Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd & Anor, Re [2006] QLRT 147

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd & Anor [2006] QLRT 147 PARTIES: In the matter of Application for Mining Lease No 80118 by Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd and Anglo Coal (Callide) No 2 Pty Limited. FILE NO: AML145/06 PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease DELIVERED ON: 8 November 2006 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: Heard on the Papers MEMBER/S: Smith DP ORDER/S: 1. Hearing dispensed with (at [2]) 2. Recommendation made that the Mining Lease be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the letter of 6 October 2006 from the Environmental Protection Agency to Mr Cassin, and further subject to native title processes (at [18]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE - TIMBER RESERVE – CONDITIONS - RECOMMENDATION Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss. 238, 245, 252, 269, 270, 392 COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITOR/S: N/A [1] SMITH DP: On 15 November 2004 Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd and Anglo Coal (Callide) No 2 Pty Limited (hereafter referred to as “the Applicants”) lodged Mining Lease Application No 80118 with the Mining Registrar, Rockhampton District. The Application was lodged pursuant to s. 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (“the Act”) for the purpose of mining for coal. No objections were duly lodged to the Mining Lease Application. Request to dispense with a hearing – Section 270 -- 1 of 4 -- [2] The Applicants have requested that the Application be dealt with without an oral hearing. Taking in to account s. 270 of the Act, I am satisfied that there is sufficient information before me. 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) of the Act, I have relied on the Additional Information and Statutory Declaration of Ronald Joseph Cassin on behalf of the Applicants dated 7 August 2006. I have also relied upon the other material lodged by the Applicants with the Mining Registrar and the Mining Registrar’s Report in relation to this Application. These reasons refer to the salient points, but not all the relevant evidence, that I have taken into account. Section 269(4)(a) – Have the provisions of the Act been complied with? [4] On 18 March 2005, the Mining Registrar issued a Certificate of Application. The Mining Registrar can only issue the Certificate if satisfied that the Applicants are eligible to apply for the mining lease and have complied with the requirements of the Act with respect to the Application.1 I note that the Application includes a non-exclusive tenure.2 In my opinion, there is sufficient evidence of compliance with the provisions of the Act in respect to this Application. Section 269(4)(b) – Is the land applied for mineralised or are the other purposes for which the lease is sought appropriate? [5] I am satisfied from the Applicants’ evidence that the land applied for is mineralised. The Application is in a known mineral producing area. 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 material before me reveals the Applicants’ proposed mining operations and program, and shows appropriate development and utilisation of the mineral resources within the area applied for. 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 material before me appears to indicate a mining lease application of an appropriate size and shape in light of the proposed mining operation. Section 269(4)(e) – Is the term sought appropriate? [8] The term sought for this mining lease is 21 years, which I consider appropriate. 1 See s. 251(1) of the Act. 2 I also note that this application is subject to Right to Negotiate processes under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwth). -- 2 of 4 -- 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 material indicates that the Applicants have the financial and technical capabilities to carry on the mining operations. The Applicants have many years previous mining experience. I am satisfied that the requirements of this criterion are met. Section 269(4)(g) – Has the past performance of the Applicant been satisfactory? [10] The Applicants’ evidence is that no enforcement action has been taken against either company. The Mining Registrar’s Report is consistent with what the Applicants say. 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] The Applicants held EPC 188C. Material from the Mining Registrar and from the Applicants indicate that other tenement holders either consent to the application or are part of the applicants’ joint venture.3 Section 269(4)(i) – Do the operations to be carried on under the authority of the mining lease conform with sound land use management? [12] There is no evidence before me to suggest that the proposed operations do not conform with sound land use management. Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent thereof: [13] A draft environmental authority was publicly advertised and received no objection. There is no evidence to suggest that the environmental impacts will not be adequately dealt with by compliance with the conditions of the authority. Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? [14] The application area includes a timber reserve over which the applicants hold a lease. The owner of the reserve has consented to the application on certain conditions as set out in the letter of 6 October 2006 from the Environmental Protection Agency to Mr Cassin. I consider those conditions appropriate. Further, although there is electricity infrastructure also within the application area, necessary arrangements have been made by the applicants with Powerlink in that regard. [15] The applicants did not formally obtain the required consents within the time stipulated in s 238 of the Act. However, such consents have been obtained; negotiations in that regard have been ongoing; the applicants have held a lease over the timber reserve; and the public right and interest will not be prejudiced. 3 See letter dated 3 February 2005 from AMP Capital Investors to Mining Registrar, together with the Mining Lease Application -- 3 of 4 -- Accordingly, pursuant to s 392 of the Act, I am satisfied that the applicants have substantially complied with s 238 of the Act. Section 269(4)(l) – Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant the mining lease? [16] 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? [17] The materials show that the project is for the extraction of a potentially valuable resource in accordance with the environmental processes. I am satisfied that the proposed mining operation is an appropriate land use. Recommendation [18] Taking into account all the evidence before me and, in particular, that evidence referred to above, and subject to the conditions set out in the letter of 6 October 2006 from the Environmental Protection Agency to Mr Cassin, and further subject to native title processes, I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Mines and Energy that Mining Lease No. 80118 be granted over the entire application area for the purpose and term sought by the Applicants. -- 4 of 4 --