Barrick (Osborne) Pty Ltd, Re [2007] QLRT 46

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Barrick (Osborne) Pty Ltd [2007] QLRT 46 PARTIES: In the matter of Application for Mining Lease No 90158 by Barrick (Osborne) Pty Ltd FILE NO/S: AML40/07 PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease DELIVERED ON: 20 March 2007 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: Heard on the papers MEMBER: Windridge MR ORDER/S: 1. Hearing dispensed with. (at [2]) 2. Recommendation made that the Mining Lease be granted. (at [17]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – RECOMMENDATION Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss 245, 269(4), 270(1) COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITORS: N/A [1] WINDRIDGE MR: This is an application by Barrick (Osborne) Pty Limited under s. 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act) for a mining lease over 1770.8915ha of land 100 kilometres south east of Duchess for the mining of silver ore gold , cobalt ore, copper ore, magnetite and purposes associated with mining operations. The application was lodged at the office of the Mining Registrar at Mt Isa on 14 May 2004. One objection was lodged, but this objection has since been withdrawn. 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). The applicant has requested the matter be dealt with on the papers. The Tribunal has ordered accordingly. I therefore dispense with the hearing. -- 1 of 3 -- 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 provided by the applicant and the material filed with the Mining Registrar in support of the 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 Mining Registrar on 21 June 2004 which confirms that the applicant is eligible to apply for the mining lease and has complied with the requirements of Part 7 of the Act. 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 certain minerals and the establishment of a treatment plant. 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 using conventional methods. The applicant has the necessary infrastructure and equipment to complete the project. 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 mineralisation. 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 20 years. There is no evidence to suggest that a 20 year term is inappropriate. 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 to undertake the proposed operation. I am satisfied the applicant has or has access to the necessary financial and technical resources. -- 2 of 3 -- 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. 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 with sound land use management? The current land use is low intensity grazing and gas pipeline purposes. The proposed use appears to be a reasonable land use. Section 269(4) (j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent thereof? [12] The draft environmental authority was publicly advertised and no objections were lodged in relation to it. Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? [13] 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. Section 269(4)(l) – Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant the mining lease? [14] There was no evidence before me that indicated any good reason why this application should be refused. Section 269(4)(m) – Is the proposed mining operation an appropriate land use taking into consideration the current and prospective uses of the land? [15] 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 [16] 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 purposes and term sought by the applicant. -- 3 of 3 --