Burnett, Re [2002] QLRT 40

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Bruce Taylor Burnett, Graham Claude Burnett and Benjamin Thor Burnett [2002] QLRT 40 PARTIES: In the Matter of Mining Lease No. 80100 - Application by Bruce Taylor Burnett, Graham Claude Burnett and Benjamin Thor Burnett for Mining Lease FILE NO: AML00035/2002 PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease DELIVERED ON: 11 July 2002 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: Heard on the papers PRESIDING MEMBER: Kingham DP ORDER/S: 1. Hearing dispensed with. (at [4]) 2. I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines that the mining lease be granted over the entire area sought for the purpose and the term sought by the Applicants. (at [19]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – RECOMMENDATION Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss.245, 248, 252, 252A, 252C, 269(4), 270 Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), ss. 19, 21, 232B, 249C, Schedule 1 Native Title (Queensland) Act 1993, s. 18A COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITORS: N/A [1] KINGHAM DP: This is an application by Bruce Taylor Burnett, Graham Claude Burnett and Benjamin Thor Burnett under s. 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act) for a mining lease over a 17.9953ha parcel of land approximately 7 kilometres south west of Mount Morgan for the purpose of mining silver ore, gold, -- 1 of 6 -- copper ore and platinum. The Application was lodged with the Mining Registrar for the Rockhampton mining district on 28 March 2002. [2] The underlying land tenure appears to be a grazing homestead perpetual lease created on 21 October 1995.1 On the assumption that the information in the tenure search is correct: the grant of the lease is an intermediate period act;2 the lease is a scheduled interest under the Native Title Act 1993;3 and the grant was validated by the Native Title (Queensland) Act 1993.4 [3] The Applicants lodged a Statutory Declaration in accordance with Practice Direction 1 of 2001 and the Mining Registrar has provided his report on this Application. I requested further information from the Applicants which was provided by letter dated 1 July 2002. Request to dispense with a hearing - Section 270: [4] I may dispense with a hearing if satisfied as to matters specified in s. 270(1). For reasons that follow at paragraph [6], I am satisfied that the provisions of part 7 of the Act have been complied with in respect of the Application. No objections to the Application were lodged during the public objection period, which ended on 6 June 2000. It appears there is no reserve land or restricted 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: [5] In taking account of and considering the criteria specified in s. 269(4), I have relied upon the material lodged by the Applicants with the Department of Natural Resources and Mines and provided by the Mining Registrar to this Tribunal; the Statutory Declaration of Bruce Burnett dated 7 June 2001; the letter from the 1 State tenure search dated 28 March 2002. 2 Section 21, s. 232B. 3 Section 249C and Schedule 1 Native Title Act 1993. 4 Section 8A Native Title (Queensland) Act 1993 & s. 19 Native Title Act 1993. -- 2 of 6 -- Applicants dated 1 July 2002 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? [6] On 4 April 2002, the Mining Registrar issued a Certificate of Application, 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.5 The Certificate of Public Notice was issued on 9 April 2002.6 The Applicants lodged a Declaration of Posting and Advertising that certified compliance with the requirements for serving and advertising the Application within the statutory time.7 The Application relates to an area that, at the time the Application was made, was covered by Exploration Permit 9382 held by Newcrest Operations Limited. That company consented to the Application.8 The Mining Registrar has advised that the company has since surrendered the Exploration Permit. Section 269(4)(b) - Is the land applied for mineralised or are the other purposes for which the lease is sought appropriate? [7] The Application seeks the grant of a mining lease for the purpose of mining silver ore, gold, copper ore and platinum. The area applied for is within the Mt Victoria Gold Mine, which was mined at the turn of last century. The Applicants have prospected the area over several years and produced the results of sampling conducted in 1995/96. I am satisfied that the area is mineralised with the minerals for which the lease is sought. 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? [8] Two of the Applicants hold the underlying land tenure. They propose to excavate gold bearing conglomerate wash from a ridge on the lease and to process it through a crusher, grinder and gravitational wash plant, all of which is already located on the land and is owned by the Applicants. A bore is being fitted out to provide water for 5 Section 252(1). 6 Section 252A. 7 Section 252C. 8 Section 248 – letter from Newcrest Operations Limited to the Applicants dated 31 January 2002. -- 3 of 6 -- the operation. The Applicants estimate it will take 6 months to establish the infrastructure to enable mining to proceed. There is no evidence to suggest that there will not be an acceptable level of development and 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? [9] The Applicants determined the boundaries of the lease by reference to the area of mineralisation. There is no evidence before me to indicate that the size and shape is not appropriate. Section 269(4)(e) - Is the term sought appropriate? [10] The Applicants have sought a term of 20 years. It appears this term is required to allow exploitation of the resource. There is no evidence to suggest that the term is not appropriate for the operation proposed. Section 269(4)(f) – Has the Applicant the necessary financial and technical capabilities to carry on mining operations under the proposed mining lease? [11] The Applicants submitted a Statement of Financial and Technical Resources with the Application and supplemented that by letter dated 1 July 2002. The Applicants own, unencumbered, the plant and equipment necessary for this operation and have sufficient cashflow to sustain the operation. The Applicants will work the lease and anticipate employing another 2 people once the plant is operational. Contract labour will be used where necessary. Bruce Burnett has 30 years experience in gold mining, including the construction of a gold mining plant in partnership with JH & AW Grieve in Great Boulder Gold and later in the Crocodile Creek Gold Mining Syndicate. Graham Burnett has prospected the area applied for. Benjamin Burnett is a qualified electrician who will oversee the erection and installation of the washplant and electrical wiring and motors. I am satisfied the Applicants have the necessary financial and technical capabilities to carry on the proposed operations. Section 269(4)(g) – Has the past performance of the Applicant been satisfactory? [12] One of the Applicants has had some 30 years mining experience. He has sworn that no enforcement action has been taken against him or the other Applicants. The Mining Registrar has confirmed that he is unaware of any such action against the -- 4 of 6 -- Applicants. There is no evidence before me to suggest unsatisfactory past performance by the Applicants. 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? [13] The holder of an exploration permit affected by the Application has consented to the Application being made and has since surrendered the permit. Section 269(4)(i) – Do the operations to be carried on under the authority of the mining lease conform with sound land use management? [14] There is limited vegetation on the area and the Applicants assert that there will be limited impact on the land’s grazing potential. It is clear that the area has been previously mined. There is no evidence before me to suggest that the 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. [15] The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assessed the associated application for an environmental authority as a standard application and issued a draft environmental authority that requires the Applicants to comply with the standard environmental conditions in the Code of Environmental Compliance for Mining Lease Projects dated January 2001. I note that no contaminants will be used to extract the ore. I am satisfied that compliance with the standard environmental conditions will minimise the environmental impacts of this operation. Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? [16] There is no relevant public infrastructure on the lease. There were no objections to the Application. There is no evidence before me that indicates the public right and interest would be prejudiced by the grant of the mining lease. Section 269(4)(l) – Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant mining lease? [17] There is no evidence before me that indicated any good reason why this Application should be refused. -- 5 of 6 -- Section 269(4)(m) – Is the proposed mining operation an appropriate land use taking into consideration the current and prospective uses of the land? [18] 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: [19] 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 Minister for Mines that the mining lease be granted over the entire area sought for the purpose and the term sought by the Applicants. -- 6 of 6 --