Burza, Re [1993] QMW 37
1
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF WARDEN PURSUANT
TO SECTION 7.26 AND 7.27 OF THE MINERAL
RESOURCES ACT, 1989.
IN THE MATTER OF:APPLICATION FOR MINING LEASE NUMBER
95066 IN THE WINTON MINING DISTRICT.
BEFORE: FRANCIS WILLIAM WINDRIDGE, WARDEN.
APPLICANT: PAUL FRANCIS ROBERT BURZA.
REPORT:
This Application for a mining lease under
section 7.1 of Part 7 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the act)
for the purpose of mining for opal is for an area of 6.25 hectares
situated on LOT 278 ON O.L. 363, County of ROSEBROOK, Parish of
PATTISON.
Power to grant such a lease is vested in the Governor in Council
pursuant to Section 7.3 of the act after recommendation by the
Minister pursuant to section 7.28(1)(a) of the act.
The Application was lodged at the Mining Registrars Office at
WINTON on 11 DECEMBER 1992 and a certificate of application was
issued on 11 FEBRUARY 1993, (7.18(1)(a) setting the last date for
receipt of objections as 11 MARCH 1993. (Section 7.18(1)(b).
No objections were lodged pursuant to section 7.20 of the act.
[1993] QMW 37
-- 1 of 10 --
2
The following matters have been taken into account and considered
in making my recommendations pursuant to Section 7.26(3).
(A)HAVE THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT BEEN COMPLIED WITH?
The material indicates that the Applicant is an eligible person as
defined in Section 1.8 of the Act, and is thus entitled to make the
application under Section 7.2 of the Act.
I accept, on the material before me, that the land applied for is
not within a reserve as defined in the act; that there is no building
of the kind mentioned in section 7.6(2)(a)(i) and (ii) on the land,
and that there is no feature of the kind mentioned in section
7.6(2)(b) on the land or within 50 metres laterally of the land. I
find that the Application is therefore not in respect of land over
which, pursuant to Section 7(6) of the act, a mining lease shall not
be granted without the consent of another person or persons.
At the time of marking out and lodging the application, the applicant
was the holder of EXPLORATION PERMIT 8490 (S.7.1).
A declaration of posting was lodged on the 23 MARCH 1993 (S.7.18(5).
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
-- 2 of 10 --
3
substantially complied with. (S.11.6).
Service of documents was in accordance with Section 11.14.
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 under the provisions of
section 7.27 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 resource sought is a mineral as defined in
Section 1.8 of the act.
I accept the Applicants advice and I am satisfied on the detailed
information given by them that the purpose for which the lease is
sought is appropriate. The application area is within an area
generally recognised as opal bearing. The applicant is only required
to satisfy the Court that mineralisation exists. The economic
viability of the project is a matter for the applicants commercial
assessment, and not a consideration for this Court.
(C)WILL THERE BE AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT AND UTILISATION
-- 3 of 10 --
4
OF THE RESOURCES WITHIN THE AREA APPLIED FOR?
From documentation lodged with the application, I am satisfied the
applicant has sufficient resources to develop the land to an
acceptable level. The applicant indicates that funds raised from his
occupation as a medical practitioner will be available for the
project.
(D)IS THE AREA SOUGHT AN APPROPRIATE SIZE AND SHAPE?
There is nothing in the information supplied by the Applicant to
suggest that the surface area of the land in respect of which the
mining lease is sought is not an appropriate size and shape.
(E)IS THE TERM SOUGHT APPROPRIATE?
The term of lease applied for is FIVE 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 Section 7.43 of the Act, or surrender at an earlier
date under Section 7.64 .
(F)HAS THE APPLICANT THE NECESSARY FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL
CAPABILITIES TO CARRY ON MINING OPERATIONS UNDER THE PROPOSED
MINING LEASE?
-- 4 of 10 --
5
From the information supplied, I am satisfied the applicant has the
necessary financial and technical capabilities or access to those
resources to carry out the mining operation. Mining for opal is
basically an extractive industry utilising shallow open cuts and
does not require complicated plant, processing equipment, or large
injections of capital. The applicant has mined opal for a number
of years and has interests in sapphire leases. In my opinion he has
the experience necessary to complete the mining operation, and has
appointed an agent on the field with experience in opal mining to
assist in the project. (Carr V Simnovec (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.
(H)WILL THE OPERATIONS TO BE CARRIED ON UNDER THE PROPOSED LEASE
CONFORM WITH SOUND LAND USE MANAGEMENT?
The land appears to be used for low intensity grazing under
favourable conditions, and it seems the proposed mining operation
will cause no significant disturbance to stock or stock watering or
management facilities. The general nature of the land is rocky with
spinifex and stunted scrub in places. There is no arable top soil.
Rainfall is low. Stock fodder is generally of poor quality and
-- 5 of 10 --
6
non-existent in drought years.
Information has been supplied as to the Applicants site management
proposals. The evidence leaves me with no reason to believe that
the proposed mining operations do not conform with sound land use
management.
(I)WILL THERE BE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAUSED BY THE
PROPOSED OPERATION, AND IF SO, THE EXTENT THEREOF?
The proposed mining activity is in an isolated area away from human
habitation. The mining will not have any deleterious effect on any
river or creek system. Chemicals will not be used in the mining
process. Due to low rainfall, and the method of mining, erosion will
not be a problem. There are no other environmental factors of
significance indicated in the evidence which may be adversely
effected by the operation. There is some evidence the disturbed
crust retains more of the natural rainfall, thereby encouraging the
regeneration of native flora because of seeds that have been dormant
for many years.
An EMOS has been lodged and accepted.
(J)WILL THE PUBLIC RIGHT AND INTEREST BE PREJUDICED?
No factors prejudicial to the public right and interest have been
identified. There appears to be no endangered flora or fauna within
the application area. It appears there are no public utilities on
-- 6 of 10 --
7
or across the application area. It appears 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 forward
specific site protection or site avoidance strategies.
(K)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, and not this Court.
When all other aspects of the application and the matters referred
to in Section 7.26(3) are taken into account, I am satisfied that
the objects of Section 1.3 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (g) will be
attained if a mining lease is granted for the term recommended, for
the following reasons:
(1) a small scale operation is planned.
(2) it is unlikely that the land applied for is of any interest
to a large scale miner with greater resources.
(3) the location of the proposed mining operation and the
proposed method of mining is unlikely to cause environmental
or public interest concerns about safety.
(4) a realistic security deposit, subject to EMOS discounts if
appropriate, will be imposed to guard against financial
failure of the miner to ensure rehabilitation is completed.
(5) the applicant appears to have sufficient experience in the
industry to accurately assess the potential of the project.
(6) there is a market for the product and the project will
provide employment.
-- 7 of 10 --
8
In my view, no good reason has been shown for a refusal to grant the
lease application (Carr V Simnovec, Pacminex V Aust. Nephrite Jade
Mines supra).
(L)IS THE PROPOSED MINING LEASE OPERATION 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 proposed mining operation appears, on the evidence, an
appropriate land use, taking into account the current and
prospective uses of the land.
A compensation agreement or determination of the Court will
compensate the landowner for any conflict or loss over land use (
S. 7.36 ). I note that a compensation agreement has been filed, and
the applicant has agreed to special conditions.
-- 8 of 10 --
9
This recommendation is based on an assessment of the information
supplied. Should there be any dispute over damage 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 compensation and if necessary, injunctive
relief under the powers contained in Section 10.20(4).
APPENDICES:
The following documents are appended:
*Copy of declaration dated 12 March 1993.
*Questionnaire completed on 13 March 1993.
*Copy of compensation agreement dated 11 February 1993.
*Copy of special conditions undated.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having dispensed with the hearing and upon consideration of all the
matters set forth in section 7.26(3) of the act, I recommend to the
Honourable, the Minister that the mining lease be granted over the
-- 9 of 10 --
10
whole of the application area for a term of FIVE years.
(S.7.26(2)(a).
Dated at BRISBANE this 30th F.W.
WINDRIDGE
day of March 1993 . MINING
WARDEN.
-- 10 of 10 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QMW/1993/037