Dooley, Re [2000] QMW 38

IN THE MATTER OF: BEFORE: APPLICANT: REPORT: APPLICATION UNDERPART 7 OF THE MINERAL RESOURCES ACT 1989 FOR A MINING LEASE (NUMBER 70221) IN THE E1vfERALD DISTRICT MR F W WINDRIDGE MINING WARDEN CREMORNE ISLAND ENTERPRISES PTY LTD The applicant (hereinafter referred to as the miner or applicant miner) seeks a rnjning lease under the provisions section 234(1) of part 7 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the MRA or the Act) for the purpose of mining for MALACHITE, CHALCOPYRITE, AZURJTE, SlLVER ORE, GOLD, ZINC ORE, PLATINUM, GRAPIDTE, and for the establishment of TREATMENT PLANT, LIVING QUARTERS and TAJLINGS DAM. The application is for surface area of 32.25 hectares and is situated on LOT 12 on PLAN WH5529 on PH 30/5310, County of WODEHOUSE, Parish of HYNE and locat ed about 35 kilometres south east of Glenden in Central Queensland. Access is through the same property. The lease, if granted, is to be known as 'WIDTL EY SKYE". Power to grant such a lease is vested in the Governor-in-Council pursuant to section 234 of the Act after recommendati on by the Minister. Except for the reservation in section 70221MLA.EME 1 [2000] QMW 38 -- 1 of 6 -- - ---- - - -------------------~---- Warden' s Court of Queensland 28 February 2000 A declaration of posting was lodged on 14 FEBRUARY 2000 (s.252 (9)), and service of documents was in accordance with s.399. I am satisfied, on the material, including the uncontested information in the application form and the declaration of posting and advertising that all the provisions of the act (other than the provisions requiring the hearing) have been complied with or substantially complied with. (s.392). I find that I am satisfied that, (a) the provisions of the act have been complied with, (b) there is no valid objection, and (c) the consent of any trustee or other person is not required. I therefore dispense with the hearing and proceed under the provisions of s.270 (1) of the act. (b) Is the land mineralised or is the other purpose for which the lease is sought appropriate? I am satisfied that the resources sought are minerals (s.5), and that the proposed infrastructure is necessary to assist in the winning of those minerals (s.234 (1)). I accept the applicant's advice and I am satisfied on the information given that the purpose for which the lease is sought is appropriate. The application area has been prospected with air photos, ground reconnaissance and assays of samples. This has identified the ore bearing reefs. The applicant is required to satisfy the Court that mineralisation exists. The economic viability of the project is a matter for the applicant's commercial assessment, but I am satisfied that there is sufficient evidence of mineralisation to warrant the grant of a lease. (c) Will there be an acceptable level of development and utilisation of the resources within the area applied for? From documentation lodged with the application, I am satisfied the applicant has sufficient resources to progress development to an acceptable level. 70221:MLA.EME 3 -- 2 of 6 -- Warden's Court of Queensland 28 February 2000 (d) Is th e area sought an appropriate size and shape? There is nothing in the infonnation supplied by the applicant to suggest that the surface area of the land over which the mining lease is sought is not an appropriate size and shape. (e) Is the term sought appropriate? The tenn of lease applied for is 21 years. I am satisfied that the term sought is appropriate and will allow for mining and rehabilitation to be completed. The applicant has the option of renewal under s.286 or surrender at an earlier date under s.309. (1) Has the applicant the necessary fmancial and technical capabilities to carry on mining operations under the proposed mining lease? From the information supplied, I am satisfied the applicant has the necessary fmancial and technical capabilities or access to those resources to carry out the mining operation. The ore will be extracted using shallow open cuts and the operation does not require extensive plant, processing equipment, or large injections of capital. The applicant has been engaged in mining for a number of years and in my opinion has the experience necessary to complete the mining operation. fCarr - v- Sirnnovec (1980) 26 SASR 263 at 268, and Pacminex-v- Aust. Nephrite Jade Mines (1974) 7 SASR 401 at 415]. (g) Has the past performance of the applicant been satisfactory? There is no material before me to suggest that the past performance of the applicant has been unsatisfactory. The local Field Officer and Environmental Officer will be available to monitor performance and rehabilitation and report any breach of conditions. The Inspectorate should monitor the methods adopted for mining, ensuring that industry standards are maintained and that all machinery is operated in a safe and competent manner by licensed persons. 70221MLA.EME 4 -- 3 of 6 -- Warden's Court of Queensland 28 Febnmy 2000 will not be a problem provided the usual control measures are put in place. There are no other environmental factors of significance, which may be adversely affected by the operation, that have not been addressed in the EMOS. By Section 35 of the Mineral Resources Regulations 1990, the applicant is required to maintain the lease and access free of parthenium weed and any other weed declared under the Rural Lands Protection Act 1985. (k) Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? No factors prejudicial to the public right and interest have been identified. It appears there are no endangered flora or fauna within the application area. There are no public utilities on or across the application area. There are no sites of historical interest or aboriginal significance within the area. If any such sites are identified, the EMOS can be amended to put fo1ward specific site protection or site avoidance strategies. (I) Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant the mining lease? The economic viability of this project is a commercial decision of the applicant. When all other aspects of the application and the matters referred to in s.269 are taken into account, I am satisfied that the objects of s.2(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (g) will be attained if a mining lease is granted for the term recommended for the following reasons: ♦ A small scale/low impact operation is planned. ♦ It is unlikely that the land applied for is of any interest to a large scale miner. ♦ The location of the proposed mining operation and the proposed method of mining is unlikely to cause environmental or public interest concerns about safety. ♦ A realistic security deposit will be imposed to guard against financial failure of the miner to ensure rehabilitation is completed. ♦ The applicant appears to have sufficient experience in the industry to accurately assess the potential of the project. ♦ There is a market for the product and the project will provide employment. 70221MLA.EME 6 -- 4 of 6 -- - - -- ----- --------- Warden's Court of Queensland 28 February 2000 In my view, no good reason has been shown for a refusal to grant the lease application (Carr-v- Sirnnovec, Pacminex -v- Aust Neplrrite Jade Mines supra). (m) Is the proposed mining lease ope ration an appropriate land use, taking into consideration the current and prospective uses of the land? The material indicates that the land is currently used for grazing purposes and appears, on the evidence, to be suitable for no other use. In my view, there appears to be no risk of significant conflict between the current land use, or any prospective land use and the proposed mining operation. The land appears to be Class Vil, and post mining will return. to Class VII. The proposed mining operation appears, on the evidence, an appropriate land use, taking into account the current and prospective uses of the land. GENERAL COMMENTS This recommendation is based on an assessment of the information supplied. Should there be any dispute over dam.age or loss, or should the miner depart from his plan of operations or EMOS and cause loss or damage or interruption to the management of the property not envisaged or not foreseen in the terms of the compensation agreement, the parties are at liberty to apply to the Court for a determination or award of damages, and if necessary, injunctive relief under the powers contained in s.363 (6). Infrastructure erected on this lease will be removed at the completion of mining and rehabilitation. 70221MLA.EME 7 -- 5 of 6 -- Warden's Court of Queensland 28 February 2000 RECOMMENDATION: Upon consideration of all the matters set forth in s.269 (4) of the Mineral Resources Act 1989, I recommend that the mining lease be granted over the whole of the application area for the purpose of mining for MALACHITE, CHALCOPYRITE, AZURITE, SILVER ORE, GOLD, ZINC ORE, PLATINUM, GRAPIDTE, and for the establishment of infrastructure namely TREATMENT PLANT, LIVING QUARTERS and TAILINGS DAM for a term of TWENTY-ONE YEARS (s.270 (2)), subject to compensation being settled between the parties or determined by this Court. ay of February 2000. ©2000 70221MIA.EME 8 -- 6 of 6 --