Bull Creek Opals Pty Ltd, Re [2007] QLRT 57
LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL
QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Re Bull Creek Opals Pty Ltd [2007] QLRT 57
PARTIES: In the matter of Application for Mining Lease No
60418 by Bull Creek Opals Pty Ltd
FILE NO/S: AM70/05
PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease
DELIVERED ON: 12 April 2007
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: Heard on the papers
MEMBER: Windridge MR
ORDER/S: 1. Hearing dispensed with. (at [2])
2. I recommend to the Honourable the Minister
for Mines and Energy that Mining Lease No.
60418 be granted over the whole of the
application area for the purpose of mining opal
for a term of 10 years. (at [17])
3. A copy of this recommendation be forwarded to
the Honourable the Minister for Mines and
Energy by the Registrar of the Land and
Resources Tribunal for consideration by the
Honourable the Minister in any future
amendments to the Mineral Resources Act 1989.
(at [19])
CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – RECOMMENDATION
Mineral Resources Act 1989 ss 245, 269(4), 270(1)
Carr v Simnovec [1980]26 SASR 263 at 268
Pacminex v Aust. (Nephrite)Jade Mines [1974] 7 SASR
401 at 415
COUNSEL: N/A
SOLICITOR/S: N/A
[1] WINDRIDGE MR: This is an application by Bull Creek Opals Pty Ltd under s.
245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (“the Act”) for a mining lease over land as
-- 1 of 4 --
described in the application about 80kms northwest of Quilpie for the purpose of
mining for opal for a term of ten years. Access is through the same property. The
application was lodged at the office of the Mining Registrar at Quilpie on 24 April
2006. No objection was lodged before the closing date for objections which was 22
March 2007.
Request to dispense with a hearing - Section 270
[2] I may dispense with a hearing if satisfied as to matters specified in s. 270(1). For
reasons that follow at paragraph [4], I am satisfied that the provisions of part 7 of the
Act have been complied with in respect of the application. The material supplied by
the Applicant and the Mining Registrar addresses each of the criteria that I must
consider in making my recommendation on this application. I am satisfied that there
is sufficient information before me to properly consider this matter. The applicant
has requested that the matter be dealt with on the papers by a member sitting alone.
Accordingly, I order that a hearing of this application be dispensed with.
Section 269(4) criteria
[3] In taking account of and considering the criteria specified in s. 269(4), I have relied
upon the Additional Information and Statutory Declaration sworn by the Applicant
on 22 November 2006. I have also relied upon the other material lodged by the
Applicant with the Department of Mines and Energy and provided by the Mining
Registrar to this Tribunal and the Mining Registrar’s Report in relation to this
application. These reasons refer to the salient points, but not to all the relevant
evidence, that I have taken into account in making my recommendation.
Section 269(4)(a) – Have the provisions of the Act been complied with?
[4] A Certificate of Application was issued by the Registrar on 21 November 2006
which he can only do if satisfied that the Applicant is eligible to apply for the mining
lease and has complied with the requirements of the Act for an application under
s.245 with respect to marking out, notification, service and posting of documents. I
note the late filing of the declaration material by the applicant. I recommended some
years ago, in my former capacity as Mining Warden for the State of Queensland, that
time constraints of this particular legislative requirement be amended, taking into
account the remoteness of application areas in relation to Registrar’s offices. It is a
mater of regret that this was not followed up, the result being further unnecessary
paper work imposed on the miner and the Registrar. I renew that recommendation to
the Hon the Minister when the provisions of the current Mineral Resources Act are
being reviewed.
Section 269(4)(b) – Is the land applied for mineralised or are the other purposes for which
the lease is sought appropriate?
[5] The application seeks the grant of a mining lease for the purpose of mining opal.
Opal has been produced from this area in the past and this application is in close
proximity another tenements. The Applicant held a current prospecting permit at the
time of marking out. The area is generally known for the production of opal, and I
am satisfied that the area is generally mineralised.
-- 2 of 4 --
Section 269(4(c) – If the land applied for is mineralised, will there be an acceptable level
of development and utilisation of the mineral resources within the area applied for?
[6] The Applicant proposes to mine the area with machinery and will use an excavator to
open up areas considered to have the best potential. The mining operation will then
become a basic open cut operation. There is no evidence to suggest that there will
not be an acceptable level of development and utilisation of the mineral resource in
the area.
Section 269(4)(d) – Is the land and the surface area of that land in respect of which the
mining lease is sought of an appropriate size and shape?
[7] The boundaries of the lease have been determined by the area of potential
mineralisation. The Applicant has sought a mining lease over the whole of the
surface area. There is no evidence to indicate the size and shape is not appropriate.
Section 269(4)(e) Is the term sought appropriate?
[8] The Applicant seeks a term of 10 years. There is no evidence to suggest that a 10
year term is inappropriate. The Applicant has the option of surrender if mining and
rehabilitation is completed before the term expires.
Section 269(4)(f) – Has the Applicant the necessary financial and technical capabilities to
carry on mining operations under the proposed mining lease?
[9] The applicant has sufficient assets, including the mining equipment required, to
undertake the proposed operation. I am satisfied the applicant has or has access to
the necessary financial and technical resources.
Section 269(4)(g) – Has the past performance of the Applicant been satisfactory?
[10] There is no evidence to suggest that the past performance of the applicant has not
been satisfactory. The applicant states he has no past convictions or record for poor
past performance.
Section 269(4)(h) – Will any disadvantage result to the holders of existing exploration
permits or mineral development licences or existing Applicants for exploration permits or
mineral development licences?
[11] There are no other holders or applicants for exploration tenures who would be
affected by the grant.
Section 269(4)(I) – Do the operations to be carried on under the authority of the mining
lease conform to sound land use management?
[12] The current land use is low intensity grazing. The landholders have not lodged any
objection.
-- 3 of 4 --
Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent
thereof?
[13] The draft environmental authority was issued on 8 March 2005. It requires the
Applicant to comply with the standard environmental conditions contained in the
Code of Environmental Compliance for Mining Lease Projects.
Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced?
[14] There is no public infrastructure on the area applied for. There was no evidence
before me that indicated public right and interest would be prejudiced. I take into
account that there was no objection to this application on public interest grounds.
Section 269(4)(l) – Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant the mining
lease?
[15] There was no evidence before me that indicated any grounds which would justify a
refusal of the application.
Section 269(4)(m) – Is the proposed mining operation an appropriate land use taking into
consideration the current and prospective uses of the land?
[16] On the basis of the evidence considered in relation to criteria (i), (j), (k) and (l), I
consider the proposed activity is an appropriate land use.
Recommendation
[17] Taking into account all the evidence before me and, in particular, that evidence
referred to above, I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Mines and Energy
that the Mining Lease be granted over the whole of the application area for the
purpose and term sought by the applicant.(Carr v Simnovec & Pacminex v Aust
(Nephrite) Jade Mines )
[18] The Honourable the Minister consider amendment to section 252C of the Mineral
Resources Act 1989, extending the time for lodgement of documents under this
section to 15 business days.
[19} I direct that a copy of this recommendation be forwarded to the Honourable the
Minister by the Registrar of the Land and Resources Tribunal.
-- 4 of 4 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QLRT/2007/057