Appendix C Environmental Offset Strategy (AARC 2014)€¦ · Environmental Offset Strategy 1 November 2014 1.0 INTRODUCTION AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd (AARC) was commissioned

Elimatta Project 5-C 2015

Appendix C Environmental Offset Strategy (AARC 2014)

Elimatta Project Environmental Offsets Strategy

Prepared for: Taroom Coal Pty Ltd

November 2014

Environmental Offsets Strategy i November 2014

Document History and Status

Issue Issued To Qty Date Reviewed Approved 1 Peter Isles 1 18/11/14 AGP GB

Author: Sally Croker Project Manager: Gareth Bramston Name of Client : Taroom Coal Pty Ltd Name of Project: Elimatta Project Title of Document: Environmental Offset Strategy

This controlled document is the property of AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd and all rights are reserved in respect of it. This document may not be reproduced or disclosed in any manner whatsoever, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd. AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd expressly disclaims any responsibility for or liability arising from the use of this document by any third party.

Opinions and judgments expressed herein, which are based on our understanding and interpretation of current regulatory standards, should not be construed as legal opinions. Information obtained from interviews and contained in the documentation has been assumed to be correct and complete. AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd does not accept any liability for misrepresentation of information or for items not visible, accessible, nor able to be inspected at the sites at the time of the site visits.

Environmental Offsets Strategy ii November 2014

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 PURPOSE .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.3 DELIVERY SCHEDULE ........................................................................................................ 1

2.0 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT ............................................................................... 3

2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL OFFSETS ACT 2014 ............................................................................. 3

2.1.1 Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy 2014 ............................................................... 3

2.1.2 Galilee Basin Offsets Strategy 2013 .................................................................................. 4

3.0 OFFSET OBLIGATION ................................................................................... 5

3.1 IMPACTS TO PRESCRIBED ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS ............................................. 5

3.1.1 Regulated Vegetation ........................................................................................................ 5

3.1.1.1 Watercourse Vegetation ......................................................................................................... 6

3.1.2 Protected Wildlife Habitat .................................................................................................. 6

3.2 SUMMARY OF OFFSET OBLIGATION ................................................................................ 6

3.3 OFFSET AREA REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 8

3.3.1 Multipliers ........................................................................................................................... 8

4.0 OFFSET SUPPLY ........................................................................................... 9

4.1 DESKTOP METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 9

4.2 DESKTOP RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 9

4.3 QUALIFICATION OF DESKTOP ASSESSMENT............................................................... 14

4.3.1 Habitat Quality Analysis ................................................................................................... 14

5.0 OFFSET DELIVERY ...................................................................................... 15

5.1 POTENTIAL DELIVERY MECHANISMS ............................................................................ 15

5.1.1 Proponent-driven Offset ................................................................................................... 15

5.1.1.1 Land-based Offset ................................................................................................................ 15

5.1.1.2 Direct Benefit Management Plan .......................................................................................... 15

5.1.2 Financial Settlement Offset .............................................................................................. 15

5.2 OFFSET DELIVERY PLAN ................................................................................................. 15

5.3 LEGALLY SECURING OFFSETS ....................................................................................... 16

6.0 MANAGEMENT, MONITORING AND REPORTING ..................................... 17

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Environmental Offsets Strategy iii November 2014

Figure 1 Land Potentially Available for Offset Supply within Brigalow Belt Bioregion ................11

Figure 2 Land Potentially Available for Offset Supply within 100 km of Project .........................12

Figure 3 Land Potentially Available for Offset Supply within the Galilee Basin Offset Corridor .13

Table 1 Vegetation Communities Impacted by the Project .......................................................... 5

Table 2 Broad Vegetation Groups ............................................................................................... 5

Table 3 Protected Wildlife Habitat Impacted by the Project ........................................................ 6

Table 4 Summary of Impacts on Prescribed Environmental Matters .......................................... 7

Table 5 Multipliers for MSES Impacted by the Project ................................................................ 8

Table 6 Offset Supply ................................................................................................................10

AARC AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd

BVG Broad Vegetation Group

DBMP Direct Benefit Management Plan

EA Environmental Authority

EHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

ha hectare(s)

km kilometre(s)

m metre(s)

ML Mining Lease

MLES Matters of Local Environmental Significance

MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance

MSES Matters of State Environmental Significance

NC Act Nature Conservation Act 1992

QEOP Queensland Environmental Offset Policy 2014

RE Regional Ecosystem

Taroom Coal Taroom Coal Pty Ltd

VM Act Vegetation Management Act 1999

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Environmental Offset Strategy 1 November 2014

1.0 INTRODUCTION

AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd (AARC) was commissioned by Taroom Coal Pty Ltd (Taroom Coal) to develop an environmental offsets strategy to address impacts of the proposed Elimatta Project on prescribed environmental matters in accordance with the Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy (QEOP).

1.1 BACKGROUND

The proposed development involves an open-cut mining operation to extract coal from within the Surat Basin, on Mining Lease (ML) applications 50254, 50270 and 50271. The Project proposes to mine approximately 8.3 million tonnes per annum of run of mine coal. It is anticipated that the coal extracted from the Elimatta Project will be processed in an on-site coal handling and preparation plant, and transported via rail to Gladstone for export.

The Elimatta Project was determined to be “not a controlled action” by the Commonwealth Department of Environment.

Potential impacts of the Elimatta Project have been identified in the Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (AARC 2014) and the technical studies which support the EIS.

1.2 PURPOSE

An offset is required under the QEOP where an assessment of a proposed activity has demonstrated that a significant environmental impact cannot be avoided or substantially reduced (mitigated) – i.e. it will have a significant residual impact. Details of environmental impact assessment for the Elimatta Project are provided in the EIS (AARC 2014) and supporting technical studies. The EIS also details commitments for mitigation and impact avoidance. The impacts to prescribed environmental matters included in this strategy are considered to be significant residual impacts that remain after application of all reasonably achievable mitigation measures.

This environmental offsets strategy aims to:

Describe the offset obligation of the Project, based on significant residual impacts to prescribed environmental matters;

Demonstrate the likelihood of a suitable offset area being available within the bioregion;

Describe the proposed timing and mechanism of offset delivery; and

Describe management, monitoring and reporting frameworks to facilitate offset delivery.

1.3 DELIVERY SCHEDULE

A simplified schedule for delivery of offsets within the Project development timeline is detailed below:

1. Environmental Management Plan accepted by the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP);

2. Environmental Authority (EA) conditions for offsets included in the draft EA;

3. EA and ML objection period;


4. Final Project approval;

5. Offset mechanism finalised;

6. Offset Delivery Plan prepared;

7. Offset delivery; and

8. Project development and mining activities commence.


2.0 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT

2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL OFFSETS ACT 2014

The Environmental Offsets Act 2014 seeks to counteract significant residual impacts of activities (such as resource activities) on prescribed environmental matters by implementing environmental offsets. Offsets attempt to achieve a conservation outcome elsewhere that is equivalent to the values being lost as a result of impacts to the prescribed environmental matter. The Act establishes a framework – the Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy 2014 (QEOP) – and recognises matters of national, state and local environmental significance.

2.1.1 Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy 2014

The principal purpose of the QEOP is to provide a support tool for decision-making and assessment of offset proposals. Under the QEOP, offsets are required for significant residual impacts to prescribed environmental matters. Prescribed environmental matters include:

Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES), listed in Schedule 2 of the Environmental Offsets Regulation 2014;

Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES), on the assumption that the QEOP will be accredited to satisfy offset requirements under the Environment Protection and

Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; and

Matters of Local Environmental Significance (MLES), if prescribed by the relevant local government.

MSES include, but are not limited to:

Endangered or Of Concern Regional Ecosystems (REs) listed under the Vegetation

Management Act 1999 (VM Act), with the exception of REs listed in Schedule 5 of the Vegetation Management Regulation 2012;

REs associated with wetlands shown on the Vegetation Management Wetlands Map (v.2.10);

Wetlands located within a Wetland Protection Area or identified as being of High Ecological Significance on a Map of Referable Wetlands;

REs located within the defined distance of the defining banks of a watercourse shown on the Vegetation Management Watercourse Map (v.1.3);

REs associated with an area identified as essential habitat on the Essential Habitat Map (v.4.10);

REs associated with connectivity values that are necessary for ecosystem functioning;

Protected wildlife habitat;

Protected areas; and

Established and legally secured offset areas.


Offsets may be required when an applicant has demonstrated that, despite all efforts to avoid or minimise impacts on prescribed environmental matters, there is a significant residual impact.

The QEOP outlines the following principles for the establishment of offsets:

1. Offsets will not replace or undermine existing environmental standards or regulatory requirements, or be used to allow development in areas otherwise prohibited through legislation or policy;

2. Environmental impacts must first be avoided, then minimised, before considering the use of offsets for any remaining impact;

3. Offsets must achieve a ‘conservation outcome’ that achieves an equivalent environmental outcome;

4. Offsets must provide environmental values as similar as possible to those being lost;

5. Offset provision must minimise the time-lag between the impact and delivery of the offset;

6. Offsets must provide additional protection to environmental values at risk, or additional management actions to improve environmental values; and

7. Where legal security is required, offsets must be legally secured for the duration of the impact on the ‘prescribed environmental matter’.

2.1.2 Galilee Basin Offsets Strategy 2013

Strategic offset investment corridors are pre-defined areas of land that are potentially suitable for offset supply and other land management activities, with the aim of providing landscape-scale benefits. The Galilee Basin Strategic Offset Corridor is partially located within the northern portion of the Brigalow Belt Bioregion. Land within these corridors suitable for providing offset supply for the Elimatta Project will be identified.

Although originally established under the repealed Queensland Biodiversity Offset Policy 2011, the QEOP recognises the value of Strategic Offset Investment Corridors in locating offset areas and capitalising on their conservation outcomes to create landscape-scale benefits. Proponents are expected to investigate potential offset supply within these corridors.


3.0 OFFSET OBLIGATION

The offset obligation of the Elimatta Project has been determined by calculating the area of proposed land disturbance for each prescribed environmental matter and applying the relevant multipliers to determine the area of land required. This is considered to be the significant residual impact of the Project, which is otherwise unable to be avoided or mitigated.

3.1 IMPACTS TO PRESCRIBED ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

3.1.1 Regulated Vegetation

Ground-truthed RE mapping for the Project site was completed by qualified ecologists as part of the Flora and Fauna Assessments of the Project. This mapping has been used in the classification of all relevant values on the Project site. Five vegetation communities identified on the site will be impacted by Project development, as detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 Vegetation Communities Impacted by the Project

Community Description Regional

Ecosystem (RE)

Broad Vegetation

Group (BVG) Status

1 Blue Gum riparian woodland 11.3.25 16a LC

2 Blue Gum riparian woodland (with interspersed Poplar Box) (90% / 10%)

11.3.25 / 11.3.2 16a / 17a LC / OC

3 Brigalow open forest 11.9.5 25a E

4 Brigalow open forest with associated Poplar Box 11.9.10 25a OC

5 Poplar Box and Cypress Pine open forest 11.10.11 17a LC

Key: LC = Least Concern; OC = Of Concern; E = Endangered

The QEOP utilises Broad Vegetation Groups (BVGs) – groups of vegetation communities with similar characteristics – as the principal factor for identifying offset supply.

Table 2 Broad Vegetation Groups

BVG Description

25a Open-forests to woodlands dominated by Acacia harpophylla sometimes with Casuarina cristata on heavy clay soils. Includes areas co-dominated with Acacia cambagei and/or emergent Eucalypt spp.

17a Woodlands dominated by Eucalyptus populnea (or E. brownii) on alluvium, sand plains and footslopes of hills and ranges.

16a

Open forest and woodlands dominated by Eucalyptus camaldulensis (or E. tereticornis) and/or E. coolabah (or E. microtheca) fringing drainage lines. Associated species may include Melaleuca spp., Corymbia tessellaris, Angophora spp., Casuarina cunninghamiana. Does not include alluvial areas dominated by herb and grasslands or alluvial plains that are not flooded.


3.1.1.1 Watercourse Vegetation

A number of drainage lines traverse the Project site, including Horse Creek, a stream order five watercourse. The QEOP prescribes distances from watercourses in which vegetation is considered to be a MSES. This is known as the defined distance from the defining banks, and varies with stream order:

Stream order 1 or 2 – 25 m from the defined distance from the defining banks;

Stream order 3 or 4 – 50 m from the defined distance from the defining banks; and

Stream order 5 or greater – 100 m from the defined distance from the defining banks.

Regulated vegetation located within these areas are MSES.

3.1.2 Protected Wildlife Habitat

Multiple seasonal surveys were undertaken to identify protected fauna inhabiting the Project site. These surveys were undertaken by suitably qualified ecologists. Details of the assessment methodology and results are provided in the EIS (AARC 2014) and supporting studies.

Two fauna species of conservation significance have been recorded on the Project site during terrestrial flora and fauna surveys.

The Short-beaked Echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus) was identified on the Project mine site during terrestrial flora and fauna surveys. Although listed as Least Concern, the Echidna is afforded ‘special least concern’ status under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) as it is considered to be an iconic species. The species is not under threat of extinction and is considered common both locally and throughout Queensland. The species survives in a wide range of habitats and can tolerate moderate levels of land disturbance (such as fragmented landscapes created by clearing of pastures). The offset obligations for regulated vegetation are considered sufficient to offset potential impacts to Echidna habitat.

The Little Pied Bat (Chalinolobus picatus) is listed as Near Threatened under the NC Act. The species was recorded primarily in riparian woodland habitat on the Project site. However, Near Threatened species are not included as MSES under the Environmental Offsets Act 2014 and QEOP. No threatened birds, reptiles or amphibians were observed on the Project site.

Table 3 Protected Wildlife Habitat Impacted by the Project

Protected Wildlife Habitat NC Act Status

Echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus)

Woodland communities present on the Project site are suitable for Echidnas. Endangered

3.2 SUMMARY OF OFFSET OBLIGATION

Table 4 provides an overview of the impacts to the MSES described above. The potential impacts to Echidna habitat are considered to be adequately accounted for by the areas of significant residual impact to regulated vegetation.


Table 4 Summary of Impacts on Prescribed Environmental Matters

MSES BVG Area of Residual Impact (ha) Offset Area (ha)

Regulated Vegetation

Endangered RE RE 11.9.5 25a 18.89 75.56

Of Concern RE RE 11.9.10 25a 12.71 50.84

RE 11.3.2 (10% of RE 11.3.25 / 11.3.2) 17a 16.93 67.72

RE occurring within defined distance of defining banks of a relevant watercourse

RE 11.9.5 25a 4.566 Already accounted for

RE 11.9.10 25a 5.538 Already accounted for

RE 11.10.11 17a 0.0423 0.17

RE 11.3.2 (10% of RE 11.3.25 / 11.3.2) 17a 12.24 Already accounted for

RE 11.3.25 (plus 90% of RE 11.3.25 / 11.3.2) 16a 113.91 455.65

Protected Wildlife Habitat

Special least concern species Echidna - Covered by the above residual impacts Already accounted for

TOTAL 184.83 649.94


3.3 OFFSET AREA REQUIREMENTS

The QEOP sets out a number of requirements for offset areas, depending on the MSES impacted, to ensure conservation outcomes are achieved. The offset requirements relevant to the Elimatta Project are set out below:

The size of an offset area must be proportionate to the area of impact to the MSES, and is regulated by the QEOP. Multipliers are discussed in further detail below;

The offset area consists of the same BVG of the MSES;

For Endangered or Of Concern REs, the offset area must consist of vegetation of the same VM Act status; and

The offset area must be located within the same bioregion and, if possible, in the same sub-region or local government area.

In addition, offset opportunities in Strategic Offset Investment Corridors should be investigated.

Offsets for two or more MSES may be co-located if the same offset area can satisfy the requirements for each MSES. In this case, the offset requirements for other regulated vegetation MSES can meet the requirements for offsetting impacts to the Echidna.

3.3.1 Multipliers

In order to achieve a conservation outcome, the offset area must be of a size and scale that is proportionate to the impact on the MSES. Multipliers are employed to ensure the offset area is scaled appropriately according to the size of the impact and the prescribed environmental matter. The QEOP defines multipliers for a number of MSES, including threatened fauna, national parks, Endangered and Of Concern REs, and wetlands. Table 5 details the prescribed multipliers for MSES impacted by the Project.

A multiplier of four, for example, requires an offset area to be four times the area of significant residual impact to a particular MSES. The maximum multiplier for a MSES (other than a protected area) is four (QEOP 2014).

Table 5 Multipliers for MSES Impacted by the Project

MSES Multiplier

Echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus) 4

Endangered RE 4

Of Concern RE 4

RE occurring within defined distance of defining banks of a relevant watercourse

Not specified, so a multiplier of 4 has

been adopted.


4.0 OFFSET SUPPLY

To demonstrate that sufficient land exists to satisfy offset requirements for the Elimatta Project, a desktop assessment was undertaken to identify suitable supply options within a 100 km buffer of the Project and within the broader Brigalow Belt Bioregion.

4.1 DESKTOP METHODOLOGY

The desktop assessment involved the use of GIS software to analyse various spatial datasets obtained from the Queensland Government Information Service in October 2014. These datasets included the following:

Pre-clear (vegetation present before European clearing) – to identify the pre-clearing extent of relevant BVGs;

Mining leases, protected areas and nature refuges – to remove conflicting land uses from offset supply; and

Regulated Vegetation Management Map, with Category A (land subject to offsets and compliance notices etc.) and Category R (regrowth vegetation associated with priority reef catchments) land removed. This identifies suitable areas for offset supply; Category B (remnant), Category C (high value regrowth) and Category X (unregulated) vegetation is available for use as environmental offsets.

4.2 DESKTOP RESULTS

Both remnant and non-remnant vegetation have been included in calculation of offset supply, in accordance with the QEOP. Three categories of offset supply are therefore provided:

Category X – land classified as unregulated (i.e. non-remnant) vegetation, which is suitable for offset supply as it is subject to vegetation clearing;

Category C – land classified as high value regrowth vegetation, also considered to be non-remnant vegetation; and

Category B – land classified as remnant vegetation.

The Offset Area is calculated as: Total Area of Residual Impact x Relevant Multiplier (4).

Table 6 presents the results of the desktop assessment, indicating the area of potential offset supply for each MSES in each regulated vegetation category. Areas of availability are indicated for the Brigalow Belt Bioregion, within a 100 km buffer of the Project site, and within the Galilee Basin Strategic Offset Investment Corridor (to the extent it occurs within the bioregion).

Within the Brigalow Belt Bioregion, the desktop assessment has identified a total of 5,391,061 ha of potentially available offset supply for BVG 25a, a total of 2,201,290 ha for BVG 17a and 195,494 ha for BVG 16a.

Figure 1 illustrates the area of potential supply within the Brigalow Belt and Figure 2 shows the area within 100 km of the Project.


Table 6 Offset Supply

BVG VM Act Status

Offset Area (ha)

Brigalow Belt (ha) 100 km of Project (ha) Galilee Corridor (ha)

Cat X Cat C Cat B Cat X Cat C Cat B Cat X Cat C Cat B

25a

E 75.56 4,541,000 24,950 262,500 789,600 2,851 29,480 102,600 5,143 26,680

OC 12.71 467,200 7,961 87,450 63,380 174.9 4,850 5,135 24.02 3,076

TOTAL 5,391,061 890,336 142,658

17a

E 67.72 999,900 10,060 217,000 76,230 727.9 10,460 9,201 447.10 11,410 n/a

(excl. E) 0.17 569,100 9,230 396,000 62,470 307.1 4,870 72,879 1,804 97,190

TOTAL 2,201,290 155,065 192,931

16a n/a 455.65 55,410 1,684 138,400 3,003 32.77 5,737 2,365 183.00 13,360

TOTAL 195,494 8,773 15,908


Land Potentially Available for Offset Supply within Brigalow Belt Bioregion Figure 1


Land Potentially Available for Offset Supply within 100 km of Project Figure 2


Land Potentially Available for Offset Supply within the Galilee Basin Offset Corridor Figure 3


4.3 QUALIFICATION OF DESKTOP ASSESSMENT

GIS based interpretation of available supply land was based on data downloaded from Queensland Government Information Service in October 2014. No ground-truthing of potential offset supply has been undertaken at this early stage of Project development; this stage of the offsets process will be conducted following approval of the Project’s MLs and EA. The results presented at this stage are subject to the accuracy of spatial data provided by the Queensland Government and ground-truthing is likely to identify discrepancies.

The availability of land for offset supply will be dependent on the willingness of current land managers to make areas of land available for offsetting, and the outcome of any subsequent negotiations.

4.3.1 Habitat Quality Analysis

The Land-based Offsets Multiplier Calculator (yet to be released) will facilitate rapid assessment by providing a set of pre-determined ‘habitat quality factors’ to ascertain the ecological equivalence of offset and impact sites. The Guide to Determining Terrestrial Habitat Quality (also yet to be released) will provide a methodology for calculating alternative habitat quality factors and determining the suitability of an offset site, relative to the impact site and prescribed environmental matter (QEOP 2014).


5.0 OFFSET DELIVERY

5.1 POTENTIAL DELIVERY MECHANISMS

The QEOP provides for two broad mechanisms for offset delivery: proponent-driven offsets or financial settlement. Proponent-driven offsets place the responsibility on the authority holder to deliver the offset, either directly on land (land-based offset) or via a Direct Benefit Management Plan (DBMP). Alternatively, the authority holder may pay a pre-determined sum to EHP, transferring the responsibility for offset delivery to the administering authority. Offsets may also be delivered via a combination of both mechanisms.

5.1.1 Proponent-driven Offset

5.1.1.1 Land-based Offset

Land-based offsets, as described in QEOP 2014, must:

Result in a ‘conservation outcome’; and

Be delivered on land owned by the authority holder; or

Be delivered on land subject to a contractual arrangement between the authority holder, the offset provider, and any other third party.

The Environmental Offsets Act 2014 states that a conservation outcome is said to be achieved if the offset is “selected, designed and managed to maintain the viability of the matter” (s11).

5.1.1.2 Direct Benefit Management Plan

Proponents may deliver offsets via a pre-approved investment package known as a Direct Benefit Management Plan (DBMP). The purpose of a DBMP package is to identify priority actions for addressing threats to, and providing benefits for, prescribed environmental matters. Compared to traditional land-based offsets, DBMPs aim to achieve landscape-scale benefits or improved conservation outcomes. Up to 10% of offset delivery under a DBMP may include compensatory measures, such as research or education.

5.1.2 Financial Settlement Offset

EHP has developed a Financial Settlement Offsets Calculation Methodology, which may be utilised to determine an offsets payment amount, based on impacts to prescribed environmental matters. This method incorporates the on-ground and administrative costs of delivering the offset on behalf of the proponent, as well as landholder incentive payments. Once financial settlement has been reached, the proponent is considered to have fulfilled their offset obligation and EHP becomes liable for the delivery of land-based conservation outcomes.

5.2 OFFSET DELIVERY PLAN

Prior to beginning Project development and offset delivery, Taroom Coal must reach an agreement with EHP on the intended offset mechanism and sign an ‘agreed delivery arrangement’. An Offset Delivery Plan must be developed if Taroom Coal opts to deliver a proponent-driven offset.


The Offset Delivery Plan must:

Describe the prescribed environmental matters to which the offsets pertain;

Describe the relevant attributes of the offset supply land, including details of any person with an interest in the land, the existing land use of the supply land, and any impact these attributes may have on offset delivery;

Describe the mechanism to secure the land as a legally secured offset area and state why this mechanism is considered reasonable and practicable; and

Identify the period during which the mechanism will be undertaken and state why this period is considered reasonable for the purpose of securing the land.

The Offset Delivery Plan will be developed in accordance with the requirements of the QEOP 2014, Environmental Offsets Act 2014 and Environmental Offsets Regulation 2014.

5.3 LEGALLY SECURING OFFSETS

Land used to supply offsets is required to be legally secured to facilitate a conservation outcome. Offset land is considered to be legally secured if it is:

An environmental offset protection area in accordance with the Environmental Offsets Act

2014;

An area of high nature conservation value in accordance with the VM Act, secured for the purposes of an offset;

A nature refuge under the NC Act, secured for the purposes of an offset;

A protected area under the NC Act, secured for the purposes of an offset; or

Covered by a statutory covenant for environmental purposes under the Land Act 1994 or Land

Title Act 1994.

The relevant legislation prescribes the mechanisms for legally securing such areas.


6.0 MANAGEMENT, MONITORING AND REPORTING

Taroom Coal will ensure that offsets are delivered in accordance with the QEOP and the specific requirements of the selected delivery mechanism(s). To ensure timely and compliant offsets, Taroom Coal will routinely monitor its progress towards offset delivery, achieving conservation outcomes and performance.

As required, a qualified person will be contracted to provide independent advice to Taroom Coal management on progress of the offset delivery.

Documents

Appendix C Environmental Offset Strategy (AARC 2014)€¦ · Environmental Offset Strategy 1 November 2014 1.0 INTRODUCTION AustralAsian Resource Consultants Pty Ltd (AARC) was commissioned