esources sign

crossings duams will not b

constructedmal dry weat

ream crossinof a ‘permane

uation, diversng of contam

P); and

plant to be caany waterco

h AS 1940 anhe site;

SWMP, subjors;

and

nd

gross solids l

imately 90% w generally ot’ season raif soil moisturof streamflow

nificantly, giv

uring the ‘drybe flowing.

d using HDD ther flow con

ng sites and went’ waterco

Page

sion drain ination risk

arried out in urse;

nd AS 3780 t

ect to

loads in runo

of the rainfaoccurring in tnfall in re prior to w through M

ven that:

y’ season

constructionnditions.

where site urse is not

27

to

off.

all the

ay

n




considered practicable. The short durations required for any diversion or temporary storage of streamflow for trenched crossings will minimise the impact on streamflow behaviour.

An adaptive management strategy will be developed following additional investigation of streamflow and water quality characteristics of the surface watercourses during the ‘dry’ season and implemented to minimise impacts on river ecosystems resulting from extraction of water for construction of the pipeline.

K

W

7

TKsep

7

TGcoloa

Tinari

TTT

1

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


7 HY

The following KGGP route; upplement thxisting datasotential risks

Re7.1

The Northern Groundwater onsidered to

ow intensity oreas are rec

The Water Acn an effort to reas where tvers) or the

The proposedThese GMUs These are de

National Water

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

YDROGEO

hydrogeologwith particulhe water reqset relating tos associated

gional H

Territory obManagemen

o be under reof land use. Hognised as b

ct enables thprovide incr

there is a nepreservation

d easement fare largely cscribed in m

Planning Repo

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

OLOGY A

gy assessmear emphasisuirements foo the availabwith its use.

Hydrogeo

tains about 1nt Units (GMelatively little However, grobeing under p

e declarationeased watered to avoid sn of wetlands

for the KGGPcontained in ore detail in

rt Card/ Norther

REP-0005

ASSESSM

ent describess on establishor the projectbility and/or o

ology

128 gigalitresUs). The Nopressure duoundwater apressure from

n of Water Cr managemestress on gros (e.g. GDEs

P (Figure 7-1the McArthuSection 7.2.

rn Territory

MENT

s the regionahing if groundt. Additionallyoccurrence of

s (GL) of grorthern Territoe to a compand surface wm resource d

ontrol Districnt and protec

oundwater res).

1) traverses aur River and

al hydrogeolodwater is a sy, this Sectiof groundwate

oundwater peory’s water rearatively sma

water resourcdevelopment

cts (WCD) wiction. This is

eserves, base

a total of six Daly River g

ogical settingsustainable reon also examer, it’s quality

er annum froesources arealler populatces in a numt (NWC, 201

ithin the Nors usually carreflow to surfa

(6) GMUs (Froundwater

Page

g along the esource to

mines the y and the

m 55 e generally ion base and

mber of local 11).

thern Territoried out in ace waters (

Figure 7-2). provinces.

29

d

ry

i.e.




Figure 7-1 Proposed KGGP route from Katherine to Gove




Figure 7-2 Groundwater Management Units (GMUs) Pipeline Easement (Eco Logical, 2013)

K

W

7

TGDa

T

Ta

7

TTdbghdindu

Aswcas

LETra

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


Gro7.2

The Northern Groundwater Districts (WCD

nd protection

The proposed

Daly Ri

Daly Ri

Protero

Protero

Protero

McArth

These GMUs re described

7.2.1 Da

The first apprThree aquifer

ipping carboores can proenerally gooydraulically cischarge gro

nto the aquifeependent upnconfined an

A borefield 3kupply of 4,03

water to increalcium (Ca2+

upports a sm

imestone intEvaporite depTotal Dissolveadium (Ra) c

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

oundwat

Territory obManagemenD) within then.

d KGGP rout

iver Basin –

iver Basin –

ozoic Sedime

ozoic Rocks

ozoic Sedime

hur Basin inc

are largely cd below. The

ly River B

oximately 50rs are presenonate rocks. Toduce water od and suitabconnected tooundwater wher. Distributepon whether nd open to d

km east of th39 million litreease pH, mak+) and magnemall horticultu

ter-fingers wiposits in the sed Solids (TDcontents have

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

ter Mana

tains about 1nt Units (GMe Northern Te

te traverses t

Tindall Lime

Jinduckin Fo

entary Rock (

low yielding

entary (Adela

luding Gove

contained in ese include:

Basin –Ti

0-kilometres nt, all formatiThe major aqup to 60 Litre

ble for most po the Katherihen river leve

ed recharge athe aquifer isirect recharg

e town of Kaes is from thking it less coesium (Mg2+)ural and crop

ith the overlyshales locallDS) reach a e also been

REP-0005

gement

128 gigalitresUs). The Waerritory which

the following

estone.

ormation.

(North East

(Bulman).

aide River).

Water Contr

the McArthu

indall Lim

of the propoons in the Loquifer is the Tes/sec (L/s) purposes. Thne River. Spels are low; also occurs, s confined byge

atherine suppese groundworrosive to m)) limits the ppping industr

ying Jinduckiy impart highmaximum ofreported.

Units (G

s (GL) of groater Act enabh provides an

g six (6) GMU

Northern Ter

rol District (W

ur River and

mestone

sed KGGP rower PalaeoTindall Limesand average

he aquifer is prings in the rhowever, duaveraging apy the overlay

plements thewater bores. metal. High hproportion of ry.

n Formation h sulfate (SOf 4000 milligr

MUs)

oundwater pebles the declan increased l

Us (refer to F

rritory).

WCD).

Daly River g

oute is withinzoic Daly Bastone, the ba

e 80 metres dfractured andriver bed andring flood evpproximatelyying cretaceo

e river water. Groundwateardness (a mgroundwater

to form lessO4

2-) concentrrams per litre

er annum froaration of Wlevel of wate

Figure 7-2).

roundwater

n the Daly Rasin; a sequeasal formatiodeep. Water d cavernousd bank at Kavents river way 40 to 140mous sedimen

Up to 40% oer is blended measure of thr used. The

s extensive arations to groe (mg.L-1) an

Page

m 55 ater Control

er manageme

provinces, an

iver Basin. ence of gentlyon. Individualquality is and is therine ater flows ba

mm/year ts or

of the annuawith the rive

he amount ofaquifer also

quifers. oundwater. d elevated

32

ent

nd

y l

ack

al er f




The uppermost formation in the basin, the Oolloo Limestone forms a major aquifer similar in properties to the Tindall Limestone. The depth to groundwater level varies during the year, in response to rainfall recharge, from 3 – 25 metres.

7.2.2 Daly River Basin – Jinduckin Formation

The Jinduckin Formation is located within the Daly River Basin. This comprises gently dipping Palaeozoic Jinduckin Formation of the Daly River Basin sequence. The aquifers are present in fractured and karstic limestone interbeds within a section consisting mainly of siltstone. Bores in the limestone are capable of producing moderate yields. Water quality is generally moderate and may be locally brackish due to the presence of interbedded evaporite deposits. Such groundwaters are high in sulfate (SO4

2-), calcium (Ca2+), sodium (Na+) and chloride (Cl-). Recharge comprises both distributed recharge and infiltration from rivers. The Daly and Katherine Rivers cross the area and these receive minor discharge from the aquifers. The underlying Tindall Limestone, which comprises UA NT242, dips beneath the Jinduckin Formation and forms the most productive aquifer.

7.2.3 Proterozoic Sedimentary GMUs (North East NT, Bulman & Adelaide River)

With reference to Figure 7-2, extending north-east from Beswick there are three (3) GMUs, referred to as Unicorporated Areas (UA), of which the KGGP traverses. These are Proterozoic-aged sedimentary units of the 1) North East Northern Territory, 2) Bulman and 3) Adelaide River GMUs; with sustainable groundwater yields of 500,000 ML, 22,000ML and 99,800ML respectively. Little is known of these GMUs; however, these Proterozoic units are generally gently folded with shale and siltstone as the dominant rock type. Aquifers associated with these GMUs are fractured systems, predominantly at depths of less than 100m.

7.2.4 McArthur Basin

The majority of the length of the KGGP passes through the McArthur River Basin which has five GMU’s and includes the Gove WCD. These include:

Gently folded Proterozoic sandstone and shale are the dominant rocks but dolomite, siltstone and greywacke also occur. Aquifers are the fractured rock type, mostly developed shallower than 100 metres. Bore yields are mostly less than 2 L/sec but higher yields occur near major fracture zones. Several mines use groundwater for processing and undertake varying levels of dewatering. Recharge is of the distributed type, probably less than 5mm/year. Discharge occurs via springs and into riverbeds.

Proterozoic dolomite comprising the Dook Creek Formation; a unit of the gently folded Proterozoic McArthur Basin. The aquifer associated with this formation is virtually untested but may contain a major groundwater resource. Recharge is of the distributed type, probably within

2 Unincorporated Area (UA) designated NT24

K

W

G

Tpsom6va1

7

Cmlorein

AthS

3 se

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


the ran1000 L/

Low-Yilow perof shaleeither ato the c

CretaceCretaceresourcgood w

Recharoccurs more th

Gove Water C

This is a declaoorly consolouthwest. Th

major user is 0 L/sec eachalues genera0 to 50 mm/y

Wa7.3

Climatic variamuch of the cowest, and weduce/negatenfrastructure

At present thehe KGGP areSections.

The groundwaeason

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

ge 10 to 50 /sec in the G

elding Protermeability roce and siltstonabsent or spacoast and tid

eous sedimeeous sands. ce, similar to

with TDS valu

rge is of the das baseflow

han 100 L/se

Control Distri

ared Water Cidated, flat lyhe towns of Nthe Gove ba

h. The total sally less thanyear. Discha

ater supp

ations througconstruction wwhen baseflowe the need to(if required)

e following we those show

ater contributi

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

mm/year. DisGoyder River

rozoic rocks cks in the gene are the doarsely develoal rivers. Rec

entary rocks. The aquifer that in the G

ues generally

distributed tyw into riverbedec.

ict (WCD)

Control Distrying CretaceoNhulunbuy aauxite mine. Psupply from tn 100 mg.L-1.arge occurs a

plies for

hout the yeawill take placw3 is at its mo undertake .

water requiremwn in Table 6

on to a stream

REP-0005

scharge occis supplied f

(near the towently folded Pominant rockoped low-yiecharge is like

This formatiis virtually u

Gove Water Cy less than 1

ype, probablyds. Several o

ict, located inous sands innd Yirrkala oProduction bthe borefield . Recharge isas baseflow i

propose

ar will influencce during the

minimum. Thislarge-scale d

ments (i.e. h6-6. These ar

m; baseflow of

urs as baseffrom dischar

wn of BulmaProterozoic Mks but doleritelding fractureely to be very

ion comprisentested but mControl Distr00 mg.L-1.

y within the rof the areas

n northeast An an outlier oobtain their wbores are typis 1697 Ml/ys of the distrinto riverbed

ed KGGP

ce the KGGPe dry season s approach idewatering fo

ydrotesting, re discussed

ften maintains

flow into riverge from the a

n). This formMcArthur Base and graniteed rocks. Say low.

es poorly conmay contain ict to the nor

range 10 to 5streams mai

Arnhem Landf the main bo

water supplieically 80 met

year. Water qibuted type, s.

constru

P constructiowhen grounds favoured aor the installa

HDD, dust s in more det

sources wate

rbeds. A dry aquifer.

mation comprsin. Alternatine also occur.

aline waters o

nsolidated, flaa major grou

rtheast. Wate

50 mm/year. intain dry sea

d. The aquifeody of the fo

es from the atres deep an

quality is gooprobably wit

uction

on schedule; dwater level

as a means toation of pipe

suppression atail in the follo

er to a stream

Page

season flow

rises variousng sequence. Aquifers areoccur adjace

at lying undwater er quality is

Discharge ason flows o

er consists ofrmation to thquifer but the

nd supply up od with TDS hin the range

however, s are at theiro line

and potable)owing

during dry

34

w of

s es e

ent

of

f he e to

e

r

) for




7.3.1 Water requirements for KGGP pipeline infrastructure: Potential source of groundwater

Where practicable and sustainable it is understood that the main supply of water for hydrotesting of the pipeline, HDD and dust suppression is to source from surface water courses (e.g. King River, Goyder River etc) as identified and discussed in Sections 6.3 to 6.5. However, as discussed in Section 6.11, until such time as an adaptive management strategy has been developed to better our understanding on the sustainability of surface water resources to provide water for the KGGP, other sources of water needs to be considered. Not only is additional water required to supplement construction activities, a good source of potable water is required for the 750 persons working on the KGGP Project.

At present it is unaware if any source for drinking water has been defined. It is understood that the construction of the pipeline will commence concurrently at each end of the proposed pipeline network; where, access to potable water is more common. However, as camp facilities move during construction, especially away from more populated centres, the location, access and quality of water for human consumption becomes somewhat limited. Therefore it is proposed that sources of potable water may come from groundwater bores in the vicinity of the KGGP.

Information on existing groundwater bore infrastructure along the KGGP was collated from the following sources.

Water Resources of North Eastern Arnhem Land (DLPE, 1999);

Water Resources of the Katherine Region and South West Arnhem Land (DLPE, 2001);

Department of Land Resource Management (DLRM) online NR Maps (Northern Territorty); and

Advice from DLRM personnel in the Northern Territory Government and from local experts appointed by Pacific Aluminium’s envirornmental consultant.

These resources were used to assess the occurrence (if any) of ‘existing’ and suitable groundwater bores which could be used as alternative sources of water; principally for human consumption.

With reference to Figures 7.1 to 7.6 (refer Appendix 2) and Table 7-1, a total of thirty (30) groundwater bores were identified. Reviews of these thirty (30) groundwater bores have indicated highly variable bore yields and restricted water quality results for parameters relevant for human health. For example, data abstracted from the 1999 and 2001 DLPE studies, shows that water quality results for these thirty (30) bores are incomplete (refer Table 7-1) and of little value in establishing the true potential for consumption. For example, the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (NHMRC4 & ARMCANZ5, 1996) provides the necessary criteria in establishing good quality drinking water. These Guidelines provide an authoritative Australian reference on acceptable drinking water quality, covering a wide range of the microbiological, physical, chemical and radiological characteristics.

4 National Health & Medical Research Council 5 Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand




With regards to the present dataset it remains unclear as to wether groundwater can be used as a potable supply; however, it still may be used as a source of water to supplement construction activities. Additional field investigations will be carried out to ascertain the degree to which groundwater from ‘existing’ bores (refer Table 7-1) can be used during construction of the KGGP project.




Table 7-1 Location, bore yield and basic water chemistry of potential groundwater bores along the KGGP easement

K

W

7

DTath

Tre

7

ABcoreKpcoAreaaine

Ramea

6 G(A

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


Po7.4

Data relating Therefore, su

ssess the rishe KGGP.

The following esult of the p

7.4.1 Ac

ApproximatelyBasin. Given ontaminationemainder of t

KP distances otential for thoastal enviro

As groundwatequired for thforementionetmospheric c

nfrastructure ffects to biot

Regulatory poppropriate m

management stablishing assessed indi

EnvironMinisteaquatic

Dear S

GuideliResour

Ahern C

Acid SuResour

Generally occur

ARMCANZ, 199

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

tential e

to groundwapplemental d

sks to ground

Sections deproposed KG

id Sulfate

y half of the the nature on as a result the KGGP coof ~500km a

he presenceonments6 theter is generahe installatioed sections oconditions, thand release

ta and other

olicy favours management

guidelines foa governing fividually and

nment Protecerial Council. c ecosystems

.E., Moore Nnes. In Queerces and Min

C.R, Ahern Mulfate Soils (Arces Science

r near coastal e

99; Dear et. al., 2

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

nvironm

ater in the aredata will be cdwater quant

escribe the poGGP.

e Soils (A

KGGP crossf the lithologof pipeline corridor there and from ~57of Acid Sulfa

ere is a risk oally shallow inn of pipeline of the pipelinhe oxidation harmful metsensitive rec

avoidance omeasures aor ASS; thereframework. H by an exper

ction and He2011. Nation

s, Canberra,

NG, Dobos Sensland Acidnes, Indooroo

M.R. and PowASS) in Que

e Centre, Ind

nvironments or 2002))

REP-0005

mental ris

ea encompacollected follotity and qual

otential risks

ASS)

ses over mety in these ar

construction a are environ70km to 603fate Soils (ASof intersectingn coastal envinfrastructur

ne there is a products frotals/metalloid

ceptors. This

of areas undere required. efore, the fol

However, eacrienced envir

eritage Councnal guidanceACT;

SK, Watling Kd Sulfate Soilopilly, Queen

well B. 1998eensland (19ooroopilly.

palaeo-coastal

sks from

ssing the KGowing additioity as a resu

s to groundwa

ta-sedimentareas, there isactivities (e.gmentally senkm along theSS). As ASS g and exposvironments, ire. Thereforehigh-risk of Am ASS haveds to the env is described

erlain by ASSThe Northerllowing referech area suspronmental sp

cil and the Ne for the man

K.M. and Ahel Technical Mnsland, Austr

. Guidelines 98). QASSIT

environments (

KGGP d

GGP is, to soonal investigalt of the cons

ater that hav

ary rocks asss a lower riskg. surface spnsitive localese proposed Kgenerally ocing ASS durit is likely tha

e, if ASS is pASS exposure to potential vironment. Thd in more det

S; however, n Territory doences will bepected of, or pecialist.

atural Resounagement of

ern C.R. 2002Manual. Deparalia; and

for SamplingT. Departmen

(<10m Australia

developm

ome degree, ations in an struction and

ve been iden

sociated withk of groundwpills etc). Hows/regions. Fo

KGGP pipelinccurs at shalring pipeline cat dewateringresent alongre. If exposeto damage p

his may havetail in Sectio

if this is not oes not have

e used as a pcontaining A

urce Manageacid sulfate

2. Soil Manaartment of N

g and Analysnt of Natural

an Height Datum

Page

ment

limited. effort to bette

d operation of

tified as a

the McArthuater

wever, over tor example, ane, there is thlow depths iconstructiong will be g the ed to pipeline e irreversiblen 7.4.2.

possible thene specific proxy for ASS, will be

ement soils in inlan

agement atural

sis of LowlanResources,

m (AHD),

38

er f

ur

the at he n .

e

n

nd

nd

K

W

7

AKthhgawsEoreEbstitogad

Teo

Wheaace

7

Wg(rthTpn

AS

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


7.4.2 Pot

As discussed KGGP constrhese systemydraulic conroundwater ind maintains

which this is oupports and

Ecosystems (nly is this a mely on it and

Ecosystems aiophysical asignificantly; bme, and witho recover. Aroundwater bnd Gove WCevelopment.

The area travvaporation af critical impo

Where surfacydrostatic textraction candditional invessessment tharacteristicstablished.

Reg7.5gro

With regards roundwater (refer Sectionhe GMUs repTerritory. The

orous sandsational wate

Although unlikSection 74 of

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

tential en

in Section 7uction purpos will responnection (i.e. is required. Fs many of theoccurring for maintains su

(GDEs), thermatter of grothe potentia

are fundamessets).The nboth temporahout this acce

At present it isby existing u

CDs. The ma.

versed by theand transpiraortance to th

ce waters (incsting, there in be manageestigations wo be includes for each G

gulatory oundwate

to the legisla(or surface w

n 7.2) presenpresent selece shallow higstone aquiferr quality man

kely, there mthe Water A

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

nvironme

7.3, it is propooses (i.e. dusnd when watebaseflow chaFor exampleese surface weach water

urface water e needs to b

oundwater sul for contamintal for the pature and deally and spatess, the ecos understoodusers in the reain threats to

e KGGP recetion from ripa

he functioning

cluding GDEis also potened appropriatwill be used td in adaptiveDE so that tr

requiremer

ation and mawater), Tablet along the Kcted major aqh yielding aqin the easte

nagement pla

may be a requAct. This will o

REP-0005

ntal rece

osed that wast suppressioer is extractearacteristics), although it water systemsource is larsystems, oth

be a better unupply (i.e. vonation from c

preservation egree of the dtially. GDEs ological dama

d that there isegions of the GDEs involv

eives high anarian vegetag of these ec

Es) are to be ntial for impactely once theto generate ae managemerigger criteria

ments for

anagement (re 7-2 lists theKGGP routequifer system

quifers in the ern McArthur anning frame

uirement to oonly be nece

ptors

ater from surfon); howevered from them) between thcan be assu

ms in the arergely unknowherwise knownderstandinglume), but alconstruction and maintendependenceoften rely on age may be is currently noe KGGP; apave expanded

nnual rainfall,ation and all scosystems an

used as a soct on GDEs. ese systems an adaptive ment strategy fa, for the ext

the Take

refer Sectione Beneficial U. As there arms within gazDaly-RoperBasin have

ework (EA 20

obtain a Wasessitated if th

face water co, at present i. A better unese surface med that groa of the KGG

wn. Thereforwn as Groung of their funcso the qualitactivities. G

nance of the GDEs havegroundwaterreversible oo over-allocaart from the ad land clearin

, but much ofsurface watend should be

ource for watPotential imhave been id

managementfor GDEs incraction of su

, Use or D

5) the takingUse Declaratre no other Wzetted WCDsand Gove Widentifiable c001; TTP, 20

ste Dischargehere is any in

ourses will bit is unknown

nderstandingwater system

oundwater floGP route, there, where grondwater Depection and sigty of water foroundwater environment

e on groundwer for a certaior they may tation or over-areas of the ng for agricu

f this is quicker. Groundwae managed a

ter for constrmpacts to GD

dentified. Inft strategy. A

cludes estimaurface water,

Disposal

g, using or thtions for all o

WCDs presens across the

WCDs, and aconservation004).

e Licence unntention to di

Page

be extracted fn as to how of the ms and ow supplies e degree to oundwater endent

gnificance. Noor the biota thDependent tal assets (i.e

water can varin period of ake a long ti-use of Daly-Roper ltural and urb

kly lost throuater is therefoaccordingly.

ruction and Es from wateformation fromAppropriate ating baseflomay be

of

he disposingther GMUs

nt in the regioNorthern n un-named values in th

nder Part 7,scharge

39

for

ot hat

e. ry

me

ban

ugh ore

er m

ow

of

on,

, e

K

W

cohcothd

T

p

G

USGP

DD

D

MC

1 2

T

A

W

* P

7

Rres(W

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


ontaminatedave only beeontaminatedhe majority oepartment, p

Table 7-2 Be

pipeline

LGMUs1

Un-named CreSandstone, ArnGranite & Low Proterozoics

Daly River BasDaly-Roper WC

Daly River Bas

McArthur RiverCreek Geosync

Refer to Figur

Refer to Bene

Table 7-3 Leg

Act (2011)

Use of water

Taking of surf

Groundwater

Extraction of g

Waste dispos

if hydrotest wPart 7, Section

CO7.6

Relevant and esult of the cix (6) GroundWCD) and G

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

d water whichen declared id water in areof the RoW, tprior to the is

neficial Use

Locations

taceous nhem Block yielding

in CD

in

r and Pine cline

re 7-2 for loc

eficial Use De

gislation for

face water for

as a supply

groundwater

al: uncontami

: contamina

water contains,74 & 74A: “G

ONCLUSI

available infconstruction odwater Mana

Gove WCD. T

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

h would entein two areas eas where thhe formal de

ssue of such

e Declaration

Region

Gove Are

Katherine

KatherineTributarie

McArthuArea

ation of GMUs

clarations http

r the Take, U

use

nated

ated*

or is suspectrant of waste

ONS

formation peof the proposagement UnitThe three (3)

REP-0005

r a waterwayas listed bele beneficial

eclaration proa licence.

ns of GMUs

ea

e River

e River & es

r River Catchm

s

p://lrm.nt.gov.a

Use and Dis

NT Wa

Part 6

Part 6

Part 6

Part 5disposPart 7discha

ted to contain,discharge” is

ertaining to thsed KGGP wts (GMUs); i major GMU

y. In that caslow. If there uses have nocess would

s (and assoc

Benealign

AquaWate

AquaQuali

AquaQuali

ment Enviro

au/__data/ass

sposal of wa

ater Act (201

6A, Water extra

6A, Water extra

6A, Water extra

5, Section 63: Gsal licence 7, Section 74 &arge licence

any level of crequired.

he supplemewas assessedncluding the s include:

se beneficial is a requiremot been declneed to be u

ciated region

eficial Use Deed with ANZE

tic Ecosystemr Quality & Ae

tic Ecosystemty & Aesthetic

tic Ecosystemty & Aesthetic

onmental, Cul

ets/pdf_file/00

ater as refere

1) reference

action licence

action licence

action licence

Grant of unde

& 74A: Grant o

contamination

ntary risks (ifd. This pipeliRoper-Daly

uses becomment to dischlared, which undertaken b

ns) along th

eclarations2

EEC Guidelin

m Protection anesthetics

m Protection, Rcs and Agricul

m Protection, Rcs and Agricul

ltural and Ripa

003/7518/bud

enced in the

decisions

decisions

decisions

erground waste

of waste

then a licence

f any) to groine extensionWater Contr

Page

me relevant anharge

is the case fby the releva

he KGGP

nes

nd Recreation

Recreational Wtural Water Us

Recreational Wtural Water Us

arian

.pdf

e NT Water

e

e with regardin

undwater asn will traversrol District

40

nd

for nt

nal

Water se

Water se

ng

s a se




Daly River Basin - Tindall Limestone;

Daly River Basin – Jinduckin Formation; and

McArthur Basin including Gove WCD.

Based on available information (i.e. TTP EIS, 2004), this desktop assessment has identified that there is a minimal risk to water quality (surface water and groundwater) as a result of the construction and operation of the KGGPproject. Current engineering design states that the pipeline will be buried to depths of 750mm below the existing terrain and to depths of 2000mm under wetlands (TTP EIS, 2004; Section 5.4.1). Apart from those areas where the pipeline is to be installed beneath wetlands, the pipeline will be constructed above the groundwater table. Although groundwater, for the most part, is well below the final construction and installation depths for most of the year, construction is to be carried out during the dry season. This approach will ensure that groundwater will not be intersected during construction, thus negating the need for dewatering operations and appropriate management of dewatering effluent. During the wet season, where water may come into contact with the buried pipeline in low lying areas, there maintains a low risk of the migration of contaminants to groundwater from the pipeline.

7.6.1 Identified Risks

With regards to impacts caused to groundwater sources and systems reliant on groundwater, no major risks have been identified; however, minor risks to water quality and quantity, and the biodiversity assets that rely on it, have been identified. These risks are described in more detail in Section 7.4; while Section 7.7 provides recommendations for further study to better assess the risks to groundwater as a result of the KGGP construction and operation and the development of an adaptive management strategy.

However, the fundamental concerns or potential risks caused to groundwater assets are associated with the following site activities associated with the KGGP. These include the following and are addressed in more detail below:

Use of water sourcing from surface water courses causing over extraction;

Allocate suitable groundwater sources (i.e. existing bores) to supplement a supply of water for construction purposes (i.e. dust suppression and hydrostatic testing) and for human consumption. However, if bores are identified these need to be investigated in terms of their yield (for supply purposes), quality (as a potable supply) and ensure abstraction of water from these bores do not have adverse environmental impacts (i.e. impacts to nearby receptors);

Exposure of Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS); and

Introduction of chemicals (i.e. fuel spills) to water resources from surface activities.

7.6.1.1 OVER EXTRACTION OF SURFACE WATER

Given the scarcity of data regarding flow or recharge of surface waters from groundwater (i.e. baseflow), there is the potential for the over abstraction of water from surface water systems if surface water is to be used in the construction of the camp. Such activities of abstracting water from surface




water courses may potentially impact biodiversity assets that rely on natural, and not anthropogenic, fluctuations of water levels.

7.6.1.2 DEFINE SUPPLEMENTAL SOURCES OF GROUNDWATER

The availability of water sources for construction purposes and for human consumption, along the KGGP route, is largely unknown. Water from surface water courses has been proposed to supply at least some of the water for construction; however, it is not recommended that water from surface water is consumed by camp personnel. This study has identified a series of existing groundwater bores along the KGGP; however, supplied data suggests that yields are low (i.e. generally <10 L/sec) and quality for human consumption is largely unknown.

The groundwater bores that have been identified in this study may be a good source of groundwater; however, these need to be investigated ahead of construction. The following identify the requirements for investigating these bores:

Review the potential existing bores located within a defined corridor using the NR Mapping Tool which identifies all bores drilled in the NT;

Ascertain if bores identified in this desktop study still exist (as current data extends back some 30 years), if they are functional and capable of producing the required yields and that the owners can provide authority for obtaining water supplies;

Provide an estimate of the capacity of each borehole to provide the necessary quantities and qualities of groundwater for the intended uses; and

Identify any health issues, and/or potential environmental impacts from the temporary use/consumption of the groundwater and disposal options.

If it is established that the existing groundwater bores identified as part of this study cannot be used as a supplemental source of groundwater for the KGGP, there is an option of installing new groundwater bores. However, installing new groundwater bores is not recommended as this exercise may prove to be costly and ineffective (i.e. due to the variability of the local geology and likely requirement for deep bore construction). If considered to be a viable option, the installation of new groundwater bores does not however require approval under the Water Act due to the Section 7 exemption discussed above.

7.6.1.3 CHANGES TO GROUNDWATER QUALITY FROM THE EXPOSURE OF ASS

In addition to the potential risks associated with the over abstracting of water from surface water systems, the potential for exposing Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) in low-lying areas (i.e. at KP ~500km and ~570km to 603km) as a result of pipeline construction, is quite high (refer to Appendix 3; Eco Logical, 2013). More recent ASS, Holocene in age, generally form in low-lying coastal areas (i.e. <10mAHD) and where groundwater levels are generally near to, or at, the surface. Therefore, in such instances groundwater will need to be dewatered to install pipeline infrastructure, and if ASS is present, appropriate measures will need to be carried out to manage dewatering effluent and the potentially harmful oxidation products from ASS exposure. In addition to the harmful products that could be

K

W

inth

7

Leina

7

Aimatheu

Tsresto

KATHERINE T

WATER RESO


ntroduced to he pipeline fr

7.6.1.4 DE

CON

astly, and altffects to wat

n the pipelinevoid contam

FU7.7

Ahead of conmportant thatssets (i.e. G

he connectivffective mansed for cons

Therefore, witupplementalequired. Withtrategies to ef the constru

TO GOVE GAS

OURCES ASS

o.: 201001-00

water resourom the gene

FINE CONS

NTAMINAT

though conser resourcese constructioination from

RTHER IN

struction actt more detailDEs) as a reity between sagement of t

struction purp

th regards to supply of wah reference testablish newuction and op

S PIPELINE

ESSMENTS

0367-00-EN-R

rces as a reseration of aci

STRUCTION

ION

idered low ris. This may inn to water resuch activitie

NVESTIGA

ivities it is re is collated to

esult of the cosurface and the pipeline dposes.

o the potentiaater for the co the risks dw sources foperation of th

REP-0005

sult of ASS oid.

N ACTIVITI

isk, there is pnvolve fuel sesources. Hoes by using i

ATIONS

ecommendedo better definonstruction ogroundwaterduring const

al risks and dconstruction iscussed in Sr, and to neg

he KGGP.

oxidation, the

ES TO EST

potential for sspills or the reowever, manaimmediate re

d that further ne the risks (of the pipelinralong the pitruction; espe

data gaps asof the KGGPSection 7.6.1gate the risks

ere may be d

TABLISH RI

surface activelease of othagement plaesponse ope

investigation(if any) assoce. Additionalpeline route ecially where

sociated withP, an adaptiv1, Table 7-4 s to, groundw

damaging eff

ISK TO SO

vities to causher harmful cans should beerations.

ns be carriedciated with glly, more detwill also ass

e these resou

h using grouve managemproposes ma

water resourc

Page

fects caused

IL/WATER

se harmful chemicals use designed to

d out. It is groundwater ail regarding

sist in the urces are to

ndwater as aent strategy anagement ces as a resu

43

to

ed o

g

be

a is

ult




Table 7-4 Recommended further studies ahead of the pipeline construction and management strategy option

Activity/Situation Issue(s) Management Strategy

Surface water extraction (i.e. GDEs) (Same for surface water strategy)

Excessive streamflow reduction

Adverse river ecosystem impacts

Monitor upstream and downstream flows and extractions using staff gauge

Cease extraction if reduction in streamflow is excessive

Cease extraction if water level drops excessively at critical downstream location

Verify suitability of existing groundwater bores along the KGGP route

To determine if groundwater is a viable source of water to supplement construction requirements

Field investigations shall include locating groundwater bores shown in Figure 1 to 6 in Appendix 2. The field investigation will involve navigation to the recorded location based on GPS coordinates, photo-location, local guide or local knowledge. At each borehole basic data will be collected on the:

Existence and accessibility to the borehole; Current ownership (if changed); Water level; Physicochemical water quality (Temp, pH, Electrical Conductivity (EC), Dissolved Oxygen (DO)); Pumping infrastructure present (i.e. windmill) and its functionality; Available power source; Estimated water yield; Bore casing material and diameter; Discharge method of the pump; and Potential health, safety and environmental impacts.

If present, the groundwater bore, headworks, pump, tanks, pipelines will be photographed for potential make-good claims. It is recommended that the owner of each groundwater bore be contacted in an effort to collate anecdotal information and permission to abstract water for the uses identified above. This may be through telephone call, email, or personal visit. A proforma borehole owner’s consent form will be developed under the requirements of the Principal and used in the field study.




Activity/Situation Issue(s) Management Strategy

Occurrence of ASS and requirement for groundwater dewatering for pipeline installation

Exposure of ASS and PASS Undertake an independent ASS field investigation by specialist personnel to delineate the likely (if at all) occurrence for ASS and characterise the soils accordingly. These investigations, along with geotechnical studies will identify if groundwater will be need to be dewatered to install the pipeline. A detailed report based on the findings of the field investigations (and laboratory results – if required) will be presented in an ASS Management Plan.

Pipeline construction Chemical leaks and spills Field investigations across all disciplines will have compiled sufficient site information pertaining to site conditions so that management plans can be generated to minimise the effects from chemical spills, thus contaminating groundwater (low risk)




8 REFERENCES

Ahern C.R, Ahern M.R. and Powell B. 1998. Guidelines for Sampling and Analysis of Lowland Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) in Queensland (1998). QASSIT. Department of Natural Resources, Resources Science Centre, Indooroopilly.

Australian & New Zealand Environment Conservation Council (ANZECC). 2000. National Water Quality Management Strategy: An introduction to the Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality. http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/quality/nwqms-introduction-4a.html.

Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ). http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publications/eh52

Dear S.E., Moore NG, Dobos SK, Watling K.M. and Ahern C.R. 2002. Soil Management Guidelines. In Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual. Department of Natural Resources and Mines; Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia.

Department of Lands, Planning and Environment & Natural Resources Division (DLPE). 1999. Water Resources of East Arnhem Land. Report # 02/1999D.

Department of Lands, Planning and Environment & Natural Resources Division (DLPE). 2001. Water Resources of the Katherine Regions and South West Arnhem Land. Report # 28/2001D.

Department of Land Resource Management. 2013. Acid Sulfate Soils Risk Mapping – DLRM Data – Extract – North_250 (GDB).

Earth, Water, Life Sciences (EWLS). 2004. Impacts on Hydrology & Water Quality from the Trans Territory Pipeline Project’ – Appendix G of Draft EIS – EWL Sciences Pty Ltd, Oct 2004.

Eco Logical Australia. 2013. Katherine to Gove Gas Pipeline (KGGP) Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared on behalf of Pacific Aluminium.

Environment Protection and Heritage Council and the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council. 2011. National guidance for the management of acid sulfate soils in inland aquatic ecosystems, Canberra, ACT.

Northern Territory of Australia Water Act. 2011. In force as of 7-November-2011

Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport (NRETAS). Fact sheet: Beneficial Use Declarations. www.nt.gov.au/nretas/water/manage

National Water Commission (NWC). 2005. ‘Australian Water Resources 2005’ - National Water Commission. 2005

Northern Territory Government (NTG). 2009. ‘Water Resources of the Roper River Region’ - Northern Territory Government. 2009




Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM). 2011. Australian groundwater-dependent ecosystems toolbox part1: assessment framework. Waterlines Report Series No 69, December, 2011. Report prepared on behalf of the National Water Commission.

Woodside Energy & Alcan Gove. 2004. Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Trans Territory Underground Pipeline.

WorleyParsons. 2012. Katherine to Gove Gas Pipeline: Constructability Workshop Outputs Report (dated 20/12/12). Report prepared by WorleyParsons on behalf of Pacific Aluminium Report # 201001-00367-CM-REP-0001

Zaar, U., G Prowse and I Matthews.1999. ‘Water Resources of East Arnhem Land’ Report 02/199D –Sept 1999

Zaar. 2003. ‘Water Resources of West Arnhem Land’ Report 34/2003D –2003



Document No.: 201001-00367-00-EN-REP-0005 Appendix Page 1 Revision: 2

Appendix 1 – Surface Water Maps

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

AMADEUS BASIN TO DARWIN PIPELINE

KATHERINE BARUNGA (BAMYILI)

MATARANKA

GAPUWIYAK

UMBAKUMBA

NUMBULWAR

OENPELLI

JABIRU

MANINGRIDAMILINGIMBI

RAMINGINING

ALYANGULA

ANGURUGU

NHULUNBUY

YIRRKALA

NGUKURR

GALIWINKU

GOVE

0 km

100 km

200 km

300 km

400 km

500 km

600 k

m

DalyRoper

Walker

Koolatoog

Goyder

BlythLiverpool

Buckingham

Gove

Katherine

Ngukurr

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community

2200000

2200000

2400000

2400000

2600000

2600000

8399

984

8399

984

8599

984

8599

984

DRG NO

PATH: ..201001-00367-GIS-SKT-019

TITLE

CHKDRN

CLIENT

DATERW 18-Feb-13

A1REV

REV REVISION DESCRIPTION

LOCALITY

A1 FOR INFORMATION ONLY

±0 100 200

Kilometres

LEGEND" WEATHER STATIONS

REGIONAL DRAINAGE BASINS100 KM KPSPFS ALIGNMENT 20130205

" POPULATED PLACESNT PIPELINESNT RAILMAJOR WATERCOURSES

INFORMATION ONLYNOT TO BE USED

FOR CONSTRUCTION

Pro

duce

d by

ryan

.wrig

ht@

wor

leyp

arso

ns.c

om, G

eom

atic

s

NOTES

WORLEYPARSONS PROJECT

DATUM

SCALE @ A31:1,500,000

GCS GDA 1994 MGA z53

KATHERINE TO GOVE GAS PIPELINE PFS

REGIONAL DRAINAGE BASINS

201001-00367-GIS-SKT-019AW

±

201001-00367

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

KATHERINE BARUNGA (BAMYILI)

MATARANKA

GAPUWIYAK

UMBAKUMBA

NUMBULWAR

OENPELLI

JABIRU

MANINGRIDAMILINGIMBI

RAMINGINING

ALYANGULA

ANGURUGU

NHULUNBUYYIRRKALA

NGUKURR

GALIWINKU

GOVE

0 km

100 km

200 km

300 km

400 km

500 km

600 k

m

G8250002

G8260053

G8260219

G9030003

G9030089

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community

2200000

2200000

2400000

2400000

2600000

2600000

8400

000

8400

000

8600

000

8600

000

DRG NO

PATH: ..201001-00367-GIS-SKT-017

TITLE

CHKDRN

CLIENT

DATERW 18-Feb-13

A2REV

REV REVISION DESCRIPTION

LOCALITY

A2 FOR INFORMATION ONLY

±0 100 200

Kilometres

LEGEND#

PROPOSED HDD CROSSING!( GAUGING STATIONS

HDD CROSSING CATCHMENT100 KM KPSPFS ALIGNMENT 20130205

" POPULATED PLACESNT PIPELINESNT RAILMAJOR WATERCOURSES


FOR CONSTRUCTION

Pro

duce

d by

ryan

.wrig

ht@

wor

leyp

arso

ns.c

om, G

eom

atic

s

NOTES

WORLEYPARSONS PROJECT

DATUM

SCALE @ A31:1,500,000

GCS GDA 1994 MGA z53

KATHERINE TO GOVE GAS PIPELINE PFS

PROPOSED HDD CROSSINGS

201001-00367-GIS-SKT-017AW

±

201001-00367




Appendix 2 – Existing Groundwater Bores Along The KGGP

#

#

#

#

"

"

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+ $+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+ $+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+ $+$+$+$+

$+ $+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+ $+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+ $+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+ $+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+ $+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+ $+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

ALICE SPRINGS DARWIN RAILWAYAMADEUS BASIN TO DARWIN PIPELINE

MINIALAPARK

KUMBIDGEE

MATARANKASTATION

MAUDCREEK

EVA

VALL

EYRO

AD

BARUNGA

UR

ALL

A R

OA

D

TINDAL AIRPORT

QU

ARR

YR

OA

D

FOX ROADKIN

GR

IVE

R

GORGE ROAD

C E NTRAL ARNHE M ROAD

STUART HIGHWAY

0 km10 km

20 km

30 km

40 km

50 km60 km

70 km80 km

90 km

AB C

D

DF

G

G

H

I J

K

Copyright ©WorleyParsons Services Pty Ltd

ABN 61 001 279 812REV DATE REVISION DESCRIPT ION REF DRAWING No REFERENCE DRAWING TITLE

..201001-00367 KGGP PFS\03Project\Workspace\_SKT\201001-00367-GIS-SKT-021.mxd

CUSTOMER

KATHERINE GOVE GAS PIPELINE

IDENTIFIED BORE HOLES

DRAWING No REV

"

"

"

"

"0 km

500 km400 km300 km

200 km100 km

JABIRU

NGUKURR

NHULUNBUY

GAPUWIYAK

KATHERINE

DRAWN DRAFT CHK DESIGNED ENG CHK REVIEWED APPROVED 201001-00367-GIS-SKT-021

20 010

Kilometers

PROJECT No

1:300,000SCALEA3 SHEET

Produ

ced b

y: RY

AN.W

RIGH

T@W

ORLE

YPAR

SONS

.COM

- Geo

matic

s

NOTES

±

201012-00367 A

LEGEND10KM KP

PFS ALIGNMENT 20130205

$+ IDENTIFIED BORE HOLES

NO DATA / POOR YIELD

$+

WATER BOREECOLOGICAL STUDY 2000-2001

" POPULATED PLACES

# HOMESTEADS

ROADS

PIPELINE

RAIL

ISSUED FOR INTERNAL REVIEW20-Feb-13A RW TC

±LOCALITY MAP

PRELIMINARYUNCHECKED


FOR CONSTRUCTION

UNCONTROLLEDCOPY

PAGE 1 OF 6

IMAGERY: LANDSAT

#

$+$+$+$+ $+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+ $+

$+

$+$+

$+

MOUNTAINVALLEY

MAINORU

GOO

NDOO

LOO

PROPACC

CENTRAL ARNHEM ROAD

90 km

100 km

110 km

120 km

130 km

140 km

150 km

160 km

170 km

180 km

190 km

I

J

K

M1

L

L




CUSTOMER



DRAWING No REV

"

"

"

"

"0 km

500 km400 km300 km

200 km100 km

JABIRU

NGUKURR

NHULUNBUY

GAPUWIYAK

KATHERINE


20 010

Kilometers

PROJECT No


Produ

ced b

y: RY

AN.W

RIGH

T@W

ORLE

YPAR

SONS

.COM

- Geo

matic

s

NOTES

±

201012-00367 A

LEGEND10KM KP




$+


" POPULATED PLACES

# HOMESTEADS

ROADS

PIPELINE

RAIL


±LOCALITY MAP



FOR CONSTRUCTION

UNCONTROLLEDCOPY

PAGE 2 OF 6

IMAGERY: LANDSAT

#

#

#

#

#

#

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+ $+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

MAINORU

MOBARN

MOUNTJEAN

MOUNTAINVALLEY

BAGHETTI

MOUNTCATT

BULMANWEEMOL

MOUNT JEAN

GORPULYU

L

MOBARN

MAINORU

MOUNT CATT

MANINGRIDAACCESS

MAINORU/WONGALARA

CENTRAL ARNHEMROAD

200 km

210 km

220 km

230 km

240 km

250 km

260 km

270 km

280 km

290 km

M1

N

O

P




CUSTOMER



DRAWING No REV

"

"

"

"

"0 km

500 km400 km300 km

200 km100 km

JABIRU

NGUKURR

NHULUNBUY

GAPUWIYAK

KATHERINE


20 010

Kilometers

PROJECT No


Produ

ced b

y: RY

AN.W

RIGH

T@W

ORLE

YPAR

SONS

.COM

- Geo

matic

s

NOTES

±

201012-00367 A

LEGEND10KM KP




$+


" POPULATED PLACES

# HOMESTEADS

ROADS

PIPELINE

RAIL


±LOCALITY MAP



FOR CONSTRUCTION

UNCONTROLLEDCOPY

PAGE 3 OF 6

IMAGERY: LANDSAT

#

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

BARRAPUNTA

RA

MIN

GIN

ING

/CE

NT R

AL

AR

NHEM

RO

AD

CENTRAL ARNHEM ROAD

290 km

300 km

310 km

320 km

330 km

340 km

350 km

360 km

370 km

380 km

390 km




CUSTOMER



DRAWING No REV

"

"

"

"

"0 km

500 km400 km300 km

200 km100 km

JABIRU

NGUKURR

NHULUNBUY

GAPUWIYAK

KATHERINE


20 010

Kilometers

PROJECT No


Produ

ced b

y: RY

AN.W

RIGH

T@W

ORLE

YPAR

SONS

.COM

- Geo

matic

s

NOTES

±

201012-00367 A

LEGEND10KM KP




$+


" POPULATED PLACES

# HOMESTEADS

ROADS

PIPELINE

RAIL


±LOCALITY MAP



FOR CONSTRUCTION

UNCONTROLLEDCOPY

PAGE 4 OF 6

IMAGERY: LANDSAT

#

# #

#

"$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+ $+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

GAPUWIYAK

DHUNGANDA

MIRRNATJA

DHAMIYAKA ACCESS

GAL ING

AR BULA

RRI

NG

DHUNGANDA

BAR

GELAND

ING

ROAD

MIR RNATJA

GAN GAN

DHUPUWAMIRRI

GA

PUW

IYA

KR

OA

DGULBUWANG AY

BUL ARRING

GO

VE/N

UM

BU

LWA

R

BALINGURA

CENTRAL ARNHEM ROAD

380 km

390 km

400 km

410 km

420 km

430 km

440 km

450 km460 km

470 km480 km

Q

R

Q1




CUSTOMER



DRAWING No REV

"

"

"

"

"0 km

500 km400 km300 km

200 km100 km

JABIRU

NGUKURR

NHULUNBUY

GAPUWIYAK

KATHERINE


20 010

Kilometers

PROJECT No


Produ

ced b

y: RY

AN.W

RIGH

T@W

ORLE

YPAR

SONS

.COM

- Geo

matic

s

NOTES

±

201012-00367 A

LEGEND10KM KP




$+


" POPULATED PLACES

# HOMESTEADS

ROADS

PIPELINE

RAIL


±LOCALITY MAP



FOR CONSTRUCTION

UNCONTROLLEDCOPY

PAGE 5 OF 6

IMAGERY: LANDSAT

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

"

"

"

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+ $+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+ $+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+$+$+

$+

$+$+$+$+$+

$+$+

$+$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+$+

$+$+

$+

$+$+$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+

$+ $+

$+

$+

$+

NHULUNBUY

YALLIQUIN

BAWAKA

MUDHAMUL

MATAMATA

YANUNGBI

GALARU

RAYMANGIRR

BUYMARR

GUTJANGAN

YUDUYUDU

YIR

RKALA

GALUPA

YIR

RK

ALA

DHANIYA

YU

DU

YU

DU

YA

NUNGBIBARRKIR

A

YINYI KAY

RORRUWUY

BUYMAR

R

DH

UPUMAR

OAD

GU

RR

UMU

RU

ACCESS

G

A RRTHALALA

DHALINYBUY

BAWAKA

MELVILLEBAY

ROAD

YANUNGBI

MATA MATA

CENTRALARNHEM ROAD

480 km490 km

500 km

510 km

520 km

530 km

540 km

550 km

560 km

570 km

580 km

590 km

600 k

m

T

U

V

W

X

Y

Z

ZA

ZB

ZC

ZD




CUSTOMER



DRAWING No REV

"

"

"

"

"0 km

500 km400 km300 km

200 km100 km

JABIRU

NGUKURR

NHULUNBUY

GAPUWIYAK

KATHERINE


20 010

Kilometers

PROJECT No


Produ

ced b

y: RY

AN.W

RIGH

T@W

ORLE

YPAR

SONS

.COM

- Geo

matic

s

NOTES

±

201012-00367 A

LEGEND10KM KP




$+


" POPULATED PLACES

# HOMESTEADS

ROADS

PIPELINE

RAIL


±LOCALITY MAP



FOR CONSTRUCTION

UNCONTROLLEDCOPY

PAGE 6 OF 6

IMAGERY: LANDSAT




Appendix 3 – Acid Sulfate Soils Risk Map Results

Acid Sulfaate Soils (ASS) riskk mapping along the KGGP (Eco Loggical. 2013)

201001-00367-00-EN-REP-0005 Rev 2 30 April FINAL · ndertake det r bores to en e constructi o...

Documents

Transcript of 201001-00367-00-EN-REP-0005 Rev 2 30 April FINAL · ndertake det r bores to en e constructi o...