Cowal Gold Project – Addendum to the Transport of ......Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be...

Cowal Gold Project – Addendum to the Transport of Hazardous Materials Study The approved road transport of hydrogen peroxide for the Cowal Gold Project (now Cowal Gold Mine [CGM]) within NSW begins at the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility (Sydney) where it is then transferred by road to the Camellia Freight Terminal (Sydney) and transported by rail to Dubbo. Barrick (Cowal) Limited (Barrick) has identified an alternative transport route that involves direct road transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the CGM. An Addendum to the Transport of Hazardous Materials Study has been prepared to reflect the proposed route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility (Sydney) to the CGM (West Wyalong, NSW).

COWAL GOLD PROJECT

ADDENDUM TO THE TRANSPORT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STUDY

AUGUST 2010

Project No. HAL-02-07 Document No. 346323

Cowal Gold Project – Transport of Hazardous Materials Study

HAL-02-07\00346323.doc 1

ADDENDUM

Transport of Hazardous Materials Study 1. Replace Section 4.5 with the attached.

2. Replace Attachment 5 with the attached.

3. Replace Attachment 5A with the attached.

4. Replace Attachment 5B with the attached.

5. Replace Attachment 5C with the attached.


HAL-02-07\00346323.doc 2

4.5 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE Road transport of hydrogen peroxide within NSW begins at the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be transported either by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (where it will be transported by rail to Dubbo and resume transport by road to the Project) or directly by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Project. The road transport route for hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been divided into five segments (Segments 1 to 5) for the purpose of route evaluation, however only Segments 1, 2, 3 and 5 are relevant to the alternative road transport route from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility directly to the Project. Route evaluations for Segments 1 to 5 are attached to this THMS as Attachments 5A to 5E, respectively. Segments 1 to 5 are described below: • Segment 1 (Attachment 5A): from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia

Freight Terminal (Sydney) or Hume Highway (Sydney).

• Segment 2 (Attachment 5B): from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (Dubbo) or the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora.

• Segment 3 (Attachment 5C): from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) or Temora to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong).

• Segment 4 (Attachment 5D): from the Newell Highway (Dubbo) to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong).

• Segment 5 (Attachment 5E): from the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong) to the Cowal Gold Project.

A summary of the outcomes of the route evaluations for Segments 1 to 5, including the identification of suitable transport routes, is provided below. The overall hydrogen peroxide transport routes to the Project and suitable transport routes for Segments 1 to 5 are shown on Figures 15 to 19. Segment 1 Routes 1A, 1B and 1D (Table 16) have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal for Segment 1 and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). These routes are assessed as posing a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, Routes 1A, 1B and 1D are all suitable for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal for Segment 1. Following consideration of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation with Councils, the RTA and the transport provider, Route 1D has been identified as the preferred route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal. Route 1E (Table 16) has been identified as the only potential available route for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Hume Highway (Sydney) for Segment 1 and is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors).

HAL-02-07-THMS HP-Add Aug10_006C

HAL-02-07-THMS HP-Add Aug 10_007B


HAL-02-07\00346323.doc 8

Table 16 Hydrogen Peroxide – Segment 1 – Suitable Transport Routes

Route Directions

1A From the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, enter McPherson Street, then turn right into Exell Street, left into Botany Road, right into Foreshore Road and right into General Holmes Drive. Follow General Holmes Drive into Joyce Drive, Qantas Drive, Airport Drive and Marsh Street. Turn left into West Botany Street and right into Wickham Street which becomes Forest Road. Follow Forest Road, then turn right into Stoney Creek Road, right into King Georges Road, left into Parramatta Road (Great Western Highway), right into James Ruse Drive, right into Grand Avenue and continue to Camellia Freight Terminal.

1B From the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, enter McPherson Street, then turn right into Exell Street, left into Botany Road, right into Foreshore Road, right into General Holmes Drive, right into Mill Pond Road, left into Botany Road, left into Gardeners Road, left into Kent Road, right into Ricketty Street which becomes Canal Road, left into Princes Highway, right into Railway Road, right into Gleeson Avenue, left into Railway Parade, right into Marrickville Road, right into Buckley Street, left into Sydenham Road and right into Livingstone Road which becomes Gordon Street and Railway Terrace. Follow Railway Terrace into Longport Street and Carlton Crescent and then turn left into Liverpool Road (Hume Highway), right into Centenary Drive and left into the Western Motorway. Exit the Western Motorway at James Ruse Drive turning right into James Ruse Drive, right into Grand Avenue and continue to Camellia Freight Terminal.

1D From the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, enter McPherson Street, then turn right into Exell Street, left into Botany Road, right into Foreshore Road and right into General Holmes Drive. Follow General Holmes Drive into Joyce Drive, Qantas Drive, Airport Drive and Marsh Street. Turn left into West Botany Street and right into Wickham Street which becomes Forest Road. Follow Forest Road, then turn right into Stoney Creek Road, right into King Georges Road, left into the Western Motorway. Exit the Western Motorway at James Ruse Drive turning right into James Ruse Drive, right into Grand Avenue and continue to Camellia Freight Terminal.

1E From the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, enter McPherson Street, then turn right into Exell Street, left into Botany Road, right into Foreshore Road and right into General Holmes Drive. Follow General Holmes Drive into Joyce Drive, Qantas Drive, Airport Drive and Marsh Street. Turn left into West Botany Street and right into Wickham Street which becomes Forest Road. Follow Forest Road, then turn right into Stoney Creek Road, right into King Georges Road, and left into the M5 Motorway/South Western Motorway. Continue on the South Western Motorway which becomes the Hume Highway.

Route 1E is assessed as posing a minimal level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. This route has also been recommended by the transport provider for the transport of hazardous materials. Consultation with Councils regarding Route 1E was also undertaken and Council comments have been taken into consideration by the THMS. Therefore, Route 1E is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Hume Highway (Sydney). Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are shown on Figure 16. Risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project are set out in Attachment 5A. Segment 2 Routes 2A and 2B (Table 17) have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (Dubbo) for Segment 2 and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Both routes are assessed as posing a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Route 2A has been recommended by the RTA, while Route 2B has been recommended by the Dubbo City Council for the transport of hazardous materials. Therefore, Routes 2A and 2B are both suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and are the preferred routes for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility.


HAL-02-07\00346323.doc 9

Route 2C (Table 17) has been identified as the only potential available route for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora for Segment 2 and is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors).


Route Directions

2A On exiting Dubbo Railway Station turn left into Talbragar Street, left into Fitzroy Street, left into Erskine Street, right into Bourke Street (Newell Highway), right into Purvis Lane, left into Yarrandale Road, left into Boothenba Road and right into the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility.

2B On exiting Dubbo Railway Station turn left into Talbragar Street, left into Fitzroy Street, left into Erskine Street, right into Bourke Street (Newell Highway), right into Boothenba Road and left into the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility.

2C From the Hume Highway (Glenfield), continue on the Highway until Bowning (west of Yass). Turn off the Hume Highway into State Route 94 (Burley Griffin Way) and continue to Temora.

Route 2C is assessed as posing a minimal level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. This route has also been recommended by the transport provider for the transport of hazardous materials. Consultation with Councils regarding Route 2C was also undertaken and Council comments have been taken into consideration by the THMS. Therefore, Route 2C is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora. Routes 2A and 2B are shown on Figure 17. Risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project are set out in Attachment 5B. Segment 3 Routes 3A and 3B (Table 18) have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) for Segment 3 and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Both routes are assessed as posing a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Route 3A has been recommended by the RTA, while Route 3B has been recommended by the Dubbo City Council for the transport of hazardous materials. Therefore, Routes 3A and 3B are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and are the preferred routes for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo). Route 3C (Table 18) has been identified as the only potential available route for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from Temora to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong) for Segment 3 and is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors).


HAL-02-07\00346323.doc 10


Route Directions

3A On exiting the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility turn left into Boothenba Road, right into Yarrandale Road, right into Purvis Lane and left into the Newell Highway.

3B On exiting the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility turn right into Boothenba Road and left into the Newell Highway.

3C On entering Temora, continue along Burley Griffin Way (State Route 94) to the Newell Highway south of Mirrool. Turn right onto the Newell Highway and continue to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong).

Route 3C is assessed as posing a minimal level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. This route has also been recommended by the transport provider for the transport of hazardous materials. Consultation with Councils and the RTA regarding Route 3C was also undertaken and Council and RTA comments have been taken into consideration by the THMS. Therefore, Route 3C is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from Temora to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong). Routes 3A and 3B are shown on Figure 18. Route 3C is shown on Figure 15. Risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project are set out in Attachment 5C. Segment 4 Route 4A (Table 19) has been identified as the only potential available route for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Newell Highway (Dubbo) to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong) for Segment 4 and is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Route 4A is assessed as posing a minimal level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. This route has also been recommended by the RTA and transport provider for the transport of hazardous materials. Consultation with Councils regarding Route 4A was also undertaken and Council comments have been taken into consideration by the THMS. Therefore, Route 4A is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and is the preferred route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Newell Highway (Dubbo) to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong). Risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project are set out in Attachment 5D.

Table 19 Hydrogen Peroxide – Segment 4 – Suitable Transport Route

Route Directions

4A From the Newell Highway (Dubbo) continue on the highway to West Wyalong. On entering West Wyalong, take the town heavy vehicle bypass route (Turn left into Copeland Street which becomes Railway Road. Take the first left off Railway Road and cross over the Temora-Lake Cargelligo Railway line. After crossing the railway line, turn immediately right and follow the railway line to the Newell Highway). Turn right onto the Newell Highway and continue to West Wyalong. Turn left onto the Mid Western Highway until the junction with Ungarie Road.

Route 4A is shown on Figure 15.


HAL-02-07\00346323.doc 11

Segment 5 Route 5A (Table 20) has been identified as the only potential available route for heavy vehicles for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong) to the Cowal Gold Project. Segment 5 and is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Route 5A is assessed as posing a minimal level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. This route is also the approved Project Access Road. Therefore, Route 5A is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and is the preferred route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong) to the Cowal Gold Project. Risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project are set out in Attachment 5E.

Table 20 Hydrogen Peroxide – Segment 5 – Suitable Transport Route

Route Directions

5A Turn off the Mid Western Highway into Ungarie Road, turn right into Wamboyne Road and right into Blow Clear Road which becomes Lake Cowal Road. Turn left into Bonehams Lane and continue to the Cowal Gold Project.

Route 5A is shown on Figure 19.


HAL-02-07\00346323.doc 12

HYDROGEN PEROXIDE ROAD TRANSPORT ROUTE EVALUATION

OVERVIEW The Cowal Gold Project (the Project) is located approximately 38 kilometres north-east of West Wyalong, New South Wales (NSW). The Project is owned by Barrick (Cowal) Limited. As described in Section 1.2 of the Transport of Hazardous Materials Study (THMS), route evaluation is required for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project. Road transport of hydrogen peroxide within NSW begins at the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be transported either by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (where it will be transported by rail to Dubbo and resume transport by road to the Project) or directly by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Project. The road transport route for hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been divided into five segments (Segments 1 to 5) for the purpose of route evaluation, however only Segments 1, 2, 3 and 5 are relevant to the alternative road transport route from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility directly to the Project. Route evaluations for Segments 1 to 5 are attached to the THMS as Attachments 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D and 5E, respectively. An overview of Segments 1 to 5 is provided below.

Segment 1 Attachment 5A Transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (Sydney) or Hume Highway (Sydney)

Segment 2 Attachment 5B Transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (Dubbo) or from the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora

Segment 3 Attachment 5C Transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) or from Temora to the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong).

Segment 4 Attachment 5D Transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Newell Highway (Dubbo) to Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong)

Segment 5 Attachment 5E Transport of hydrogen peroxide from Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong) to the Cowal Gold Project

The following figures are referred to in Attachments 5A to 5E and are appended to this overview: Figure 5-1 Project Location, Overall Hydrogen Peroxide Transport Routes and Segment 4

Potential Available Route

Figure 5-2 Route Selection Assessment Process

Figure 5-3 Hydrogen Peroxide – Segment 1 Potential Available Routes





HAL-02-07\00346323.doc

FIGURES 5-1 to 5-6

HAL-02-07-THMS HP-Add Aug10_011BHAL-02-07-THMS HP-Add Aug10_006C

HAL-02-07-THMS HP-Add Aug10_012B

COWAL GOLD PROJECT TRANSPORT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STUDY

ATTACHMENT 5A


SEGMENT 1

SOLVAY INTEROX BANKSMEADOW FACILITY TO CAMELLIA FREIGHT TERMINAL (SYDNEY) OR HUME HIGHWAY (SYDNEY)

AUGUST 2010 Project No. HAL-02-07\1\21

Document No. 346364 ID: 685563

Hydrogen Peroxide Road Transport Route Evaluation – Segment 1

HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page

5A1 INTRODUCTION 5A-1

5A2 DEFINITION OF THE TRANSPORT AREA 5A-1

5A3 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, SOURCE AND DESTINATION 5A-2 5A3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL 5A-2 5A3.2 SOURCE AND DESTINATION 5A-2

5A4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING 5A-2 5A4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF AVAILABLE ROADS FOR HEAVY VEHICLES 5A-3

5A4.1.1 Road Hierarchy 5A-3 5A4.1.2 Identification of Truck Routes 5A-4 5A4.1.3 Potential Available Routes for Heavy Vehicles and Selection of

Potential Routes 5A-4 5A4.2 MANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS 5A-5

5A4.2.1 Physical Considerations 5A-5 5A4.2.2 Laws and Regulations 5A-6

5A4.3 SUBJECTIVE FACTORS 5A-7 5A4.3.1 Landuse 5A-7 5A4.3.2 Proximity of Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes 5A-8 5A4.3.3 Emergency and Evacuation Planning and Infrastructure 5A-9 5A4.3.4 RTA and Transporter Preferred Transport Routes 5A-10

5A4.4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING FINDINGS 5A-11

5A5 PRELIMINARY LIST OF ROUTES 5A-13

5A6 SECONDARY SCREENING 5A-13 5A6.1 ROAD AND TRAFFIC FACTORS 5A-13

5A6.1.1 Accident Statistics 5A-14 5A6.1.2 Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes 5A-14

5A6.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY 5A-15 5A6.3 OPERATIONAL FACTORS 5A-15 5A6.4 RISK ASSESSMENT 5A-15

5A6.4.1 Hazard Identification 5A-16 5A6.4.2 Consequence Analysis 5A-17 5A6.4.3 Estimation of the Likelihood of a Hazardous Incident 5A-17 5A6.4.4 Risk Analysis and Assessment of Risk Results 5A-18

5A7 SELECTION OF ROUTES 5A-21

5A8 RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES 5A-22

5A9 REFERENCES 5A-24


TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Hazardous Material Source and Destinations

Table 2 Transport Details - Camellia Freight Terminal or Hume Highway Destinations

Table 3 Truck Routes

Table 4 Sensitive Landuses

Table 5 Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes

Table 6 Summary of Subjective Factors

Table 7 Preliminary Screening Findings

Table 8 Preliminary List of Routes

Table 9 Summary of Accident Statistics

Table 10 Heavy Vehicle Incidents – Initiating and Contributing Causes

Table 11 Summary of Risk Analysis Assessment Factors

Table 12 Risk Analysis Findings


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-1

5A1 INTRODUCTION The Cowal Gold Project (the Project) is located approximately 38 kilometres (km) north-east of West Wyalong, New South Wales (NSW) (Figure 5-1). The Project is owned by Barrick (Cowal) Limited (Barrick). As described in Section 1.2 of the Transport of Hazardous Materials Study (THMS), route evaluation is required for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project. Road transport of hydrogen peroxide within NSW begins at the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be transported either by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (where it will then be transported by rail to Dubbo and resume transport by road to the Project) or directly by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Project. The road transport route for hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been divided into five segments (Segments 1 to 5) for the purpose of route evaluation, however only Segments 1, 2, 3 and 5 are relevant to the alternative road transport route from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility directly to the Project. This attachment sets out the route evaluation for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide from either the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (Sydney) or the Hume Highway (Sydney). This part of the overall hydrogen peroxide road transport route is referred to as Segment 1. Route evaluations for Segments 2, 3, 4 and 5 are attached to the THMS as Attachments 5B, 5C, 5D and 5E, respectively. This route evaluation has been carried out in accordance with the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning’s draft “Route Selection” guidelines (DUAP, 1995a) (the Guidelines), as required by Development Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i). Figure 5-2 shows the assessment process flowsheet for this route evaluation.

5A2 DEFINITION OF THE TRANSPORT AREA The transport area is defined by the Guidelines as follows:

Definition of the transport area is carried out from a traffic perspective. It should include the area over which traffic to or from the development is likely to have a significant effect.

The transport area for Segment 1 is defined as the area between the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility (20 – 22 McPherson Street, Banksmeadow) and the Camellia Freight Terminal (Grand Avenue, Camellia) and the area between the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility (20 - 22 McPherson Street, Banksmeadow) and the Hume Highway (within the suburb of Glenfield) (Figure 5-3). The transport area is situated within the Local Government Areas (LGAs) of Botany Bay, City of Sydney, Ashfield, Burwood, Marrickville, Rockdale, Hurstville, Canterbury, Bankstown, Strathfield, Auburn, Parramatta, Liverpool and Campbelltown all located in the Sydney Statistical Division.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-2

5A3 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, SOURCE AND DESTINATION

5A3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL As described in Section 1.2 of the THMS, identification of hazardous materials for which a route evaluation is required was undertaken prior to the preparation of this route evaluation. This included an assessment of the class of material being transported (i.e. the classification of dangerous goods under the Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail [ADG Code] [National Transport Commission, 2007], the type of container and the movement quantity and frequency. The assessment identified hydrogen peroxide as a hazardous material for which a route evaluation is required. The Department of Planning (DoP) concurred with this assessment (as outlined in DoP correspondence dated 14 October 2005). Hydrogen peroxide is classified as Class 5.1 under the ADG Code. Details of the type of container (i.e. packaging) and the movement quantity and frequency are provided in the following section.

5A3.2 SOURCE AND DESTINATION The source and destination of hydrogen peroxide for Segment 1 are outlined in Table 1 and shown on Figure 5-3.

Table 1 Hazardous Material Source and Destinations

Source: Solvay Interox Banksmeadow

Facility

Destination: Camellia Freight Terminal

Destination: Hume Highway (Sydney)

Location Town/City LGA Location Town/City LGA Location Town/City LGA

20 – 22 McPherson

Street, Banksmeadow

Sydney Botany Bay

Grand Avenue, Camellia

Sydney Parramatta Hume Highway

(Glenfield)

Sydney Campbelltown

Details of the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal or the Hume Highway are provided in Table 2.

Table 2

Transport Details - Camellia Freight Terminal or Hume Highway Destinations

Hazardous Material

Delivery Vehicle

Maximum Volume per Delivery

Maximum Frequency of Deliveries

Transported State

Packaging

Hydrogen Peroxide

Single semi-trailer

25.4 t

3 per week Liquid Bulk tanker (i.e. Isotainer)

B-Double 43.4 t 3 per week Liquid Bulk tanker (i.e. Isotainer)

5A4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING The following subsections identify available roads for heavy vehicles in the transport area and examine mandatory and subjective factors for potential transport routes. Section 5A5 provides the results of this analysis as a preliminary list of routes. Further screening of this preliminary list is provided in Section 5A6.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-3

5A4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF AVAILABLE ROADS FOR HEAVY VEHICLES The Guidelines require the identification of potential available roads for heavy vehicles to be based on: • a review of the road hierarchy (Section 5A4.1.1); and

• the identification of routes suitable in general for the movement of trucks (Section 5A4.1.2). Results of the review of the road hierarchy and the identification of routes suitable in general for the movement of trucks are provided in Section 5A4.1.3.

5A4.1.1 Road Hierarchy The RTA has developed a road hierarchy for NSW that classifies roads as national highways, state roads, regional roads or local roads. The NSW road hierarchy is described below. National Highways National highways are classified as arterial roads and comprise the principal connections between Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne, Adelaide and Brisbane (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005; RTA, 2004a). A small portion (approximately 2 km) of the South Western Motorway is classified as a national highway. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Therefore this part of the South Western Motorway would be used by heavy vehicles within the transport area where possible/applicable. State Roads State roads are classified as arterial roads and are the principal traffic carrying and linking routes for the movement of people and goods within the urban centres of Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong and the Central Coast, and throughout NSW (RTA, 2004a). State roads are characterised by high flows of general traffic over long distances and have a higher capacity relative to surrounding roads (ibid.). There are numerous state roads within the transport area including Marsh Street, West Botany Street, Wickham Street, Forest Road, Stoney Creek Road, King Georges Road, Botany Road, Centenary Drive, Rookwood Road, the M5 Motorway/South Western Motorway and the Western Motorway. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads (over regional and local roads) wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Accordingly, these roads would be used by heavy vehicles within the transport area where possible. Regional Roads Regional roads comprise the secondary road network which, in combination with state roads, provide for travel between smaller towns and districts and perform a sub-arterial function within major urban centres (RTA, 2004a). The RTA considers regional roads to be suitable for heavy vehicles (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Local Roads Local roads are generally all other roads other than national highways, state roads and regional roads. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to avoid local roads where possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005).


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-4

5A4.1.2 Identification of Truck Routes In accordance with the Guidelines, truck routes within the transport area were identified following a review of: the NSW road hierarchy; the NSW truck route network; routes used by heavy vehicles within and through the transport area; heavy vehicle bypasses; and travel time. The NSW road hierarchy is described in Section 5A4.1.1. Arterial and sub-arterial roads (i.e. national highways, state roads and regional roads) should be evaluated for their appropriateness to cater for heavy vehicles (DUAP, 1995a). The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005), therefore these roads were used wherever possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. The RTA was consulted to determine the NSW truck route network and identify routes used by heavy vehicles within and through the transport area. The use of 14.6 m semi-trailers (prime mover and trailer combined length of 19 m) is legal on all roads in NSW (except where a sign shows a load limit for a particular road, bridge, causeway or ferry) (RTA, 2003a). Therefore, for heavy vehicles less than 19 m in length, all roads within NSW (except those signed otherwise) form part of the NSW truck route network. The RTA has published a map showing B-Double and road train routes throughout Sydney (RTA, 2001). These roads are approved restricted access vehicle routes and are specifically designed to accommodate these heavy vehicles and would therefore accommodate either the single semi-trailers or B-Doubles proposed to be used to transport hydrogen peroxide. As dangerous goods vehicles are not permitted to use the airport tunnel, this prevents the use of the more direct route from Sydney via the M5 east tunnels. Designated B-Double and road train routes were used wherever possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. Designated heavy vehicle bypasses within the transport area were taken into consideration when identifying truck routes. There were no heavy vehicle bypasses identified within the transport area (RTA, pers. comm., 22 July 2005). In accordance with the Guidelines, travel time was also taken into consideration when identifying truck routes. Generally, an increase in travel distance increases the travel time. This subsequently increases the cost of transport. Therefore, the shortest and most direct route is the most preferable in terms of cost.

5A4.1.3 Potential Available Routes for Heavy Vehicles and Selection of Potential Routes Following a review of the road hierarchy and the identification of truck routes within the transport area, Routes 1A to 1E have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for Segment 1. Routes 1A to 1E are set out in Table 3 and shown on Figure 5-3. Routes 1A to 1E were then tested against mandatory and subjective factors. The assessment is set out below in Sections 5A4.2 and 5A4.3.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-5


Route Directions



1C From the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, enter McPherson Street, then turn right into Exell Street, left into Botany Road, right into Foreshore Road and right into General Holmes Drive. Follow General Holmes Drive into Joyce Drive, Qantas Drive, Airport Drive and Marsh Street. Turn left into West Botany Street and right into Wickham Street which becomes Forest Road. Follow Forest Road and turn right into Stoney Creek Road, right into King Georges Road and left into the South Western Motorway. Exit the South Western Motorway at Fairford Road turning right into Fairford Road and left into the Western Motorway. Exit the Western Motorway at James Ruse Drive turning right into James Ruse Drive, right into Grand Avenue and continue to Camellia Freight Terminal.



5A4.2 MANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS

5A4.2.1 Physical Considerations Physical considerations may preclude a potential transport route from consideration because of weight limitations on bridges, height restrictions on underpasses, inadequate shoulders for breakdowns, extensive construction activities or inadequate parking and turning spaces (DUAP, 1995a). Roads designated by the RTA as B-Double or road train routes are considered to be physically capable of accommodating the single semi-trailers that are proposed to be used to transport hydrogen peroxide. No further assessment of physical capability has been undertaken for these roads. Route 1B utilises several roads not designated as B-Double or road train routes (viz. Railway Road, Gleeson Avenue, Railway Parade, Marrickville Road, Buckley Street, Sydenham Road, Livingstone Road, Gordon Street, Railway Terrace, Longport Street, Carlton Crescent and Liverpool Road). Sections of these roads utilised in Routes 1A to 1D are physically capable of accommodating single semi-trailers (RTA, pers. comm., 30 September 2005; Marrickville Council, pers. comm., 21 September 2005; The Council of the Municipality of Ashfield, pers. comm., 20 September 2005). Therefore, physical considerations do not preclude any of the potential transport routes.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-6

5A4.2.2 Laws and Regulations Laws and regulations may prohibit the transport of hazardous materials on certain roads or structures (DUAP, 1995a). The Guidelines state that local, state and national transport authorities should be consulted and prohibited roadways eliminated from consideration unless there are no suitable alternative routes (DUAP, 1995a). National Transport Authority The Australian Government Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) (now the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) was consulted to determine if the transport of hazardous materials was prohibited on any roads or structures in NSW. DOTARS advised that the Competent Authority for road transport in each State and Territory should be contacted for information relating to the road transport of dangerous goods (DOTARS, 2005a). The NSW Competent Authority is the Manager, Dangerous Goods, Department of Environment and Conservation (now the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water [DECCW] (DOTARS, 2005b). The Manager, Dangerous Goods, DECCW was consulted to determine if the transport of hazardous materials was prohibited on any roads or structures in NSW. The DECCW advised that the RTA is the determining authority for dangerous goods routes in NSW and has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation, 1999 (DEC, pers. comm., 26 July 2005). State Transport Authority The RTA has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation, 1999. Clause 59 of the Regulation prohibits the carriage of dangerous goods (within the meaning of the Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Act, 2008 and Clause 32 of the Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation, 2009) through some areas within Sydney. Segment 1 does not involve the road transport of hydrogen peroxide through any prohibited areas prescribed in Clause 59 of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation, 1999 and defined in Rule 300-2 of the Road Rules, 2008. Local Transport Authority For the purposes of this study, the local transport authority has been defined as the authority accountable for a specified road according to its classification. In NSW, the State Government, through the RTA, manages national highways and state roads and is accountable for the outcomes on these roads (RTA, 2004a). Therefore, the RTA is the local transport authority for national highways and state roads. Councils are accountable for regional and local roads (RTA, 2004a) and are therefore the local transport authorities for these roads. In the case of Airport Drive and Qantas Drive, the Sydney Airport Authority is accountable for these roads and is therefore the local transport authority. Potential transport routes utilise local, regional and state roads (RTA, 2004b), therefore the local transport authorities are the RTA, the Sydney Airport Authority, The Council of the City of Botany Bay, Marrickville Council, Rockdale City Council, The Council of the Municipality of Ashfield, Parramatta City Council. As stated above, the RTA has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation, 1999. The Sydney Airport Authority does not prohibit the transport of hazardous materials on Airport Drive or Qantas Drive (Sydney Airport Authority, pers. comm., 29 September 2005).


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-7

The Council of the City of Botany Bay, Marrickville Council, Rockdale City Council, The Council of the Municipality of Ashfield and Parramatta City Council do not prohibit the transport of hazardous materials on any roads for which they are accountable (The Council of the City of Botany Bay, pers. comm., 20 September 2005; Marrickville Council, pers. comm., 21 September 2005; Rockdale City Council, pers. comm., 20 September 2005; The Council of the Municipality of Ashfield, pers. comm., 23 September 2005; Parramatta City Council, pers. comm., 19 September 2005). Laws and regulations do not preclude any of the potential transport routes.

5A4.3 SUBJECTIVE FACTORS Subjective factors usually include the proximity of the potential transport route to sensitive landuses (such as hospitals, schools, aged care facilities, churches and items of heritage or cultural significance) (Section 5A4.3.1) and sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes (such as park reservations and wetlands) (Section 5A4.3.2) (DUAP, 1995a). Emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure are also usually included in the assessment of subjective factors (Section 5A4.3.3) (DUAP, 1995a). A subjective factor considered for this route evaluation is the opinion of the RTA. This subjective factor was considered because the RTA is the NSW State Government Agency responsible for improving road safety (Section 5A4.3.4) (RTA, 2005a).

5A4.3.1 Landuse Sensitive Landuses Sensitive landuses include schools (pre-schools and primary and secondary schools), hospitals, aged care facilities, churches and items of heritage or cultural significance. Table 4 and the following sections detail sensitive landuses along Routes 1A to 1E.

Table 4

Sensitive Landuses

Route Schools Hospitals Aged Care Facilities

Churches Items of Heritage or

Cultural Significance

Number of Schools

Number of Students

Number of Hospitals

Number of Beds

1A 19 9,679 0 0 2 13 122

1B 14 6,075 0 0 5 16 161

1C 17 7,882 0 0 14 15 126

1D 19 9,679 0 0 2 12 116

1E 21 10,943 0 0 4 13 89

Schools Vehicles travelling along Routes 1A to 1D would pass numerous schools including Botany Public School, Auburn North Primary and Rosehill Primary. Vehicles travelling along Routes 1A, 1C, 1D and 1E would pass several other schools including Bexley Public School, Sydney Technical High School, Arncliffe Public School, Kingsgrove Infants, Kingsgrove Primary, Kingsgrove High, Arkana College, Beverly Hills Primary and St. Gabriels School. Vehicles travelling along Route 1B would also pass several other schools including Mascot Primary, Gardeners Road Primary, Wilkins Primary, Marrickville High School, Petersham Public School, and Strathfield South Primary.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-8

Vehicles travelling along Route 1E would also pass several other schools including Hannans Road Primary School, Sir Joseph Banks High School, Panania North Primary, Mount St. Josephs Girls Secondary, Hammondville Primary and Prestons Primary. Hospitals/Aged Care Facilities There are no hospitals located along Routes 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D or 1E. The number of aged care facilities located along Routes 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D and 1E is 2, 5, 14, 2 and 4, respectively. Churches The number of churches located along Routes 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D and 1E is 13, 16, 15, 12 and 13, respectively. Items of Heritage or Cultural Significance The NSW State Heritage Inventory was searched for items of heritage or cultural significance located along potential transport routes. The number of items of heritage or cultural significance located along Routes 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D and 1E is 122, 161, 126, 116 and 89, respectively (NSW Heritage Office, 2005). Other Landuses Other landuses may include residential, commercial or industrial areas and areas of open space. Routes 1A to 1E predominantly pass through residential and/or commercial areas (e.g. Mascot Shops). Adjacent landuses are similar along all potential routes and do not provide a strong basis for comparison. Therefore, further detailed consideration of other adjacent landuses was not undertaken for this route evaluation.

5A4.3.2 Proximity of Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes Sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes include park reservations (i.e. national parks, state forests, recreational parks and conservation areas) and waterways (i.e. wetlands, lakes, dams, rivers, creeks and other drainage lines). Sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes traversed by or occurring along or within approximately 100 m of Routes 1A to 1E are identified in Table 5 and described in the following sections.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-9


Route Park Reservations Waterways

Number Approximate Total Road Frontage (m)

1A 17 6,318 32

1B 26 6,840 27

1C 25 10,810 34

1D 20 7,098 33

1E 36 11,640 12

Park Reservations Vehicles travelling on Routes 1A to 1E would pass within approximately 100 m of several park reservations including Sir Joseph Banks Park, Bexley Park, Kingsgrove Park and Salt Pan Reserve . To determine the preferred transport route, a measure of the quality and size of potentially affected park reservations is required. It was conservatively assumed that all park reservations are of a similar high quality. The road frontage of park reservations was measured to compare the size of the parks traversed by or occurring along or within approximately 100 m of potential routes. The approximate total length of road frontage of park reservations for Routes 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D and 1E is 6,318 m, 6,840 m, 10,810 m, 7,098 m and 11,640 m, respectively. Waterways Vehicles travelling on Routes 1A to 1E would cross or come within approximately 100 m of numerous waterways including Haslams Creek, Cooks River, Cox Creek, Duck River, Duck Creek and Georges River.

5A4.3.3 Emergency and Evacuation Planning and Infrastructure Emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure includes: the availability of formalised emergency and evacuation procedures and plans; the location of emergency response teams and their ability to respond to hazardous material release; access; and ease of emergency evacuation (DUAP, 1995a). In NSW the management of state emergencies and rescues is controlled under the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act, 1989. The Act sets out strategies for the integration of emergency management at local, district and state levels. The NSW State Emergency Management Committee (SEMC) was established by the Act and is responsible for emergency planning at the state level. The SEMC has prepared a NSW State Disaster Plan (DISPLAN), the objective of which is to ensure the co-ordinated response to emergencies by all agencies having responsibilities and functions in emergencies (SEMC, 2005). A Hazardous Materials Emergency Sub-Plan (HAZMATPLAN) has been prepared as a sub-plan to the DISPLAN. The aim of the HAZMATPLAN is to detail special arrangements for the control and co-ordination of a response to, and initial recovery from, hazardous materials emergencies in NSW (SEMC, 1999).


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-10

The District Emergency Management Committee (DEMC) is responsible to the SEMC. Each DEMC is responsible for preparing plans which detail the prevention of, preparation for, response to and recovery from emergencies in its District (District DISPLAN) (SEMC, 2005). The Local Emergency Management Committee (LEMC) is responsible to the DEMC for each LGA (SEMC, 2005). Each LEMC is responsible for preparing plans in relation to the prevention of, preparation for, response to, and recovery from emergencies in its LGA (Local DISPLAN) (SEMC, 2005). The above approach to emergency management in NSW ensures: the availability of formalised emergency and evacuation procedures and plans (i.e. DISPLAN, HAZMATPLAN, District DISPLAN, local DISPLAN); the location of emergency response teams throughout NSW; and the ability of emergency response teams to respond to hazardous material release. Access and ease of emergency evacuation would be affected by several factors including proximity to emergency services, nature of the hazardous material, availability of alternative routes and road surface (i.e. sealed or unsealed) (RTA, pers. comm., 18 August, 2005). As detailed above, the approach to emergency management in NSW is comprehensive and would ensure that emergency services could access and respond promptly to an incident involving a hazardous material.

In addition, the NSW state and regional road network is extensive and the availability of alternative routes is considered to be adequate. All roads used for the transport of hazardous materials to the Project are sealed, ensuring accessibility and ease of emergency evacuation in the event of an incident. Following a review of emergency management in NSW, emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure are considered to be adequate for all potential routes. These routes are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure. 5A4.3.4 RTA and Transporter Preferred Transport Routes The RTA, an authority which maintains the majority of the road system (i.e. national highways and state roads) and which acts as an advisory body to Councils, was contacted to determine the RTA’s preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal. Route 1A is the route preferred by the RTA for the transport of hazardous materials from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (RTA, pers. comm., 27 June 2005). The transport provider was contacted to determine their preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal. Route 1B is the route preferred by the transporter for the transport of hazardous materials from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal. Previous correspondence received from the RTA indicating preference for heavy vehicles to use national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005) has been taken into consideration in the identification of Route 1E. The transport provider was also contacted to determine their preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Hume Highway (Sydney). Route 1E is the route preferred by the transporter for the transport of hazardous materials from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Hume Highway (Sydney).


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-11

5A4.4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING FINDINGS Preliminary screening took into account available roads for heavy vehicles and mandatory and subjective factors (Sections 5A4.1, 5A4.2 and 5A4.3). Following a review of the road hierarchy and the identification of truck routes within the transport area, Routes 1A to 1E have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for Segment 1. Mandatory factors did not preclude these routes from the route evaluation. Table 6 provides a summary of subjective factors outlined in Section 5A4.3 for Routes 1A to 1E.


Assessment Factor Route 1A Route 1B Route 1C Route 1D Route 1E

Schools 19 14 17 19 21

Number of School Students 9,679 6,075 7,882 9,679 10,943

Hospitals 0 0 0 0 0

Number of Hospital Beds 0 0 0 0 0

Aged Care Facilities 2 5 14 2 4

Churches 13 16 15 12 13

Items of Heritage or Cultural Significance

122 161 126 116 89

Other Landuse # # # # #

Number of Park Reservations 17 26 25 20 36

Park Reservations – Approximate Total Road Frontage (m)

6,318 6,840 10,810 7,098 11,640

Waterways 32 27 34 33 12

Emergency Infrastructure Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate

RTA and Transporter Preferred Route

RTA preferred route

Transporter preferred route

- - Transporter preferred

route # There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 1A to 1E.

Further information is provided in Section 5A4.3.1.

RTA Roads and Traffic Authority

Table 6 indicates that Routes 1A to 1E would have minimal impact on subjective factors and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials. In accordance with the Guidelines, Table 7 presents the results of the preliminary screening on a comparative basis. Table 7 details the most preferred, acceptable, least preferred and excluded routes for each of the subjective factors detailed in Section 5A4.3. For the purposes of this study: • a preferred route is one which is deemed to have a minimal amount, if any, of the factor of

interest;

• an acceptable route has a typical amount of the factor of interest;

• a least preferred route has a significant increase in the amount of the factor of interest when compared to alternative routes; and

• an excluded route is deemed to have an unacceptable amount of the factor of interest.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-12


Assessment Factor Most Preferred Route

Acceptable Route Least Preferred Route

Excluded Route

Schools 1B 1A, 1C, 1D, 1E -

Hospitals 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E - - -

Aged Care Facilities 1A, 1D 1B, 1E 1C -

Churches - 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E - -


1E 1A, 1C, 1D 1B -

Other Landuse # # # #

Park Reservations 1A, 1B, 1D 1C, 1E -

Waterways 1E, 1B 1A, 1C, 1D - -

Emergency Infrastructure 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E - - -


1A 1B, 1E 1C, 1D -

Comparative Assessment of all Factors

1A, 1B, 1E 1D 1C -

# There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 1A to 1E. Further information is provided in Section 5A4.3.1.


Tables 6 and 7 indicate that there is a minor preference for Routes 1A, 1B and 1E following preliminary screening. Routes 1A, 1B and 1E are the preferred routes for four of the subjective factors presented in Table 7 and therefore would have the least potential adverse effect in the unlikely event of a release of hydrogen peroxide. The preliminary screening has identified Route 1D as an acceptable route and worthy of further assessment. Route 1C is the least preferred route for Segment 1 following preliminary screening (Table 7). This route is the least preferred route for three of the subjective factors and the preferred route for only two subjective factors presented in Table 7. Route 1C would therefore have the greatest potential adverse effect in the event of a potential release of hydrogen peroxide. Therefore, Route 1C has been excluded for the remainder of the Segment 1 route evaluation.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-13

5A5 PRELIMINARY LIST OF ROUTES On the basis of the preliminary screening analysis in Section 5A4, the following preliminary list of routes from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal or Hume Highway (Sydney) has been determined (Table 8).


Route Directions





5A6 SECONDARY SCREENING Secondary screening involves the assessment of the preliminary list of routes (Section 5A5) against road and traffic factors (Section 5A6.1), emergency response capability (Section 5A6.2), operational factors (Section 5A6.3) and risk (including environmental and landuse factors) (Section 5A6.4) (Figure 5-2). The potential routes have been assessed against each secondary screening factor to confirm that the routes are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and to determine the preferred route. The final selection of routes is detailed in Section 5A7.

5A6.1 ROAD AND TRAFFIC FACTORS The Guidelines state that the assessment of potential transport routes for suitability on road and traffic grounds will require the collection of particular information (for example road structural condition) to establish the capability and level of service of the road system (DUAP, 1995a). The Guidelines offer the following road and traffic factors that consider the ability of a route to effectively and safely handle traffic using it: structural and geometric adequacy; level of service of carriageway and critical intersections; travel speed; accident rates; and the availability of alternative emergency routes.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-14

The capability of a route to safely and effectively handle the traffic using it is reflected in the accident statistics for that route (Pinnacle Risk Management, pers. comm., 20 July 2005). Accident statistics are influenced by the route’s structural and geometric adequacy, level of service (of carriageway and intersections), and travel speed. It follows then that the structural and geometric adequacy, level of service (of carriageway and intersections), and travel speed are effectively embodied within the accident statistics of the transport route (Pinnacle Risk Management, pers. comm., 20 July 2005). Therefore, it is appropriate to compare accident statistics for potential transport routes and infer from them the capability and level of service of the road system. Accident statistics for potential routes are provided in Section 5A6.1.1. An assessment of remaining road and traffic factors (i.e. the availability of alternative emergency routes) is provided in Section 5A6.1.2.

5A6.1.1 Accident Statistics Available accident statistics for Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E were obtained from the RTA and are summarised in Table 9.


Route Length (km)

No. of Heavy Vehicles (per day)1

% Increase of Heavy Vehicles due to Project2

Heavy Vehicle Accidents (per year)3

Annual Million km of Heavy

Vehicle Travel

Heavy Vehicle Accidents/Annual

Million km of Heavy Vehicle Travel

1A 36.7 1,573 – 8,551 0.01% – 0.03% 55.6 0.79 – 12.57 0.14 – 2.79

1B 35.9 1,014 – 8,551 0.01% – 0.04% 34.2 0.05 – 16.31 0 – 11.99

1D 36.5 1,573 – 8,551 0.01% – 0.03% 54.0 0.79 – 16.31 0.14 – 2.79

1E 43.0 1,573 – 7,792 0.01% – 0.03% 44.7 0.81 – 12.23 0.14 – 2.79 1 RTA (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Sydney Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. Assumes 10% of

all vehicles are heavy vehicles. 2 Assumes 3 truck movements per week. 3 RTA (2005b) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Sydney region 200-2004. Provided by Robert Chadwick on 2 August 2005.

Accident statistics for Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are considered to be within normal operating levels for the road types and use. The increase of heavy vehicles due to the Project would be very small (up to approximately 0.04%) and would be unlikely to affect traffic flows or accident statistics. Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are therefore suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to accident statistics. Accident statistics for Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are compared in Table 12, Section 5A6.4.4.

5A6.1.2 Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes The NSW state and regional road network is extensive. As a result, there are alternative emergency transport routes that could be used in the event of a temporary closure of Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-15

5A6.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY The emergency response capability available for potential routes may include considerations such as the speed of response of emergency services, ease of access to the potential accident site and the availability of emergency combat equipment (DUAP, 1995a). The formalised approach to emergency management in NSW ensures: the availability of emergency combat equipment at a local, district and state level; the location of emergency response teams throughout NSW; and the ability of emergency response teams to respond to hazardous material release (Section 5A4.3.3). Further information on the management of emergencies in NSW and an evaluation of the ease of access to a potential accident for Segment 1 are provided in Section 5A4.3.3. Following a review of emergency management in NSW, emergency response capability is considered to be adequate for Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E. These routes are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to emergency response capability. 5A6.3 OPERATIONAL FACTORS Operating costs and distribution logistics have been considered in the selection of the preferred transport route for Segment 1. Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are all suitable on the basis of logistical considerations. The Guidelines state that the main cost criterion when comparing alternative routes is the expected increase or decrease in distance and travel time if another route is used. Generally, an increase in travel distance increases the travel time and subsequently the cost of transport. Therefore, the shortest route is the most preferable, in respect of operating costs. Route 1B is the shortest available route for Segment 1 and is therefore cost effective. However, Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are similar in length and operating costs would not differ considerably between routes. Therefore all routes are cost effective and equally suitable on the basis of operating costs. 5A6.4 RISK ASSESSMENT The Guidelines outline an intermediate risk assessment method that should be undertaken for each potential transport route found to be satisfactory on road and traffic grounds. If the intermediate method does not enable the analyst to identify a clear-cut low risk alternative and differences between potential routes are small then a detailed risk assessment may need to be carried out in accordance with Hazardous Industry Planning and Advisory Paper No. 6, Guidelines for Hazard Analysis (HIPAP No. 6) (DUAP, 1995b). The risk assessment for Segment 1 has been undertaken in accordance with HIPAP No. 6. HIPAP No. 6 sets out methodology for risk assessment as follows: 1. Hazard identification: the identification of all possible conditions that could lead to a hazardous

incident is achieved by evaluating the hazards of the material of interest, the land use adjacent to each potential transport route, the type of transport vehicle to be used, the conditions of the material when being transported and the causes of potential incidents involving heavy vehicles.

2. Consequence Analysis: determined on either a qualitative or quantitative basis depending on the potential hazardous incident outcomes.

3. Estimation of likelihood of a hazardous incident: estimated using available historical traffic data or generic traffic data.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-16

4. Risk analysis.

5. Assessment of risk results.

5A6.4.1 Hazard Identification

5A6.4.1.1 Type of Hazardous Material Hydrogen peroxide is classified under the ADG Code as Class 5.1 (oxidising substance) with Subsidiary Risk 8 (corrosive substance) and Packing Group II. Hydrogen peroxide is a clear, colourless liquid with a sharp odour. It is a strong oxidising agent and is relatively stable in its pure form and at low pH. The vapour immediately above the liquid is irritating. Exposure to hydrogen peroxide via ingestion, eye or skin contact or inhalation results in relatively low toxic impact. Hydrogen peroxide can react strongly with organic materials, reducing agents, some acids and alkalis, metals, flammable and combustible materials (including paper, cloth, leather etc). It is catalytically decomposed (into water and oxygen) by heavy metals and their salts, dust, oxidisable organic materials, enzymes and rust. Decomposition can also be initiated or accelerated by light, heat, high pH or various other impurities, and may be extremely violent. Hydrogen peroxide is not combustible but will strongly support the combustion of other materials. Hydrogen peroxide is not toxic in itself, however can cause injury through its ability to form free, active oxygen. Irritation and burns to mucous membranes, skin, and eyes can occur. Hydrogen peroxide has no potential for bio-accumulation as it degrades rapidly in air and water. However in sufficient quantities, it can be toxic to aquatic biota and plants.

5A6.4.1.2 Adjacent Landuse Refer to Section 5A4.3.1 for a description of adjacent landuse for potential transport routes.

5A6.4.1.3 Transport Vehicle and Conditions of Transport Hydrogen peroxide will be transported to the Project by single semi-trailer or B-Double. It will be transported by bulk tanker (i.e. Isotainer) as a liquid at ambient temperature and pressure. Regulation of temperature and pressure are not required during the transport of this material.

5A6.4.1.4 Causes of Hazardous Incidents Initiating and contributory causes for incidents involving heavy vehicles has been detailed in Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk Analysis (CCPS, 1995). The identified causes, with additional causes included, are reproduced in Table 10.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-17


Human Error Equipment Failures System or Procedural Failures

External Events

• driver impairment, e.g. alcohol or drugs

• speeding

• driver overtired

• driver exceeding safe working hours

• en-route inspection

• contamination

• overfilling

• other vehicle’s driver

• taking tight turns/ramps too quickly (overturns)

• unsecured loads

• non-dedicated trailer

• leaking valve

• leaking fitting

• brake failure

• relief device failure

• tyre failure

• soft shoulder

• overpressure

• material defect

• steering failure

• sloshing

• high centre of gravity

• corrosion

• bad weld

• excessive grade

• poor intersection design

• road chamber/width

• suspension system

• tyre fire caused by friction, brakes overheating or exploding tyres give sparks due to metal in the rubber)

• fuel tank fire (diesel)

• driver incentives to work longer hours

• driver training

• carrier selection

• container specification

• route selection

• emergency response training

• speed enforcement

• driver rest periods

• maintenance

• inspection

• time of the day restrictions

• vandalism/sabotage

• rain

• fog/visibility

• wind

• flood/washout

• fire at rest area/parking areas

• earthquake

• existing accident

• animals on road

5A6.4.2 Consequence Analysis An accident involving a heavy vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide resulting in a release of the material is the hazardous incident relevant to the transport of hydrogen peroxide. The consequences of a release of hydrogen peroxide from this hazardous incident are largely dependent on what is contacted by the oxidising, corrosive liquid. The following consequences of this hazardous incident are relevant: • direct exposure to liquid or vapour hydrogen peroxide for those at or near to an accident scene;

• contamination of waterways (from a large liquid release) causing a minor lowering of pH resulting in a moderate impact on fish and other aquatic life;

• burning of vegetation upon contact; and

• fire. Hydrogen peroxide does not bio-accumulate.

5A6.4.3 Estimation of the Likelihood of a Hazardous Incident Accident data for heavy vehicles utilising Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are detailed in Section 5A6.1.1 and Table 9. Approximately 55.6, 34.2, 54.0 and 44.7 accidents per year involving heavy vehicles occur for Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E, respectively.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-18

In the event of an accident involving a heavy vehicle, the carried goods may or may not be released. The probability of release is dependent on factors such as speed, shipping conditions (i.e. pressurised compared to non-pressurised), inadequate load securing, and strength and integrity of the container. Various studies of release probabilities from heavy vehicles involved in an accident have been undertaken. The Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk Analysis (CCPS, 1995) indicates that the release probability for various road types is between 5 and 10% (i.e. approximately one heavy vehicle accident in every 10 to 20 will result in a release of the material). An estimation of the likelihood of an accident involving a vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project resulting in a release of the material must take into account the following: • the number of vehicles transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project relative to the total number

of heavy vehicles already using the same transport route;

• the number of accidents that have involved heavy vehicles; and

• the probability of a release of the material (which is assumed to be 10% of all accidents involving heavy vehicles results in a release of material) (CCPS, 1995).

The likelihood of an accident involving a vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project resulting in a release of the material for Routes 1A, 1B , 1D and 1E is estimated to be 4x10-4/year (i.e. such an accident is estimated to occur on Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E once every 2,500 years). These values indicate a low level of risk associated with the transport of hazardous materials.

5A6.4.4 Risk Analysis and Assessment of Risk Results Risk analysis took into account the preliminary screening findings as well as road and traffic factors (Section 5A6.1), emergency response capability (Section 5A6.2) and operational factors (Section 5A6.3). Table 11 provides a summary of all assessment factors utilised in the risk analysis for Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E.


Assessment Factor Route 1A Route 1B Route 1D Route 1E

Schools 19 14 19 21

Number of School Students 9,679 6,075 9,679 10,943

Hospitals 0 0 0 0

Number of Hospital Beds 0 0 0 0

Aged Care Facilities 2 5 2 4

Churches 13 16 12 13

Items of Heritage or Cultural Significance 122 161 116 89


Number of Park Reservations 17 26 20 36


6,318 6,840 7,098 11,640

Waterways 32 27 33 12

Emergency Infrastructure Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate

RTA and Transporter Preferred Route RTA preferred route


- Transporter preferred route


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-19

Table 11 (Continued) Summary of Risk Analysis Assessment Factors

Assessment Factor Route 1A Route 1B Route 1D Route 1E

Length (km) 36.7 35.9 36.5 43.0

No. of Heavy Vehicles (per day)1 1,573 – 8,551 1,014 – 8,551 1,573 – 8,551 1,573 – 7,792

% Increase of Heavy Vehicles due to Project2 0.01% – 0.03% 0.01% – 0.04% 0.01% – 0.03% 0.01% – 0.03%

Heavy Vehicle Accidents (per year)3 55.6 34.2 54.0 44.7

Annual Million km of Heavy Vehicle Travel 0.79 – 12.57 0.05 – 16.31 0.79 – 16.31 0.81 – 12.23

Heavy Vehicle Accidents/Annual Million km of Heavy Vehicle Travel

0.14 – 2.79 0 – 11.99 0.14 – 2.79 0.14 – 2.79

Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes Available Available Available Available

Emergency Response Capability Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate

Operational Factors Cost effective Cost effective Cost effective Cost effective 1 RTA (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Sydney Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. Assumes 10% of

all vehicles are heavy vehicles. 2 Assumes 3 truck movements per week. 3 RTA (2005b) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Sydney region 2000-2004. Provided by Robert Chadwick on 2 August 2005.

# There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E. Further information is provided in Section 5A4.3.1.


In accordance with the Guidelines, Table 12 presents the results of the risk analysis on a comparative basis. In each case the consequences and likelihood of potential hazardous events were considered. This risk assessment approach effectively combines the estimated accident frequency with the potential for harm (i.e. risk), making it consistent with the principles and methodologies embodied within Australian Standard (AS) 4360 Risk Management and HIPAP No. 6. Table 12 details the most preferred, acceptable, least preferred and excluded routes for the risk analysis assessment factors. For the purposes of this risk assessment: • a preferred route is one which is deemed to have a minimal amount, if any, of the factor of

interest and poses a minimal amount of risk to the factor of interest;

• an acceptable route has a typical amount of the factor of interest and poses an acceptable amount of risk to the factor of interest;

• a least preferred route has a significant increase in the amount of the factor of interest and poses a significant increase of risk to the factor of interest; and

• an excluded route is deemed to have an unacceptable amount of the factor of interest and poses an unacceptable level of risk to the factor of interest.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-20



Acceptable Route

Least Preferred Route

Excluded Route

Schools 1B 1A, 1D, 1E - -

Hospitals 1A, 1B, 1D, 1E - - -

Aged Care Facilities 1A, 1D 1B, 1E - -

Churches - 1A, 1B, 1D, 1E - -


1E 1A, 1D 1B -


Parks 1A, 1B, 1D 1E -

Waterways 1E, 1B 1A, 1D - -

Emergency Infrastructure 1A, 1B, 1D, 1E - - -

RTA and Transporter Preferred Route 1A 1B, 1E 1D -

Heavy Vehicle Accidents (per year)1 1B, 1E 1A, 1D - -


1A, 1D, 1E 1B - -

Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes

1A, 1B, 1D, 1E - - -

Emergency Response Capability 1A, 1B, 1D, 1E - - -

Operational Factors 1A, 1B, 1D, 1E - - -

Comparative Assessment of all Factors 1A, 1B 1D - - 1 RTA (2005b) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Sydney region 2000-2004. Provided by Robert Chadwick on 2 August 2005.

# There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E. Further information is provided in Section 5A4.3.1.


There are no defined absolute risk criteria for the transport of hazardous materials throughout NSW, therefore the assessment of risk results is a balanced judgement based on experience in accordance with HIPAP No. 6. Overall, the net increase in the number of heavy vehicles due to the transport of this material would be up to approximately 0.04% (i.e. a minor impact on existing traffic volume). Therefore, there would be only a minor increase in transport risk when compared to existing risk levels. From a risk perspective, the results detailed in Tables 11 and 12 show little difference in the level of risk associated with Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E. In addition, these results deem all four suitable routes to pose a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, there is insufficient difference in the results of the risk analysis to recommend a preferred route. Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from a comparative risk perspective.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-21

5A7 SELECTION OF ROUTES The purpose of the Guidelines is to provide guidance on the identification and assessment of transport routes suitable for hazardous materials, based on an integrated approach that accounts for traffic, environmental and landuse safety and economic and other operational factors (DUAP, 1995a). In accordance with the Guidelines, the selection of preferred routes1 is a balanced judgement considering each of the factors, since it is not possible to integrate them into a single indicator of acceptability because of their diversity (DUAP, 1995a). To make a balanced judgement, preliminary and secondary screening factors have been assessed with respect to the consequences and likelihood of a potential hazardous event occurring (e.g. a heavy vehicle carrying the material of interest being involved in an accident resulting in a release of material). In order to make a balanced judgement, consultation with Councils was also undertaken. The transport area for Segment 1 is situated within the Botany Bay, City of Sydney, Ashfield, Burwood, Marrickville, Rockdale, Hurstville, Canterbury, Bankstown, Strathfield, Auburn, Parramatta, Liverpool and Campbelltown LGAs. These Councils were consulted during the preparation of the THMS. To identify a route which presents the lowest overall risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment, a holistic review of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation undertaken with the RTA, Councils and transport provider has been performed. There are a number of possible outcomes of any route evaluation, including:

1. One route is preferable because the potential for harmful effects resulting from the accidental

loss of containment are significantly lower than the alternative routes considered.

2. Two or more routes are considered preferable because there is little difference in the overall potential impact resulting from the accidental loss of containment.

3. Two or more routes are considered suitable because there is little difference in the overall potential impact resulting from the accidental loss of containment. Consideration of operational factors (e.g. cost) or consultation with the RTA or Councils may, however, determine the preferred route.

Whilst a preferred route may be determined, the alternative routes may not pose unacceptable risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, this route evaluation presents all routes that are suitable for the transport of the hazardous material in question. In accordance with Development Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i), suitable routes identified in this route evaluation for the transport of hazardous materials shall be used except where departures are necessary for local deliveries or emergencies. Following preliminary and secondary assessment, Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for Segment 1 and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). These routes are assessed as posing a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, Routes 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E are all suitable for the transport of hydrogen peroxide for Segment 1.

1 In all cases, preferred routes have been assessed as being suitable for the transport of hazardous materials.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-22

Following consideration of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation with Councils, the RTA and the transport provider, Route 1D has been identified as the preferred route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal. Following consideration of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation with Councils and the transport provider, as well as previous consultation with the RTA, Route 1E has been identified as the preferred route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Hume Highway (Sydney). 5A8 RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES The identification of risk management measures is the final step in the route evaluation process (Figure 5-2). The Guidelines state that the identification of risk management measures should include opportunities for risk reduction where the evaluation shows undesirable levels of risk along the preferred routes, together with consideration of an appropriate safety management system (DUAP, 1995a). The level of risk associated with the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been minimised by the selection of suitable transport routes based on an assessment of mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk. Suitable routes identified in this route evaluation for the transport of hazardous materials shall be used in accordance with Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i). This route evaluation did not identify undesirable levels of risk for any suitable transport routes as risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider are suitable for the hazardous material being transported. Therefore, no additional opportunities for risk reduction are recommended. The risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project include: • As hydrogen peroxide is classified as a dangerous good under the ADG Code, it must be

transported in accordance with the requirements set out in the NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009 and the ADG Code. Examples of the requirements set out in the ADG Code include:

- dangerous goods must not be transported in a tank vehicle if the tank is: constructed of material which is incompatible with the goods; or leaking, defective or damaged so that it is not safe to transport the goods; or is not free from dangerous goods which are incompatible with the dangerous goods to be transported (Clause 4.4.2.4.1);

- road tank vehicles must be inspected and maintained in accordance with AS 2890 (where the tank of a road or rail tank vehicle is also a pressure vessel, it must be maintained, tested and inspected in accordance with AS 3778 and any State or Territory law applicable to pressure vessels) (Clause 6.9.2.3.1);

- a vehicle used to transport dangerous goods: must be suitable for transporting the goods; must be free of any defect that is likely to create a risk in transporting the goods; must be clean; in the case of tank vehicle – must be selected and used in accordance with Section 4.4.2; in the case of a road vehicle used to transport a freight container, portable tank or bulk container fitter with corner castings – must be fitted with twistlocks or other equipment for securing a container on a vehicle set out in AS/NZS 3711.10; in the case of a road vehicle to transport a demountable tank or bulk container without corner castings – must be fitted with devices to secure the container (Clause 4.4.1);


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-23

- except as exempted by Clause 5.3.8, a portable tank or bulk container that contains dangerous goods, or has contained dangerous goods and has not been cleaned free from dangerous goods, must be placarded with emergency information panels that are: selected in accordance with Clause 5.3.4.2; and displayed in accordance with Clause 5.3.1.4; and located on two sides of the tank or container so that, when it is placed on a vehicle, the emergency information panels will, as far as practical, be visible from both sides of the vehicle (Clause 5.3.4.1);

- in addition to the placards required by Clause 5.3.6.1, a road vehicle on which any dangerous goods are carried in bulk containers, tanks or placardable units must be placarded with emergency information panels in accordance with Clause 5.3.6.3;

- dangerous goods must not be transported on the same road vehicle or train with incompatible goods unless the dangerous goods and the incompatible goods: are segregated in accordance with Chapter 9 of the ADG Code; or are otherwise allowed under the ADG Code to be transported together (Clause 9.2.1.3);

- an emergency information holder must be securely placed on a road vehicle in accordance with Clause 11.2.2;

- the minimum personal protective and safety equipment (including respiratory protection equipment) must be provided, based on the classification of the dangerous goods being transported, in accordance with Table 12.2 of Clause 12.1.3.1;

- a road vehicle used in the transport of a placard load of dangerous goods should be equipped with safety equipment in accordance with Clause 12.1.1;

- a road vehicle transporting a placard load of dangerous goods must be equipped with a fire extinguisher or fire extinguishers in accordance with Table 12.1 of Clause 12.1.2.1;

- if a road vehicle transporting dangerous goods is disabled on a road or street, or has stopped and constitutes a road hazard, other road users must be alerted in accordance with Clause 13.1.2.

• Drivers transporting dangerous goods in bulk by a road vehicle must hold a dangerous goods driver licence that authorises them to drive the vehicle with those goods under Part 18 of the NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009.

• Vehicles transporting dangerous goods by road in bulk are required to be licensed to transport the goods under Part 18 of the NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009.

• Those undertaking any task involved in the transport of dangerous goods by road (e.g. driving a vehicle transporting dangerous goods; loading, unloading, packing and consigning dangerous goods) are required to be appropriately instructed and trained under Part 1 of the NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009.

• The driver of a road vehicle transporting dangerous goods that is involved in an incident resulting in a dangerous situation must: notify the prime contractor, the Competent Authority, and the police or fire service, of the incident as soon as practicable; and provide any reasonable assistance required by an authorised officer, or an officer of an emergency service, to deal with the situation in accordance with Part 14 NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009.

• As soon as practicable, after becoming aware of the incident, the prime contractor responsible for the transport of the goods must provide the Competent Authority with details of the incident as well as a written report about the incident no later than 21 days after the day the incident happens in accordance with Part 14 of the NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009.


HAL-02-07\00685563.DOC 5A-24

• Vehicles transporting hazardous materials to the Project are required to carry appropriate communication devices (such as a radio or telephone).

5A9 REFERENCES Centre for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS) (1995) Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk

Analysis.

Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) (2005a) Road Transport – Dangerous Goods – The Land Transport of Dangerous Goods in Australia. Available at http://dotars.gov.au. Date retrieved: 17 August 2005.

Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) (2005b) Road Transport – Dangerous Goods – Competent Authorities for Road and Rail Transport. Available at http://dotars.gov.au. Date retrieved: 17 August 2005.

Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP) (1995a) Route Selection - Guidelines for Land Use and Environmental Safety Planning for Hazardous Materials - Road Transport Considerations. Final draft.

Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP) (1995b) Hazardous Industry Planning and Advisory Paper No. 6, Guidelines for Hazard Analysis (HIPAP No. 6).

National Road Transport Commission (1998) Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail (ADG Code), Seventh Edition. Prepared by the National Road Transport Commission in conjunction with the Advisory Committee on the Transport of Dangerous Goods and the Federal Office of Road Safety.

NSW Heritage Office (2005) State Heritage Inventory. Available at www.heritage.nsw.gov.au. Data retrieved 15th July 2005.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2010) Travel Restrictions Vehicle Routes. Map valid to 31 August 2010.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2003a) 14.6 Metre Semi-Trailers. June 2003. Cat. No. 45070811B.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Sydney Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2004a) Information Paper and Invitation for Submissions – NSW Road Classification Review. May 2004.

Roads and Transport Authority (RTA) (2004b) NSW State and Regional Road Network. Map prepared by P Gibbons RNIM.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2005a) Responsibilities. Available at http://rta.nsw.gov.au. Date retrieved: 25 November 2005.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2005b) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Sydney Region 2000-2004. Provided by Robert Chadwick on 2 August 2005.

State Emergency Management Committee (SEMC) (1999) Hazardous Materials Emergency Sub-Plan (HAZMATPLAN).

State Emergency Management Committee (SEMC) (2005) NSW State Disaster Plan (DISPLAN).


ATTACHMENT 5B


SEGMENT 2

DUBBO RAILWAY STATION TO PATRICK LOGISTICS STORAGE FACILITY (DUBBO) OR HUME HIGHWAY

(SYDNEY) TO TEMORA




HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-i


5B1 INTRODUCTION 5B-1

5B2 DEFINITION OF THE TRANSPORT AREA 5B-1

5B3 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, SOURCE AND DESTINATION 5B-2

5B3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL 5B-2 5B3.2 SOURCE AND DESTINATION 5B-2

5B4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING 5B-3

5B4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF AVAILABLE ROADS FOR HEAVY VEHICLES 5B-3 5B4.1.1 Road Hierarchy 5B-3 5B4.1.2 Identification of Truck Routes 5B-4 5B4.1.3 Potential Available Routes for Heavy Vehicles and Selection of

Potential Routes 5B-5 5B4.2 MANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS 5B-5

5B4.2.1 Physical Considerations 5B-5 5B4.2.2 Laws and Regulations 5B-6

5B4.3 SUBJECTIVE FACTORS 5B-7 5B4.3.1 Landuse 5B-7 5B4.3.2 Proximity of Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes 5B-8 5B4.3.3 Emergency and Evacuation Planning and Infrastructure 5B-9 5B4.3.4 RTA and Transporter Preferred Transport Routes 5B-10

5B4.4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING FINDINGS 5B-10

5B5 PRELIMINARY LIST OF ROUTES 5B-12

5B6 SECONDARY SCREENING 5B-13

5B6.1 ROAD AND TRAFFIC FACTORS 5B-13 5B6.1.1 Accident Statistics 5B-13 5B6.1.2 Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes 5B-14

5B6.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY 5B-14 5B6.3 OPERATIONAL FACTORS 5B-15 5B6.4 RISK ASSESSMENT 5B-15

5B6.4.1 Hazard Identification 5B-15 5B6.4.2 Consequence Analysis 5B-17 5B6.4.3 Estimation of the Likelihood of a Hazardous Incident 5B-17 5B6.4.4 Risk Analysis and Assessment of Risk Results 5B-18

5B7 SELECTION OF ROUTES 5B-21

5B8 RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES 5B-22

5B9 REFERENCES 5B-25



HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Dubbo to Patrick Logistics Storage Facility)

Table 2 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Hume Highway to Temora)

Table 3 Transport Details - Patrick Logistics Storage Facility or Temora Destinations












HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-1

5B1 INTRODUCTION The Cowal Gold Project (the Project) is located approximately 38 kilometres (km) north-east of West Wyalong, New South Wales (NSW) (Figure 5-1). The Project is owned by Barrick (Cowal) Limited (Barrick). As described in Section 1.2 of the Transport of Hazardous Materials Study (THMS), route evaluation is required for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project. Road transport of hydrogen peroxide within NSW begins at the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be transported either by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (where it will then be transported by rail to Dubbo and resume transport by road to the Project) or directly by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Project. The road transport route for hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been divided into five segments (Segments 1 to 5) for the purpose of route evaluation, however only Segments 1, 2, 3 and 5 are applicable to the alternative road transport route from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility directly to the Project. This attachment sets out the route evaluation for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide from either the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (Dubbo) or the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora. This part of the overall hydrogen peroxide road transport route is referred to as Segment 2. The route evaluation for Segment 2 compares multiple route options for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility. However, only one route has been identified for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora. This route is not directly comparable to the other routes, as it differs significantly in regards to the route length and transport area. This route has been included in this assessment for the purposes of evaluating whether it is suitable for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora. Route evaluations for Segments 1, 3, 4 and 5 are attached to the THMS as Attachments 5A, 5C, 5D and 5E, respectively. This route evaluation has been carried out in accordance with the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning’s draft “Route Selection” guidelines (DUAP, 1995a) (the Guidelines), as required by Development Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i). Figure 5-2 shows the assessment process flowsheet for this route evaluation.

5B2 DEFINITION OF THE TRANSPORT AREA The transport area is defined by the Guidelines as follows:


The transport area for Segment 2 is defined as the area between the Dubbo Railway Station (Talbragar Street, Dubbo) and the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (Lot 5, Boothenba Road, Dubbo) (Figure 5-4) and the area between the Hume Highway (within the suburb of Glenfield) and Temora (Figure 5-1). The transport area between the Dubbo Railway Station and the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility is situated within the Dubbo Local Government Area (LGA), which is located within the North Western Statistical Division.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-2

The transport area between the Hume Highway (within the suburb of Glenfield) and Temora is situated within the LGAs of Campbelltown, Wollondilly, Wingecarribee, Greater Argyle (Goulburn Mulwaree), Upper Lachlan, Yass Valley, Harden, Cootamundra and Temora.

5B3 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, SOURCE AND DESTINATION

5B3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL As described in Section 1.2 of the THMS, identification of hazardous materials for which a route evaluation is required was undertaken prior to the preparation of this route evaluation. This included an assessment of the class of material being transported (i.e. the classification of dangerous goods under the Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail [ADG Code] [National Transport Commission, 2007]), the type of container and the movement quantity and frequency. The assessment identified hydrogen peroxide as a hazardous material for which a route evaluation is required. The Department of Planning (DoP) concurred with this assessment (as outlined in DoP correspondence dated 14 October 2005). Hydrogen peroxide is classified as Class 5.1 under the ADG Code. Details of the type of container (i.e. packaging) and the movement quantity and frequency are provided in the following section.

5B3.2 SOURCE AND DESTINATION The source and destination of hydrogen peroxide transported from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility for Segment 2 are outlined in Table 1 and shown on Figure 5-4.

Table 1 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Dubbo to Patrick Logistics Storage Facility)

Source: Dubbo Railway Station

Destination: Patrick Logistics Storage Facility

Location Town/City LGA Location Town/City LGA

Talbragar Street Dubbo Dubbo Lot 5, Boothenba Road

Dubbo Dubbo

The source and destination of hydrogen peroxide transported from the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora for Segment 2 are outlined in Table 2 and shown on Figure 5-1.

Table 2 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Hume Highway to Temora)

Source: Hume Highway (Sydney)

Destination: Temora


Hume Highway (Glenfield)

Sydney Campbelltown Burley Griffin Way (State Route 94)

Temora Temora

Details of the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility or the Hume Highway to Temora are provided in Table 3.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-3

Table 3 Transport Details - Patrick Logistics Storage Facility or Temora Destinations

Hazardous Material

Delivery Vehicle



Transported State

Packaging

Hydrogen Peroxide

Single semi-trailer

25.4 t



5B4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING The following subsections identify available roads for heavy vehicles in the transport areas and examine mandatory and subjective factors for potential transport routes. Section 5B5 provides the results of this analysis as a preliminary list of routes. Further screening of this preliminary list is provided in Section 5B6.

5B4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF AVAILABLE ROADS FOR HEAVY VEHICLES The Guidelines require the identification of potential available roads for heavy vehicles to be based on: • a review of the road hierarchy (Section 5B4.1.1); and

• the identification of routes suitable in general for the movement of trucks (Section 5B4.1.2). Results of the review of the road hierarchy and the identification of routes suitable in general for the movement of trucks are provided in Section 5B4.1.3.

5B4.1.1 Road Hierarchy The RTA has developed a road hierarchy for NSW that classifies roads as national highways, state roads, regional roads or local roads. The NSW road hierarchy is described below. National Highways National highways are classified as arterial roads and comprise the principal connections between Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne, Adelaide and Brisbane (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005; RTA, 2004a). The Newell Highway and the Hume Highway are the only national highways within the transport area. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Therefore, these roads would be used for heavy vehicles within the transport area where possible. State Roads State roads are classified as arterial roads and are the principal traffic carrying and linking routes for the movement of people and goods within the urban centres of Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong and the Central Coast, and throughout NSW (RTA, 2004a). State roads are characterised by high flows of general traffic over long distances and have a higher capacity relative to surrounding roads (ibid.).


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-4

State roads within the transport area include the Golden Highway, Erskine Street and the Burley Griffin Way (State Road 94). The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads (over regional and loca roads) wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Accordingly, these roads would be used by heavy vehicles within the transport area where possible. Regional Roads Regional roads comprise the secondary road network which, in combination with state roads, provide for travel between smaller towns and districts and perform a sub-arterial function within major urban centres (RTA, 2004a). The RTA considers regional roads to be suitable for heavy vehicles (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Local Roads Local roads are generally all other roads other than national highways, state roads and regional roads. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to avoid local roads where possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005).

5B4.1.2 Identification of Truck Routes In accordance with the Guidelines, truck routes within the transport area were identified following a review of: the NSW road hierarchy; the NSW truck route network; routes used by heavy vehicles within and through the transport area; heavy vehicle bypasses; and travel time. The NSW road hierarchy is described in Section 5B4.1.1. Arterial and sub-arterial roads (i.e. national highways, state roads and regional roads) should be evaluated for their appropriateness to cater for heavy vehicles (DUAP, 1995a). The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005), therefore these roads were used wherever possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. The RTA and Dubbo City Council were consulted to determine the NSW truck route network and identify routes used by heavy vehicles within and through the transport area. The use of 14.6 m semi-trailers (prime mover and trailer combined length of 19 m) is legal on all roads in NSW (except where a sign shows a load limit for a particular road, bridge, causeway or ferry) (RTA, 2003a). Therefore, for heavy vehicles less than 19 m in length, all roads within NSW (except those signed otherwise) form part of the NSW truck route network. The RTA has published a map showing B-Double and road train routes throughout NSW (RTA, 2001). These roads are approved restricted access vehicle routes and are specifically designed to accommodate these heavy vehicles and would therefore accommodate either the single semi-trailers or B-Doubles proposed to be used to transport hydrogen peroxide. Designated B-Double and road train routes were used wherever possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. Dubbo City Council has also determined a truck route network and identified roads within Dubbo suitable for use by B-Doubles and road trains (Dubbo City Council, 2004). These roads were also used where possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles carrying hazardous materials to avoid travelling over the Blue Mountains and in the vicinity of the World Heritage listed Greater Blue Mountains Area given the sensitive nature of the area (RTA, pers. comm., 2 September 2005). This was taken into consideration when identifying truck routes within the transport area. Designated heavy vehicle bypasses within the transport area were taken into consideration when identifying truck routes. There were no heavy vehicle bypasses identified within the transport area (RTA, pers. comm., 25 July 2005; Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 29 July 2005).


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-5

In accordance with the Guidelines, travel time was also taken into consideration when identifying truck routes. Generally, an increase in travel distance increases the travel time. This subsequently increases the cost of transport. Therefore, the shortest and most direct route is the most preferable in terms of cost.

5B4.1.3 Potential Available Routes for Heavy Vehicles and Selection of Potential Routes Following a review of the road hierarchy and the identification of truck routes in the transport area, Routes 2A to 2C have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility for Segment 2. Routes 2A to 2C are set out in Table 4 and shown on Figure 5-4. Routes 2A to 2C were then tested against mandatory and subjective factors. Route 2D was identified as the only potential route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Hume Highway (Sydney) to Temora. Route 2D is also set out in Table 4 and shown on Figure 5-1. Route 2D was then tested against mandatory and subjective factors to assess its acceptability as a suitable transport route. The assessment for all routes is set out below in Sections 5B4.2 and 5B4.3.


Route Directions



2C On exiting Dubbo Railway Station turn left into Talbragar Street, left into Fitzroy Street, right into Cobborah Road (Golden Highway), left into Yarrandale Road, left into Boothenba Road and right into the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility.

2D From the Hume Highway (Glenfield), continue on the Highway until Bowning (west of Yass). Turn off the Hume Highway into State Route 94 (Burley Griffin Way) and continue to Temora.

5B4.2 MANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS

5B4.2.1 Physical Considerations Physical considerations may preclude a potential transport route from consideration because of weight limitations on bridges, height restrictions on underpasses, inadequate shoulders for breakdowns, extensive construction activities or inadequate parking and turning spaces (DUAP, 1995a). Roads designated by the RTA and Dubbo City Council as B-Double or road train routes are considered to be physically capable of accommodating the single semi-trailers or B-Doubles that are proposed to be used to transport hydrogen peroxide. Route 2D only utilises roads designated by the RTA as B-Double or road train routes. No further assessment of physical capability has been undertaken for these roads. Routes 2A to 2C utilise two roads not designated as B-Double or road train routes (i.e. Talbragar and Fitzroy Streets). These roads are physically capable of accommodating single semi-trailers (Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 19 September 2005). Route 2B utilises a segment of Boothenba Road not designated as a B-Double or road train route. This section of Boothenba Road is physically capable of accommodating single semi-trailers (RTA, pers. comm., 23 August, 2005; Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 19 September 2005).


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-6

Therefore, physical considerations do not preclude any of the potential transport routes.

5B4.2.2 Laws and Regulations Laws and regulations may prohibit the transport of hazardous materials on certain roads or structures (DUAP, 1995a). The Guidelines state that local, state and national transport authorities should be consulted and prohibited roadways eliminated from consideration unless there are no suitable alternative routes (DUAP, 1995a). National Transport Authority The Australian Government Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) (now the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) was consulted to determine if the transport of hazardous materials was prohibited on any roads or structures in NSW. DOTARS advised that the Competent Authority for road transport in each State and Territory should be contacted for information relating to the road transport of dangerous goods (DOTARS, 2005a). The NSW Competent Authority is the Manager, Dangerous Goods, Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) (now the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water [DECCW] (DOTARS, 2005b). The Manager, Dangerous Goods, DECCW was consulted to determine if the transport of hazardous materials was prohibited on any roads or structures in NSW. The DECCW advised that the RTA is the determining authority for dangerous goods routes in NSW and has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999 (DEC, pers. comm., 26 July 2005). State Transport Authority The RTA has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999. Clause 59 of the Regulation prohibits the carriage of dangerous goods (within the meaning of the Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Act, 2008 and Clause 32 of the Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation, 2009) through some areas within Sydney. Segment 2 does not involve the road transport of hydrogen peroxide through any prohibited areas prescribed in Clause 59 of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation, 1999 and defined in Rule 300-2 of the Road Rules, 2008. Local Transport Authority For the purposes of this study, the local transport authority has been defined as the authority accountable for a specified road according to its classification. In NSW, the State Government, through the RTA, manages national highways and state roads and is accountable for the outcomes on these roads (RTA, 2004a). Therefore, the RTA is the local transport authority for national highways and state roads. Councils are accountable for regional and local roads (RTA, 2004a) and are therefore the local transport authorities for these roads. Potential transport routes utilise local and state roads as well as national highways (RTA, 2004b), therefore the local transport authorities are the RTA and Dubbo City Council. As stated above, the RTA has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999. Dubbo City Council does not prohibit the transport of hazardous materials on any roads for which it is accountable (Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 1 September 2005).


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-7

Laws and regulations do not preclude any of the potential transport routes.

5B4.3 SUBJECTIVE FACTORS Subjective factors usually include the proximity of the potential transport route to sensitive landuses (such as hospitals, schools, aged care facilities, churches and items of heritage or cultural significance) (Section 5B4.3.1) and sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes (such as park reservations and wetlands) (Section 5B4.3.2) (DUAP, 1995a). Emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure are also usually included in the assessment of subjective factors (Section 5B4.3.3) (DUAP, 1995a).

5B4.3.1 Landuse Sensitive Landuses Sensitive landuses include schools (pre-schools and primary and secondary schools), hospitals, aged care facilities, churches and items of heritage or cultural significance. Table 5 and the following sections detail sensitive landuses along Routes 2A to 2D.


Route Schools Hospitals Aged Care Facilities

Churches Items of Heritage or

Cultural Significance

Number of Schools

Number of Students

Number of Hospitals

Number of Beds

2A 0 0 0 0 0 1 2

2B 0 0 0 0 0 1 2

2C 1 768 2 256 1 0 1

2D* N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A * Route 2D predominantly passes through rural areas comprising of areas of open space. Sensitive landuses (e.g. the primary school and

early childhood day care centre located in the Harden LGA) are relatively uncommon along Route 2D and do not preclude it from the route evaluation. Therefore, further detailed consideration of sensitive landuses for Route 2D was not undertaken for this route evaluation.

Schools Vehicles travelling along Route 2C would pass Dubbo College Senior Campus (Yarrandale Road). Hospitals/Aged Care Facilities There are no hospitals or aged care facilities along Routes 2A and 2B. The following hospitals and aged care facilities are located on Cobborah Road (Golden Highway) and would be passed by heavy vehicles using Route 2C: • Lourdes Hospital;

• The Dubbo Base Hospital; and

• Lourdes Aged Care Assessment Service. The Lourdes and Dubbo Base Hospitals have a combined total of 256 beds.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-8

Churches One church is located along Routes 2A and 2B (Bourke Street). Items of Heritage or Cultural Significance The NSW State Heritage Inventory was searched for items of heritage or cultural significance located along potential transport routes. The Dubbo Railway Station is listed on the State Heritage Inventory (NSW Heritage Office, 2005). This is the origin of Segment 2 and therefore would be passed by heavy vehicles using Routes 2A to 2C. Tantallon house is also listed on the State Heritage Inventory and is located on Routes 2A and 2B. Other Landuses Other landuses may include residential, commercial or industrial areas and areas of open space. Routes 2A to 2C pass through residential, commercial and industrial areas and areas of open space. Route 2D predominantly passes through rural areas comprising of areas of open space.

5B4.3.2 Proximity of Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes Sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes include park reservations (i.e. national parks, state forests, recreational parks and conservation areas) and waterways (i.e. wetlands, lakes, dams, rivers, creeks and other drainage lines). Sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes traversed by or occurring along or within approximately 100 m of Routes 2A to 2D are identified in Table 6 and described in the following sections.




2A 2 275 4

2B 2 275 3

2C 3 900 1

2D 4 8,125 9

Park Reservations Vehicles travelling on potential routes 2A to 2C would pass within approximately 100 m of Victoria Park and an unnamed reserve at the corner of Fitzroy and Erskine Streets. Vehicles travelling on Route 2C would also pass Theresa Maliphant Park. To determine the preferred transport route, a measure of the quality and size of potentially affected park reservations is required. It was conservatively assumed that all park reservations are of a similar, high quality. The road frontage of park reservations was measured to compare the size of the parks traversed by or occurring along or within approximately 100 m of potential routes. The approximate total length of road frontage of park reservations for Routes 2A, 2B and 2C is, 275 m, 275 m and 900 m, respectively.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-9

Vehicles travelling on Route 2D would pass within approximately 100 m of four park reservations including Penrose State Forest, Jindalee State Forest and Mundoonen National Park. The approximate total length of road frontage of park reservations for Route 2D is 8,125 m. Waterways Vehicles travelling on Routes 2A and 2B would cross or come within approximately 100 m of the Macquarie River, a tributary of the Macquarie River and Troy Creek. Route 2A would also pass an unnamed perennial lake or water course on Purvis Lane. Route 2C would only cross Troy Creek. Route 2D would traverse or come within approximately 100 m of nine waterways, including the Lachlan River, Muttama Creek and Bland Creek.

5B4.3.3 Emergency and Evacuation Planning and Infrastructure Emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure includes: the availability of formalised emergency and evacuation procedures and plans; the location of emergency response teams and their ability to respond to hazardous material release; access; and ease of emergency evacuation (DUAP, 1995a). In NSW the management of state emergencies and rescues is controlled under the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989. The Act sets out strategies for the integration of emergency management at local, district and state levels. The NSW State Emergency Management Committee (SEMC) was established by the Act and is responsible for emergency planning at the state level. The SEMC has prepared a NSW State Disaster Plan (DISPLAN), the objective of which is to ensure the co-ordinated response to emergencies by all agencies having responsibilities and functions in emergencies (SEMC, 2005). A Hazardous Materials Emergency Sub-Plan (HAZMATPLAN) has been prepared as a sub-plan to the DISPLAN. The aim of the HAZMATPLAN is to detail special arrangements for the control and co-ordination of a response to, and initial recovery from, hazardous materials emergencies in NSW (SEMC, 1999). The District Emergency Management Committee (DEMC) is responsible to the SEMC. Each DEMC is responsible for preparing plans which detail the prevention of, preparation for, response to and recovery from emergencies in its District (District DISPLAN) (SEMC, 2005). The Local Emergency Management Committee (LEMC) is responsible to the DEMC for each LGA (SEMC, 2005). Each LEMC is responsible for preparing plans in relation to the prevention of, preparation for, response to, and recovery from emergencies in its LGA (Local DISPLAN) (SEMC, 2005). The above approach to emergency management in NSW ensures: the availability of formalised emergency and evacuation procedures and plans (i.e. DISPLAN, HAZMATPLAN, District DISPLAN, local DISPLAN); the location of emergency response teams throughout NSW; and the ability of emergency response teams to respond to hazardous material release. Access and ease of emergency evacuation would be affected by several factors including proximity to emergency services, nature of the hazardous material, availability of alternative routes and road surface (i.e. sealed or unsealed) (RTA, pers. comm., 18 August, 2005). As detailed above, the approach to emergency management in NSW is comprehensive and would ensure that emergency services could access and respond promptly to an incident involving a hazardous material.

In addition, the NSW state and regional road network is extensive and the availability of alternative routes is considered to be adequate. All roads used for the transport of hazardous materials to the Project are sealed, ensuring accessibility and ease of emergency evacuation in the event of an incident.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-10

Following a review of emergency management in NSW, emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure are considered to be adequate for all potential routes. These routes are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure.

5B4.3.4 RTA and Transporter Preferred Transport Routes The RTA, an authority which maintains the majority of the road system (i.e. national highways and state roads) and which acts as an advisory body to Councils, was contacted to determine the RTA’s preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility. Route 2A is the route preferred by the RTA for the transport of hazardous materials from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (RTA, pers. comm., 15 June 2005). The transport provider was contacted to determine their preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (i.e. Routes 2A to 2C). Route 2C is the route preferred by the transporter for the transport of hazardous materials for Segment 2 (Patrick Logistics, pers. comm., 9 June 2005). Previous correspondence received from the RTA indicating preference for heavy vehicles to use national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm.., 4 May 2005) has been taken into consideration in the identification of Route 2D. The transport provider was also contacted to determine their preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Hume Highway to Temora. Route 2D is the route preferred by the transport provider for the transport of hazardous materials from the Hume Highway to Temora.

5B4.4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING FINDINGS Preliminary screening took into account available roads for heavy vehicles and mandatory and subjective factors (Sections 5B4.1, 5B4.2 and 5B4.3). Following a review of the road hierarchy and the identification of truck routes within the transport area, Routes 2A to 2D have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for Segment 2. Mandatory factors did not preclude these routes from the route evaluation. Table 7 provides a summary of subjective factors outlined in Section 5B4.3 for Routes 2A to 2D.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-11


Assessment Factor Route 2A Route 2B Route 2C Route 2D

Schools 0 0 1 #

Number of School Students 0 0 768 #

Hospitals 0 0 2 #

Number of Hospital Beds 0 0 256 #

Aged Care Facilities 0 0 1 #

Churches 1 1 0 #

Items of Heritage or Cultural Significance 2 2 1 #


Number of Park Reservations 2 2 3 4


275 275 900 8,125

Waterways 4 3 1 9

Emergency Infrastructure Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate





Table 7 indicates that Routes 2A to 2C would have minimal impact on subjective factors and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials. As Route 2D is not being compared to Routes 2A to 2C, the increased park frontage for Route 2D in comparison to Routes 2A to 2C is not considered relevant. Table 7 indicates that based on subjective factors, Route 2D is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials. In accordance with the Guidelines, Table 8 presents the results of the preliminary screening on a comparative basis. Table 8 details the most preferred, acceptable, least preferred and excluded routes for each of the subjective factors detailed in Section 5B4.3. For the purposes of this study: • a preferred route is one which is deemed to have a minimal amount, if any, of the factor of

interest;





HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-12



Acceptable Route Least Preferred Route

Excluded Route

Schools 2A, 2B 2D 2C -

Hospitals 2A, 2B 2D 2C -

Aged Care Facilities 2A, 2B 2C, 2D - -

Churches 2C 2A, 2B, 2D - -


2C 2A, 2B, 2D - -


Park Reservations - 2A, 2B, 2D 2C -

Waterways 2C 2A, 2B, 2D - -

Emergency Infrastructure 2A, 2B, 2C 2D - -


2A 2C, 2D - -


2A 2B, 2D 2C -


Tables 7 and 8 indicate that Route 2A is the initial preferred route (when compared to Routes 2B and 2C) for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility, following preliminary screening. This route is the preferred route (when compared to Routes 2B and 2C) for five of the subjective factors presented in Table 8 and therefore would have the least potential adverse effect in the event of a release of hydrogen peroxide. The preliminary screening has identified Route 2B as an acceptable route (when compared to Routes 2A and 2C) and worthy of further assessment. Route 2C is the least preferred route (when compared to Routes 2A and 2B) following preliminary screening (Table 8). This route is the least preferred route for three of the subjective factors presented in Table 8 and therefore would have the greatest potential adverse effects on subjective factors. Based on the above, Route 2C has been excluded for the remainder of the Segment 2 route evaluation. The preliminary screening has identified Route 2D as an acceptable route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Hume Highway to Temora and worthy of further assessment.

5B5 PRELIMINARY LIST OF ROUTES On the basis of the preliminary screening analysis in Section 5B4, the following preliminary list of routes from either the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility or the Hume Highway to Temora has been determined (Table 9).


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-13


Route Directions



2D From the Hume Highway (Glenfield), continue on the Highway until Bowning (west of Yass). Turn off the Hume Highway into State Route 94 (Burley Griffin Way) and continue to Temora.

5B6 SECONDARY SCREENING Secondary screening involves the assessment of the preliminary list of routes (Section 5B5) against road and traffic factors (Section 5B6.1), emergency response capability (Section 5B6.2), operational factors (Section 5B6.3) and risk (including environmental and landuse factors) (Section 5B6.4) (Figure 5-2). The potential routes have been assessed against each secondary screening factor to confirm the routes are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and to determine the preferred route. The final selection of routes is detailed in Section 5B7.

5B6.1 ROAD AND TRAFFIC FACTORS The Guidelines state that the assessment of potential transport routes for suitability on road and traffic grounds will require the collection of particular information (for example road structural condition) to establish the capability and level of service of the road system (DUAP, 1995a). The Guidelines offer the following road and traffic factors that consider the ability of a route to effectively and safely handle traffic using it: structural and geometric adequacy; level of service of carriageway and critical intersections; travel speed; accident rates; and the availability of alternative emergency routes. The capability of a route to safely and effectively handle the traffic using it is reflected in the accident statistics for that route (Pinnacle Risk Management, pers. comm., 20 July 2005). Accident statistics are influenced by the route’s structural and geometric adequacy, level of service (of carriageway and intersections), and travel speed. It follows then that the structural and geometric adequacy, level of service (of carriageway and intersections), and travel speed are effectively embodied within the accident statistics of the transport route (Pinnacle Risk Management, pers. comm., 20 July 2005). Therefore, it is appropriate to compare accident statistics for potential transport routes and infer from them the capability and level of service of the road system. Accident statistics for potential routes are provided in Section 5B6.1.1. An assessment of remaining road and traffic factors (i.e. the availability of alternative emergency routes) is provided in Section 5B6.1.2. 5B6.1.1 Accident Statistics Available accident statistics for Routes 2A, 2B and 2D were obtained from the RTA and are summarised in Table 10.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-14


Route Length (km)

No. of Heavy Vehicles (per day)

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8

% Increase of Heavy Vehicles

due to Project2,10

Heavy Vehicle Accidents

(per year)3,9,10,11

Annual Million km of Heavy

Vehicle Travel

Heavy Vehicle Accidents/Annual

Million km of Heavy Vehicle Travel

2A 7.2 1,167 – 2,265 0. 02% – 0.04% 3.0 0.37 – 1.14 0.00 – 1.75

2B 5.5 2,334 – 3,311 0.01% – 0.02% 2.8 0.54 – 2.29 0.00 – 0.87

2D 381.5 237 – 4,214 0.002% – 0.03% 14.4 0.26 – 44.16 0.00 – 0.75 1 RTA (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Western Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 2 Assumes 3 truck movements per week. 3 RTA (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Western Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by Neil Peden on 25 July 2005. 4 RTA (2004c) Traffic Volume Data for the Southern Region 2003. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 5 RTA (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Sydney Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 6 RTA (2004d) Traffic Volume Data for the South Western Region 2003. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 7 RTA (2000) Excel database of traffic composition for the South Western Region. Provided by David Amery on 22 July 2005. 8 RTA (2003c) Excel database of traffic composition for the Southern Region. Provided by Nick Boyd on 1 September 2005. 9 RTA (2005a) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Sydney Region. Provided by Robert Chadwick on 2 August 2005. 10 RTA (2005b) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Southern Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by Fiona Ristovski on 30 August 2005. 11 RTA (2005c) Excel database of traffic crash data for the South Western Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by David Amery on 5 August 2005.

Accident statistics for Routes 2A and 2B are considered to be within normal operating levels for the road types and use. The increase of heavy vehicles due to the Project would be very small (up to approximately 0.04%) and would be unlikely to affect traffic flows or accident statistics. Routes 2A and 2B are therefore suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to accident statistics. Accident statistics for Routes 2A and 2B are compared in Table 13, Section 5B6.4.4. Accident statistics for Route 2D are also considered to be within normal operating levels for the road types and use and the increase of heavy vehicles due to the Project would be unlikely to affect traffic flows or accident statistics. Route 2D is therefore suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to accident statistics. 5B6.1.2 Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes The NSW state and regional road network is extensive. As a result, there are alternative emergency transport routes that could be used in the event of a temporary closure of Routes 2A, 2B and 2D.

5B6.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY The emergency response capability available for potential routes may include considerations such as the speed of response of emergency services, ease of access to the potential accident site and the availability of emergency combat equipment (DUAP, 1995a). The formalised approach to emergency management in NSW ensures: the availability of emergency combat equipment at a local, district and state level; the location of emergency response teams throughout NSW; and the ability of emergency response teams to respond to hazardous material release (Section 5B4.3.3). Further information on the management of emergencies in NSW and an evaluation of the ease of access to a potential accident for Segment 2 is provided in Section 5B4.3.3. Following a review of emergency management in NSW, emergency response capability is considered to be adequate for Routes 2A and 2B. Emergency response capability is also considered to be adequate for Route 2D. These routes are therefore all suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to emergency response capability.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-15

5B6.3 OPERATIONAL FACTORS Operating costs and distribution logistics have been considered in the selection of the preferred transport route for Segment 2. Routes 2A, 2B and 2D are all suitable on the basis of logistical considerations. The Guidelines state that the main cost criterion when comparing alternative routes is the expected increase or decrease in distance and travel time if another route is used. Generally, an increase in travel distance increases the travel time and subsequently the cost of transport. Therefore, the shortest route is the most preferable in respect of operating costs. Route 2B is the shortest available route for Segment 2 and is therefore cost effective. However, Route 2A is similar to Route 2B in length and operating costs would not differ considerably between routes. Routes 2A and 2B are therefore cost effective and equally suitable on the basis of operating costs. As described in Section 5A1, Route 2D has been identified as the only potential alternative route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide following changes in rail supply arrangements that have triggered the requirement for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Project. The operating costs associated with Route 2D would not be prohibitive and are acceptable to Barrick. Route 2D is therefore considered to be suitable on the basis of operating costs.

5B6.4 RISK ASSESSMENT The Guidelines outline an intermediate risk assessment method that should be undertaken for each potential transport route found to be satisfactory on road and traffic grounds. If the intermediate method does not enable the analyst to identify a clear-cut low risk alternative and differences between potential routes are small then a detailed risk assessment may need to be carried out in accordance with Hazardous Industry Planning and Advisory Paper No. 6, Guidelines for Hazard Analysis (HIPAP No. 6) (DUAP, 1995b). The risk assessment for Segment 2 has been undertaken in accordance with HIPAP No. 6. HIPAP No. 6 sets out methodology for risk assessment as follows: 1. Hazard identification: the identification of all possible conditions that could lead to a hazardous




4. Risk analysis.

5. Assessment of risk results. 5B6.4.1 Hazard Identification

5B6.4.1.1 Type of Hazardous Material Hydrogen peroxide is classified under the ADG Code as Class 5.1 (oxidising substance) with Subsidiary Risk 8 (corrosive substance) and Packing Group II.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-16

Hydrogen peroxide is a clear, colourless liquid with a sharp odour. It is a strong oxidising agent and is relatively stable in its pure form and at low pH. The vapour immediately above the liquid is irritating. Exposure to hydrogen peroxide via ingestion, eye or skin contact or inhalation results in relatively low toxic impact. Hydrogen peroxide can react strongly with organic materials, reducing agents, some acids and alkalis, metals, flammable and combustible materials (including paper, cloth, leather etc). It is catalytically decomposed (into water and oxygen) by heavy metals and their salts, dust, oxidisable organic materials, enzymes and rust. Decomposition can also be initiated or accelerated by light, heat, high pH or various other impurities, and may be extremely violent. Hydrogen peroxide is not combustible but will strongly support the combustion of other materials. Hydrogen peroxide is not toxic in itself, however can cause injury through its ability to form free, active oxygen. Irritation and burns to mucous membranes, skin, and eyes can occur. Hydrogen peroxide has no potential for bio-accumulation as it degrades rapidly in air and water. However in sufficient quantities, it can be toxic to aquatic biota and plants.

5B6.4.1.2 Adjacent Landuse Refer to Section 5B4.3.1 for a description of adjacent landuse for potential transport routes.

5B6.4.1.3 Transport Vehicle and Conditions of Transport Hydrogen peroxide will be transported to the Project by single semi-trailer or B-Double. It will be transported by bulk tanker (i.e. Isotainer) as a liquid at ambient temperature and pressure. Regulation of temperature and pressure are not required during the transport of this material.

5B6.4.1.4 Causes of Hazardous Incidents Initiating and contributory causes for incidents involving heavy vehicles has been detailed in Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk Analysis (CCPS, 1995). The identified causes, with additional causes included, are reproduced in Table 11.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-17


Human Error Equipment Failures System or Procedural

Failures External Events


• speeding




• contamination

• overfilling



• unsecured loads


• leaking valve

• leaking fitting

• brake failure


• tyre failure

• soft shoulder

• overpressure

• material defect


• sloshing


• corrosion

• bad weld

• excessive grade







• driver training



• route selection




• maintenance

• inspection



• rain

• fog/visibility

• wind

• flood/washout


• earthquake


• animals on road

5B6.4.2 Consequence Analysis An accident involving a heavy vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide resulting in a release of the material is the hazardous incident relevant to the transport of hydrogen peroxide. The consequences of a release of hydrogen peroxide from this hazardous incident are largely dependent on what is contacted by the oxidising, corrosive liquid. The following consequences of this hazardous incident are relevant: • direct exposure to liquid or vapour hydrogen peroxide for those at or near to an accident scene;




5B6.4.3 Estimation of the Likelihood of a Hazardous Incident Accident data for heavy vehicles utilising Routes 2A, 2B and 2D are detailed in Section 5B6.1.1 and Table 10. Approximately 3.0 accidents per year involving heavy vehicles occur for Route 2A and approximately 2.8 accidents per year involving heavy vehicles occur for Route 2B. The normalised accident rates per million kilometres involving heavy vehicles using Route 2D is between 0.00 and 0.75 (Table 10). This is lower than Routes 2A and 2B and is not considered to be unacceptable.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-18

In the event of an accident involving a heavy vehicle, the carried goods may or may not be released. The probability of release is dependent on factors such as speed, shipping conditions (i.e. pressurised compared to non-pressurised), inadequate load securing, and strength and integrity of the container. Various studies of release probabilities from heavy vehicles involved in an accident have been undertaken. The Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk Analysis (CCPS, 1995) indicates that the release probability for various road types is between 5 and 10% (i.e. approximately one heavy vehicle accident in every 10 to 20 will result in a release of the material). An estimation of the likelihood of an accident involving a vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project resulting in a release of the material must take into account the following: • the number of vehicles transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project relative to the total number




The likelihood of an accident (based on averaged accident data) involving a vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project resulting in a release of the material for Routes 2A and 2B is estimated to be 7x10-5/year and 4x10-5/year, respectively (i.e. such that an accident is estimated to occur on Route 2A once every 14,300 years and on Route 2B once every 25,000 years). The likelihood of an accident (based on averaged accident data) involving a vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project resulting in a release of the material for Route 2D is estimated to be 3.4x10-4/year (i.e. such that an accident is estimated to occur on Route 2D once every 2,900 years). These values indicate a low level of risk associated with the transport of hazardous materials.

5B6.4.4 Risk Analysis and Assessment of Risk Results Risk analysis took into account the preliminary screening findings as well as road and traffic factors (Section 5B6.1), emergency response capability (Section 5B6.2) and operational factors (Section 5B6.3). Table 12 provides a summary of all assessment factors utilised in the risk analysis for Routes 2A, 2B and 2D.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-19


Assessment Factor Route 2A Route 2B Route 2D

Schools 0 0 #

Number of School Students 0 0 #

Hospitals 0 0 #

Number of Hospital Beds 0 0 #

Aged Care Facilities 0 0 #

Churches 1 1 #

Items of Heritage or Cultural Significance 2 2 #

Other Landuse # # #

Number of Park Reservations 2 2 4

Park Reservations – Approximate Total Road Frontage (m) 275 275 8,125

Waterways 4 3 9

Emergency Infrastructure Adequate Adequate Adequate



Length (km) 7.2 5.5 381.5

No. of Heavy Vehicles (per day)1,4,5,6,7,8 1,167 – 2,265 2,334 – 3,311 237 - 4,214

% Increase of Heavy Vehicles due to Project2 0.02% – 0.04% 0.01% – 0.02% 0.002% - 0.03%

Heavy Vehicle Accidents (per year)3,9,10,11 3.0 2.8 14.4

Annual Million km of Heavy Vehicle Travel 0.37 – 1.14 0.54 – 2.29 0.26 - 44.16


0.00 – 1.75 0.00 – 0.87 0.00 - 0.75

Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes Available Available Available

Emergency Response Capability Adequate Adequate Adequate

Operational Factors Cost effective Cost effective Cost effective 1 RTA (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Western Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 2 Assumes 3 truck movements per week. 3 RTA (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Western Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by Neil Peden on 25 July 2005. 4 RTA (2004c) Traffic Volume Data for the Southern Region 2003. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 5 RTA (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Sydney Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 6 RTA (2004d) Traffic Volume Data for the South Western Region 2003. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate. 7 RTA (2000) Excel database of traffic composition for the South Western Region. Provided by David Amery on 22 July 2005. 8 RTA (2003c) Excel database of traffic composition for the Southern Region. Provided by Nick Boyd on 1 September 2005. 9 RTA (2005a) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Sydney Region. Provided by Robert Chadwick on 2 August 2005. 10 RTA (2005b) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Southern Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by Fiona Ristovski on 30 August 2005. 11 RTA (2005c) Excel database of traffic crash data for the South Western Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by David Amery on 5 August 2005.

# There is little difference in the type of land use along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 2A and 2B. Sensitive landuses along Route 2D are relatively uncommon and do not preclude this route from the route evaluation. Further information is provided in Section 5B4.3.1.


In accordance with the Guidelines, Table 13 presents the results of the risk analysis on a comparative basis for Routes 2A and 2B. Table 13 details the most preferred, acceptable, least preferred and excluded routes for the risk analysis assessment factors. For the purposes of this risk assessment: • a preferred route is one which is deemed to have a minimal amount, if any, of the factor of




HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-20



Table 13 also presents the results of the risk analysis for Route 2D and details whether the route is suitable from a risk perspective. In each case, the consequences and likelihood of potential hazardous events were considered. This risk assessment approach effectively combines the estimated accident frequency with the potential for harm (i.e. risk), making it consistent with the principles and methodologies embodied within Australian Standard (AS) 4360 Risk Management and HIPAP No. 6.



Acceptable Route


Excluded Route

Schools 2A, 2B 2D - -

Hospitals 2A, 2B 2D - -

Aged Care Facilities 2A, 2B 2D - -

Churches - 2A, 2B, 2D - -


- 2A, 2B, 2D - -


Park Reservations - 2A, 2B, 2D - -

Waterways - 2A, 2B, 2D - -

Emergency Infrastructure 2A, 2B - - -

RTA and Transporter Preferred Route 2A 2B, 2D - -

Heavy Vehicle Accidents (per year)1 - 2A, 2B, 2D - -


- 2A, 2B, 2D - -


2A, 2B 2D - -

Emergency Response Capability 2A, 2B 2D - -

Operational Factors 2A, 2B 2D - -


2A 2B, 2D - -

Source: RTA (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Western Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by Neil Peden on 25 July 2005.

# Further information is provided in Section 5B4.3.1.


There are no defined absolute risk criteria for the transport of hazardous materials throughout NSW, therefore the assessment of risk results is a balanced judgement based on experience in accordance with HIPAP No. 6. Overall, the net increase in the number of heavy vehicles due to the transport of this material would be up to approximately 0.04% for Routes 2A and 2B and up to approximately 0.03% for Route 2D (i.e. a minor impact on existing traffic volume). Therefore, there would be only a minor increase in transport risk for either transport option when compared to existing risk levels.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-21

From a risk perspective, the results detailed in Tables 12 and 13 show little difference in the comparative level of risk associated with Routes 2A and 2B. In addition, these results deem both potential routes to pose a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, there is insufficient difference in the results of the risk analysis to recommend a preferred route when comparing Routes 2A and 2B. Routes 2A and 2B are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility from a comparative risk perspective. The results detailed in Tables 12 and 13 indicate that Route 2D poses a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Route 2D is therefore considered to be suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from the Hume Highway to Temora from a risk perspective. 5B7 SELECTION OF ROUTES The purpose of the Guidelines is to provide guidance on the identification and assessment of transport routes suitable for hazardous materials, based on an integrated approach that accounts for traffic, environmental and landuse safety and economic and other operational factors (DUAP, 1995a). In accordance with the Guidelines, the selection of preferred routes is a balanced judgement considering each of the factors, since it is not possible to integrate them into a single indicator of acceptability because of their diversity (DUAP, 1995a). To make a balanced judgement, preliminary and secondary screening factors have been assessed with respect to the consequences and likelihood of a potential hazardous event occurring (e.g. a heavy vehicle carrying the material of interest being involved in an accident resulting in a release of material). In order to make a balanced judgement, consultation with Councils was also undertaken. The transport area for Routes 2A and 2B is wholly situated within the Dubbo LGA and the Dubbo City Council was consulted during the preparation of the THMS. The transport area for Route 2D is situated within the Campbelltown, Wollondilly, Wingecarribee, Greater Argyle (Goulburn Mulwaree), Upper Lachlan, Yass Valley, Harden, Cootamundra and Temora LGAs. These Councils were also consulted during the preparation of the THMS. To identify a route which presents the lowest overall risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment, a holistic review of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation with the RTA, Council and transport provider has been performed. There are a number of possible outcomes of any route evaluation, including:




3. Two or more routes are considered suitable because there is little difference in the overall potential impact resulting from the accidental loss of containment. Consideration of operational factors (e.g. cost) or consultation with the RTA or Council may, however, determine the preferred route.


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-22

Whilst a preferred route may be determined, the alternative routes may not pose unacceptable risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, this route evaluation presents all routes that are suitable for the transport of the hazardous material in question. In accordance with Development Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i), suitable routes identified in this route evaluation for the transport of hazardous materials shall be used except where departures are necessary for local deliveries or emergencies. Following preliminary and secondary assessment, Routes 2A and 2B have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility for Segment 2 and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Both routes are assessed as posing a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Route 2A has been recommended by the RTA, while Route 2B has been recommended by the Dubbo City Council (Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 6 June 2005) for the transport of hazardous materials. Therefore, Routes 2A and 2B are both suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and are the preferred routes for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Dubbo Railway Station to the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility. Following preliminary and secondary assessment, Route 2D has been identified as the only potential available route for heavy vehicles from the Hume Highway to Temora for Segment 2 and is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Following consideration of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation with Councils and the transport provider, as well as previous consultation with the RTA, Route 2D does not pose an unacceptable risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment and is therefore considered to be suitable for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Hume Highway to Temora. 5B8 RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES The identification of risk management measures is the final step in the route evaluation process (Figure 5-2). The Guidelines state that the identification of risk management measures should include opportunities for risk reduction where the evaluation shows undesirable levels of risk along the preferred routes, together with consideration of an appropriate safety management system (DUAP, 1995a). The level of risk associated with the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been minimised by the selection of suitable transport routes based on an assessment of mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk. Suitable routes identified in this route evaluation for the transport of hazardous materials shall be used in accordance with Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i).


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-23

This route evaluation did not identify undesirable levels of risk for any suitable transport routes as risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider are suitable for the hazardous material being transported. Therefore, no additional opportunities for risk reduction are recommended. The risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project include: • As hydrogen peroxide is classified as a dangerous good under the ADG Code, it must be









- the minimum personal protective and safety equipment (including respiratory protection equipment) that must be provided, based on the classification of the dangerous goods being transported, in accordance with Table 12.2 of Clause 12.1.3.1;

- the safety equipment with which a road vehicle used in the transport of a placard load of dangerous goods should be equipped in accordance with Clause 12.1.1;


HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-24






• The driver of a road vehicle transporting dangerous goods that is involved in an incident resulting in a dangerous situation must: notify the prime contractor, the Competent Authority, and the police or fire service, of the incident as soon as practicable; and provide any reasonable assistance required by an authorised officer, or an officer of an emergency service, to deal with the situation in accordance with Part 14 NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009.




HAL-02-07/00685564.doc 5B-25

5B9 REFERENCES Centre for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS) (1995) Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk

Analysis.



Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAPa) (1995a) Route Selection - Guidelines for Land Use and Environmental Safety Planning for Hazardous Materials - Road Transport Considerations. Final draft.


Dubbo City Council (2004) Approved Road Train and B-Double Routes in Dubbo City Council. Dubbo City Council Technical Services Division.

National Road Transport Commission (1998) Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail (ADG Code), Sixth Edition. Prepared by the National Road Transport Commission in conjunction with the Advisory Committee on the Transport of Dangerous Goods and the Federal Office of Road Safety.

NSW Heritage Office (2005) State Heritage Inventory. Available at www.heritage.nsw.gov.au. Data retrieved 15th July 2005.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2010) Travel Restrictions Vehicle Routes. Map valid to 31 August 2010.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2003a) 14.6 Metre Semi-Trailers. June 2003. Cat. No. 45070811B.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2003b) Traffic Volume Data for the Western Region 2002. Prepared by the RTA Traffic and Transport Directorate.


Roads and Transport Authority (RTA) (2004b) NSW State and Regional Road Network. Map prepared by P Gibbons RNIM.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Western Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by Neil Peden on 25 July 2005.




ATTACHMENT 5C


SEGMENT 3

PATRICK LOGISTICS STORAGE FACILITY TO NEWELL HIGHWAY (DUBBO) OR TEMORA TO WEST WYALONG




HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-i


5C1 INTRODUCTION 5C-1

5C2 DEFINITION OF THE TRANSPORT AREA 5C-1

5C3 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, SOURCE AND DESTINATION 5C-2

5C3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL 5C-2 5C3.2 SOURCE AND DESTINATION 5C-2

5C4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING 5C-3

5C4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF AVAILABLE ROADS FOR HEAVY VEHICLES 5C-3 5C4.1.1 Road Hierarchy 5C-3 5C4.1.2 Identification of Truck Routes 5C-4 5C4.1.3 Potential Available Routes for Heavy Vehicles and Selection of

Potential Routes 5C-5 5C4.2 MANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS 5C-5

5C4.2.1 Physical Considerations 5C-5 5C4.2.2 Laws and Regulations 5

5C4.3 SUBJECTIVE FACTORS 5C-7 5C4.3.1 Landuse 5C-7 5C4.3.2 Proximity of Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes 5C-7 5C4.3.3 Emergency and Evacuation Planning and Infrastructure 5C-8 5C4.3.4 RTA and Transporter Preferred Transport Routes 5C-9

5C4.4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING FINDINGS 5C-9

5C5 PRELIMINARY LIST OF ROUTES 5C-11

5C6 SECONDARY SCREENING 5C-11

5C6.1 ROAD AND TRAFFIC FACTORS 5C-11 5C6.1.1 Accident Statistics 5C-12 5C6.1.2 Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes 5C-12

5C6.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY 5C-12 5C6.3 OPERATIONAL FACTORS 5C-12 5C6.4 RISK ASSESSMENT 5C-13

5C6.4.1 Hazard Identification 5C-13 5C6.4.2 Consequence Analysis 5C-15 5C6.4.3 Estimation of the Likelihood of a Hazardous Incident 5C-15 5C6.4.4 Risk Analysis and Assessment of Risk Results 5C-16

5C7 SELECTION OF ROUTES 5C-18

5C8 RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES 5C-19

5C9 REFERENCES 5C-22



HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to Dubbo)

Table 2 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Temora to West Wyalong)

Table 3 Transport Details - Dubbo or West Wyalong Destinations










HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-1

5C1 INTRODUCTION The Cowal Gold Project (the Project) is located approximately 38 kilometres (km) north-east of West Wyalong, New South Wales (NSW) (Figure 5-1). The Project is owned by Barrick (Cowal) Limited (Barrick). As described in Section 1.2 of the Transport of Hazardous Materials Study (THMS), route evaluation is required for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project. Road transport of hydrogen peroxide within NSW begins at the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility, Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be transported either by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Camellia Freight Terminal (where it will then be transported by rail to Dubbo and resume transport by road to the Project) or directly by road from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Project. The road transport route for hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been divided into five segments (Segments 1 to 5) for the purpose of route evaluation, however only Segments 1, 2, 3 and 5 are relevant to the alternative road transport route from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility directly to the Project. This attachment sets out the route evaluation for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide from either the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) or Temora to West Wyalong. This part of the overall hydrogen peroxide road transport route is referred to as Segment 3. The route evaluation for Segment 3 compares two route options for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo). However, only one route has been identified for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from Temora to West Wyalong. This route is not directly comparable to the other routes, as it differs significantly in regards to the route length and transport area. This route has been included in this assessment for the purposes of evaluating whether it is suitable for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from Temora to West Wyalong. Route evaluations for Segments 1, 2, 4 and 5 are attached to the THMS as Attachments 5A, 5B, 5D and 5E, respectively. This route evaluation has been carried out in accordance with the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning’s draft “Route Selection” guidelines (DUAP, 1995a) (the Guidelines), as required by Development Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i). Figure 5-2 shows the assessment process flowsheet for this route evaluation.

5C2 DEFINITION OF THE TRANSPORT AREA The transport area is defined by the Guidelines as follows:


The transport area for Segment 3 is defined as the area between the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility (Lot 5 Boothenba Road, Dubbo) and the Newell Highway (Dubbo) (Figure 5-5) and the area between the between the Burley Griffin Way (State Route 94) (Temora) and the Newell Highway/Mid Western Highway (West Wyalong) (Figure 5-1). The transport area between the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility and the Newell Highway (Dubbo) is situated within the Dubbo Local Government Area (LGA), which is located within the North Western Statistical Division.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-2

The transport area between Temora and West Wyalong is situated within the LGAs of Temora, Coolamon and Bland, which are located in the Central West Statistical Division.

5C3 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, SOURCE AND DESTINATION

5C3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL As described in Section 1.2 of the THMS, identification of hazardous materials for which a route evaluation is required was undertaken prior to the preparation of this route evaluation. This included an assessment of the class of material being transported (i.e. the classification of dangerous goods under the Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail [ADG Code] [National Transport Commission, 2007]), the type of container and the movement quantity and frequency. The assessment identified hydrogen peroxide as a hazardous material for which a route evaluation is required. The Department of Planning (DoP) concurred with this assessment (as outlined in DoP correspondence dated 14 October 2005). Hydrogen peroxide is classified as Class 5.1 under the ADG Code. Details of the type of container (i.e. packaging) and the movement quantity and frequency are provided in the following section.

5C3.2 SOURCE AND DESTINATION The source and destination of hydrogen peroxide transported from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) for Segment 3 are outlined in Table 1 and shown on Figure 5-5.

Table 1 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to Dubbo)

Source: Patrick Logistics Storage Facility

Destination: Newell Highway (Dubbo)


Lot 5 Boothenba Road

Dubbo Dubbo Newell Highway Dubbo Dubbo

The source and destination of hydrogen peroxide transported from Temora to West Wyalong for Segment 3 are outlined in Table 2 and shown on Figure 5-1.

Table 2 Hazardous Material Source and Destination (Temora to West Wyalong)

Source: Temora

Destination: West Wyalong


Burley Griffin Way (State Route 94)

Temora Temora Newell Highway/ Mid Western

Highway

West Wyalong Bland

Details of the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) or Temora to West Wyalong are provided in Table 3.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-3

Table 3 Transport Details - Dubbo or West Wyalong Destinations

Hazardous

Material Delivery Vehicle



Transported State

Packaging

Hydrogen Peroxide

Single semi-trailer

25.4 t



5C4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING The following subsections identify available roads for heavy vehicles in the transport area and examine mandatory and subjective factors to be considered for potential transport routes. Section 5C5 provides the results of this analysis as a preliminary list of routes. Further screening of this preliminary list is provided in Section 5C6.

5C4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF AVAILABLE ROADS FOR HEAVY VEHICLES The Guidelines require the identification of potential available roads for heavy vehicles to be based on: • a review of the road hierarchy (Section 5C4.1.1); and

• the identification of routes suitable in general for the movement of trucks (Section 5C4.1.2). Results of the review of the road hierarchy and the identification of routes suitable in general for the movement of trucks are provided in Section 5C4.1.3.

5C4.1.1 Road Hierarchy The RTA has developed a road hierarchy for NSW that classifies roads as national highways, state roads, regional roads or local roads. The NSW road hierarchy is described below. National Highways National highways are classified as arterial roads and comprise the principal connections between Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne, Adelaide and Brisbane (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005; RTA, 2004a). The Newell Highway is the only national highway within the transport area. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Therefore, this road would be used for heavy vehicles within the transport area where possible. State Roads State roads are classified as arterial roads and are the principal traffic carrying and linking routes for the movement of people and goods within the urban centres of Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong and the Central Coast, and throughout NSW (RTA, 2004a). State roads are characterised by high flows of general traffic over long distances and have a higher capacity relative to surrounding roads (ibid.). The Burley Griffin Way (State Route 94) and the Mid Western Highway are the only State roads within the transport area. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads (over regional and local roads) wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). Accordingly, these roads would also be used by heavy vehicles within the transport area where possible.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-4

Regional Roads Regional roads comprise the secondary road network which, in combination with state roads, provide for travel between smaller towns and districts and perform a sub-arterial function within major urban centres (RTA, 2004a). The RTA considers regional roads to be suitable for heavy vehicles (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005). There are no regional roads within the transport area. Local Roads Local roads are generally all other roads other than national highways, state roads and regional roads. The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to avoid local roads where possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005).

5C4.1.2 Identification of Truck Routes In accordance with the Guidelines, truck routes within the transport area were identified following a review of: the NSW road hierarchy; the NSW truck route network; routes used by heavy vehicles within and through the transport area; heavy vehicle bypasses; and travel time. The NSW road hierarchy is described in Section 5C4.1.1. Arterial and sub-arterial roads (i.e. national highways, state roads and regional roads) should be evaluated for their appropriateness to cater for heavy vehicles (DUAP, 1995a). The RTA prefers heavy vehicles to utilise national highways and state roads wherever possible (RTA, pers. comm., 4 May 2005), therefore these roads were used wherever possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. The RTA and Dubbo City Council were consulted to determine the NSW truck route network and identify routes used by heavy vehicles within and through the transport area. The use of 14.6 m semi-trailers (prime mover and trailer combined length of 19 m) is legal on all roads in NSW (except where a sign shows a load limit for a particular road, bridge, causeway or ferry) (RTA, 2003). Therefore, for heavy vehicles less than 19 m in length, all roads within NSW (except those signed otherwise) form part of the NSW truck route network. The RTA has published a map showing B-Double and road train routes throughout NSW (RTA, 2001). These roads are approved restricted access vehicle routes and are specifically designed to accommodate these heavy vehicles and would therefore accommodate either the single semi-trailers or B-Doubles proposed to be used to transport hydrogen peroxide. Designated B-Double and road train routes were used wherever possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. Dubbo City Council has also determined a truck route network and identified roads within Dubbo suitable for use by B-Doubles and road trains (Dubbo City Council, 2004). These roads were also used where possible when identifying truck routes within the transport area. Designated heavy vehicle bypasses within the transport area were taken into consideration when identifying truck routes. There were no heavy vehicle bypasses identified within the transport area (RTA, pers. comm., 25 July 2005; Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 29 July 2005). In accordance with the Guidelines, travel time was also taken into consideration when identifying truck routes. Generally, an increase in travel distance increases the travel time. This subsequently increases the cost of transport. Therefore, the shortest and most direct route is the most preferable in terms of cost.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-5

5C4.1.3 Potential Available Routes for Heavy Vehicles and Selection of Potential Routes Following a review of the road hierarchy and the identification of truck routes within the transport area, Routes 3A and 3B have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) for Segment 3. Routes 3A and 3B are set out in Table 4 and shown on Figure 5-5. Routes 3A and 3B were then tested against mandatory and subjective factors. Route 3C was identified as the only potential route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from Temora to West Wyalong. Route 3C is also set out in Table 4 and shown on Figure 5-1. Route 3C was then tested against mandatory and subjective factors to assess its acceptability as a suitable transport route. The assessment for all routes is set out below in Sections 5C4.2 and 5C4.3.


Route Directions




5C4.2 MANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS

5C4.2.1 Physical Considerations Physical considerations may preclude a potential transport route from consideration because of weight limitations on bridges, height restrictions on underpasses, inadequate shoulders for breakdowns, extensive construction activities or inadequate parking and turning spaces (DUAP, 1995a). Roads designated by the RTA and Dubbo City Council as B-Double or road train routes are considered to be physically capable of accommodating the single semi-trailers or B-Doubles that are proposed to be used to transport hydrogen peroxide. No further assessment of physical capability has been undertaken for these roads. Route 3A only utilises designated road train routes (RTA, 2001; Dubbo Shire Council, 2004). Route 3B utilises a segment of Boothenba Road not designated as a B-Double or road train route. This section of Boothenba Road is physically capable of accommodating single semi-trailers (RTA, pers. comm., 23 August, 2005; Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 19 September 2005). Route 3C only utilises roads designated by the RTA as B-Double or road train routes. Therefore, physical considerations do not preclude any of the above potential transport routes.

5C4.2.2 Laws and Regulations Laws and regulations may prohibit the transport of hazardous materials on certain roads or structures (DUAP, 1995a). The Guidelines state that local, state and national transport authorities should be consulted and prohibited roadways eliminated from consideration unless there are no suitable alternative routes (DUAP 1995a.).


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-6

National Transport Authority The Australian Government Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) (now the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) was consulted to determine if the transport of hazardous materials was prohibited on any roads or structures in NSW. DOTARS advised that the Competent Authority for road transport in each State and Territory should be contacted for information relating to the road transport of dangerous goods (DOTARS, 2005a). The NSW Competent Authority is the Manager, Dangerous Goods, Department of Environment and Conservation (now the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water [DECCW] (DOTARS, 2005b). The Manager, Dangerous Goods, DECCW was consulted to determine if the transport of hazardous materials was prohibited on any roads or structures in NSW. The DECCW advised that the RTA is the determining authority for dangerous goods routes in NSW and has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999 (DEC, pers. comm., 26 July 2005). State Transport Authority The RTA has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999. Clause 59 of the Regulation prohibits the carriage of dangerous goods (within the meaning of the Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Act, 2008 and Clause 32 of the Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation, 2009) through some areas within Sydney. Segment 2 does not involve the road transport of hydrogen peroxide through any prohibited areas prescribed in Clause 59 of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation, 1999 and defined in Rule 300-2 of the Road Rules, 2008. Local Transport Authority For the purposes of this study, the local transport authority has been defined as the authority accountable for a specified road according to its classification. In NSW, the State Government, through the RTA, manages national highways and state roads and is accountable for the outcomes on these roads (RTA, 2004a). Therefore, the RTA is the local transport authority for national highways and state roads. Councils are accountable for regional and local roads (RTA, 2004a) and are therefore the local transport authorities for these roads. Potential transport routes utilise local roads, the Hume Highway (a national highway) and the Burley Griffin Way (a state road), therefore the local transport authority is the Dubbo City Council and the RTA. Dubbo City Council does not prohibit the transport of hazardous materials on any roads for which it is accountable (Dubbo City Council, pers. comm., 1 September 2005). As stated above, the RTA has prohibited the carriage of hazardous materials on a number of routes under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999. Laws and regulations do not preclude any of the potential transport routes.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-7

5C4.3 SUBJECTIVE FACTORS Subjective factors usually include the proximity of the potential transport route to sensitive landuses (such as hospitals, schools, aged care facilities, churches and items of heritage or cultural significance) (Section 5C4.3.1) and sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes (such as park reservations and wetlands) (Section 5C4.3.2) (DUAP, 1995a). Emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure is also usually included in the assessment of subjective factors (Section 5C4.3.3) (DUAP, 1995a).

5C4.3.1 Landuse Sensitive Landuses Sensitive landuses include schools (pre-schools and primary and secondary schools), hospitals, aged care facilities, churches and items of heritage or cultural significance. There are no schools (pre-schools and primary and secondary schools), hospitals, aged care facilities, churches or items of heritage or cultural significance located along Routes 3A, 3B or 3C. Other Landuses Other landuses may include residential, commercial or industrial areas and areas of open space. Routes 3A and 3B predominantly pass through industrial areas and areas of open space. Route 3C predominantly passes through rural areas comprising of areas of open space.

5C4.3.2 Proximity of Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes Sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes include park reservations (i.e. national parks, state forests, recreational parks and conservation areas) and waterways (i.e. wetlands, lakes, dams, rivers, creeks and other drainage lines). Sensitive ecosystems and natural landscapes traversed by or occurring along or within approximately 100 m of Routes 3A to 3C are identified in Table 5 and described in the following sections.

Table 5

Sensitive Ecosystems and Natural Landscapes



3A 0 0 2

3B 0 0 0

3C 1 500 42

Park Reservations No park reservations would be passed by vehicles using Routes 3A or 3B. Vehicles travelling on Route 3C would pass within approximately 100 m of the Charcoal Tank Nature Reserve. The approximate total length of road frontage of the Charcoal Tank Nature Reserve for Route 3C is 500 m.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-8

Waterways Vehicles travelling on Route 3A would cross or come within approximately 100 m of two waterways including Troy Creek. Vehicles travelling on Route 3C would cross or come within approximately 100 m of 42 waterways including Trigalong Creek, Mirrool Creek, Scotts Creek, Mandamah Creek and branches of Yiddah Creek.

5C4.3.3 Emergency and Evacuation Planning and Infrastructure Emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure includes: the availability of formalised emergency and evacuation procedures and plans; the location of emergency response teams and their ability to respond to hazardous material release; access; and ease of emergency evacuation (DUAP, 1995a). In NSW the management of state emergencies and rescues is controlled under the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989. The Act sets out strategies for the integration of emergency management at local, district and state levels. The NSW State Emergency Management Committee (SEMC) was established by the Act and is responsible for emergency planning at the state level. The SEMC has prepared a NSW State Disaster Plan (DISPLAN), the objective of which is to ensure the co-ordinated response to emergencies by all agencies having responsibilities and functions in emergencies (SEMC, 2005). A Hazardous Materials Emergency Sub-Plan (HAZMATPLAN) has been prepared as a sub-plan to the DISPLAN. The aim of the HAZMATPLAN is to detail special arrangements for the control and co-ordination of a response to, and initial recovery from, hazardous materials emergencies in NSW (SEMC, 1999). The District Emergency Management Committee (DEMC) is responsible to the SEMC. Each DEMC is responsible for preparing plans which detail the prevention of, preparation for, response to and recovery from emergencies in its District (District DISPLAN) (SEMC, 2005). The Local Emergency Management Committee (LEMC) is responsible to the DEMC for each LGA (SEMC, 2005). Each LEMC is responsible for preparing plans in relation to the prevention of, preparation for, response to, and recovery from emergencies in its LGA (Local DISPLAN) (SEMC, 2005). The above approach to emergency management in NSW ensures: the availability of formalised emergency and evacuation procedures and plans (i.e. DISPLAN, HAZMATPLAN, District DISPLAN, local DISPLAN); the location of emergency response teams throughout NSW; and the ability of emergency response teams to respond to hazardous material release. Access and ease of emergency evacuation would be affected by several factors including proximity to emergency services, nature of the hazardous material, availability of alternative routes and road surface (i.e. sealed or unsealed) (RTA, pers. comm., 18 August, 2005). As detailed above, the approach to emergency management in NSW is comprehensive and would ensure that emergency services could access and respond promptly to an incident involving a hazardous material. In addition, the NSW state and regional road network is extensive and the availability of alternative routes is considered to be adequate. All roads used for the transport of hazardous materials to the Project are sealed, ensuring accessibility and ease of emergency evacuation in the event of an incident. Following a review of emergency management in NSW, emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure are considered to be adequate for both potential routes. These routes are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to emergency and evacuation planning and infrastructure.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-9

5C4.3.4 RTA and Transporter Preferred Transport Routes The RTA, an authority which maintains the majority of the road system (i.e. national highways and state roads) and which acts as an advisory body to Councils, was contacted to determine the RTA’s preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo). Route 3A is the route preferred by the RTA for the transport of hazardous materials from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) (RTA, pers. comm., 15 June 2005). The transport provider was contacted to determine their preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo). Route 3B is the route preferred by the transporter for the transport of hazardous materials for Segment 3 (Patrick Logistics, pers. comm., 9 June 2005). The RTA was also contacted to determine the RTA’s preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from Temora to West Wyalong. Route 3C is the route preferred by the RTA for the transport of hazardous materials from Temora to West Wyalong (RTA, pers. comm., 26 July 2005). The transport provider was also contacted to determine their preferred route for the transport of hazardous materials from Temora to West Wyalong. Route 3C is the route preferred by the transporter for the transport of hazardous materials from the Temora to West Wyalong.

5C4.4 PRELIMINARY SCREENING FINDINGS Preliminary screening took into account available roads for heavy vehicles and mandatory and subjective factors (Sections 5C4.1, 5C4.2 and 5C4.3). Following a review of the road hierarchy and the identification of truck routes within the transport area, Routes 3A to 3C have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles for Segment 3. Mandatory factors did not preclude these routes from the route evaluation. Table 6 provides a summary of subjective factors outlined in Section 5C4.3 for Routes 3A and 3B.


Assessment Factor Route 3A Route 3B Route 3C

Schools 0 0 #


Hospitals 0 0 #



Churches 0 0 #


Other Landuse # # #


Park Reservations – Approximate Total Road Frontage (m) 0 0 500

Waterways 2 0 42




RTA and transporter

preferred route # There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 3A to 3C.

Further information is provided in Section 5C4.3.1.



HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-10

Table 6 indicates that Routes 3A to 3C would have minimal impact on subjective factors and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials. As Route 3C is not being compared to Routes 3A and 3B, the increased park frontage and number of waterways for Route 3C in comparison to Routes 3A and 3B is not considered relevant. Table 7 indicates that based on subjective factors, Route 3C is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials. In accordance with the Guidelines, Table 7 presents the results of the preliminary screening on a comparative basis. Table 7 details the most preferred, acceptable, least preferred and excluded routes for each of the subjective factors detailed in Section 5C4.3. For the purposes of this study: • a preferred route is one which is deemed to have a minimal amount, if any, of the factor of

interest;






Acceptable Route


Excluded Route

Schools 3A, 3B 3C - -

Hospitals 3A, 3B 3C - -

Aged Care Facilities 3A, 3B 3C - -

Churches 3A, 3B 3C - -


3A, 3B 3C - -


Park Reservations 3A, 3B 3C - -

Waterways 3B 3A, 3C - -

Emergency Infrastructure 3A, 3B 3C - -

RTA and Transporter Preferred Route 3A 3B, 3C - -


3A, 3B 3C - -

# There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 3A and 3B. Further information is provided in Section 5C4.3.1.


Tables 6 and 7 indicate that Routes 3A and 3B are equally preferred routes for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) following preliminary screening. The preliminary screening has identified Route 3C as an acceptable route for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from Temora to West Wyalong and worthy of further assessment.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-11

5C5 PRELIMINARY LIST OF ROUTES On the basis of the preliminary screening analysis in Section 5C4, the following preliminary list of routes from either the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) or Temora to West Wyalong has been determined (Table 8).


Route Directions




5C6 SECONDARY SCREENING Secondary screening involves the assessment of the preliminary list of routes (Section 5C5) against road and traffic factors (Section 5C6.1), emergency response capability (Section 5C6.2), operational factors (Section 5C6.3) and risk (including environmental and landuse factors) (Section 5C6.4) (Figure 5-2). The potential routes have been assessed against each secondary screening factor to confirm that the routes are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and to determine the preferred route. The final selection of routes is detailed in Section 5C7.

5C6.1 ROAD AND TRAFFIC FACTORS The Guidelines state that the assessment of potential transport routes for suitability on road and traffic grounds will require the collection of particular information (for example road structural condition) to establish the capability and level of service of the road system (DUAP, 1995a). The Guidelines offer the following road and traffic factors that consider the ability of a route to effectively and safely handle traffic using it: structural and geometric adequacy; level of service of carriageway and critical intersections; travel speed; accident rates; and the availability of alternative emergency routes. The capability of a route to safely and effectively handle the traffic using it is reflected in the accident statistics for that route (Pinnacle Risk Management, pers. comm., 20 July 2005). Accident statistics are influenced by the route’s structural and geometric adequacy, level of service (of carriageway and intersections), and travel speed. It follows then that the structural and geometric adequacy, level of service (of carriageway and intersections), and travel speed are effectively embodied within the accident statistics of the transport route (Pinnacle Risk Management, pers. comm., 20 July 2005). Therefore, it is appropriate to compare accident statistics for potential transport routes and infer from them the capability and level of service of the road system. Accident statistics for potential routes are provided in Section 5C6.1.1. An assessment of remaining road and traffic factors (i.e. the availability of alternative emergency routes) is provided in Section 5C6.1.2.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-12

5C6.1.1 Accident Statistics Routes 3A and 3B pass through an industrial area, therefore few vehicles access the area and few accidents occur. While no accidents involving heavy vehicles were recorded along Route 3B in the last five years, one accident has been recorded along Route 3A, on Purvis Lane (RTA, 2005). Route 3A is approximately 3.6 km in length and, Route 3B is approximately 0.5 km in length. Route 3C is approximately 97 km in length. Accident statistics for Routes 3A and 3B are considered to be within normal operating levels for the road types and use. The increase of heavy vehicles due to the Project would be very small and would be unlikely to affect traffic flows or accident statistics. Routes 3A and 3B are therefore suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to accident statistics. Accident statistics for Routes 3A and 3B are compared in Table 11, Section 5C6.4.4. Accident statistics for Route 3C are also considered to be within normal operating levels for the road types and use and the increase of heavy vehicles due to the Project (i.e. between 0.01% - 0.04%) would be unlikely to affect traffic flows or accident statistics. Route 3C is therefore suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to accident statistics. 5C6.1.2 Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes The NSW state and regional road network is extensive. As a result, there are alternative emergency transport routes that could be used in the event of a temporary closure of Routes 3A to 3C. 5C6.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITY The emergency response capability available for potential routes may include considerations such as the speed of response of emergency services, ease of access to the potential accident site and the availability of emergency combat equipment (DUAP, 1995a). The formalised approach to emergency management in NSW ensures: the availability of emergency combat equipment at a local, district and state level; the location of emergency response teams throughout NSW; and the ability of emergency response teams to respond to hazardous material release (Section 5C4.3.3). Further information on the management of emergencies in NSW and an evaluation of the ease of access to a potential accident for Segment 3 are provided in Section 5C4.3.3. Following a review of emergency management in NSW, emergency response capability is considered to be adequate for Routes 3A to 3C. These routes are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials with respect to emergency response capability. 5C6.3 OPERATIONAL FACTORS Operating costs and distribution logistics have been considered in the selection of the preferred transport route for Segment 3. Routes 3A to 3C are both suitable on the basis of logistical considerations. The Guidelines state that the main cost criterion when comparing alternative routes is the expected increase or decrease in distance and travel time if another route is used. Generally, an increase in travel distance increases the travel time and subsequently the cost of transport. Therefore, the shortest route is the most preferable in respect of operating costs. Route 3B is the shortest available route for Segment 3 and is therefore cost effective. However, Route 3A is similar to Route 3B in length and operating costs would not differ considerably between routes. Routes 3A and 3B are therefore cost effective and equally suitable on the basis of operating costs.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-13

As described in Section 5A1, Route 3C has been identified as the only potential alternative route for Segment 3 following changes in rail supply arrangements which have made the Camellia Freight Terminal temporarily unavailable and triggered the requirement for the road transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Solvay Interox Banksmeadow Facility to the Project. The operating costs associated with Route 3C would not be prohibitive and are acceptable to Barrick. Route 3C is therefore considered to be suitable on the basis of operating costs.

5C6.4 RISK ASSESSMENT The Guidelines outline an intermediate risk assessment method that should be undertaken for each potential transport route found to be satisfactory on road and traffic grounds. If the intermediate method does not enable the analyst to identify a clear-cut low risk alternative and differences between potential routes are small then a detailed risk assessment may need to be carried out in accordance with Hazardous Industry Planning and Advisory Paper No. 6, Guidelines for Hazard Analysis (HIPAP No. 6) (DUAP, 1995b). The risk assessment for Segment 3 has been undertaken in accordance with HIPAP No. 6. HIPAP No. 6 sets out methodology for risk assessment as follows: 1. Hazard identification: the identification of all possible conditions that could lead to a hazardous




4. Risk analysis.

5. Assessment of risk results.

5C6.4.1 Hazard Identification

5C6.4.1.1 Type of Hazardous Material Hydrogen peroxide is classified under the ADG Code as Class 5.1 (oxidising substance) with Subsidiary Risk 8 (corrosive substance) and Packing Group II. Hydrogen peroxide is a clear, colourless liquid with a sharp odour. It is a strong oxidising agent and is relatively stable in its pure form and at low pH. The vapour immediately above the liquid is irritating. Exposure to hydrogen peroxide via ingestion, eye or skin contact or inhalation results in relatively low toxic impact. Hydrogen peroxide can react strongly with organic materials, reducing agents, some acids and alkalis, metals, flammable and combustible materials (including paper, cloth, leather etc). It is catalytically decomposed (into water and oxygen) by heavy metals and their salts, dust, oxidisable organic materials, enzymes and rust. Decomposition can also be initiated or accelerated by light, heat, high pH or various other impurities, and may be extremely violent.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-14

Hydrogen peroxide is not combustible but will strongly support the combustion of other materials. Hydrogen peroxide is not toxic in itself, however can cause injury through its ability to form free, active oxygen. Irritation and burns to mucous membranes, skin, and eyes can occur. Hydrogen peroxide has no potential for bio-accumulation as it degrades rapidly in air and water. However in sufficient quantities, it can be toxic to aquatic biota and plants.

5C6.4.1.2 Adjacent Landuse Refer to Section 5C4.3.1 for a description of adjacent landuse for potential transport routes.

5C6.4.1.3 Transport Vehicle and Conditions of Transport Hydrogen peroxide will be transported to the Project by single semi-trailer or B-Double. It will be transported by bulk tanker (i.e. Isotainer) as a liquid at ambient temperature and pressure. Regulation of temperature and pressure are not required during the transport of this material.

5C6.4.1.4 Causes of Hazardous Incidents Initiating and contributory causes for incidents involving heavy vehicles has been detailed in Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk Analysis (CCPS, 1995). The identified causes, with additional causes included, are reproduced in Table 9.


Human Error Equipment Failures System or Procedural Failures

External Events


• speeding




• contamination

• overfilling



• unsecured loads


• leaking valve

• leaking fitting

• brake failure


• tyre failure

• soft shoulder

• overpressure

• material defect


• sloshing


• corrosion

• bad weld

• excessive grade







• driver training



• route selection




• maintenance

• inspection



• rain

• fog/visibility

• wind

• flood/washout


• earthquake


• animals on road


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-15

5C6.4.2 Consequence Analysis An accident involving a heavy vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide resulting in a release of the material is the hazardous incident relevant to the transport of hydrogen peroxide. The consequences of a release of hydrogen peroxide from this hazardous incident are largely dependent on what is contacted by the oxidising, corrosive liquid. The following consequences of this hazardous incident are relevant: • direct exposure to liquid or vapour hydrogen peroxide for those at or near to an accident scene;




5C6.4.3 Estimation of the Likelihood of a Hazardous Incident Accident data for heavy vehicles utilising Routes 3A to 3C are detailed in Section 5C6.1.1. No accidents involving heavy vehicles have occurred along Route 3B. Approximately 0.2 accidents per year involving heavy vehicles occur on Route 3A. Approximately 1.0 accidents per year involving heavy vehicles occur for Route 3C. The normalised accident rates per million kilometres involving heavy vehicles using Route 3C is between 0.00 and 3.31. This is not considered to be unacceptable. In the event of an accident involving a heavy vehicle, the carried goods may or may not be released. The probability of release is dependent on factors such as speed, shipping conditions (i.e. pressurised compared to non-pressurised), inadequate load securing, and strength and integrity of the container. Various studies of release probabilities from heavy vehicles involved in an accident have been undertaken. The Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk Analysis (CCPS, 1995) indicates that the release probability for various road types is between 5 and 10% (i.e. approximately one heavy vehicle accident in every 10 to 20 will result in a release of the material). An estimation of the likelihood of an accident involving a vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project resulting in a release of the material must take into account the following: • the number of vehicles transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project relative to the total number




The likelihood of an accident involving a vehicle transporting hydrogen peroxide to the Project resulting in a release of the material for Routes 3A to 3C is estimated to be 5x10-6/year, 0/year and 8x10-5/year, respectively (i.e. such an accident is estimated to occur on Route 3A once every 200,000 years and on Route 3C once every 12,500 years). These values indicate a very low level of risk associated with the transport of hazardous materials.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-16

5C6.4.4 Risk Analysis and Assessment of Risk Results Risk analysis took into account the preliminary screening findings as well as road and traffic factors (Section 5C6.1), emergency response capability (Section 5C6.2) and operational factors (Section 5C6.3). Table 10 provides a summary of all assessment factors utilised in the risk analysis for Routes 3A to 3C.


Assessment Factor Route 3A Route 3B Route 3C

Schools 0 0 #


Hospitals 0 0 #



Churches 0 0 #


Other Landuse # # #


Park Reservations – Approximate Total Road Frontage (m) 0 0 500

Waterways 2 0 42




RTA preferred route

Length (km) 3.6 0.5 97.0

Heavy Vehicle Accidents (per year)1 0.2 0 1.0

Availability of Alternative Emergency Routes Available Available Available

Emergency Response Capability Adequate Adequate Adequate

Operational Factors Cost effective Cost effective Cost effective 1 RTA (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Western Region 2000-2004. Provided by Neil Peden on 25 July 2005. RTA (2005)

Excel database of traffic crash data for the South Western Region 2000-2004. Provided by David Amery on 5 August 2005.

# There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 3A to 3C. Further information is provided in Section 5C4.3.1.


In accordance with the Guidelines, Table 11 presents the results of the risk analysis on a comparative basis for Routes 3A and 3B. Table 11 details the most preferred, acceptable, least preferred and excluded routes for the risk analysis assessment factors. For the purposes of this risk assessment: • a preferred route is one which is deemed to have a minimal amount, if any, of the factor of






HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-17

Table 11 also presents the results of the risk analysis for Route 3C and details whether the route is suitable from a risk perspective.

In each case, the consequences and likelihood of potential hazardous events were considered. This risk assessment approach effectively combines the estimated accident frequency with the potential for harm (i.e. risk), making it consistent with the principles and methodologies embodied within Australian Standard (AS) 4360 Risk Management and HIPAP No. 6.

Table 11

Risk Analysis Findings


Acceptable Route


Excluded Route

Schools 3A, 3B 3C - -

Hospitals 3A, 3B 3C - -

Aged Care Facilities 3A, 3B 3C - -

Churches 3A, 3B 3C - -


3A, 3B 3C - -


Parks 3A, 3B 3C - -

Waterways 3B 3A, 3C - -

Emergency Infrastructure 3A, 3B 3C - -

RTA and Transporter Preferred Route - 3A, 3B, 3C - -

Heavy Vehicle Accidents (per year)1 3B 3A, 3C - -


3A, 3B 3C - -

Emergency Response Capability 3A, 3B 3C - -

Operational Factors 3A, 3B 3C - -


3B 3A, 3C - -

1 RTA (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Western Region 2000-2004. Provided by Neil Peden on 25 July 2005. RTA (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the South Western Region 2000-2004. Provided by David Amery on 5 August 2005.

# There is little difference in the type of landuse along each potential route, therefore this factor was not used to compare Routes 3A to 3C. Further information is provided in Section 5C4.3.1.


There are no defined absolute risk criteria for the transport of hazardous materials throughout NSW, therefore the assessment of risk results is a balanced judgement based on experience in accordance with HIPAP No. 6. From a risk perspective, the results detailed in Tables 10 and 11 show little difference in the comparative level of risk associated with Routes 3A and 3B. In addition, these results deem both potential routes to pose a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, there is insufficient difference in the results of the risk analysis to recommend a preferred route when comparing Routes 3A and 3B. These routes are therefore equally suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) from a comparative risk perspective.

The results detailed in Tables 10 and 11 indicate that Route 3C poses a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Route 3C is therefore considered to be suitable for the transport of hazardous materials from Temora to West Wyalong from a risk perspective.


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-18

5C7 SELECTION OF ROUTES The purpose of the Guidelines is to provide guidance on the identification and assessment of transport routes suitable for hazardous materials, based on an integrated approach that accounts for traffic, environmental and landuse safety and economic and other operational factors (DUAP, 1995a). In accordance with the Guidelines, the selection of preferred routes is a balanced judgement considering each of the factors, since it is not possible to integrate them into a single indicator of acceptability because of their diversity (DUAP, 1995a). To make a balanced judgement, preliminary and secondary screening factors have been assessed with respect to the consequences and likelihood of a potential hazardous event occurring (e.g. a heavy vehicle carrying the material of interest being involved in an accident resulting in a release of material). In order to make a balanced judgement, consultation with Councils was also undertaken. The transport area for Routes 3A and 3B is wholly situated within the Dubbo LGA and the Dubbo City Council was consulted during the preparation of the THMS. The transport area for Route 3C is situated within the Temora, Coolamon and Bland LGAs. These Councils were also consulted during the preparation of the THMS. To identify a route which presents the lowest overall risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment, a holistic review of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation undertaken with the RTA, Council and transport provider has been performed. There are a number of possible outcomes of any route evaluation, including:




3. Two or more routes are considered suitable because there is little difference in the overall potential impact resulting from the accidental loss of containment. Consideration of operational factors (e.g. cost) or consultation with the RTA or Council may, however, determine the preferred route.

Whilst a preferred route may be determined, the alternative routes may not pose unacceptable risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Therefore, this route evaluation presents all routes that are suitable for the transport of the hazardous material in question. In accordance with Development Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i), suitable routes identified in this route evaluation for the transport of hazardous materials shall be used except where departures are necessary for local deliveries or emergencies. Following preliminary and secondary assessment, Routes 3A and 3B have been identified as potential available routes for heavy vehicles from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo) for Segment 3 and are suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Both routes are assessed as posing a minimal to acceptable level of risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment. Route 3A has been recommended by the RTA, while Route 3B has been recommended by Dubbo City Council (Dubbo City Council, pers. Comm., 6 June 2005) for the transport of hazardous materials from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo).


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-19

Therefore, Routes 3A and 3B are both suitable for the transport of hazardous materials and are the preferred routes for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from the Patrick Logistics Storage Facility to the Newell Highway (Dubbo). Following preliminary and secondary assessment, Route 3C has been identified as the only potential available route for heavy vehicles from Temora to West Wyalong for Segment 2 and is suitable for the transport of hazardous materials when tested against mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk (including environmental and landuse factors). Route 3C has been recommended by the RTA for the transport of hazardous materials from Temora to West Wyalong (RTA pers. Comm., 26 July 2010). Following consideration of the preliminary and secondary screening factors and consultation with Councils, the RTA and transport provider, Route 3C does not pose an unacceptable risk to surrounding people, property and the natural environment and is therefore considered to be suitable for the transport of hydrogen peroxide from Temora to West Wyalong.

5C8 RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES The identification of risk management measures is the final step in the route evaluation process (Figure 5-2). The Guidelines state that the identification of risk management measures should include opportunities for risk reduction where the evaluation shows undesirable levels of risk along the preferred routes, together with consideration of an appropriate safety management system (DUAP, 1995a). The level of risk associated with the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project has been minimised by the selection of suitable transport routes based on an assessment of mandatory considerations, subjective factors, road and traffic factors, emergency response capability, operational factors and risk. Suitable routes identified in this route evaluation for the transport of hazardous materials shall be used in accordance with Consent Condition 5.4(b)(i). This route evaluation did not identify undesirable levels of risk for any suitable transport routes as risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider are suitable for the hazardous material being transported. Therefore, no additional opportunities for risk reduction are recommended. The risk management measures required to be implemented by the material supplier and transport provider for the transport of hydrogen peroxide to the Project include: • As hydrogen peroxide is classified as a dangerous good under the ADG Code, it must be





HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-20






- the minimum personal protective and safety equipment (including respiratory protection equipment) that must be provided, based on the classification of the dangerous goods being transported, in accordance with Table 12.2 of Clause 12.1.3.1;

- the safety equipment with which a road vehicle used in the transport of a placard load of dangerous goods should be equipped in accordance with Clause 12.1.1;






• The driver of a road vehicle transporting dangerous goods that is involved in an incident resulting in a dangerous situation must: notify the prime contractor, the Competent Authority, and the police or fire service, of the incident as soon as practicable; and provide any reasonable assistance required by an authorised officer, or an officer of an emergency service, to deal with


HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-21

the situation in accordance with Part 14 NSW Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Regulation 2009.




HAL-02-07/00685567.DOC 5C-22

5C9 REFERENCES Centre for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS) (1995) Guidelines for Chemical Transportation Risk

Analysis.



Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP) (1995a) Route Selection - Guidelines for Land Use and Environmental Safety Planning for Hazardous Materials - Road Transport Considerations. Final draft.


Dubbo City Council (2004) Approved Road Train and B-Double Routes in Dubbo City Council. Dubbo City Council Technical Services Division.

National Road Transport Commission (1998) Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail (ADG Code), Sixth Edition. Prepared by the National Road Transport Commission in conjunction with the Advisory Committee on the Transport of Dangerous Goods and the Federal Office of Road Safety.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2010) (2010) Travel Restrictions Vehicle Routes. Map valid to 31 August 2010..

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2003) 14.6 Metre Semi-Trailers. June 2003. Cat. No. 45070811B.


Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2004b) NSW State and Regional Road Network. Map prepared by P Gibbons RNIM.

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) (2005) Excel database of traffic crash data for the Western Region 2000 - 2004. Provided by Neil Peden on 25 July 2005.



Cowal Gold Project – Addendum to the Transport of ......Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be...

Documents

Transcript of Cowal Gold Project – Addendum to the Transport of ......Sydney. Hydrogen peroxide will be...