AMCI (CQ) Pty Ltd & Anor, Re [2005] QLRT 129

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re AMCI (CQ) Pty Ltd & Anor [2005] QLRT 129 PARTIES: Re Application for Mining Lease No. 70340 by AMCI (CQ) Pty Ltd and Nebo Central Coal Pty Ltd FILE NO/S: AML152/05 PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease DELIVERED ON: 30 September 2005 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: Heard on the papers MEMBER: Koppenol P ORDER/S: Recommendation made that Application for Mining Lease No. 70340 applied for by the Applicants be granted for the purpose, area and term applied for. (at [19]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE APPLICATION – RECOMMENDATION Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss 245, 252(1), 269(4) Environmental Protection Act 1994 COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITORS: N/A Application [1] This is an application by AMCI (CQ) Pty Ltd (75%) and Nebo Central Coal Pty Ltd (25%) (the applicants) under section 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act) for a mining lease over a 1,754ha area of land situated 20km west of Coppabella for the mining of coal. The application was lodged with the mining registrar for the Emerald mining district on 2 February 2005. No objections to the application were lodged during the public objection period which ended on 13 September 2005. -- 1 of 5 -- Hearing on the papers [2] The applicants requested that this application be heard by the Tribunal on the papers and without an oral hearing. That procedure is appropriate in the present case. Tribunal’s statutory function [3] In cases such as this, the Tribunal’s statutory function under section 269 of the Act is to take into account and consider a number of prescribed factors and then to make a recommendation to the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines about whether the application should be granted or rejected. In doing so, I have considered all of the material that was provided to the Tribunal by the applicants and the mining registrar. However these reasons only refer to such of the evidence as is relevant or necessary for my decision. Section 269(4) recommendation [4] Section 269(4) provides as follows: “269 Tribunal’s recommendation on hearing … (4) The tribunal, when making a recommendation to the Minister that an application for a mining lease be granted in whole or in part, shall take into account and consider whether— (a) the provisions of this Act have been complied with; and (b) the area of land applied for is mineralised or the other purposes for which the lease is sought are appropriate; and (c) if the land applied for is mineralised there will be an acceptable level of development and utilisation of the mineral resources within the area applied for; and (d) the land and the surface area of the land in respect of which the mining lease is sought is of an appropriate size and shape in relation to— (i) the matters mentioned in paragraphs (b) and (c); and (ii) the type and location of the activities proposed to be carried out under the lease and their likely impact on the surface of the land; and (e) the term sought is appropriate; and (f) the applicant has the necessary financial and technical capabilities to carry on mining operations under the proposed mining lease; and (g) the past performance of the applicant has been satisfactory; and (h) any disadvantage may result to the rights of— (i) holders of existing exploration permits or mineral development licences; or (ii) existing applicants for exploration permits or mineral development licences; and (i) the operations to be carried on under the authority of the proposed mining lease will conform with sound land use management; and (j) there will be any adverse environmental impact caused by those operations and, if so, the extent thereof; and (k) the public right and interest will be prejudiced; and (l) any good reason has been shown for a refusal to grant the mining lease; and (m) taking into consideration the current and prospective uses of that land, the proposed mining operation is an appropriate land use. … .” [5] I will deal in turn with the factors set out in section 269(4). [6] Section 269(4)(a): On 16 August 2005, the mining registrar issued a certificate of application. Pursuant to section 252(1) of the Act, the mining registrar can only do -- 2 of 5 -- so 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. The applicants have lodged with the mining registrar statutory declarations certifying compliance with the statutory requirements for notifying the application. I note the land the subject of this application comprises freehold land, a statutory grazing homestead perpetual lease and a dedicated road, and that the native title provisions of the Act do not therefore apply. The mining registrar has certified that the owners of the affected restricted land (shed, yards and dams) and reserve land (a highway) have consented to the grant of this application. I am satisfied that the provisions of the Act have been complied with. [7] Section 269(4)(b): The applicants said that they knew that the proposed mining lease area was mineralised because drilling and other exploration activities carried out on the area have indicated that the area is mineralised. I am satisfied that the area is mineralised. [8] Section 269(4)(c): The coal will be mined by underground mining techniques. This mining lease (Annandale, ML 70340) comprise a coal preparation plant, rail loop and associated infrastructure. It also contains deep (greater than 350m) underground coal resources that are intended to be accessed from the Carborough Downs mining lease (MLA 70339). Carborough Downs is directly south of Annandale and adjoins it. Both mining leases are owned by the same joint venture. Initial underground mining on Annandale is expected to commence in March 2007. This will be as part of the investigatory development program for Stage 1 of the Carborough Downs project— which involves continuous miner operations developing 2 panels from nearer the subcrop on Carborough Downs to the deeper coal measures on Annandale. Once these panels have been developed and the mining conditions assessed, a decision will be made for the longer term production methods for the underground mine. The mine may continue as a continuous miner operation, or further capital may be injected to install a longwall mining or higher capacity mining system. Following approximately 6 months of the initial investigatory development underground at Annandale, mining will not recommence again for several years. The shallower more accessible underground coal on Carborough Downs will be extracted in preference to the underground coal on Annandale. Annandale is located between Carborough Downs and the Broadlea North area which includes Broadlea MLA 70338. The principal use for the land at Annandale is to construct a coal preparation plant to centrally process the coal from the 2 project areas and also construction of a rail loop and load-out facility to load and rail the coal via the established rail infrastructure network. The coal will be trucked from Carborough Downs in the south and Broadlea in the north to Annandale for processing. As such, the Annandale ML will also contain haul roads and facilities for the haulage contractor. Sediment dams and some diversion ponds will be constructed to ensure any runoff from stockpiles are contained on site. A raw water dam will also be constructed to provide a storage area for water taken from the Sunwater pipeline. The coal preparation plant is expected to be commissioned in February 2006 and the rail loop and load-out would be available to transport product coal in March 2006. Carborough Downs and Broadlea are expected to commence coal mining in January 2006. This allows for coal delivery and build up of ROM stockpiles at Annandale in time for the coal preparation plant commissioning. I am satisfied that there will be -- 3 of 5 -- an acceptable level of development and utilisation of the mineral resources within the area applied for. [9] Section 269(4)(d): The application said that the area and shape applied for was in order to economically fully recover the coal reserves (194 million tonnes, including coal within the adjacent ML 70339), meet environmental obligations and to construct a rail loop. There is no evidence to indicate that the size and shape is not appropriate. [10] Section 269(4)(e): A term of 30 years is sought. That term was nominated to fully exploit the coal reserves and complete mining rehabilitation. I am satisfied that the term sought is appropriate. [11] Section 269(4)(f): The applicants are subsidiaries of AMCI Holdings Australia Pty Ltd. Other subsidiary companies own the Glennies Creek underground coal mine in the Hunter Valley, New South Wales and formerly owned the Coppabella and Moorvale Mines in Queensland. The applicants’ directors have extensive experience in coal mining. Supporting material provided with the application indicates that the applicants have the requisite financial and technical capabilities. [12] Section 269(4)(g): The applicants and their directors have never had any notices to rectify non-compliance or damage, notices to show cause, tenures cancelled, penalties imposed or convictions under the Act. [13] Section 269(4)(h): The evidence indicates that there are no such underlying tenures which are not held by the applicants. [14] Section 269(4)(i): The current land use is for agricultural purposes, primarily the grazing of cattle. It is apparently otherwise capable of being used for coal mining purposes only. The mining activities will be carried out in accordance with the draft environmental authority issued under the Environmental Protection Act 1994. After mining, the land will be appropriately rehabilitated. I am satisfied that the proposed mining operations conform with sound land use management. [15] Section 269(4)(j): The mining activities will be carried out in accordance with the draft environmental authority (mining activities) issued by the Environmental Protection Agency. The applicants must comply with the various environmental conditions set out in that document. There were no objections to the issue of that authority. I am not satisfied that there will be such an environmental impact caused by the proposed mining operations as to warrant an unfavourable recommendation in the present application. [16] Section 269(4)(k): There was no evidence before me that indicated that the public right and interest would be prejudiced. A highway traverses the southern boundary of the mining lease area and the owner of the highway has consented to the inclusion of the surface area of the highway in ML 70340, subject to certain conditions. Power lines and water pipelines traverse the mining leases area from west to east but the applicants’ mining plans do not involve any disturbance to them. -- 4 of 5 -- [17] Section 269(4)(l): There was no evidence before me that indicated any good reason why this application should be refused. [18] Section 269(4)(m): On the basis of the evidence and other material referred to above, I consider that the proposed activity is an appropriate land use. Recommendation [19] Taking into account all of the evidence and other material before me and in particular that referred to above, I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines that Application for Mining Lease No. 70340, applied for by the applicants, be granted for the purpose, area and term applied for. -- 5 of 5 --