Dempster & Cuddy, Re [2003] QLRT 143

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Dempster & Cuddy [2003] QLRT 143 PARTIES: In the Matter of Mining Lease No. 95396 – Application by Ian Gilbert Dempster & Sidney Douglas Cuddy for Mining Lease FILE NO: AML00135/2003 PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease DELIVERED ON: 13 November 2003 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: Heard on the papers PRESIDING MEMBER: Kingham DP ORDER/S: 1. Hearing dispensed with. (at [2]) 2. Recommendation made that the Mining Lease is granted over the entire application area, for the purpose and for the term sought by the Applicants. (at [17]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – RECOMMENDATION Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss 245, 252, 252A, 252C, 269(4), 270(1), 650 COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITOR/S: N/A AGENT/S: N/A [1] KINGHAM DP: This is an application by Ian Gilbert Dempster & Sidney Douglas Cuddy under s. 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act) for a mining lease over a 8.7415ha area of land at Tyson Valley, 10km northeast of Mailmans Hole in the Winton Shire for the purpose of mining opal. The Application was lodged with the Mining Registrar for the Winton mining district on 23 July 2003. No objection to the Application was lodged during the public objection period, which ended on 7 October 2003. The underlying tenure is a pastoral holding. As the application was lodged after 31 March 2003, Part 17 Division 4 of the Act (native title provisions for mining leases) does not apply (s. 650(1)). I note that the area applied for is covered by an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) registered under the Native Title Act -- 1 of 4 -- 1993(Cth) and that the Applicants have executed a Deed as Grantee Parties to the ILUA. 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. It appears there is no restricted or reserve land in the area applied for. I am satisfied that the preconditions to exercising my discretion to dispense with a 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 enable 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 by Mr Dempster on behalf of the Applicants on 23 October 2003. 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] On 8 September 2003, the Mining Registrar re-issued a Certificate of Public Notice.1 The Applicant 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 23 July 2003, which he can only do if satisfied that the Applicant is eligible to apply for the mining lease and has complied with the requirements of the Act with respect to the Application.3 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 opal. The area applied for is in the vicinity of a number of other mining leases. The Applicants have explored the area and have applied for a number of other leases in the immediate vicinity of this lease. I am satisfied that the area is generally mineralised. 1 Section 252A. 2 The Mining Registrar extended time for lodgement of the declaration pursuant to Section 252C(1)(b). 3 Section 252(1). -- 2 of 4 -- 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 Applicants propose to mine the area using conventional open cut methods. They each have approximately 10 years mining experience. They have applied for a number of other mining leases which they propose to conduct as a 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 area of potential mineralisation. The Applicants have sought a mining lease over the entire surface area applied for. 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 10 years. This term is consistent with the requirements of the ILUA. There is no evidence to suggest that a 10 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 Applicants have sufficient assets, including some of the mining equipment required, to undertake the proposed operation. Both Applicants have prior experience as opal lease holders in the Winton mining district. They currently hold a number of opal mining leases in the district. I am satisfied the Applicants 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 the past performance of the Applicants 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 of 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? [12] The current land use is low intensity cattle grazing. The landholders did not object to the mining lease. -- 3 of 4 -- Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent thereof? [13] The draft environmental authority was issued on 14 August 2003. It requires the Applicant to comply with the standard 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. Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? [14] There is no public infrastructure on the area applied for. There was no evidence before me that indicated the public right and interest would be prejudiced. It is significant that there was no objection to this Application. 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. 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 the Minister for Mines that the Mining Lease is granted over the entire application area, for the purpose and for the term sought by the Applicants. -- 4 of 4 --