Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd & Ors, Re [2004] QLRT 149

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd & Ors [2004] QLRT 149 PARTIES: In the matter of Mining Lease No 1831 -Application by Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd, Mitsui German Creek Investment Pty Ltd and Jena Pty Limited for additional surface area to be included in the mining lease FILE NO: AML135/2004 PROCEEDING: Application for Additional Surface Area DELIVERED ON: 7 December 2004 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: Heard on the Papers PRESIDING MEMBER: Kingham DP ORDER: 1. Hearing dispensed with. (at [2]) 2. Recommendation made that Additional Surface Area No. 7 is included in Mining Lease 1831. (at [17]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – ADDITIONAL SURFACE AREA – RECOMMENDATION Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss 252, 252A, 252C, 269, 270, 275 COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITOR/S: N/A AGENT/S: N/A [1] KINGHAM DP: This is an application by Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd, Mitsui German Creek Investment Pty Ltd and Jena Pty Limited under s.275 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act) for an additional surface area known as ASA 7 to be included in ML 1831. ASA 7 is a 1,416ha area of land at German Creek Mine via Middlemount Central Queensland in the Peak Downs and Broadsound Shires. The Application seeks its inclusion in the mining lease for the purpose of mining coal and gaseous hydrocarbons. The Application was lodged with the Mining Registrar for the Emerald mining district on 14 January 2004. No objection to the -- 1 of 5 -- Application was lodged during the public objection period, which ended on 23 July 2004. One of the underlying land tenures is an estate in fee simple held by Anglo Coal (Capcoal Management) Pty Ltd. That company, like the Applicant, is a member of the Anglo American plc group of companies. The other underlying land tenures are two road reserves owned by each of the two Shire Councils in whose shires the area applied for is located. [2] The Applicants have requested the Application be considered without an oral hearing. 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. I note that there were no objections to this Application. There is restricted land in the area applied for. The owner of that land has consented to the inclusion of the surface area applied for. Parts of two road reserves are included in the area applied for. The owners of those reserves have also consented to the inclusion of the surface area. I am, therefore, satisfied that the preconditions to my exercising the discretion to dispense with a hearing have been fulfilled. The material supplied by the Applicants 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 enable me to properly consider this matter. Accordingly, I order that a hearing of this Application be dispensed with. [3] In taking account of and considering the criteria specified in s. 269(4), I have relied upon the Additional Information and Statutory Declaration of John Laurence Merritt, the Senior Environmental Advisor of the German Creek mine sworn on behalf of the Applicants on 30 July 2004. I have also relied upon the other material lodged by the Applicants 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] On 9 June 2004, the Mining Registrar issued a Certificate of Public Notice.1 The Applicants lodged a Declaration of Compliance with the requirements for notifying the Application, within the time required.2 The Mining Registrar issued a Certificate of Application on 14 January 2004, which he can only do 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.3 There is no evidence to suggest that the provisions of the Act have not been complied with. 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 for coal and gaseous hydrocarbons. The German Creek mine currently comprises four operating mines: Oak Park, an open cut dragline strip mine; and Central Colliery, Southern Colliery and Grasstree Mine, which are all underground mines. These four 1 Section 252A. 2 The Mining Registrar extended time for lodgement pursuant to Section 252C(1)(b). 3 Section 252(1). -- 2 of 5 -- mines operate across five mining leases: MLs 1831, 1998, 70047, 70311 and 1894. Major infrastructure is located on ML 1831. The issue of mineralisation of ML 1831 was addressed in the initial application for the lease. Mineralisation of the area applied for has been confirmed by the Applicants’ ongoing exploration program. Underground mining operations are progressively advancing downdip of the current underground operation at Grasstree Mine as shallow coal reserves are exhausted. The additional surface area covers an area downdip of Grasstree Mine overlying future longwall mining blocks. 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 German Creek mine commenced production in late 1981. Total production for 2003 calendar year was 5.4 Mt of product and is scheduled to be 6 Mt in 2004. ASA 7 has been applied for so the Grasstree Mine can advance. There is no evidence to suggest there would not be an acceptable level of utilisation of the mineral resources in 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 surface area applied for is determined by the existing mining lease and surface area boundaries. It overlies longwall mining blocks the Applicants wish to mine. There is no evidence to indicate that the size and shape is not appropriate. Section 269(4)(e) – Is the term sought appropriate? [8] When ASA No. 7 is included in ML 1831, the term of that lease will also apply to ASA 7. Section 269(4)(f) – Has the Applicants the necessary financial and technical capabilities to carry on mining operations under the proposed mining lease? [9] The Applicants have demonstrated their financial and technical capabilities in the development and operation of the German Creek mine. The principal applicant, Anglo Coal (German Creek) Pty Ltd, is a member of a group of companies with substantial mining interests in Queensland and internationally. The Anglo Coal Australia Group received an unqualified report in its most recent independent audit (2002). Mitsui Coal Holdings Pty Limited has also produced a statement of its financial position which demonstrates its substantial financial resources. The Applicants are able to draw upon the financial and technical resources of a long term, substantial and successful mining group. Section 269(4)(g) – Has the past performance of the Applicants been satisfactory? [10] There is no evidence to suggest the past performance of the Applicants has not been satisfactory. -- 3 of 5 -- 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 holders of or Applicants for exploration tenures that 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? [12] The land is currently used for grazing cattle. A related company to the principal Applicant owns the underlying freehold land tenure. Agreements have been entered into with the owner of the two road reserves. Those agreements include arrangements for notification of operations that would affect the use of the roads and provide for the repair of any damage caused to them. I also take into account the matters referred to in paragraph [13] about the environmental impacts of the activities. Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent thereof: [13] A draft environmental authority was issued on 7 June 2004, which limits vegetation clearance to that which is necessary to ameliorate subsidence cracks. It also requires habitat trees to be identified and to be protected from damage or clearing where practicable. The draft environmental authority was publicly advertised and there was no objection to its grant or to its terms. There is no evidence to suggest that the environmental impacts will not be appropriately dealt with by compliance with the conditions of the environmental authority. Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? [14] Other than the road reserves referred to above, there is no public infrastructure on the area applied for. I am satisfied that the compensation agreements with the owners of the road reserves are appropriate for protecting the public interest in that infrastructure. It is significant that there was no objection to this Application. There is no other evidence before me that indicated the public right and interest would be prejudiced. Section 269(4)(l) – Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant mining lease? [15] 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? [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. -- 4 of 5 -- Recommendation [17] Taking into account all the evidence before me and, in particular, the evidence referred to above, I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines that Additional Surface Area No. 7 is included in Mining Lease No. 1831. -- 5 of 5 --