Equigold NL, Re [2001] QLRT 57

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Equigold NL [2001] QLRT 57 PARTIES: In the Matter of Application for Mining Lease No. 80095 by Equigold NL FILE NO: LXX40033/2001 PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease DELIVERED ON: 2 August 2001 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: Heard on the papers PRESIDING MEMBER: Koppenol P ORDER: 1. Tribunal constituted by President. (at [2]) 2. Hearing dispensed with. (at [3]) 3. I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines that Application for Mining Lease No. 80095, applied for by the Applicant to enable groundwater monitoring, stockpiling of topsoil and construction of sediment dams, be granted over the entire application area (817.8ha) to expire on 31 May 2013. (at [19]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE APPLICATION – RECOMMENDATION Environmental Protection Act 1994, ss. 211, 214, 228 Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss. 245, 252(1), 252A, 252C, 269(4), 270, 279 Land and Resources Tribunal Act 1999, ss. 39, 40 Practice Direction No. 1 of 2001 COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITORS: N/A -- 1 of 6 -- [1] KOPPENOL P: This is an Application by Equigold NL (the Applicant) under s. 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act) for a mining lease over an 817.8ha area of land approximately 13km south-west of Mount Perry to enable groundwater monitoring, stockpiling of topsoil and construction of sediment dams. The Application was lodged with the Mining Registrar for the Rockhampton mining district on 20 December 2000. No objection to the Application was lodged during the public objection period, which ended on 6 July 2001. Constitution of Tribunal [2] In its Additional Information and Statutory Declaration form (AISD form)1 which was lodged on 12 July 2001, the Applicant requested that a single Presiding Member of the Tribunal hear the matter. I am agreeable to that course and in accordance with ss. 39 and 40 of the Land and Resources Tribunal Act 1999, I direct that the Tribunal be constituted for this matter by me. Dispensing with hearing [3] The Applicant also requested in its AISD form that its Application be heard by the Tribunal on the papers and without an oral hearing. Under s. 270 of the Act, the Tribunal has a discretion to dispense with the hearing – if 4 specified criteria have been satisfied. Because (for reasons which will appear) I am satisfied that (a) the provisions of part 7 (Mining Leases) of the Act have been complied with, (b) no objection to the grant of this Application has been duly lodged, (c) the owner of the affected surface area (road) reserve land consents (albeit subject to certain conditions),2 and (d) the owner of the affected restricted land (surrounding a small dam) consents, I regard this an appropriate case to dispense with a hearing. I order accordingly. Section 269(4) criteria [4] In respect of the criteria specified in s. 269(4) of the Act (which are required to be taken account of and considered in a case such as this), I have relied upon the 1 See Tribunal Practice Direction No 1 of 2001 (issued 13 June 2001). 2 Relating to the construction of a new road and the maintenance of the alternative access. -- 2 of 6 -- material lodged by the Applicant with the Department of Natural Resources and Mines and provided by the Mining Registrar to this Tribunal, and also upon the AISD form and the Mining Registrar’s Report dated 13 and 20 July 2001. These reasons refer to the salient points, but not to all of the relevant evidence and other material, that I have taken into account in making my recommendation. Section 269(4)(a) - Have the provisions of the Act been complied with? [5] On 20 December 2000, the Mining Registrar issued a Certificate of Application. Pursuant to s. 252(1) of the Act, the Mining Registrar can only do so 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. [6] Pursuant to s. 252A, a Certificate of Public Notice was issued by the Mining Registrar on 22 May 2001.3 The Applicant has lodged statutory declarations certifying compliance with the statutory requirements for notifying the Application within the time required.4 I note that the underlying tenure is freehold, grazing homestead perpetual lease (GHPL) and road reserve and that the native title provisions of the Act are not applicable to this Application. Consents from the owners of the reserve and restricted land involved have been obtained. 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 to enable groundwater monitoring, stockpiling of topsoil and construction of sediment dams – in relation to the Applicant’s current gold mining lease (ML1259) at Mt Rawdon. The area concerned has been applied for to provide a buffer around the existing mining and processing operations, to allow environmental management and monitoring and for stockpiling topsoil. I am satisfied that the purposes for which the lease is sought are appropriate. 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? 3 This commenced the public notification period for both the Application for the mining lease and an associated Application for an environmental authority (mining lease) under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act) (s. 211). 4 The declarations were lodged under s. 252C of the Act and s. 214 of the EP Act. -- 3 of 6 -- [8] Because the lease is sought for the purposes set out above, this criterion does not relevantly apply. 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 Application said that the area and shape applied for was “to provide a sufficient area” for the various purposes (as above) for which the lease is sought. The shape of this area is rather like a capital “L” or “U” (with one short side) which abuts the current mining operation on 3 sides. Because of the nature of the current mining operations and of the purposes for which the new lease is sought, it is understandable that an area of the size and shape proposed would be required. There is no evidence to indicate that the size and shape is not appropriate. Section 269(4)(e) - Is the term sought appropriate? [10] The Applicant has sought a term in the order of 12 years, so that it would expire on 31 May 2013 – when the term for ML1259 expires. I am satisfied that the term which is presently sought is appropriate. 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 Applicant submitted a statement of financial and technical resources with its Application. I have perused that material and am satisfied as to the Applicant’s financial resources and ability to conduct the proposed operations. I am also satisfied that the Applicant has the requisite technical resources to conduct the proposed operations. Section 269(4)(g) – Has the past performance of the Applicant been satisfactory? [12] The Applicant is an existing and successful gold miner, both in Queensland and elsewhere (Western Australia and overseas). There was no material before me to suggest any unsatisfactory past performance by the Applicant. 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? -- 4 of 6 -- [13] The only relevant tenure is the Exploration Permit held by the Applicant. The underlying land tenure is freehold, GHPL and road reserve. No relevant disadvantage will therefore result. 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] The current land use is cattle grazing and fattening. Apart from mining-related activities, it is not capable of being used for any other purpose. Compensation agreements (pursuant to s. 279 of the Act) have already been made between the Applicant and the affected landholders. The area applied for is to be used in relation to the Applicant’s existing gold mining lease. I am satisfied that this criterion has been established. Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impact caused by the proposed mining operations, and if so, the extent thereof? [15] The Environmental Protection Agency issued a draft environmental authority in relation to this mining lease Application on 16 May 2001. This requires the Applicant to comply with the standard environmental conditions outlined in the Code of Environmental Compliance for Mining Lease Projects approved under the Environmental Protection Act 1994. The Code includes relevant conditions for dealing with land disturbance, rehabilitation and other issues. There was no objection to the draft environmental authority being issued and, pursuant to s. 228 of that Act, the environmental authority must be issued in substantially the same terms. I am satisfied that the standard conditions will adequately deal with the environmental impacts of this activity. Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? [16] There was no evidence before me that indicated that the public right and interest would be prejudiced. Although a public road is located on the Application area, this is to be closed, a new road constructed and alternative access maintained. No other public infrastructure is located on the Application area. 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 the mining lease? -- 5 of 6 -- [17] 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? [18] On the basis of the evidence and material considered in relation to criteria (i), (j), (k) and (l) 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 Minister for Mines that Application for Mining Lease No. 80095, applied for by the Applicant to enable groundwater monitoring, stockpiling of topsoil and construction of sediment dams, be granted over the entire application area (817.8ha), with the term to expire on 31 May 2013. -- 6 of 6 --