Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd & Ors, Re [2006] QLRT 3

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd & Ors [2006] QLRT 3 PARTIES: In the matter of Application for Mining Lease No 70336 by Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd (56.97%) Mitsui German Creek Investment Pty Limited (30%) and Jena Pty Limited (13.03%) FILE NO/S: AM1/06 PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease DELIVERED ON: 20 January 2006 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 Natural Resources and Mines that Mining Lease No. 70336 be granted over the whole of the application area for coal mining and associated purposes for a term of 30 years. (at [17]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – RECOMMENDATION Mineral Resources Act 1989 ss 245, 269(4), 270(1) COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITOR: N/A [1] WINDRIDGE MR: This is an application lodged by Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd & Ors under s. 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (“the Act”) for a mining lease over 4171ha of land of which all is surface area. The application area is located 27 kilometres south-south-east of Middlemount on land as described more particularly in the application. The application was lodged at the office of the Mining Registrar at Emerald on 6 August 2004. No objection was lodged before the closing date for objections which was 16 December 2005. -- 1 of 4 -- 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. There were no objections to this application. I am satisfied that the preconditions to exercising my discretion to dispense with the hearing have been fulfilled. 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. 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 on behalf of the applicant on 22 December 2005. I have also relied upon the other material lodged by the applicant with the Department of Natural Resources and Mines 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 24 September 2005 which can only be done if the Registrar is 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. 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 open cut coal mining and purposes associated with that mining operation. The applicant has investigated the area under the authority of a Mineral Development Licence No.170 and a prospecting permit. The area is generally known for the production of coal, and this lease is required for mining and other purposes associated with the mining of that resource. 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 lease is to be used for coal mining and associated purposes to support the mining operations conducted on the lease. I am satisfied that the purposes stated in the application reflect an acceptable level of development. -- 2 of 4 -- 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 that is required for the open cut mine, overburden heaps, roadways, dams, and associated infrastructure. The applicant has sought a lease over surface area of 4171ha. There is no evidence to indicate the size and shape is not appropriate. Section 269(4)(e) Is the term sought appropriate? [8] The applicants seek a term of 30 years. There is no evidence to suggest that a 30 year term is inappropriate. The term is required to support mining and rehabilitation conducted by the applicants in the area, and the applicants have 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 companies have sufficient assets through company sources to undertake the proposed operation. I am satisfied the applicants have or have 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 companies has not been satisfactory. The applicants state there has been no show cause or conviction imposed in respect of mining operations. 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 applicant companies held the appropriate tenure at the time of marking out, and where necessary, consents have been given. I am satisfied that no other person is disadvantaged. 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] The current land is suitable for cattle grazing. While mining will disturb the grazing operations, the extraction of the resource is an alternative appropriate use of the land. Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent thereof? [13] The draft environmental authority was issued in November 2005. It requires the applicant to comply with the environmental conditions contained in the Code of Environmental Compliance for Mining Lease Projects. The draft authority was publicly advertised and no objections were lodged in relation to it. There is no evidence to suggest that the environmental impacts will not be adequately dealt with by compliance with the conditions of the Code. -- 3 of 4 -- Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? [14] 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 Natural Resources and Mines that the mining lease be granted to over the whole of the application area for the purposes and term sought by the applicant. -- 4 of 4 --