Inland Rail - Gowrie to Helidon

• Table of Contents and Executive Summary ( 6.21 MB)
• Chapter 01 – Introduction ( 5.1 MB)
• Chapter 02 – Project Rationale ( 8.7 MB)
• Chapter 03 – Project Approvals ( 1.3 MB)
• Chapter 04 – Assessment Methodology ( 910 KB)
• Chapter 05 – Stakeholder Engagement ( 1.26 MB)
• Chapter 06 – Project Description ( 6.8 MB)
• Chapter 07 – Sustainability ( 340 KB)
• Chapter 08 – Land Use and Tenure ( 33.7 MB)
• Chapter 09 – Land Resources ( 46 MB)
• Chapter 10 – Landscape and Visual Amenity ( 20.5 MB)
• Chapter 11 – Flora and Fauna ( 42.4 MB)
• Chapter 12 – Air Quality ( 31 MB)
• Chapter 13 – Surface Water and Hydrology ( 47.1 MB)
• Chapter 14 – Groundwater ( 34.5 MB)
• Chapter 15 – Noise and Vibration ( 11.2 MB)
• Chapter 16 – Social ( 7.14 MB)
• Chapter 17 – Economics ( 860 KB)
• Chapter 18 – Cultural Heritage ( 4.7 MB)
• Chapter 19 – Traffic, Transport and Access ( 10.9 MB)
• Chapter 20 – Hazard and Risk ( 1.8 MB)
• Chapter 21 – Waste and Resource Management ( 2.62 MB)
• Chapter 22 – Cumulative Impacts ( 2.4 MB)
• Chapter 23 – Draft Outline Environmental Management Plan ( 1.57 MB)
• Chapter 24 – Conclusion ( 475 KB)
• Chapter 25 – Glossary and Abbreviations ( 610 KB)
• Chapter 26 – References ( 760 KB)

• Appendix A – Terms of Reference ( 840 KB)
• Appendix B – Terms of Reference Compliance Table ( 686 KB)
• Appendix C – Design Drawings ( 14 MB)
• Appendix D – Community Consultation ( 8.5 MB)
• Appendix E – Study Team ( 340 KB)
• Appendix F – Proponent Commitments ( 400 KB)
• Appendix G – Corporate Policies ( 3.7 MB)
• Appendix H – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Technical Report ( 40.9 MB)
• Appendix I – Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Technical Report Part 1 of 4 ( 41.9 MB)
• Appendix I – Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Technical Report Part 2 of 4 ( 41.2 MB)
• Appendix I – Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Technical Report Part 3 of 4 (33.7 MB)
• Appendix I – Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Technical Report Part 4 of 4 (29.7 MB)
• Appendix J – Matters of National Environmental Significance Technical Report Part 1 of 3 ( 33.9 MB)
• Appendix J – Matters of National Environmental Significance Technical Report Part 2 of 3 ( 27.1 MB)
• Appendix J – Matters of National Environmental Significance Technical Report Part 3 of 3 (37.7 MB)
• Appendix K – Air Quality Technical Report ( 32.5 MB)
• Appendix L – Surface Water Technical Report ( 44.1 MB)
• Appendix M – Hydrology and Flooding Technical Report Part 1 of 2 ( 22.9 MB)
• Appendix M – Hydrology and Flooding Technical Report Part 2 of 2 ( 37.4 MB)
• Appendix N – Groundwater Technical Report ( 47.9 MB)
• Appendix O –Construction Noise and Vibration Technical Report Part 1 of 3 ( 38.6 MB)
• Appendix O – Construction Noise and Vibration Technical Report Part 2 of 3 ( 36.5 MB)
• Appendix O – Construction Noise and Vibration Technical Report Part 3 of 3 ( 22.2 MB)
• Appendix P – Operational Railway Noise and Vibration Technical Report ( 39.8 MB)
• Appendix Q – Social Impact Assessment Technical Report ( 6.6 MB)
• Appendix R – Economic Impact Assessment Technical Report ( 1.8 MB)
• Appendix S – Non-Indigenous Heritage Technical Report ( 17.7 MB)
• Appendix T – Spoil Management Strategy ( 2.5 MB)
• Appendix U – Traffic and Transport Impact Assessment Technical Report Part 1 of 2 ( 28.8 MB)
• Appendix U – Traffic and Transport Impact Assessment Technical Report Part 2 of 2 ( 42.9 MB)
• Appendix V – Impacted Properties ( 408 KB)
• Appendix W – Geotechnical Factual Report Part 1 of 2 ( 37.8 MB)
• Appendix W – Geotechnical Factual Report Part 2 of 2 ( 24 MB)
• Appendix X – EMR Search Certificates and Laboratory Certificates (2.8 MB)
• Appendix Y – Environmental Offset Delivery Strategy ( 11.3 MB)

• The Coordinator-General has reviewed the submissions received on the Inland Rail – Gowrie to Helidon draft EIS and has decided additional information is required from ARTC.
• Additional information has been sought in several key areas including, but not limited to noise and vibration, traffic and transport, stakeholder engagement, flooding, groundwater, and social impact.
• ARTC will be providing a written response to the Coordinator-General addressing the submissions received on the draft EIS as part of the revised draft EIS.
• The Coordinator-General also decided the revised draft EIS will be publicly notified, and the community will be invited to have their say on the updated information in the revised draft EIS.

No. The finalisation of the EIS is the next stage of the EIS process. This will occur after the additional information is provided by ARTC and publicly notified.

Yes. A requirement of the terms of reference is for ARTC to undertake rigorous community and stakeholder engagement during the EIS process.

To ensure this continues to occur, ARTC has been directed to prepare and implement a Community and Stakeholder Engagement Plan. An outline of the plan is included in the draft EIS and will be updated in the revised draft EIS.

To ensure ARTC complies with their Community and Stakeholder Engagement Plan after the EIS process is complete, conditions may be set in the project’s evaluation to manage social impacts.

In June 2020, the Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications and the Department of Transport and Main Roads as representatives of the State of Queensland, jointly established the Independent panel of experts for flood studies in Queensland (the panel).

Five members of the expert panel were appointed:

• Mark Babister, Chair – Managing Director, WMAwater
• Tina O’Connell – Principal Engineer, Hydrology and Hydraulics, HDR
• Ferdinand Diermanse – Expert Researcher, Deltares
• Steve Clark – Managing Director, Water Technology
• Martin Giles – Senior Principal, BMT.

The panel’s focus was investigating whether national and state guidelines, as well as industry best practice, were applied by ARTC to modelling techniques and outputs to create the existing flood models. The panel assessed four core areas:

• extent
• assumptions
• application
• interpretation.

The panel investigated the design of waterway structures in relation to the Inland Rail in a floodplain environment in Queensland.

Managing the work of the panel was the responsibility of the Australian Government and Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads. The panel reported to a joint working group comprising officers from the Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications and the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads. All panel advice, recommendations and deliverables were reported to the Joint Working Group.

On 7 October 2022, the flood panel released their final report and recommendations on the Department of Transport and Main Road’s website.

The final flood report concludes that the flood models developed by ARTC are fit for purpose, in accordance with national guidelines and industry best practice, and account for the impacts of the reference designs. The report recommends ARTC undertake further actions during both the revised draft EIS and detailed design stages and for a suitably qualified practitioner to review the design against the flood impact objectives and actions at key design stages.

The findings of the panel will inform the Coordinator-General’s evaluation of the EIS.

To provide ongoing advice and assurance on the matters raised in the panel’s final report, the Coordinator-General has engaged two of the former panel members, supported by a Geomorphologist.  Their ongoing advice will further inform the Coordinator-General’s evaluation of the EIS.

On 7 October 2022 the Australian Government announced a review into the Inland Rail project to be led by Dr Kerry Schott AO.

Australian Rail Track Corporation Limited (ARTC) is an Australian Government-owned corporation and current operator of the Australian freight network, managing and maintaining approximately 8,500 kilometres of rail network across five states.

ARTC have appointed Inland Rail Pty Ltd (IRPL) as agent to act on their behalf.

IRPL is a wholly owned subsidiary of ARTC and is responsible for the delivery of the Inland Rail project in line with the Australian Government response to the independent review of Inland Rail. This includes the environmental impact assessment process and Australian Government approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. ARTC will operate the line once constructed.

The proposed G2H project would be located between Gowrie (north-west of Toowoomba) and Helidon (east of Toowoomba) running parallel with the existing rail alignment. It connects to the proposed Inland Rail – Border to Gowrie project at its north-west end and the Inland Rail – Helidon to Calvert project at its south-east end.

The project would pass near the townships of Gowrie, Charlton, Willowburn, Toowoomba, Withcott, Postman’s Ridge, Lockyer and Helidon.

The project spans two local government areas (LGAs) including the Toowoomba Regional Council and Lockyer Valley Regional Council LGAs.

Yes. ARTC referred the project to the Australian Government Environment Minister for consideration under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), and it was determined that the project is a controlled action.

The State’s evaluation report on the EIS will assess Australian Government environment matters and make recommendations for the Australian Government to then consider in finalising the evaluation.

An EIS is the highest form of environmental assessment in Queensland. It involves a rigorous assessment of environmental, social and economic impacts.

Broadly an EIS is a rigorous and comprehensive environmental impact assessment of a project, involving whole-of-government coordination and public consultation.

An EIS is prepared in accordance with the terms of reference for the EIS and is publicly notified.

The EIS provides a comprehensive description of:

• the current environment in the area of the project
• all potential environmental, social and economic impacts of the project
• proponent proposals to avoid, minimise, mitigate and/or offset those potential impacts.

The impacts include direct, indirect and cumulative impacts resulting from the construction, commissioning, operation and decommissioning of the project.

The State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 sets out the EIS process for declared coordinated projects. The Act states that, after the terms of reference for an EIS is finalised, a proponent has 18 months to provide an EIS that is accepted as addressing the terms of reference. This can require several rounds of public consultation.

Timeframes for assessment of the final EIS vary depending on project complexities and the standard of information provided by proponents.

If a proponent needs additional time to prepare and finalise the EIS, they can request an extension of time to the 18-month period allowed for under the Act.

Details of the timeframes granted for ARTC and further information is available.

When an EIS is accepted as ‘final’, the evaluation of the EIS proceeds, taking into consideration submissions received, and an evaluation report on the project’s EIS is produced.

The terms of reference for the project state what ARTC must include in the draft EIS, including assessments of traffic, noise, air quality, flora, fauna and flooding, as well as an assessment of the social and economic effects of the project.

The terms of reference also include specific requirements for public consultation to understand specific detail about people’s concerns. ARTC is required to address those concerns and the proposed approach to avoid, reduce, manage or mitigate those concerns in the EIS.

On 29 November 2019, the Australian and Queensland Governments signed a Bilateral Agreement for Inland Rail which will enable the delivery of the project in Queensland.

The Queensland Government through the Department of Transport and Main Roads is working collaboratively with the Australian Rail Track Corporation on the state's requirements and statutory approvals.

The Act and the Regulation prescribe certain activities as 'regulated activities' that are likely to have a widespread and irreversible impact on an area of regional interest. The Act and the Regulation do not apply to Queensland Inland Rail projects as these are not 'regulated activities' under the Act or the Regulation. There is no proposal to amend the Act or Regulation in this regard.

Potential impacts on strategic cropping land will be fully considered and assessed by the Coordinator-General in the evaluation of the EIS for the Inland Rail projects. The Coordinator-General encourages all affected landholders and communities to make submissions on the draft EISs for the Inland Rail projects to ensure all impacts are adequately considered. The proponent for the Inland Rail project, the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC), is required to detail the potential impacts on strategic cropping land and propose avoidance and mitigation measures in the EIS.

On 17 September 2019, the Senate announced an inquiry into various aspects of Inland Rail. The matter was referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee to consider the management of the Inland Rail project by the ARTC and the Commonwealth Government. The Senate report was tabled on 11 August 2021 which included 26 recommendations.

The Commonwealth Government response to the report was released on 16 December 2021.

Details of the EIS assessment process, including the project’s initial advice statement, terms of reference and draft EIS documents, are available for viewing.

You can also contact the government’s EIS process team at inlandrailg2h@coordinatorgeneral.qld.gov.au.

For more information regarding the G2H project, other sections of Inland Rail, and ARTC refer to InlandRailQld@ARTC.com.au.