appendix c – post mine land use plan · appendix c – post mine land use plan 264. venus...

CLIENT: AUSTRALIA VENUS RESOURCE PTY LTD PROJECT: VENUS PHOSPHATE MINE REPORT: EA MAJOR AMENDMENT DATE: MAY 2015

APPENDIX C – POST MINE LAND USE PLAN

264

VENUS PHOSPHATE

POST MINE LAND USE PLAN

Report prepared for: Australia Venus Resource Pty Ltd

Date: 22nd April 2015

CLIENT: AUSTRALIA VENUS RESOURCE PTY LTD PROJECT: VENUS PHOSPHATE TRIAL PIT REPORT: POST MINE LAND USE PLAN DATE: APRIL 2015

IMPORTANT NOTE

No part of this document may be reproduced without written permission from the Clients and C&R Consulting Pty Ltd. If this report is to form part of a larger study, or is a response to a “Request for Additional Information” from a Compliance Agency, this report must be included as an Appendix within the full report without any additions, deletions or amendments. C&R Consulting Pty Ltd do not accept any responsibility in relation to any financial and/or business decisions made for any other property or development other than that for which this information has been provided.

____________________________ Dr Chris Cuff Director 22nd April 2015 ____________________________ Date

____________________________ Dr Cecily Rasmussen Director 22nd April 2015 ____________________________ Date

2


SUMMARY OF RELEVANT INFORMATION

Project Title Venus Phosphate Post Mine Land Use Plan

Property Location Venus Phosphate (ML90209)

Project Purpose Detail the requirements and criteria the final landforms of the mining activity must achieve through rehabilitation.

Clients Details

Nominated Representative Jack Cheng

Title/Position Engineer

Company Australia Venus Resource Pty Ltd

Telephone (07) 3147 8007

Email [email protected]

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Version C&R Author(s) Date issued Reviewer(s) Date returned

Draft 1 Mr. B. Cuff 26/03/2015 Mr. M. Knott (C&R) 27/03/2015

Draft 2 Mr. B. Cuff 27/03/2015 Mr. J. Cheng &

Dr. M. Li (AVR)

31/03/2015

FINAL Mr. B. Cuff 01/04/2015 - -

Amended Mr. B. Cuff 22/04/2015 - -

3

mailto:[email protected]


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................6 1.1 OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................ 8

2. SETTING .........................................................................................................................9 2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT................................................................................... 9 2.2 CLIMATE ................................................................................................ 9 2.3 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................. 11 2.4 SOILS ................................................................................................. 11 2.5 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................... 15

2.5.1 Background Water & Sediment Quality ....................................................................17 2.5.2 Environmental Values...............................................................................................17

2.6 PROPOSED MINING TECHNIQUES .................................................................. 17

3. LAND USE ....................................................................................................................19 3.1 CURRENT LAND USE ................................................................................. 19 3.2 POST MINE LAND USE .............................................................................. 20 3.3 SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF FINAL LANDFORMS ........................................... 21

4. REHABILITATION ........................................................................................................25 4.1 WASTE ROCK DUMPS ............................................................................... 25 4.2 INFRASTRUCTURE AREAS ........................................................................... 26

4.2.1 ROM..........................................................................................................................26 4.2.2 Infrastructure.............................................................................................................27 4.2.3 Roads........................................................................................................................27

4.3 RESIDUAL VOID...................................................................................... 30 4.4 REVEGETATION CRITERIA........................................................................... 30

5. REHABILITATION SUCCESS CRITERA .....................................................................32 5.1 REHABILITATION HIERARCHY....................................................................... 33 5.2 MONITORING ......................................................................................... 33

5.2.1 Land Survey..............................................................................................................33 5.2.2 Vegetation Survey ....................................................................................................35 5.2.3 Water ........................................................................................................................35 5.2.4 Reference Sites ........................................................................................................36

5.3 REHABILITATION SUCCESS CRITERA .............................................................. 36 5.3.1 Waste Rock Dumps ..................................................................................................37 5.3.2 Infrastructure.............................................................................................................40 5.3.3 Residual void ............................................................................................................42

6. PMLUP ADMINISTRATION ..........................................................................................44 6.1 IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PMLUP .......................................... 44 6.2 PERFORMANCE AND REVIEW OF PMLUP .......................................................... 44 6.3 RESPONSIBLITIES.................................................................................... 44 6.4 REPORTING........................................................................................... 44

7. REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................45

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: ML90209 regional setting ....................................................................................................7 Figure 2: Recorded annual rainfall at The Monument and Phosphate Hill .......................................10 Figure 3: Mapped soil units from the Atlas of Australian Soils within ML90209 ...............................13 Figure 4: Location of trial pit infrastructure in relation to atlas of Australian soil units......................14

4


5

Figure 5: Receiving environments ....................................................................................................16 Figure 6: Conceptual design cross section locations .......................................................................22 Figure 7: Conceptual design cross section of final waste rock dump as shown in cross section A-B23 Figure 8: Conceptual design cross section of final trial pit as shown in cross section C-D..............23 Figure 9: Conceptual design cross section of final waste rock pile and trial pit tied into natural

ground level as shown in cross section E-F ......................................................................24 Figure 10: Example of an elevated road embankment that must be breached so it does not impede

the flow of water across the local floodplain......................................................................28 Figure 11: Breaches in elevated road embankments to allow water flow...........................................29 Figure 12: Cross section through rehabilitated roadway showing re-contoured road surface (if

required) ............................................................................................................................29

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Relevant Environmental Authority conditions......................................................................8 Table 2: Average and maximum monthly rainfall ............................................................................10 Table 3: Agriculture and conservation land suitability class definitions...........................................19 Table 4: Final land use and rehabilitation approval schedule .........................................................20 Table 5: Authorised mining activities (Schedule A – Table 1 of the EA) .........................................21 Table 6: Landform design ................................................................................................................21 Table 7: Summary of Completion Criteria for each domain ............................................................32 Table 8: Erosion rating system ........................................................................................................34 Table 9: Analytical parameters for water .........................................................................................36 Table 10: Potential reference sites ....................................................................................................36 Table 11: Completion Criteria for waste rock dumps.........................................................................37 Table 12: Rehabilitation Goals, Objectives, Indicators and Completion Criteria for infrastructure

areas, roads, tracks, ROM pads and laydown areas ........................................................40 Table 13: Residual void Completion Criteria .....................................................................................42 Table 14: Personnel responsibilities towards effective PMLUP management ..................................44


1. INTRODUCTION

The Venus Phosphate Project (the project) is located on ML90209, approximately 140 km southeast of Mount Isa and 150 km southwest of Cloncurry in northwest Queensland, immediately adjacent to Phosphate Hill Mine (PHM) (Figure 1). The ML covers approximately 1,602 ha of grazing land on Chatsworth Station in the Shire of Cloncurry. Although significant exploration works have been conducted across ML90209 it is considered a Greenfield site.

Several environmental assessments have been completed across the project site, with an Environmental Management Plan (GHD 2011) submitted to the administering authority in 2011 by the previous owners (Krucible Metals Pty Ltd) to gain approval for the development of a bulk sampling trial pit. The development of a 10,000 t trial pit was approved in 2012 under Environmental Authority (EA) EPML00975013. The project site was subsequently purchased by Australia New Agribusiness and Chemical Group Pty Ltd (ANB) at the end of 2013.

Prior to any works commencing the holder of the EA must submit to the administering authority a Plan of Operations (PoO) including a Financial Assurance (FA) and several management plans for review. As such, C&R Consulting (Geochemical and Hydrobiological Solutions) Pty Ltd (C&R) was commissioned by Australia Venus Resource Pty Ltd (AVR), a wholly owned subsidiary of ANB, to produce a Post Mine Land Use Plan (PMLUP) for the project.

Planning for the post mine land use is an important issue on mine sites. The PMLUP outlines clear objectives for all mine disturbances within the site. Planning for the post mine land use should occur before any mining operations occur on the site and should clearly outline targets and objectives for the post mine land use. Whilst the mine is active, all operations should work towards achieving the post mine land use objectives. Failure to do this is likely to be inhibitive to mining processes and costly to mining operations.

6


Figure 1: ML90209 regional setting

7


1.1 OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this PMLUP are to clearly outline rehabilitation objectives/ requirements for disturbance areas included in the Plan of Operations (PoO). The requirements for the PMLUP are outlined in conditions F11 and F12 of the EA (Table 1).

Table 1: Relevant Environmental Authority conditions

Number Condition

F11 The Post Mine Land Use Plan must be included in the plan of operations and be reviewed and updated with each subsequent Plan of operations, describing how the rehabilitation objectives/requirements will be achieved.

F12 The Post Mine Land Use Plan must include

(a) Rehabilitation objectives for all land disturbed by mining activities and infrastructure include of:

I. Pre and post disturbance land use for each mining activity;

II. Pre and post disturbance land suitability for each mining activity;

III. The maximum disturbance area (ha) of each mining activity; and

IV. The latitude and longitude (GDA94 of each mining activity;

(b) Schematic representations of final land form of the residual voids, waste rock dumps inclusive of:

I. Drainage feature;

II. Slope design;

III. Cover Design; and

IV. Erosion controls proposed on reformed land;

(c) Descriptions of experimental design for monitoring of analogue and rehabilitated areas inclusive of statistical design;

(d) Proposed revegetation criteria including (if appropriate):

I. Species diversity, abundance and composition;

II. Projective cover;

III. Dry matter production and

IV. Stocking rates to ensure self-sustaining vegetation is maintained;

(e) Proposed revegetation methods inclusive of plant species selection, re-profiling, respreading soil, soil ameliorants/ amendments, surface preparation and methods of propagation;

(f) Material balance including available topsoil and low permeability capping material;

(g) Research programme and associated milestones;

(h) Geotechnical, geochemical and hydrological studies;

(i) Chemical, physical and biological properties of soil and water;

(j) Clear objectives and success criteria for each land unit including establishment in accordance with outcomes stipulated in the administering authority’s guideline for Rehabilitation Requirements for mining projects;

(k) Measurable completion criteria of rehabilitation success for each disturbance type (or land unit); and

(l) Rehabilitation monitoring programme which includes sufficient replication to enable statistical analysis of results at an acceptable power.

8


2. SETTING

2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT

The project is situated in the Georgina Basin of the Burke River catchment. The site lies on the margin of the Mitchell Grass Downs Bioregion, immediately to the south of the existing PHM.

The surrounding landscape is a combination of various habitat types, four of which occur throughout the study area, including:

Mitchell Grass Plains on heavy clay soils;

Spinifex Hummock Grasslands on red earths with lateritic gravel;

Hummock Grasslands with Snappy Gum (Eucalyptus leucophloia) emergents; and

Mixed Shrublands.

Tree cover is generally limited to sparse open fringing woodland along the small water courses with scattered trees generally reflecting drainage lines or other low lying areas.

The main land uses in the surrounding area include pastoral (in particular cattle grazing), and mining, with the Phosphate Hill Mine immediately to the north. Other large mines operating within 100km of the site include Osborne (recently place in Care and Maintenance) and Cannington. A number of smaller mines also operate within this area.

The terrain is generally flat and vegetation communities have been altered by grazing practices.

2.2 CLIMATE

The area is within the seasonally arid tropics where rain of any significance only falls during the November to March wet season. Rainfall data collected at neighbouring Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) gauges (Phosphate Hill, BOM Station 36016; and The Monument, BOM Station 36017) show the average annual rainfall for the area is approximately 330 mm with a maximum of 826.8 mm and minimum of 80.4 mm (Figure 2). Approximately 75% of this rain falls between November and March (Table 2). This is typical of the dry tropics where long periods of aridity are interspersed by short periods of rainfall.

Rainfall at Phosphate Hill has been monitored since 1975, but missing data limits the usable rainfall information in this data set to an intermittent 30 year period (Figure 2). No supporting climatic data (i.e. temperature, etc.) has been collected at the Phosphate Hill monitoring station. Rainfall has been monitored at The Monument since 1976, although missing data limits the usable rainfall information in this data set to an intermittent 35 year period. In addition, The Monument is located approximately 20km from the project site and may, therefore, be subject to local variability.

Based on previous experience in the region, it is common to have over 300 days in any year where evaporation exceeds rainfall, even on days of intense rainfall. Therefore, very little rainfall may actually remain on site, or be available for groundwater recharge.

The high variability within the climatic data suggests that the use of averages is not appropriate for any assessment of the environment. For example, in 1981 The Monument received 299 mm of rainfall within one month (almost equivalent to the yearly average), with almost half the annual total (150 mm) falling in a single day. These intense rainfall

9


events are not uncommon in this area, with at least five events occurring in the past 35 years that have resulted in more than 100 mm rainfall in one day. Further, maximum rainfall for the area is over double the yearly average, with the minimum rainfall nearly a quarter of the annual average (Figure 2 and Table 2). Therefore, to accurately reflect the climatic conditions at the site it is important to consider this intense variation.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

Year

An

nu

al r

ain

fall

(mm

)

The Monument

Phosphate Hill

Average

Figure 2: Recorded annual rainfall at The Monument and Phosphate Hill

Table 2: Average and maximum monthly rainfall

The Monument (mm) Phosphate Hill (mm)

Month Average Maximum Average Maximum

January 89.5 459.4 86.7 388.5

February 72.4 223.2 68.3 219.8

March 28.6 232.0 26.5 232.0

April 13.7 125.2 15.7 123.8

May 17.5 103.0 10.8 63.2

June 10.7 79.4 7.7 59.0

July 10.4 75.0 10.3 71.6

August 4.8 47.8 4.3 41.2

September 6.7 46.1 6.4 45.4

October 11.6 41.6 9.8 69.6

November 31.1 119.0 27.4 85.4

December 52.2 220.0 60.7 239.5

10


2.3 GEOLOGY

The project will target the Korella phosphate deposit (also known as the Corella Bore Prospect). The Korella phosphate deposit is a marine sedimentary phosphorate hosted in the Beetle Creek Formation of the early Palaeozoic Georgina Basin, northwest Queensland. The Korella deposit lies 5 km south of PHM, Queensland’s most significant producer of high-quality diammonium and monoammonium phosphate fertilizer for domestic and export markets (Denaro et al., 2013).

The Beetle Creek Formation (BCF) is a Middle Cambrian package of basal siltstone (up to 60 m thick) and overlying phosphorate, phosphatic siltstone, chert and limestone (up to ~ 40 m). At Korella, the BCF forms part of the Narpa Group of the Burke River Structural Belt, a fault bounded north-south elongate basin of mostly Palaeozoic strata about 180 km long and 60 km wide. The BCF overlies the Thorntonia Limestone and is overlain by the Inca Formation, comprising up to 150 m of silty siliceous shale, chert and carbonaceous calcareous mudstone (Jell, 2013). Regionally, this contact is interpreted as an onlapping disconforrmity (Jell, 2013) but mine-scale interpretation of this surface is as a fault disconformity (GDH, 2011).

At Korella, high grade phosphatic ore is associated with the BCF and Inca Formation contact, with subordinate, lower grade ore in two stratigraphic zones lower in the BCF. This distribution contrasts with the 9 phosphate ‘lodes’ confined to lower Beetle Creek strata at PHM, where the BCF and Inca Formation contact is largely absent through erosion.

The BCF is interpreted as a deepening upward succession (GHD, 2011) and the PHM phosphate deposits are associated with older shallow marine deposition, whereas the Korella phosphatic deposits are of younger, deeper water affinity. Additionally, the fault disconformity at Korella is interpreted as fluid pathway for post burial diagenetic phosphate enrichment beneath the contact (GDH, 2011). Whereas post-depositional uplift has eroded the upper units of the BCF at PHM, local down-faulting at Korella resulted in preservation of the high grade and relatively pure (low iron, aluminum and cadmium) phosphate ore.

2.4 SOILS

No detailed soil information currently exists for the project site. The Atlas of Australian Soils recognises three distinct soil groups within the mine lease (Figure 3):

1. Atlas of Australian soils code FA41 – Undulating to moderately undulating with some strongly undulating areas; rock outcrop is common: dominant soils are very shallow gravelly loams (Um5.51), with (Um1.43) and (K-Um1.43) more common on phosphatic rock outcrops. Associated are other shallow gravelly loams (Um5.2), (Um1.41), (Um1 .3), and lesser (Um5.11). On some outwash slopes are calcareous earths (Gc2.22) and gravel-free red earths (Gn2.13).

Cursory landform observations across the site indicate the description and distribution of this soil unit as mapped by the Atlas of Australian Soils is accurate with some amendments. Within the site no rock outcrop was observed within this unit. The soil unit on the site is dominated by red gravelly loams to a depth greater than 0.75m.

The majority of the trial pit infrastructure is located within this soil unit (Figure 4), including:

- Trial Mining Area;

- Trial pit Dump;

- Site Office;

11


12

- Crushing Plant;

- Settlement pond; and

- Parts of the Pit Access road.

2. Atlas of Australian soils code MM46 – Alluvial plains with some slightly higher scalded areas that are often gravel-strewn: dominant soils are deep red-brown cracking clays (Ug5.38), with associated deep brown (Ug5.34) or occasionally grey (Ug5.24) cracking clays in lower sites. In some areas the clays are slightly gravel-strewn. On the low rises and adjacent to streams are gravel-strewn loamy red duplex soils (Dr2.33), (Dr2.43), and (Dr2.13) and occasional uniform clays (Uf6.31). Crusty duplex soils (Dr1.33) and (Dr1.43) may also occur. On some stream levees are deep loamy or occasionally sandy red earths (Gn2.13, Gn2.12)

Cursory landform observations across the site indicate this description and distribution of this soil as mapped by the Atlas of Australian Soils are accurate. The MM46 soil unit on this site is varied. To the west of the unit there is a strong interaction with the FA41 soil unit. It is likely that gravel has washed out of the FA41 soil unit and is strewn atop of grey cracking clays (the MM46 soil unit). This strewn zone extends for approximately 300 m from the mapped border of these two units. In effect this is a mixing zones of the two units. Outside of this 300 m mixing zone the soils are considerably more uniform, being observed as grey cracking clays.

Trial pit mine infrastructure that is present within the MM46 soil unit include (Figure 4):

- Parts of the Pit Access road; and

- Haul Road.

3. Atlas of Australian soils code MN6 – Broadly undulating lands with granite tor outcrop on some ridge crests: dominant soils are quartz-gravel-strewn moderately deep loamy red friable earths (Gn3.13), with lesser (Gn3.12). Associated on some slopes are gravel-strewn loamy red duplex soils (Dr2.12, Dr2.13) and gravel-strewn red clays (Uf6.31). On some lower areas are deep brown or red-brown cracking clays (Ug5.32, Ug5.37). Shallow to moderately deep Fitty red earths (Gn2.11, Gn2.12) and shallow gravelly loams (Um5.51) occur near rock outcrop.

Only a small proportion of this soil unit is present on the site. No mine infrastructure is located within this soil unit (Figure 3).


Figure 3: Mapped soil units from the Atlas of Australian Soils within ML90209

13


Figure 4: Location of trial pit infrastructure in relation to atlas of Australian soil units

14


2.5 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

The mining lease is located in the upper reaches of several small drainage lines. These un-named drainage features flow in various directions from the project site because of a very shallow ridge line that passes through the centre of the mining lease running in a north-south direction. Flows exiting the lease in the north report to Mahaffey Creek before entering Kolar Creek and subsequently the Burke River (Figure 5). Flows exiting the lease to the east cumulate in a small unnamed gully (hereon referred to as Eastern Gully) before confluence with Kolar Creek greater than 8 km downstream (Figure 5). Westerly report directly to the headwaters of Middle Creek while southerly flows exit site via an unnamed creek (hereon referred to as Southern Creek) before reporting to Middle Creek which confluences with Burke River over 70km downstream (Figure 5).

All waterways associated with the lease are classed as ‘upland rivers’ under the ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) guidelines as the project site has an elevation of greater than 150 m. Further, due to the historic land uses associated with the area (e.g. mining and grazing) these tributaries are also categorised as ‘slightly to moderately disturbed’ as the riparian zone throughout much of the catchment is still relatively intact (ANZECC & ARMCANZ 2000). ‘Slightly to moderately disturbed’ waterways are defined under ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) as “ecosystems in which aquatic biological diversity may have been adversely affected to a relatively small but measurable degree by human activity”.

The trial pit is situated on the eastern facing slope of the shallow ridge in the northern half of the mining lease. Therefore the receiving environments of most concern from the development of the trial pit and its associated infrastructure are the Eastern Gully and subsequent Kolar Creek. These drainage lines are highly ephemeral generally containing water for less than two months of the year with Eastern Gully predicted to hold water for less than two weeks each year.

Kolar Creek is a highly braided system. Erosion and sedimentation processes operating within the creek can be extensive following intense, localised rainfall events. Previous observations have noted significant sediment slugs progressing through the watercourse over a number of wet seasons.

15


Figure 5: Receiving environments

16


2.5.1 BACKGROUND WATER & SEDIMENT QUALITY

Sampling of the drainages covered by the mining lease has been limited to sediment quality as the highly ephemeral nature of these tributaries restricts the ability to collect water samples. The results of the sediment sampling suggest that the majority of quality characteristics were compliant with ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) guideline values as well as relevant human health based investigation levels (C&R 2010). However, chromium was found to be elevated in some of the samples collected from the westward flowing drainage lines. Across the lease chromium levels ranged from 18 mg/kg to 136 mg/kg (C&R 2010). As no development of the site had commenced when these samples were collected, it is suggested that these results depict natural variation in chromium concentrations.

GHD (2011) analysed water quality sampling results collected by PHM in Kolar Creek’s feeder creeks, Deadhorse Creek and Galah Creek. A summary of the results displayed in Table 8 of the GHD (2011) report found:

Total nitrogen, reactive phosphorus and total phosphorus were regularly recorded above guideline values for ‘upland rivers’ in ‘Tropical Australia’ ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000); and

Copper and zinc levels were regularly recorded above ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) 95% Species Protection Levels;

All other monitored analytes were generally compliant with guideline values where available. Note, the Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (2009) state that no guideline values are available for the area and those allocated within ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) are most likely irrelevant. Therefore, site specific water quality objectives (WQOs) must be determined.

2.5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES

The Queensland Environmental Protection (Water) Policy, 2009 (EPP) lists several environmental values (EVs) that must be considered when determining watercourse specific values associated with receiving environments. The EPP has not prescribed catchment specific EVs and subsequent WQOs for the Upper Channel Country region to which the project site belongs. Therefore, based on a detailed knowledge of the environmental processes and land use practices within the area and up to 15 km downstream of the project site it is recommended that the following EVs must be protected:

The biological integrity of the slightly to moderately disturbed system. Generally requiring the adoption of ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) 95% Species Protection Levels for WQOs until site specific triggers can be determined;

Water for agricultural purposes. Significant grazing practices are undertaken within the area and WQOs must also comply with ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) Livestock Drinking Water guidelines; and

Cultural and spiritual values of the water.

2.6 PROPOSED MINING TECHNIQUES

The mining authorised under the EA is for bulk sampling of a trial pit. The trial pit and associated infrastructure includes:

200 m long ramp to be dug at a 10 % slope to the ore body ~40 m below the surface;

Overburden stockpile alongside the ramp;

Topsoil stockpile;

Crushing and screening plant;

Mine camp;

Package sewage treatment plant (STP);

17


18

Front end loader, excavator and trucks;

Roads; and

Power.

The amount of ore to be stockpile on the site at any time during trial mining may be up to 5000 t (approximately 1700 m3) depending on demand from customers.

The access ramp into the trial pit is designed to drop into the pit floor at the shallowest point on the footwall (depth of 20 m) with a 10 % ramp. The base of the ramp will open up the work area across to the fault that delineates the Western high wall and a 10 m work bench on the active faces to enable mining to proceed north initially with a series of pushbacks.

The ground is soft and therefore no blasting will be undertaken for the trial mining operations. Instead, truck and shovel methods will be used to remove spoil and target the ore body. Spoil and ore will be removed from the trial pit via haul truck.

All topsoil will be stripped and stockpiled, separate of other waste, for use in rehabilitation. The overburden will be pre-stripped and dumped in an out-of-pit dump. Upon mining the limit of the pit in the south (adjacent to the ROM haul road), in-pit dumping will be adopted to progressively fill the mining void once the ore has been mined and to keep haulage cycles to a minimum.

Run of mine (ROM) ore will be hauled from the pit to a run-of-mine dump hopper where it will be crushed and fed into a secondary crushing plant. Screening in between crushing will be used to provide some grade improvement and the final crushed product will be analysed and then stockpiled.

Crushed phosphate rock will be loaded onto road trucks for transport to the former Osbourne Mine rail load-out facility where it will be stockpiled before loading.

Note the project does not include a beneficiation process.


3. LAND USE

3.1 CURRENT LAND USE

The project site has historically experienced low intensity cattle grazing with minimal pasture improvements. The majority of vegetation present on the site is mapped as remnant vegetation. Surrounding parcels of land have either been used for similar grazing or mining activities. There is no evidence to suggest that any activities that have been undertaken at the project site in the past could lead to land contamination.

Land suitability classes, as defined by the Department of Primary Industries Guidelines for Land Evaluation in Queensland (1991), are outlined in Table 3. Pre-mining and anticipated post-mining land suitability classes for the project are provided in Table 4. The GHD (2011) EM Plan has designated a pre-mining land suitability of Class 3 to Class 4 for the project site.

Table 3: Agriculture and conservation land suitability class definitions

Description Class

Agricultural Conservation

Class 1 Suitable land with negligible limitations. Land which is well suited to a proposed use.

Areas well suited for conservation uses must possess significant conservation benefits in the pre mining environment and be capable of being returned to that use post-mining.

Class 2 Suitable land with minor limitations. Land which is suited to a proposed use but which may require minor changes in management to sustain that use.

These areas are suited to conservation use in that a significant component of the pre mining conservation values can be restored post mining. There will however be some loss in conservation values where soil terrain or hydrological post mining conditions may inhibit the full replication of the pre mining values.

Class 3 Suitable land with moderate limitations. Land which is moderately suited to a proposed use but which requires significant inputs to ensure sustainable use

These lands contain significant conservation values pre-mining however restoration of all of these values may not be feasible. These areas could however be restored to a form of conversation use which provides alternative conservation benefits

Class 4 Marginally suitable land. Land which is marginally suited for a proposed use and would require major inputs to ensure sustainability. These inputs may not be justified by the benefits to be obtained in using the land for the particular purpose and is hence considered presently unsuited.

These lands contain limited conservation value pre mining and/or are incapable of being effectively restored post mining to any alternative conservation use which provides similar benefits. The area could however be restored to provide a stable form of use which does not impact on surrounding conservation values.

Class 5 Unsuitable land with extreme limitations. Land which is unsuited

These lands contain no significant

19


20

Description Class

Agricultural Conservation

and cannot be sustainably used for a proposed use.

conservation values.

3.2 POST MINE LAND USE

The nature of the open cut trial mining operations and construction of a waste rock dump will alter the landform in the vicinity of the project. An open cut void, not normally found in the area, will remain following mining operations. This void will be bunded so that it will only capture and collect incidental surface water flows. The waste rock dump will significantly alter the topography due to the change in elevation compared with the surrounding landscape. Waste rock dumps will be regraded to a suitable predetermined gradient and rehabilitated. Should further mining development not proceed all site infrastructure will be dismantled at the completion of the project. Access tracks and haul roads will be ripped and seeded to encourage revegetation with some roads and tracks remaining subject to EHP and Landholder approval. The location and proposed geometry of each disturbance is documented in Table 5 with the pre and post land uses shown in Table 4.

On completion of the trial mining project should further mine development not proceed, land at the site will be suitable for one of two land uses:

Native ecosystem; or

Cattle grazing (pre-mine land use).

Table 4: Final land use and rehabilitation approval schedule

Disturbance Type

Residual void

Waste rock dump

Infrastructure ROM Roads Settlement Pond

Tenure ID Lot 13 on SP223510

Lot 13 on SP223510

Lot 13 on SP223510

Lot 13 on SP223510

Lot 13 on SP223510

Lot 13 on SP223510

Projective area (ha)

1.52 4.01 <0.05 0.25 4.96 0.16

Pre mine land use

Grazing/ native ecosystem






Post mine Land use

Void/water storage





Void/water storage???


Pre mine Land capability

3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4

Post mine land capability

5 3/4 3/4 3/4 3/4* 5

Projective cover range (%)

NA 70% 70% 70% 70% NA


Table 5: Authorised mining activities (Schedule A – Table 1 of the EA)

Dimension

(m)

Map Reference

(GDA94, Zone 54)

Mine Domain Mine Feature Name

Tenure Type & Number

Maximum Disturbance

Area (ha) L W Northing Easting

Dams Settlement Pond

ML90209 0.16 40 40 394081 7573323

Waste Waste Rock Dump

ML90209 4.01 154 260 393829 7573466

Run of Mine (ROM)

ROM pad

Crushing Plant

ML90209 0.25 70 35 394113 7573269

Ancillary Infrastructure

Office Block ML90209 <0.05 394036 7573275

Trial mining pit

ML90209 0.56 70 80 394185 7573560Voids

Access Ramp

ML90209 0.96 240 40 394147 7573445

3.3 SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF FINAL LANDFORMS

Schematic representations of the final landform are shown in Figure 6 to Figure 9. These landforms have been designed from information within the GHD (2011) EM Plan. The design criteria have been summarised in Table 6. It should be noted that these design criteria and schematic diagrams are conceptual only. Detailed, engineered mine drawings will be completed prior to the construction of these landforms.

The waste rock dump will initially be constructed with 10 m lifts and 5 m berms rising at 3 % to allow water to run away from the dump edge and to allow for settling and compaction by traffic prior to reshaping/rehabilitating. The tipping face will initially be at the natural rill angle of the material (32-36 degrees) with battering of slopes to 20 degrees prior to revegetation and rehabilitation (Figure 7). Windrows will be established around all areas adjacent to tipping areas.

The trial mine will not only provide bulk samples for fertiliser plant testing but will also provide design data for the potential longer term operating mine. The trial pit design will have an overall pit wall angle of 55 degrees (Figure 8 and Figure 9). Access to the pit is designed to drop into the pit floor at the shallowest point on the footwall with a 10 % ramp.

Table 6: Landform design

Disturbance type Maximum slope range (deg) Projective surface area (ha)

Waste Rock Dump 15-20 4.01

Residual Voids 45-55 1.52

Infrastructure 5-10 0.25

21


22

Figure 6: Conceptual design cross section locations

Figure 7: Conceptual design cross section of final waste rock dump as shown in cross section A-B

Figure 8: Conceptual design cross section of final trial pit as shown in cross section C-D

23

Figure 9: Conceptual design cross section of final waste rock pile and trial pit tied into natural ground level as shown in cross section E-F

24


4. REHABILITATION

Progressive rehabilitation of all areas significantly disturbed by mining activities should occur as soon as practical. This will be dependent on the timing of operations and seasonal variability. As a general principle all land disturbed by mining activities must be rehabilitated to a stable landform with a self-sustaining vegetation cover. The progressive rehabilitation strategy for the site will include the following:

Prior to topsoil recovery, all cleared timber will be mulched and/or stockpiled for use in rehabilitation to provide habitats for fauna. Topsoil should then be stripped to a depth of 300 mm in all areas disturbed by mining activities. This topsoil will be stored in stockpiles with the location and approximate size of each stockpile documented in a topsoil inventory database. On the basis of the current mine plan, if soil is stripped to a depth of 300 mm within all disturbed areas 11,880 m3 of top soil will be stockpiled;

During mining erodible overburden material and material not conducive to vegetation establishment should be selectively placed lower in the waste rock dump;

Recontouring of overburden and engineered structure should occur as soon as possible. This will include the construction of required water management and erosion control structures (e.g. catch drains, contour banks, benches, etc.) as per the designated landform design;

Topsoil placement on disturbed landforms:

- All areas disturbed must be topsoiled to a depth of 200 mm over the top of the overburden;

- Top soil should be utilised on a shortest route basis and it is not essential that a stockpile be exhausted prior to moving to another location; and

- For the duration of all topsoiling works, accurate accounts of truck and scrapper movements must be recorded to allow for an evaluation of topsoil placement to ensure evenness in spreading;

Prior to the onset of the wet season, seedbed preparation should take place. This will involve deep ripping to a depth of 300 mm,

Immediately prior to the onset of the wet season and if rains are forecast seeding should occur across all disturbed areas where the seedbed has been prepared. Seeding should occur at a rate of approximately 7 kg/ha using an appropriate seed (see Section 4.4). Seeding can occur with the use of a seed hopper/spreader mounted to the rear of a dozer or by hand. Hand spreading is only viable in this instance because the areas are relatively small.

All mine affected areas should be regularly inspected especially after rainfall events. Areas that require maintenance (i.e. erosion areas) should be rectified as soon as possible.

Detailed rehabilitation methods for each disturbance type are outlined throughout this Section.

4.1 WASTE ROCK DUMPS

Waste rock dumps will be designed to blend with the existing environment as much as practically possible. The targeted post mine land use for waste rock dumps is native ecosystem low level grazing.

The waste rock dumps will have a maximum slope angle of 20 degrees (i.e. 36%). Consideration should be given to achieve the gentlest slope possible given the designated space provided. However, this should be balanced against economic factors and additional area required to achieve lower gradient slopes.

25


Rehabilitation methods for waste rock dumps will include final contouring of the dump to achieve the desired slope and landform, topsoil dressing and spreading across the waste rock/overburden, ripping and seeding of the area with an appropriate seed mix. The seed mix will be analogues with a designated reference site and will be chosen based on the intended future use of the area. Erosion and sediment control measures and water management structures will be formed to ensure safe water management over the area and to minimise any potential impact associated with overland flow through infrastructure areas. Refer to the Venus Phosphate Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (C&R 2015) for further information on these measures.

Monitoring maintenance and assessment of rehabilitated areas will be ongoing and undertaken in accordance with rehabilitation success criteria as documented in Section 5.2 of this report. This monitoring will also determine when rehabilitation success criteria have been achieved and the tenure of the land can be relinquished.

4.2 INFRASTRUCTURE AREAS

All infrastructure areas will remain at or near the original topography. Where agreed to with the landholder and EHP infrastructure will remain in place. Where this infrastructure is not required by the landholder the area will be rehabilitated. Rehabilitation of infrastructure will be to grazing/native ecosystem.

Before rehabilitation takes place in infrastructure areas a contaminated land investigation will be undertaken to establish if any remediation or removal of contaminated soil is required. The level of assessment will be dependent on the intended land use for the infrastructure areas. It is likely that because the designated land use is grazing the HIL C criteria will have to be achieved. Actions will then be undertaken, as recommended in the contaminated land investigation, to remediate any contaminated land within infrastructure areas.

Once the area has been remediated and designated as being free of contamination, rehabilitation will commence. This will include the recontouring and reshaping of any previously disturbed mine affected areas to “tie in” with the natural topography. After which the area will be redressed with top soil from a top soil stockpile ripped and then reseeded.

The seed mix will be analogues with a designated reference site and will be chosen based on the intended future use of the area. Erosion and sediment control measures and water management structures will be formed to ensure safe water management over the area and to minimise any potential impact associated with overland flow through infrastructure areas. Refer to the Venus Phosphate Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (C&R 2015) for further information on these measures.

Monitoring maintenance and assessment of rehabilitated areas will be ongoing and undertaken in accordance with rehabilitation success criteria as documented in Section 5.2 of this report. This monitoring will also determine when rehabilitation success criteria have been achieved and the tenure of the land can be relinquished.

4.2.1 ROM

ROM Pads consist of compacted raw material that is extracted from the general mine operations. This material can contain numerous contaminants such as aluminium, arsenic, barium, copper, iron, and in some cases uranium, phosphorus and fluoride.

Where possible these layers are to be removed and buried as backfill in voids and covered with benign material. Alternatively, ROM pads can be capped with benign material, topsoiled and seeded with a suitable species composition. Capping must occur to at least 1m thickness to provide a suitable growth medium.

26


4.2.2 INFRASTRUCTURE

Decommissioning of the Mine Infrastructure Area (MIA) will require the removal of significant infrastructure, unless a written agreement with the landholder exists for it to be kept. This infrastructure will include:

Demountable buildings;

Sheds;

Chemical and fuel storage areas; and

Laydown area.

The sub-soil must be able to support vegetation to at least 300 mm depth (typical root zone for grasslands). Whether this is achieved by removing contaminated material or providing a suitable capping will be dependent on cost considerations and rehabilitation design at the time.

4.2.3 ROADS

Roads refer to trafficable access paths that have been overlain with a road base or bitumen surface. Hard or contaminated materials (such as bitumen or road base) must be firstly removed and placed in a hydraulically secured burial (i.e. base of the void). Once this material has been broken up and removed, the roads must be moulded into the surrounding landscape (if elevated) to minimise water concentration and erosion (Figure 10 displays an example):

If the road runs perpendicular to a drainage feature, breaches should be made within the 50 year flooding extent to allow the passage of water and prevent the road from acting as an earthen embankment (for example, refer Figure 11); or

If the road runs parallel to the direction of flow, it is recommended that small mounds are provided running across the road. This is to break up any flows that may be using the road corridor as a ‘preferred flow path’ and increasing erosion. The mounds will reduce the velocity of the flow and move it to the surrounding landscape.

Once these actions have been completed the area will be ripped, topsoiled and seeded with the appropriate species (Figure 12).

Tracks are generally not built up or cut into the surrounding landscape. They usually consist of lightly compacted topsoil for vehicle access. Therefore rehabilitation of the tracks does not require a large amount of work to be undertaken. Instead, it is recommended that each track be assessed to show the ability of vegetation to naturally re-establish. If the degree of compaction of the land is not suitable for vegetation to re-establish, the track should be ripped. Light seeding should occur to promote vegetation re-establishment.

27


Figure 10: Example of an elevated road embankment that must be breached so it does not impede the flow of water across the local floodplain

Elevated Road Embankment

28


Q50 Flood Extent

Breaches to allow water flow

Road Embankment

Drainage Line

Figure 11: Breaches in elevated road embankments to allow water flow

Figure 12: Cross section through rehabilitated roadway showing re-contoured road surface (if required)

29


4.3 RESIDUAL VOID

The trial pit will be protected by diversion banks to stop the ingress of stormwater over the walls during operations and to divert clean water around the pit. At the end of mine life, the diversion banks will remain with upstream gullies diverted away from the residual void. The walls will remain in a stable state from operations and be certified by a geotechnical engineer at the end of the mine life.

The ramps leading into the residual void will also remain and be incorporated into the final landform. The ramp stability will also be subject to geotechnical approval at the time of final rehabilitation.

Safety of the area is a major consideration once final rehabilitation has been achieved. Residual voids high walls and low walls will be fenced including across the pit access ramp to ensure no animals can access the pit or stored water. The area will also be signposted in accordance with a risk assessment to be undertaken at time of decommissioning.

4.4 REVEGETATION CRITERIA

Revegetation for the post mine environment is highly dependent on the designated land use for the site. The designated post mine land use controls what species of plants are likely to colonise the area as well as other target vegetation factors such as species diversity, projective cover and dry matt cover. The post mine land use for all disturbed areas across the project site is Low Level Grazing/Native Ecosystem. For the purposes of this report Low Level Grazing/Native Ecosystem is defended as:

A vegetation community that incorporates ground-cover species at a sufficient density to support grazing but not out-compete native ecosystem species in the area.

Native species or the grazing pasture established in surrounding areas should be used for the majority of the seed mix. Tree and bush cover must be provided at a sufficient density to allow for some habitat value/landscape structure to be retained. These areas should be self-functioning areas with minimal inputs required after establishment to ensure healthy survival. Ground cover should be pasture species, but not at sufficient densities to out-compete native ecosystem elements or prevent seedling establishment.

Revegetation criteria should be assessed against local reference sites that are to be used as bench marks. Flora investigations within the area describe the vegetation as being dominated by Feathertop (Aristida inaequiglumis) and Buffel Grass (Cenchrus cillaris). Other less dominant grass species included Barley Mitchell Grass (Astrebla pectinata) and Grader Grass (Themeda quadrivalvis). A shrub layer may also be present consisting of Spotted Fuchsia-bush (Eremophila latrobei), Limestone cassia (Senna artemisioides ssp oligophylla), Senna artemisioides ssp turtii, Turpentine (Acacia chrisholmii)) and Acacia tenuissima.

An area with a similar species composition should be selected as a reference site. It is likely that the minimum requirements for successful revegetation will be as follows:

The total organic groundcover (live cover and fry matt cover) of any rehabilitated area should be within 1 standard deviation of a suitable reference site. As a general rule total ground cover should try to achieve a minimum of 70% where ground cover is defined as any cover that assists in controlling erosion and may include live cover, plant litter and rocky debris. The proportion of live and dry cover is likely to be highly variable as the area is prone to drought.

The species diversity within rehabilitated areas should be measured against a suitable reference site. Native tree, shrub and grass density and composition should be no less than within 1 standard deviation from the mean of a suitable reference site.

30


31

A preliminary seed mix for revegetation purposes has been established. The following seed mix is recommended for the establishment of an understory:

Aristida contorta;

Aristida inaequiglumis;

Astrebla pectinate;

Brachyachne convergens;

Cenchrus ciliaris;

Sida fibulifera; and

Sida trichopoda.

Seeds of selected pasture grasses, legumes, native tree and shrub species appropriate to the desired post mine land use should be sown generally between October and February depending on seasonal conditions and operational requirements. Native and exotic pastures are the preferred ground cover for the area as an erosion control measure.

Selected native tree and shrub tube stock may be planted as required to supplement direct seeding techniques. Shrubs that are likely to be planted include:

Spotted Fuchsia-bush (Eremophila latrobei);

Limestone Cassia (Senna artemisioides ssp oligophylla);

Senna artemisioides ssp sturtii; and

Turpentine (Acacia chrisholmii).


5. REHABILITATION SUCCESS CRITERA

The following Sections outline the Rehabilitation Goals, Rehabilitation Objectives, Indicators, Completion Criteria and Monitoring Requirements for each domain within the project site.

A review of EM Plans contained in EIS documents and Rehabilitation Management Plans from other mine sites has revealed that Completion Criteria are relatively simplistic and prescriptive across the entire site. These Completion Criteria often involve a number of vegetative and soil quality measures that must be met for rehabilitation to be deemed ‘successful’. However, this does not provide clear guidance on “acceptable” outcomes for rehabilitation not involving simple revegetation. Questions that are not addressed in these documents include:

When can rehabilitation of voids, dams, roads, etc. be considered successful and application for progressive certification made?; and

What other factors need to be considered for successful establishment of the post-mining land use, other than successful revegetation?

Therefore multiple Completion Criteria have been nominated for each domain across the site. Compliance with these criteria is to be used to gauge whether an area should be acceptable for progressive or final certification.

An additional measure above that required under the administering authority’s guidelines has been added to the Completion Criteria for each domain. This is entitled “Evidence to be supplied of compliance with Completion Criteria” and outlines the form of evidence that must be provided to indicate compliance with the Completion Criteria. Such entries include:

Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report – A Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report is required to determine whether the Completion Criteria have been met. This is similar to a Rehabilitation Inspection but must assess all of the Completion Criteria for the relevant area, and can refer to previous rehabilitation inspections. The Final Rehabilitation Report or the Progressive Rehabilitation Report must be audited. Other requirements of these reports are outlined in DEHP Guideline Final and progressive rehabilitation reports and audit statements for level 1 mining lease projects (2013).

Certification Report – A report by an appropriately qualified third party outlining that the Completion Criteria has been met and the relevant infrastructure / works are fit for purpose.

Inspection by Appropriately Qualified Person – A report undertaken by someone who is qualified and has demonstrated experience investigating the relevant issue

A summary of the Completion Criteria for each domain is provided in Table 7. This summary also outlines the justification to designating the nominated Completion Criteria. The full Completion Criteria for each domain are documented in Section 5.3.

Table 7: Summary of Completion Criteria for each domain

Domain Summary of Criteria

Waste Rock dumps The majority of Completion Criteria for spoil dumps focus on establishing a self-sustaining ground cover that can recover after grazing activities, minimising erosion and maintaining water quality of runoff. A light-shrub cover of 30 stems per hectare has been designated to provide structure to the rehabilitation and also provide wind-breaks for the required post-mining land use of “Grazing”. The revegetation of the

32


33

Domain Summary of Criteria

waste rock dumps should be analogues with an appropriate reference site.

Infrastructure, Roads, Tracks, ROM Pads & Stockpiles, Laydown Areas.

These areas are provided with relatively standard Completion Criteria. However, emphasis is placed on ensuring that contaminated material is remediated or removed (such as ROM Pads) and that erosion is controlled

Residual Voids The Completion Criteria for residual voids focus on leaving the landscape relatively stable and preventing access for stock and humans.

5.1 REHABILITATION HIERARCHY

The Rehabilitation Hierarchy relates to a series of ‘end points’ defining successful rehabilitation across mine sites. The definitions of each level of the hierarchy are outlined in the DEHP Guideline 18 Rehabilitation Requirements for Mining Resource Activities. A summary of each level of the hierarchy in a decreasing level of description/quantification is:

1. Completion Criteria: Generally quantitative or semi-quantitative and are used to determine whether indicators, and therefore objectives, are being met.

2. Rehabilitation Indicators: These are what are measured, and how, to certify compliance with the Rehabilitation Objective(s). They can include specific measurements (e.g. pH), groupings (e.g. water quality) a process under a recognised standard or protocol and used to gauge changes to a system.

3. Rehabilitation Objectives: Rehabilitation Objectives are more specific targets that will vary between each mine domain (e.g. polluted water is contained and/or treated on-site).

4. Rehabilitation Goals: These are goals prescribed by the administering authority to rehabilitation for all mine sites. The goals are that each domain must be:

- Safe to humans and wildlife;

- Non-polluting;

- Stable; and

- Able to sustain the agreed upon post mining land use.

The rehabilitation hierarchy is used in this document to establish rehabilitation success criteria for each domain as shown in Section 5.3.

5.2 MONITORING

Monitoring rehabilitation success is an essential part of any mining operation. Rehabilitation monitoring will be consistent across all domains for the trial mine operation. Monitoring will consist of a Land Survey, Soil Survey, Vegetation Survey and Water Survey (where relevant) to be conducted annually. Additionally, geotechnical reports should be conducted bi-annually for pre and post wet season assessments (GHD 2011).

5.2.1 LAND SURVEY

Rehabilitation areas will be inspected for erosion rills, erosion gullies, signs of slumping or failure and topsoil depth to determine their erosion rating (Table 8). These observations must be made along transects based on the following protocols:


Two 50 m transects along the contour are required for every 5 ha of rehabilitated area. Discretion should be used in determining the number of transects required for smaller areas. For example, the current disturbance footprint for the waste rock dump is only 2.08 ha. At least 1 observation point must be placed within this area to determine the success of rehabilitation factors within the waste rock dump.

Transects should be made at the mid-slope on steep lands if possible. Where a contour bench is present an individual slope will be defined as the slope from the top of the spoil to the contour bench.

A minimum overlap of 15 m along the slope is acceptable for transects in any one small rehabilitation area.

Table 8: Erosion rating system

Erosion Rating

Rills per transect

Average depth of rills

Topsoil depth

General observations

0 0 - 3 <10 cm >90% of original depth

Generally little erosion. The majority of rills are only <10 cm depth.


Minimal instances of sheet-wash and gully erosion.


Minimal-moderate erosion occurring but limited to localised areas.

3 4 + >50 cm >40% of original depth

Moderate erosion occurring.

4 4+ any >80 cm depth

>30% of original depth

Heavy erosion occurring.

A general inspection of each slope for surface cracks, rills >1 m depth and areas of bare spoil (washouts) should be undertaken in addition to the transects. This can be accomplished by a meandering walkover of the spoil dumps. The purpose of this walk over is to document significant erosion that may not be present outside of the transect (i.e. major gullies). Where a washout is encountered, an estimate must be made of its area. If multiple washouts are encountered, an estimate of the percentage of the rehabilitation area disturbed by washouts must then be made (i.e. 5%). Within the annual rehabilitation report the results of each 50 m transect must be presented with additional areas of significant erosion documented.

For each rehabilitation area requiring monitoring, soil analyses are required to confirm factors outlined in the Completion Criteria. It is recommended that soil sampling must adopt the following methods as adapted from the Australian Soil and Land Survey Field Handbook (Mcdonald et al. 1998):

One soil sampling site for each 5 ha inspected. If numerous areas are inspected that are <5 ha in size, one sampling site will be required for each area inspected.

At each soil sampling site, samples should be collected from 0 cm, 10 cm, 20 cm and 50 cm depth.

Soil samples should be analysed for the following at a NATA accredited laboratory:

- pH and EC;

- Total soluble salts;

- Nutrients (ammonia, total nitrogen, and total phosphorous);

- Metals (aluminium, arsenic, boron cadmium, chromium [Cr total], copper, lead, manganese, nickel, zinc, uranium, barium and iron);

34


- Exchangeable sodium percentage;

- Cation exchange capacity and exchangeable cations / anions;

- Sodium adsorption ratio;

- Dispersivity (such as Emerson ratings);

- Total Organic Matter and Total Organic Carbon; and

- Carbon : Nitrogen Ratio.

While all of the above parameters are not required under the Completion Criteria, they are useful to determine the health and ability of the soil to support plant growth. When collected over a period of several years, a useful time-series will be developed that outlines the processes occurring in, and interactions between, soil and vegetation.

The ratio of carbon (total organic carbon) to nitrogen (total nitrogen, percentage by weight) is useful to determine the capacity of the soil to support microbial populations. Comparison to reference site data will determine when conditions are suitable and meet the surrounding areas. This is a requirement under the Completion Criteria.

Soil analyses at nominated soil reference sites must also be undertaken. Results from rehabilitated lands can then be compared to results from rehabilitation reference sites and areas where deficiencies exist can be identified. Comparison of soil quality data between the reference sites and rehabilitation sites can then be used to assess soil processes.

5.2.2 VEGETATION SURVEY

Within each 5 ha of rehabilitation area a 50 m by 10 m belt transect must be sighted. Discretion should be used in determining the number of transects required for smaller areas. For example the current disturbance footprint for the waste rock dump is only 2.08 ha. At least 1 observation point must be placed within these areas to determine the success of rehabilitation factors within waste rock dumps. Each belt transect must be surveyed as follows:

Ten random quadrats (1 m2) analysing overall vegetation cover, percentage dry matter cover, percentage vegetation cover, percentage soil cover and ground cover species composition.

Trees/bushes identified to a species level, approximated for height, measured for diameter at breast height (DBH) and counted for species abundance.

This information will be needed to assess the Completion Criteria. Some of the Completion Criteria will have to be extrapolated from these selected data or high-resolution aerial photographs (e.g. tree density). Any signs of adverse health conditions should be noted. Fauna use of the rehabilitation areas should also be noted. All vegetation surveys should be completed in accordance with the Methodology for Survey and Mapping of Regional Ecosystems and Vegetation Communities in Queensland (Neldner et al. 2005).

Where an area will be, or has been, subject to grazing trials, the same methodology should be used to inspect the area pre-grazing and post-grazing to ensure information is comparable. This relates to the location of transects, number of surveys and survey effort.

5.2.3 WATER

During the inspection, samples should be taken of any seepage zones (soil samples) and/ or residual pools (water samples) left on the top of spoil dumps or within benches. This is to ensure that stormwater runoff from spoil dumps is generally compliant with the receiving water baseline or ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) 95% Species Protection Levels for aquatic

35


36

ecosystems. Soil and/or water samples should be analysed for the parameters outlined in Table 9.

Table 9: Analytical parameters for water

Groups Parameters tested

Physical Parameters

pH & EC. Suspended solids & turbidity.

Cations / Anions Alkalinity as CaCO3, Chloride, Sulphate as SO42-, Calcium, Magnesium, Sodium, Potassium & Fluoride

Metals Dissolved and total of : Aluminium, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead, vanadium, zinc, molybdenum, selenium, silver, uranium, boron, iron & mercury

Nutrients Ammonia as N, Nitrate as N, Nitrite as N, Total N & Total P.

Results of these analyses must then be compared to the relevant baseline of the receiving water, and the ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) 95% Species Protection Levels for aquatic ecosystems.

5.2.4 REFERENCE SITES

Reference sites for monitoring need to be established to assess how rehabilitation is progressing for the mine in relation to localised vegetation. These reference sites are used as benchmarks for rehabilitation success. It is recommended that 3 reference sites in areas that are never likely to be affected by mining be established within the mine lease. The suitability of these sites will have to be verified in the field for their appropriateness as reference site. All reference sites should be assessed using the same methods to those adopted for rehabilitation sites. Proposed sites are listed in Table 10.

Table 10: Potential reference sites

Potential reference site

Northing Easting Description

REF1 394048 7574177 Reference site is located in an area of vegetation described as 4.4.1/4.5.3. Large areas of disturbance for the mine are located within this regional ecosystem. This is located immediately to the north of the potential mine area

REF2 394411 757368 Reference site is located in an area of vegetation described as 4.4.1. Large areas of disturbance for the mine are located within this regional ecosystem.

REF3 394698 7571978 Reference site is located in an area of vegetation described as 4.4.1/4.5.3. Large areas of disturbance for the mine are located within this regional ecosystem

5.3 REHABILITATION SUCCESS CRITERA

Rehabilitation success criteria for each domain for the trial pit are documented in Table 11-Table 13.

37

5.3.1 WASTE ROCK DUMPS

Table 11: Completion Criteria for waste rock dumps

Spoil Dump Rehabilitation

Goal

Waste Rock Dump Rehabilitation

Objective

Spoil Dump Indicators

Spoil Dump Completion Criteria Evidence to be supplied of compliance with Completion Criteria

Slopes are suitable for human and/or animal trafficking.

Certification in rehabilitation report that slopes are safe and risk of future failure is determined to be acceptable.

Geotechnical assessment to determine slip hazard.

Erosion ratings are suitable for long-term safety.

Erosion ratings (as adopted by the erosion rating system) are less than or equal to 2 (as defined in Table 8) at all rehabilitation transects undertaken.

Evidenced in inspections of rehabilitation.

Long

‐term Safety

Waste rock dump remains safe for humans and animals now and in the future

No significant cracking (>1m depth) occurring in the spoil dumps from slumping or erosion.

Certification in final/progressive rehabilitation report that there are no surface cracks or erosion rills greater than 1m depth.

Evidenced in inspections of rehabilitation.

Leaching of toxic material into waterways or surface pools does not occur.

Any pools or seepage zones on top of or at the base of spoil dumps are sampled and analysed. Analysis results must comply with the long-term baseline of the receiving water, be within the water quality range of long-term predictions for water quality in any residual void within the catchment, or ANZEC C 95% Species Protection Level / Queensland Water Quality / NEPC Contaminated Lands guidelines.

Testing of any seepage zones or pools at the top of spoil dumps and results outlined in the Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report or Rehabilitation Inspections.

Leaching tests of exposed material meet specified guideline values (using standard protocols such as US EPA Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure).

Rehabilitation Inspection / Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report outlining the location of exposed overburden or waste, appropriate leaching tests, and comparison to relevant guidelines. Testing from any seepage from capping or spoil dumps and results outlined in the Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report or Rehabilitation Inspection.

Non

‐Polluting

No toxic materials are available to be exposed to human or animal contact All toxic and harmful

material has been either capped or buried at a depth suitable to ensure no exposure to humans or wildlife.

Written evidence is provided that hazardous material has been buried within spoil dumps at a depth that will ensure no exposure to humans or wildlife.

38


Goal


Objective



Polluted water contained on site or treated.

Downstream surface / groundwater monitoring.

Certification that monitoring data meet specified design criteria relevant to potential contaminants.

Downstream baseline data does not exceed receiving water baseline or ANZECC Guidelines, as evidenced in the Rehabilitation Inspection or Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Erosion rates, measured or modelled (using a suitable modelling methods such as RUSLE, CAESAR, SIBERIA, MINErosion, etc.) are no higher than 50% above the erosion rate of the surrounding landscape.

Certification report comparing erosion losses (measured or modelled) from spoil dumps to surrounding grazing lands. Erosion rates.

Erosion ratings for inspection transects (minimum 50m each transect) are less than or equal to 2.

Rehabilitation Inspection Report or Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report outlines erosion ratings for various areas.

Areas where washouts occur do not exceed 5% of the total rehabilitation area for the site.

Analyses from aerial photographs or on-ground inspections, outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Each individual washout does not exceed 100m2.


Loss of material from spoil dumps is suitable for the surrounding landscape.

Erosion indicators such as slumping, washouts, rills, etc. are minimal.

No slumping or slips occur. Analyses from aerial photographs or on-ground inspections, outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Topsoil is fastened to the underlying spoil to minimise the chances of mass movements and slumping.

Methods of rehabilitation.

Topsoil has been keyed into the spoil below; or tree and bush species are present in sufficient densities to hold the topsoil to the underlying spoil material.


Functional erosion structures.

Erosion structures are fit for purpose.

Inspection and certification of erosion and water control structures (such as contour banks, drop structures, armoured areas etc.).

Certification Report undertaken by an suitably qualified person showing structures are fit for purpose after mine closure / certification, evidenced in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Total ground-cover (i.e. grasses) must not be below 70%.

On-ground Rehabilitation Inspection, outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Stab

le

Vegetation cover. Vegetation cover percentage and type.

Dry matt cover should be no lower than 70%. On-ground Rehabilitation Inspection, outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

pH(1:5) range of soil is between 5.5 – 9.0 to at least 0.3m.


Sustaina

ble Land

Use Soil Properties that

support and will continue to support the desired final land use

Chemical properties of topsoil and soil profiles that are within the root zone of proposed vegetation.

Cation Exchange Capacity greater than 10meq/100g.


39


Goal


Objective



Root zone salinity is less than 0.6dS/m (in a 1:5 soil water mixture).


Evidence of nutrient and organic matter cycling is occurring (this can be provided by continued sampling for organic carbon and nitrogen in the soil profile for a period of 3 years).

Soil quality analyses as outlined in Section 5.2.1, evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Topsoil is >150mm thick across all vegetated areas; OR chemical analyses indicate spoil is suitable to support long-term vegetation cover and meet the required land suitability classification.


Slope is <20deg. On-ground Rehabilitation Inspection, outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Physical parameters of the soil.

Erosion ratings are less than or equal to 2 as outlined in Table 8.


For grazing land uses, a suitable grass species has established and is self-sustaining as evidenced by secondary establishment of grass species.


Weed prevalence and occurrence is no greater than the pre-mining land use.


Vegetation is suitable for the post-mining land use

Vegetation diversity

An approximate shrub density within 1 standard deviation of an appropriate reference site measured in shrubs per hectare occurs on Waste rock dumps.

On-ground Rehabilitation Inspection or aerial photograph interpretation, outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

If grazing is to occur, grazing trials indicate that the rehabilitated area is able to recover from grazing; AND a grazing regime is recommended.

Rehabilitation Inspections outline species diversity, ground cover, health and erosion undertaken prior to and after grazing. These results should be outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

40

5.3.2 INFRASTRUCTURE

Table 12: Rehabilitation Goals, Objectives, Indicators and Completion Criteria for infrastructure areas, roads, tracks, ROM pads and laydown areas

Infrastructure Rehabilitation

Goal


Objective

Infrastructure Indicators

Infrastructure Completion Criteria Evidence to be supplied of compliance with Completion Criteria

Long

‐term

Safety Infrastructure has been

retained in a safe and operable manner; or is decommissioned and removed.

Certification that residual infrastructure is safe and fit for purpose.

Infrastructure areas only Final inspection by suitably qualified person that residual infrastructure is fit for purpose and suitable for adoption by the post-mine landholder.

Evidence that any infrastructure left on-site is safe to use and operable, as evidenced by maintenance logs or inspections.

Any fuel storage areas to remain after mine closure have been certified as fit for purpose.

Inspection report.

Infrastructure areas only Inspection and audit undertaken in accordance with AS1940:2004 and certified as meeting these standards.

Audit showing that any areas subject to AS1940:2004 or any later standard, left to the landholder after mining, are in compliance with the standard.

Contamination land assessment (in accordance with the Draft Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Land in Queensland) shows that contaminated material has been removed, neutralised or chemically and hydrologically isolated.

Levels of contaminants.

Leaching tests of exposed material meet specified guideline values (using standard protocols such as US EPA Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure).

Contaminated land assessment, evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Water quality.

Water quality generated from the area is within the baseline for the receiving environment (i.e. Smokey Creek) or ANZECC (2000) 95% Species Protection Levels for Aquatic Ecosystem Protection.

Evidence in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Report that water quality generated from infrastructure areas meets relevant guidelines.

Non

‐Polluting

Contaminated materials have been neutralized or removed.

Soil salinity. Soils of the area are not highly saline (i.e. less than 0.6dS/m).

Evidence that soil inspections (undertaken for Contaminated land assessments and other Completion Criteria) show that soil is not highly saline. Evidence supplied in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Reports.

Stab le Rehabilitated areas are

stable. Erosion. Rehabilitated areas are generally <5% gradient.

Survey, topographic data, or cross sections as evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Reports.

41


Goal


Objective

Infrastructure Indicators

Infrastructure Completion Criteria Evidence to be supplied of compliance with Completion Criteria

Erosion rates are compatible with the surrounding land use.

Evidence is provided in the Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report that sediment loss from the batter slopes is similar to soil loss rates from surrounding grazing lands. Evidence must be in the form of measured sediment loss (through measured accumulation in dams servicing the catchment, time-series of topographic survey or estimates from time series of rill development) or through calibrated modelling (i.e. CAESAR / SIBERIA, etc. modelling that has been calibrated with a low estimate of error for the site).

Hydrology.

Elevated road embankments do not overly impede the flow of water across the floodplain or terrace during a Q50 event (i.e. breaches in the elevated roadway are provided to allow water flow).

Inspection of rehabilitated roads and certification that the road embankment will not impede flows for discharges up to the Q50 event. Evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Vegetation cover has established to >70% groundcover.

Rehabilitation inspection undertaken in accordance with Section 5.2.2 outlining vegetation cover, as evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Inspection.

The area has demonstrated an ability to recover from significant disturbance (i.e. grazing trials or fire) by quickly re-establishing target covers and without substantial weed infestation.

Rehabilitation inspections for species diversity, ground cover, health and erosion undertaken prior to, and after grazing. These results should be outlined in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Vegetation and Grazing Function

At least 10 trees / bushes per hectare. On-ground inspections or aerial photography, as evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Topsoil pH is greater than 5.5 but less than 9.0 to at least 30cm depth. Root zone salinity is <0.6dS/m to at least 45cm depth.

Sustaina

ble Land

Use

Cation Exchange Capacity >10meq/100g to at least 30cm depth.

Results of soil quality inspections undertaken in accordance with Section 5.2.1, evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

The land is able to function to a grazing land use.

Topsoil Quality

Evidence of nutrient and organic matter cycling occurring (this can be provided by continued sampling for organic carbon and nitrogen in the soil profile for a period of 3 years).

Soil quality analyses as outlined in Section 5.2.1, evidenced in the Final / Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

42

5.3.3 RESIDUAL VOID

Table 13: Residual void Completion Criteria

Residual Void Rehabilitation

Goal


Objective

Residual Void Indicators

Residual Void Completion Criteria Evidence Required for Completion Criteria

Access to the void crest is prevented.

Safety barriers are installed in accordance with Technical Guidelines for Environmental Management of Exploration and Mining in Queensland (1995) and certified by an RPEQ.

An audit against relevant standards outlines safety barriers are installed appropriately. Evidenced in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Ramp is suitably designed.

Ramp remains traversable by animals / livestock.

Audit identifies ramp as traversable by animals / livestock if access is going to be permitted to the void or suitable means of escape by wildlife provided.

Probability of rock fall, slip or slumping is low.

Geotechnical inspection and certification that the residual void is stable and has a low probability of rock fall, land slip or slumping.

Geotechnical certification.

Signage.

Signage is erected advising of steep slopes, potential for geotechnical failure or slumping, and uneven ground at the perimeter of the void safety area.

Evidenced in an audit of the residual void prior to completion. This can be documented as photographic evidence. Lo

ng‐term Safety

Residual Void remains safe for humans and animals in the future

Underground drifts and accesses are appropriately sealed.

Sealing of drifts and other access to the mine occurs in accordance with the Technical Guidelines for Environmental Management of Exploration and Mining in Queensland (1995) or any subsequent guideline.

An audit against relevant standards outlines safety barriers are installed appropriately. Evidenced in the Final/Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Water balance modelling shows that there is a negligible risk of spill of the residual void to the surrounding environment.

Certification / modelling report is undertaken

Geochemical modelling or leachate testing is undertaken and analysed to determine the potential long-term water quality evolution of the residual void.

Certification / modelling report is undertaken Long-term predictions of residual void waters.

Hydrogeological evaluation indicates contaminants (if detected) will not migrate from the void and pollute surrounding groundwater or surface water supplies

Certification / groundwater investigation that no aquifer resource or surface water supplies are at risk. N

on‐Polluting

No toxic materials are available to be exposed to human or animal contact

Hazardous substances removed from site.

Records are available for all/any material buried within the residual void.

Audit of records of burial of hazardous substances, and overburden / capping, in the residual void.

43


Goal


Objective

Residual Void Indicators

Residual Void Completion Criteria Evidence Required for Completion Criteria

Access prevented. If geochemical modelling or leachate testing shows potential for harm to livestock, access is prevented by a fence on top of the safety bund.

Inspection of bunds and certification / audit that livestock access is prevented under conditions at time of inspection.

Highwall and low walls of any residual void are made stable and certified by a geotechnical engineer.

Certification report.

The zone of Highwall/low wall instability, within the period identified by the regulator, must be calculated by a suitably qualified Geotechnical Engineer.

Certification report. Wall stability.

Safety bunds are installed to prevent access to the residual void in accordance with the Technical Guidelines for Environmental Management of Exploration and Mining in Queensland (1995) or any subsequent guideline.

Final Rehabilitation Report or Progressive Rehabilitation Report.

Waters diverted into the void or entering over the void crest are controlled and erosion via this mechanism is taken into consideration for the long-term stability of the void.


Overland flows and drainage lines must be prevented from entering the void where erodibility of exposed strata in the void has been identified as high.


Stab

le Ensure long-term

stability of void structures in terms of safety and consequences of further erosion

Water control.

Appropriately designed drains must be installed in areas where the erosive power of runoff will be concentrated within the void and its catchment.


Geological and mineralogical waste material placement.

No bulk waste, contaminated or highly saline material is threatened to be exposed by long-term (i.e. 50 years) erosion.

Certification report outlining potential erosion in 50 years and probability of exposing waste material.

Sustaina

ble

Land

Use

The residual void is suitable for the post-mining land use.

Voids remain for future re-opening and extraction of further resources.

Local landholders and district council provide support for allowing voids to remain largely intact for future operations.

Written approval from landholders and council.


6. PMLUP ADMINISTRATION

6.1 IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PMLUP

This PMLUP is to be implemented and maintained in accordance with this report. The EA holder has sole and full responsibility for ensuring:

The post mine land use objective and progressive rehabilitation occurs across the site in accordance with this report; and

The monitoring and maintenance of these landforms is the responsibility of the EA holder until they meet success criteria and are subsequently officially decommissioned.

6.2 PERFORMANCE AND REVIEW OF PMLUP

It is recommended that this PMLUP is reviewed and audited with each Plan of Operations submission. Any changes in operational practices must be incorporated into the PMLUP and communicated to employees and contractors on-site.

The following criteria will be used to determine whether the PMLUP is effective:

Rehabilitated areas are safe to humans and wildlife;

Post mine land uses are Non-polluting;

Post mine land uses are Stable; and

Able to sustain the agreed mining land use.

6.3 RESPONSIBLITIES

Responsibilities of all personnel associated with the site towards the effective management of rehabilitated areas are outlined in Table 14.

Table 14: Personnel responsibilities towards effective PMLUP management

Personnel Responsibilities

Site Senior Executive Shall ensure that a formal review of this management plan is made with each Plan of Operations submission.

Shall ensure that adequate resources and direction is available to ensure that this management plan is developed and effectively implemented.

All Superintendents /Supervisors

Shall ensure that the management plan outlined is followed.

Shall recommend or act on recommendations to rectify any deficiencies found in this management plan.

Mine Workers, Contractors & Visitors

Shall comply with this management plan and ensure rehabilitation management issues are adequately dealt with.

6.4 REPORTING

Monitoring of rehabilitated areas will be undertaken in accordance with Section 5.2 of this report. This will involve a bi-annual geotechnical investigation and an annual rehabilitation inspection across all mine effected areas.

44


7. REFERENCES

ANZECC (Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council) and ARMCANZ (Agricultural and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand) (2000). Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality. National Water Quality Management Strategy. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra.

Denaro, T. J., Randall, R. E. and Smith, R. J. (2013). Chapter 10 Mineral and Energy Resources, in Jell, P. A.(ed) Geology of Queensland, Geological Survey of Queensland, pp 970.

GHD (2011). Korella Phosphate Project – Environmental Management Plan, July 2011. Report prepared for Krucible Metals Limited.

Jell, P. A. (2013). 2.6 Georgina Basin, in Jell, P. A. (ed) Geology of Queensland, Geological Survey of Queensland, pp 970.

Neldner, V.J., Wilson, B. A., Thompson, E.J. and Dillewaard, H.A. (2005) Methodology for

Survey and Mapping of Regional Ecosystems and Vegetation Communities in Queensland. Version 3.1. Updated September 2005. Queensland Herbarium, Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane. 128 pp.

QWQG (2009). Queensland Water Quality Guidelines, Version 3. Department of Environment and Resource Management, Queensland. ISBN 978-0-9806986-0-2.

.

45


APPENDIX D – WASTE ROCK DUMP RUNOFF MODEL

310


A.1 – MODEL CONSTRUCTION

To construct a runoff model for the proposed waste rock dump it was necessary to reconstruct the mineralogy of the waste rock and determine the chemical nature of the reacting fluid (rainwater). To do this the following sources were used:

1. The Geology of the Duchess Phosphate Deposits, Northwestern Queensland, Australia (Russell & Trueman 1971): This Paper indicates that the Venus Deposit is hosted by the Beetle Creek Formation. Consequently, the mineralogy of the Beetle Creek Formation and the overlying Inca Formation has been used as a guide to the mineralogy of the waste rock/overburden. From the published data it is evident that iron (mainly ferric), silicon, aluminium, calcium and magnesium will always be present.

2. The Korella Phosphate Project, Environmental Management Plan: Appendix D – Korella Phosphate Drill Hole Sample Mass Sprectroscopy Analysis (GHD 2011). This Report provides analysis for over 50 elements for over 60 samples. The maximum average and minimum analytical values have been used to reconstruct an approximate mineralogy for maximum, average and minimum compositions of the waste rock, but constrained by the known mineralogy of the Beetle Creek and Inca Formations.

Silicon, in the form of quartz, is assumed to be always present and is used to make totals (as oxides) sum to 100%.

Other assumptions in the reconstruction of the mineralogy include:

- Although the following may be present as discrete minerals (e.g. Vanadinite Pb5(VO4)3.Cl and Mimetite Pb5(AsO4)3.Cl), VO4, CrO4, MoO4, SbO4, AsO4, and SeO4

are all considered as largely bound into the apatite structure (Ca5(PO4)3.Cl). - Cations including Pb, Ce, La, Cd, Y are also considered to be largely bound into the

apatite structure even though minor amounts of monazite ((Ce,La)PO4) and Xenotime (YPO4) may be present as discrete phases.

- CO3, Cl, Br and OH may all substitute for F in fluorapatite (Ca5(PO4)3.F).

3. New Insights to the Chemical and Isotropic Composition Across Australia (Crosbie et al June 2012). Table A5 for Charleville was chosen from this report as representative of a rainfall in similar climatic context to the Venus Mine. Table A1, Alice Springs, was also similar. The data for Mt Isa (Table A18) were not used as they indicate potential impacts from the smelting activities present in the area.

4. Rainfall Data: As would be predicted, the rainfall is fairly dilute and simple in composition. Real values, all less than 0.6mg/L, were recorded for Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, P, K, Si, Na, S and Zn with carbon at 1.542mg/L (7.669mg/L CO3).

It should be noted that:

(a) At 0.3250mg/L (equivalent to 0.9965mg/L PO4) the phosphorus in the rainfall exceeds the Queensland Freshwater Guidelines for reactive phosphorus (0.020mg/L).

(b) At 0.05924mg/L the zinc in the rainfall exceeds the ANZECC Freshwater Guidelines 95% Species Protection Level (0.008mg/L), and the 80% Species Protection Level (0.031mg/L). The zinc level in the rainfall (0.05924mg/L) is, however, compatible with both ANZECC (2000) and Canadian Irrigation and Livestock Guidelines.

311


A.2 – MINERALOGICAL CONSTRAINTS

Using the constraints mentioned in Step 1, the following mineralogies were calculated for maximum, average and minimum values of the chemical data presented in the GHD (2011) EM Plan:

Minimum 1kg (10 minerals in all)

Average 1kg (10 minerals in all)

Maximum 1kg (10 minerals in all

Mineral Qty Mineral Qty Mineral Qty

Calcite 28g Calcite 76g Calcite 191g

Fluorapatite 11g Fluorapatite 36g Fluorapatite 81g

Fe2O3 (Hematite) and/or Goethite

279g Fe2O3 (Hematite) and/or Goethite

218g Fe2O3 (Hematite) and/or Goethite

270g

Dolomite 22g Dolomite 69g Dolomite 127g

“Pyrolusite” (MnO2) 2g “Pyrolusite” (MnO2) 1g “Pyrolusite” (MnO2) 2g

Gypsum 15g Gypsum 20g Gypsum 58g

Kaolinite 259g Kaolinite 223g Kaolinite 108g

Beidellite/Nontronite 259g Beidellite/Nontronite 223g Beidellite/Nontronite 108g

Quartz 120g Quartz 108g Quartz 50g

Muscovite/Illite 5g Muscovite/Illite 6g Muscovite/Illite 5g

To calculate runoff composition, models were run according to the following components with Charleville rainfall as the reactant. Minimum, average and maximum were used to define the mineralogical compositions:

Rock and Mineral Reactions

React 1 Maximum + 5 Rain

10 (all) minerals (calcite, fluorapatite, hematite and/or goethite,

dolomite, pyrolusite, gypsum, kaolinite, beidellite/nontronite, quartz, muscovite/illite)

H2O:Rock ratio = 6:1

React 1 Maximum + 5 Rain 5 minerals

(calcite, fluorapatite, hematite, kaolinite, quartz) H2O:Rock ratio = 1:1

React.1 Maximum + 1 Rain Reactants at concentration x2.

5 minerals (calcite, fluorapatite, hematite, kaolinite, quartz)

H2O:Mineral ratio = 1:1

React.1 Average + 1 Rain Reactant at concentration x2

5 minerals (calcite, fluorapatite, hematite, kaolinite, quartz)


React.1 Minimum + 1 Rainfall

7 minerals (calcite, dolomite, fluorapatite, gypsum, hematite,

kaolinite, quartz) Only 100g minerals present.


Speciates

Speciate Minimum All 10 minerals – Low Iron

Speciate Average All 10 minerals – Moderate Iron

Speciate Maximum All 10 minerals – High Iron

312


Of the cases examined, the worst case scenarios were represented by the 1 Maximum + 5 Rainfall, 10 minerals, both in react and speciate mode. Complete reaction leaves the following minerals remaining in the system:

Barite BaSO4

Will limit:

Levels of Ba, Sr, Pb in solution (Isostructural Sulphates)

Calcite CaCO3

Will limit:

Levels of Cd, Mn, Zn, Fe, Ca, Ni and Mg in solution (Isostructural Carbonates)

Carnotite K2(UO2)2(VO4)2·3H2O

Will limit:

Levels of U and V in solution.

Levels of AsO, SbO4, SeO4 in solution (Isostructural Anions)

Diaspore -AlO(OH)

Will limit:

Al in solution.

As in solution by adsorption

Dolomite Ca.Mg(CO3)2

Will limit:

Cd, Mn, Zn, Fe, Co and Ni in solution (Isostructural Carbonates)

Fluorapatite Ca5(PO4)3F

Will limit:

P and F in solution.

Ba, Sr, Pb, Cd, Mn, Zn, Fe, Co, Ni and Mg (Cation Isomorphism);

VO4, AsO4, SbO4, SeO4, CrO4 and MoO4 (Isostructural Anions);

Rare earths and Yttrium (Cation Isomorphism).

Gypsum CaSO4.2H2O

May limit

Ba, Sr, Pb and Cd in solution (Cation Isomorphism)

Hematite Fe2O3

Will limit:

Fe in solution

As in solution by adsorption

Nontronite-Ca Ca0.15Fe3+2(SiAl)4O10(OH)2.nH2O

Will limit:

Si and Al in solution, and

A range of cations by adsorption

“Pyrolusite” MnO2

Will limit:

Mn in solution, and

A range of cations – Zn, Pb, Co, Ni, Cr, etc by adsorption

Rutile TiO2

Possibly an artifact of the modeling. More likely to be anatase (also TiO2). Will limit:

Sn levels in solution. Names vary “Sb2O5” Will limit:

313

314


Sb in solution.

As, Se, Mo (Cation Isomorphism)

Soddyite (UO2)2SiO4.2H2O Will limit:

U in solution.

Thorianite ThO2

Will limit:

Th in solution.

May also limit some rare earths (Cation Isomorphism)

A.3 – ASSESSMENT

ANZECC Freshwater Guidelines 95% SPL


ANZECC Irrigation Guidelines

ANZECC Livestock Guidelines

Canadian Irrigation Guidelines

Canadian Livestock Guidelines

NEPM

Non-compliant 3. 2 Aluminium

Compliant Remainder Remainder No Value No Value No Value No Value No Value

Note 1: ANZECC Livestock Guideline is 0.5mg/L Note 2: Canadian Livestock Guideline at

0.025mg/L is interim only. Non-compliant 6 1 1 6

Arsenic

Compliant Remainder ALL Remainder ALL Remainder Remainder No Value

Non-Compliant Remainder Remainder Remainder Remainder Remainder Cadmium

Compliant Low & Average Fe3+ values

Low & Average Fe3+ values

Low, Average, High Fe3+ values

Low, Average, High Fe3+ values

Low. Average, High Fe3+ values

ALL No Value

Non-Compliant

3 (Range = 1662-

3616mg/L) CLG = 1000mg/L

Calcium

Compliant

No Value No Value No Value No Value No Value

No Value

Non-Compliant ALL Remainder Remainder Remainder Remainder Chromium

Compliant Low, Average & High Fe3+ values

Occasionally ALL Frequently Frequently

No Value

Non-Compliant Cobalt

Compliant No Value No Value

ALL ALL ALL ALL No Value

Non-Compliant ALL ALL Copper

Compliant ALL ALL ALL ALL No Value

315

ANZECC ANZECC ANZECC ANZECC Canadian Canadian

Freshwater Freshwater NEPM

Guidelines 95% SPL

Guidelines 80% SPL

Irrigation Guidelines

Livestock Guidelines

Irrigation Livestock Guidelines Guidelines

Non-Compliant No Value No Value 1 1 1 1 Fluorine

Compliant No Value No Value Remainder Remainder Remainder Remainder

1 NC: F= 2.16mg/L NEPM Gdl = 2.0mg/L

Non-Compliant 2 2

1 (0.1mg/L)

1 (0.2mg/L)

1 (01mg/L)

Lead Compliant Remainder Remainder ALL Remainder Remainder Remainder

No Value

Non-Compliant Manganese

Compliant ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL No Value

Non-Compliant 5 NC

(GL= 0.010mg/L)

Molybdenum

Compliant

No Value No Value

Remainder ALL ALL

(GL= 0.010-0.050mg/L)

ALL ALL

(GL=0.050mg/L)

Non-Compliant Nickel

Compliant

Always compliant with both ANZECC and Canadian Irrigation and Livestock Guidelines. Always non-compliant with ANZECC 95% and 80% Species Protection Guidelines.

At low values of Fe3+ the nickel value of 0.0024mg/L becomes compatible with both the 95% and the 80% values.

Non-Compliant

Phosphorus

Compliant

The Queensland Freshwater Guideline commonly applied is 0.020mg/L filterable, reactive, phosphorus (i.e. PO43-).

All values, including that for rainfall, are not compliant with Guideline values with the exception of a single modelled case with only five (5) minerals reacting, and a water to waste-rock ratio of 6:1.

It is generally accepted that as long as phosphate minerals are in the system, runoff will always be non-compatible with the Queensland Guidelines.

Non-Compliant

Selenium Compliant

With Fe3+ in the system, selenium is compatible with all Guidelines. It is also always compatible with the Canadian Livestock Guidelines of 0.050mg/L when iron is not in the system.

Selenium values always lie within the range of the Canadian Irrigation Guideline of 0.020 to 0.050mgL. Similarly, when iron is not in the system, all values exceed the ANZECC 95% Guideline (0.011mg//L) and the ANZECC

Irrigation and Livestock Guidelines (both 0.020mg/L) The ANZECC 80% Species Protection Level Guideline (0.034mg/L) is exceeded in 50% of cases when iron is not present in

the system.

316

317



ANZECC Irrigation Guidelines

ANZECC Livestock Guidelines

Canadian Irrigation Guidelines

Canadian Livestock Guidelines

NEPM

Non-Compliant

Uranium Compliant

No Freshwater Guidelines are available. With the exception of one (1) aberrant model which did not converge satisfactorily, all values are compliant with both

Australian and Canadian Irrigation and Livestock Guidelines. There are no Freshwater Species Protection Level Guideline for Uranium.

Non-Compliant

Vanadium

Compliant

No Freshwater Guidelines are available and no value is available for ANZECC Livestock Water values. The ANZECC Irrigation Water Guideline and Canadian Irrigation and Livestock Water Guideline value of 0.100mg/L is

exceeded by small amounts in 4 cases. This is consistent with the relatively high levels of vanadium recorded in the rock analyses.

Non-compliant Zinc

Compliant

Zinc is incompatible with the 95% ANZECC Freshwater Guideline in 90% of cases and with the 80% levels in 75% of cases. Both are compatible when low levels of iron are present in the system.

Values for zinc are always compatible with both Australian and Canadian Irrigation and Livestock Guidelines.


ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

There is a general non-compliance with both the 95th percentile and the 80th percentile ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) Species Protection Level Guidelines. However, there is a good overall compliance with both Australian (ANZECC & ARMCANZ 2000) and Canadian Livestock Drinking Water Guidelines with a slightly lower degree of compliance with both Australian (ANZECC & ARMCANZ 2000) and Canadian Irrigation Water Guidelines. Thus, it is concluded that while these waters are generally compatible with livestock use, care should be taken if irrigation usage is intended. The runoff composition is such that it should never be allowed to discharge directly into aquatic ecosystems without treatment.

The simplest treatment option is hydrated lime. This will reduce levels, by precipitation, of cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, vanadium and zinc as hydroxides. While this treatment must be used with care to prevent the occurrence of pH values greater than 9.0 in the discharge waters, it may also limit aluminium concentrations. Aluminium, arsenic, molybdenum and selenium will also be limited to compatibility with both Australian (ANZECC & ARMCANZ 2000) and Canadian Irrigation and Livestock Guidelines by the presence of low to moderate levels of iron in the system. The constant presence of iron within the system is a basic assumption of all the models.

318


APPENDIX E – SPILLAGE MANAGEMENT & EMERGENCY PLAN

319

VENUS PHOSPHATE

SPILLAGE MANAGEMENT & EMERGENCY PLAN


Date: 1st April 2015

CLIENT: AUSTRALIA VENUS RESOURCE PTY LTD PROJECT: VENUS PHOSPHATE TRIAL PIT REPORT: SPILLAGE MANAGEMENT & EMERGENCY PLAN DATE: APRIL 2015

IMPORTANT NOTE


____________________________ Dr Chris Cuff Director 1st April 2015 ____________________________ Date

____________________________ Dr Cecily Rasmussen Director 1st April 2015 ____________________________ Date

2



Project Title Venus Phosphate Spillage Management & Emergency Plan


Project Purpose Manage potential impacts to the environment from uncontrolled spills of hazardous materials.

Clients Details




Telephone (07) 3147 8007


DOCUMENT CONTROL


Draft 1 Mr. M. Knott 24/03/2015 Mr. B. Cuff (C&R) 24/03/2015

Draft 2 Mr. M. Knott 24/03/2015 Mr. J. Cheng &

Dr. M. Li (AVR)

31/03/2015

FINAL Mr. M. Knott 01/04/2015 - -

3



TABLE OF CONTENTS


2. SETTING .........................................................................................................................7 2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT................................................................................... 7 2.2 CLIMATE ................................................................................................ 7 2.3 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................... 9 2.4 SOILS ................................................................................................... 9 2.5 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................... 13



3. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS..........................................................................................17

4. STORAGE REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................18 4.1 HOUSEKEEPING ...................................................................................... 18

5. EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE ...............................................................................19 5.1 RELEVANT EQUIPMENT .............................................................................. 20

6. RESPONSIBILITIES .....................................................................................................21 6.1 REPORTING........................................................................................... 21 6.2 TRAINING............................................................................................. 23

7. REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................24

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: ML90209 regional setting ....................................................................................................6 Figure 2: Recorded annual rainfall at The Monument and Phosphate Hill .........................................8 Figure 3: Mapped soil units from the Atlas of Australian Soils within ML90209 ...............................11 Figure 4: Location of trial pit infrastructure in relation to atlas of Australian soil units......................12 Figure 5: Receiving environments ....................................................................................................14

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Relevant Environmental Authority conditions......................................................................5 Table 2: Average and maximum monthly rainfall ..............................................................................8 Table 3: Personnel responsibilities for the management of erosion and sedimentation on site .....21 Table 4: EA conditions relevant to notification requirements for reporting environmental

emergencies ......................................................................................................................22

4


1. INTRODUCTION



Prior to any works commencing the holder of the EA must submit to the administering authority a Plan of Operations (PoO) including a Financial Assurance (FA) and several management plans for review. As such, C&R Consulting (Geochemical and Hydrobiological Solutions) Pty Ltd (C&R) was commissioned by Australia Venus Resource Pty Ltd (AVR), a wholly owned subsidiary of ANB, to produce a Spillage Management & Emergency Plan (SMEP) for the project.

1.1 OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this SMEP are to clearly outline methods and strategies to mitigate and respond to uncontrolled spills of hazardous materials to limit the risks posed to the environmental values of the project site. This will be achieved by detailing:

The environmental setting of the project site;

The types of hazardous materials stored on site;

Storage requirements of all hazardous materials;

Emergency spill response requirements for minor and major spills;

Equipment suitable for containing and cleaning spills; and

The notification requirements and responsibilities.

This document is developed to comply with condition F17 of the EA (Table 1), by combining the required Spillage Management Plan and Emergency Plan into one succinct management tool.


Number Condition

F17 A Spillage Management Plan and an Emergency Plan for all hazardous materials stored on-site, together with a description of suitable equipment and training must be updated and included with each Plan of Operations.

5



6


2. SETTING







Mixed Shrublands.




2.2 CLIMATE




The high variability within the climatic data suggests that the use of averages is not appropriate for any assessment of the environment. For example, in 1981 The Monument received 299 mm of rainfall within one month (almost equivalent to the yearly average), with almost half the annual total (150 mm) falling in a single day. These intense rainfall events are not uncommon in this area, with at least five events occurring in the past 35

7


years that have resulted in more than 100 mm rainfall in one day. Further, maximum rainfall for the area is over double the yearly average, with the minimum rainfall nearly a quarter of the annual average (Figure 2 and Table 2). Therefore, to accurately reflect the climatic conditions at the site it is important to consider this intense variation.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

Year

An

nu

al r

ain

fall

(mm

)

The Monument

Phosphate Hill

Average





January 89.5 459.4 86.7 388.5

February 72.4 223.2 68.3 219.8

March 28.6 232.0 26.5 232.0

April 13.7 125.2 15.7 123.8

May 17.5 103.0 10.8 63.2

June 10.7 79.4 7.7 59.0

July 10.4 75.0 10.3 71.6

August 4.8 47.8 4.3 41.2

September 6.7 46.1 6.4 45.4

October 11.6 41.6 9.8 69.6

November 31.1 119.0 27.4 85.4

December 52.2 220.0 60.7 239.5

8


2.3 GEOLOGY

The project will target the Korella phosphate deposit (also known as the Corella Bore Prospect). The Korella phosphate deposit is a marine sedimentary phosphorite hosted in the Beetle Creek Formation of the early Palaeozoic Georgina Basin, northwest Queensland. The Korella deposit lies 5 km south of PHM, Queensland’s most significant producer of high-quality diammonium and monoammonium phosphate fertilizer for domestic and export markets (Denaro et al., 2013).

The Beetle Creek Formation (BCF) is a Middle Cambrian package of basal siltstone (up to 60 m thick) and overlying phosphorite, phosphatic siltstone, chert and limestone (up to ~ 40 m). At Korella, the BCF forms part of the Narpa Group of the Burke River Structural Belt, a fault bounded north-south elongate basin of mostly Palaeozoic strata about 180 km long and 60 km wide. The BCF overlies the Thorntonia Limestone and is overlain by the Inca Formation, comprising up to 150 m of silty siliceous shale, chert and carbonaceous calcareous mudstone (Jell, 2013). Regionally, this contact is interpreted as an onlapping disconforrmity (Jell, 2013) but mine-scale interpretation of this surface is as a fault disconformity (GDH, 2011).



2.4 SOILS






- Trial pit Dump;

- Site Office;

- Crushing Plant;

9


10







- Haul Road.





11



12







13



14




GHD (2011) analysed water quality sampling results collected by PHM in Kolar Creek’s feeder creeks, Deadhorse Creek and Galah Creek. A summary of the results displayed in Table 8 of the GHD (2011) EM Plan found:



All other monitored analytes were generally compliant with guideline values where available. Note, the Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (2009) state that no guideline values are available for the area and those allocated within ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) are most likely irrelevant. Therefore, site specific water quality objectives (WQOs) must be determined as soon as possible.










Topsoil stockpile;


Mine camp;


15


16


Roads; and

Power.









3. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Hazardous materials are any substance or material that could adversely affect humans, animals or the environment, either by it or through interaction with other factors. Hazardous materials are identified by:

One of the following statements in the Safety Data Sheets (SDS) or product label:

- “Classified as Hazardous According to NOHSC Criteria”;

- “Classified as a Dangerous Good by the Criteria of the ADG Code”.

Dangerous Good pictograms (diamonds) in the SDS and on the product label.

The principal hazardous substances stored on site that have the potential to be spilled are:

Hydrocarbons – fuel, oils, grease, waste hydrocarbons;

Cleaning Agents – truck wash, detergents;

Solvents; and

Organic Waste – sewerage.

17


4. STORAGE REQUIREMENTS

As there can be adverse health and environmental impacts caused by exposure to hazardous materials the following requirements shall be implemented as a minimum:

The means of entry into and exit from the areas, rooms or buildings where hazardous materials are kept or handled will be kept clear at all times;

A physical barrier will protect hazardous materials stored adjacent to roadways, or areas where vehicles and equipment operate, e.g. railing, bollards, berms, etc.;

A means of either containing a spill, or diverting the spilled material into a compound within the boundaries of the storage area;

Whenever (i.e. day or night) people can access an area where dangerous goods are kept, sufficient lighting will be provided as well as in all access ways leading to the storage area;

Segregation distances of stored hazardous materials will be in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard (e.g. AS/NZS 1940 for flammable and combustible liquids);

Hazardous materials will be kept away from sources of heat, securely closed when not in use and in such a manner as to avoid spillage;

Containers into which hazardous materials are transferred will be suitable for the storage of that substance and labelled as per the Labelling Workplace Hazardous Chemicals Code of Practice 2011;

Spills, leaks and other wastes will be cleaned up immediately, and disposed of in accordance with best practice waste management standards (refer to Section 5);

Personnel are not permitted to introduce, keep, prepare or consume any food or drink, in any place dedicated to the storage of hazardous materials;

Chemical storage cabinets will be in compliance with AS/NZS 1940:2004 – The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids – Minor Storage; and

A designated fuelling depot for all vehicles will be located on-site, with the area bunded to prevent any spills entering downstream environments.

4.1 HOUSEKEEPING

To prevent any incidents from occurring which may have adverse health or environmental consequences the following housekeeping practices should be applied in areas where hazardous materials are stored:

Entry and exit paths as well as aisles inside any store will be kept clear at all times;

Packages will be regularly inspected for signs of spill or leakage and if so removed for repackaging or disposal by approved methods dependent on the type of hazardous material;

Minor spills or seepage will be treated to neutralise the substance and to decontaminate the surface according to advice contained in the relevant SDS;

Any packages that have been opened or partially used will be clearly identified; and

Labels will be retained on emptied containers until the containers have been decontaminated, at which time the labels will be removed or obscured.

18


5. EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE

Set steps must be followed in the event of a spill to ensure the risk of impact to downstream environments is significantly reduced. The steps for responding to minor and major spills are:

1. Stop and Assess – On discovering a spill of hazardous materials determine the nature of the spill – quantity, flammability and potential to spread. Also determine if additional assistance is required. Consider danger to yourself and others.

If the spill is; 20 litres or greater, in a rehabilitation area, if there is a risk impacting environmental values or the possibility of contamination of waterways it is deemed a major spill and the Site Environmental Representative must be notified immediately.

2. Control Spillage – Isolate the source of the spill, shut down the pump, turn off valves, block holes in tank, etc. if safe to do so.

3. Contain and Prevent (further dispersion) – Reduce the extent of the impact by bunding, segregating or absorbing spill material.

4. Treat the Spill – To treat a small quantity spill (<20 litres) on a hard surface spread approved benign absorbent material (e.g. saw dust or commercial absorbent material approved for use on site). Large volumes (>20 litres) need to be contained as soon as practicable by creating a bund or sump area. Once contained determine if the fluid can be evacuated or pumped into the waste tank (appropriate for the type of material spilled), the final residues should then be soaked up with absorbents.

5. Monitoring and reporting – If a major spill has occurred that:

- was 20 litres or greater;

- impacted a rehabilitation area;

- posed a risk to environmental values; or

- could possibly contaminate waterways.

Sampling of the area around the spill or any potentially effected waterway is required to determine extent of remediation required and potential for environmental harm. The Site Environmental Representative will undertake the required sampling (dependent on the contaminant spilt and the nature of the spill) and report the findings to the administering authority if an impact is noted. Dependent on the findings of this sampling further remediation or investigations may be required.

All minor/small spills should be reported to your shift/team supervisor who will ensure the appropriate steps have been undertaken to treat the spill, remove the waste and limit the risk of future spills occurring.

6. Removal of contaminated waste – Once the spill has been cleaned up, the waste generated must be disposed of correctly. Note; it is the spilled contaminant rather than the absorbent material that determines disposal requirements.

If hazardous materials are spilled on soil, the soil is classed as contaminated and will have to be removed. This contaminated soil is then treated and disposed of in an area set aside for this purpose. The Site Environmental Representative should determine if a land farm is feasible for the project site for remediating soil contaminated by hydrocarbons (these have the greatest propensity for spillage). Otherwise, contaminated soil may be disposed of (buried) within the spoil dumps or in pit.

Any contaminated materials (other than soil) collected on site must be removed from site and disposed of in an approved regulated waste facility. These contaminated materials can be stored on site within appropriately marked metal waste bins for a period of time (<2 weeks) until a transfer can be arranged. The closest regulated waste transfer facility is located in Cloncurry.

19


20

5.1 RELEVANT EQUIPMENT

Spill kits will be installed at all hazardous materials storage locations, the workshop, the admin building and the fuel depot. These kits should include:

Hazchem absorbent pads;

General purpose absorbents;

Various sized booms;

PVC gloves;

Contaminated waste bags; and

An instruction sheet.

The spill kits should be clearly labelled and stored in large coloured (preferably high visibility) wheelie bins that can be used to store contaminated waste after the contents has been used to clean up a spill.

Heavy equipment may also be utilised in the event of a major spill. Mobile plants (including excavators and dozers) can be used to build earthen bunds or sumps to collect spill material and prevent further spread. They can also be employed to remove any contaminated soil for disposal. Any mobile plant used for the purpose of removing contaminated waste must be appropriately cleaned following disposal of waste.


6. RESPONSIBILITIES

Responsibilities of all personnel associated with the site towards the effective management of spills are outlined in Table 3.

Table 3: Personnel responsibilities for the management of erosion and sedimentation on site


Site Senior Executive Shall ensure that a formal review of this management plan is made.





Shall ensure the potential for liquid spills on site is assessed and that the site is adequately prepared to manage spills by the correct process.


Shall comply with this management plan and ensure all spills are adequately dealt with.

6.1 REPORTING

Reporting requirements differ dependent on the size and nature of the spill:

Minor/small spills – The respondent must notify their supervisor after the spill has been treated in accordance with the steps outlined in Section 5. The supervisor will determine if the spill has been effectively treated and if further notifications are required to the Senior Site Executive, Workplace Health and Safety Representative and/or the Environmental Representative dependent on the nature of the spill and if personnel were involved.

Major spills – The respondent must notify their supervisor after the spill has been treated in accordance with the steps outlined in Section 5. The respondent and/or the supervisor must then notify the Site Environmental Representative so that the appropriate actions can be taken to ensure potential impacts to the environment are assessed. At this stage the Senior Site Executive and Workplace Health and Safety Representative may need to be notified dependent on the nature of the spill and if personnel were involved.

The Site Environmental Representative must notify the administering authority of the results of any monitoring of downstream environments should exceedences of appropriate guideline values (refer to ANZECC & ARMCANZ 2000) for potential contaminants occur. Notification of the administering authority must occur within 48 hours of receiving the analytical results.

Notification of potential emergency events or incidents must be reported to stakeholders and the administering authority in accordance with relevant EA conditions. Stakeholders must be informed in the timeframe specified in condition A21 with the information detailed in condition A22 (Table 4). The administering authority must receive initial notification in the timeframe identified in condition A17 with the information requested in condition A18, with further written notification required as per condition A19 (Table 4). After investigations have been conducted the administering authority may require further notification in accordance with condition A20 (Table 4).

21


Table 4: EA conditions relevant to notification requirements for reporting environmental emergencies

Condition No.

Condition

A17 The holder of this environmental authority must notify the administering authority by telephone, email or facsimile as soon as reasonably practicable but within twenty-four (24) hours, after becoming aware of any emergency or incident which results in the release of contaminants not in accordance, or reasonably expected to be not in accordance with the conditions of this approval.

A18 The notification in condition (A17) must include, but not be limited to, the following:

a) the environmental authority number and name of holder;

b) the name and telephone number of the designated contact person;

c) the location of the emergency or incident;

d) the date and time of the release;

e) the time the holder of the environmental authority became aware of the release;

f) the estimated quantity and type of substances involved in the incident;

g) the actual or potential cause of the incident;

h) a description of the nature and effects of the incident including environmental risks, any risks to public health or live stock;

i) any sampling conducted or proposed, relevant to the emergency or incident;

j) Immediate actions taken to prevent or mitigate any further environmental harm and/or environmental nuisance caused by the release; and

k) What notification of persons who may be affected by the event has occurred/is being undertaken.

A19 Within fourteen (14) days or another nominated time agreed to by the administering authority, following initial notification of an emergency or incident, further written advice must be provided to the administering authority, including the following:

a) Results and interpretation of any samples taken and analysed;

b) Outcomes of actions taken at time to prevent or minimise unlawful environmental harm; and

c) Proposed actions to prevent a recurrence of the emergency or incident.

A20 The holder of this environmental authority must notify the administering authority by telephone, email or facsimile as soon as practicable but within forty-eight hours, after becoming aware of any monitoring results that demonstrates an exceedance of any approval limit.

A21 The holder of this environmental authority must notify any potentially impacted stakeholders by telephone, email or facsimile within 12 hours after becoming aware of any emergency or incident that has the potential to impact on environmental values or breaches any condition of this environmental authority concerning releases of contaminants to the environment.

A22 The notification in condition A21 must include the following:

a) The location of the release;

b) The date and time of the release;

c) The estimated quantity and type of any substances involved in the incident;

d) The potential impacts to environmental values caused by the release; and

e) Where there is potential impact on livestock or human health, precautionary measures that should be taken.

22


23

6.2 TRAINING

All staff should be advised of their responsibilities under the SMEP. Further, training on how to use a spill kit and individuals’ reporting requirements must be provided to new staff. This will include ensuring that each staff member has a detailed knowledge of the contents of this SMEP and the document’s structure.

A hard copy of the SMEP should be kept in the site office for any personnel to refer to if required.


7. REFERENCES






24


APPENDIX F – GHD HYDROGEOLOGY REPORT (2011)

344

Krucible Metals

Report for Korella Phosphate Project

Hydrogeology

July 2011

32/15953/1727 Korella Phosphate Project Hydrogeology

This Korella Phosphate Project Hydrogeology Report (“Report”):

1. has been prepared by GHD Pty Ltd for Krucible Metals;

2. may only be used and relied on by Krucible Metals;

3. must not be copied to, used by, or relied on by any person other than Krucible Metals without the prior written consent of GHD;

4. may only be used for the purpose of the Hydrogeology (and must not be used for any other purpose).

GHD and its servants, employees and officers otherwise expressly disclaim responsibility to any person other than Krucible Metals arising from or in connection with this Report.

To the maximum extent permitted by law, all implied warranties and conditions in relation to the services provided by GHD and the Report are excluded unless they are expressly stated to apply in this Report.

The services undertaken by GHD in connection with preparing this Report:

• were limited to those specifically detailed in this Report;

• did not include GHD undertaking any site visits or testing, in addition to those previously completed for site or Phosphate Hill.

The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this Report are based on assumptions made by GHD when undertaking services and preparing the Report (“Assumptions”), including (but not limited to):

• inferring the general hydrogeology for the site can be inferred from the Phosphate Hill area immediately to the north of the site and from limited bores within the site

GHD expressly disclaims responsibility for any error in, or omission from, this Report arising from or in connection with any of the Assumptions being incorrect.

Subject to the paragraphs in this section of the Report, the opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this Report are based on conditions encountered and information reviewed at the time of preparation and may be relied on until 3 months, after which time, GHD expressly disclaims responsibility for any error in, or omission from, this Report arising from or in connection with those opinions, conclusions and any recommendations.


Contents

1. Existing Hydrogeological Conditions 1

1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Hydrostratigraphy 1 1.3 Groundwater Chemistry 3 1.4 Groundwater Recharge and Discharge 4 1.5 Aquifer Hydraulic Properties 4 1.6 Depth to Groundwater 5 1.7 Groundwater – Surface Water Interaction 8

2. Discussion 10

3. Reference 11

Table Index Table 1 Regional Stratigraphy: Phosphate Hill (after Hill

Berry and Forster 2000) 1 Table 2 Regional Groundwater Chemistry (from WMC

2005) 3

Figure Index Figure 1 Registered Bore Locations (from DERM GWDB) and

Regional Geology (from 1:250,000 digital Geology) 2 Figure 2 Groundwater Elevation Time Series 6 Figure 3 Groundwater Elevation Time Series (69354 and 69355

only) 7 Figure 4 Groundwater Depth Time Series 8

1


1. Existing Hydrogeological Conditions

1.1 Introduction

The Korella Phosphate Project site lies within the Duchess Embayment, which comprises a sequence of Cambrian marine sediments. The dominant aquifer in the region is the Beetle Creek Formation (BCF), underlain by a relatively thin layer of Thorntonia Limestone and the relatively impermeable Mount Birnie

Beds (Figure 1). There is little direct hydrogeological information available for the Korella site, but the general hydrogeology can be inferred from the Phosphate Hill area immediately to the north.

1.2 Hydrostratigraphy

A summary of the geological units based on the Phosphate Hill area (Hill, Berry and Forster 2000) west

of the Mehaffey Fault, and their hydrogeological properties is provided in Table 1. The Cambrian sediments were deposited in a shallow to moderate depth marine shelf environment and contain a significant proportion of carbonate minerals. The sedimentary rocks form a gentle half-basin, with some

additional internal folding and faulting, outcropping to the west, truncated to the east by the Mehaffey Fault.

Table 1 Regional Stratigraphy: Phosphate Hill (after Hill Berry and Forster 2000)

Unit Code Lithology Aquifer

Alluvium (Quaternary)

Qa Sand, gravel and silt. Generally unconsolidated in drainage channels (as sand and gravel), but semi-consolidated on plain lands.

Localised

Beetle Creek Formation

BCF Fossiliferous siltstone, siliceous and calcareous siltstones, with phosphatic cherts and dolomites in calcareous facies. Bedding plane and sub-vertical jointing. Up to 50 m thick.

Primary Aquifer

Thorntonia Limestone

TL Dolomitic limestone and chert members. Up to 25-30 m thick. Siliceous in places due to replacement of dolomite. Sub metre chert bands within the mine area

Aquifer

Mount Birnie Beds

MBB Mudstone, siltstone and minor sandstone. Thickness varies to at least 318 m. Considered to be impermeable and the local hydrogeological basement

Hydrogeological Basement

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

ElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElbElb

OlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOlsOls

EmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmtEmt

EmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEmeEme

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

KOLAR CREEK

7,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,5417,541 7,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,5427,542

7,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,5607,560

51,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,03851,038

51,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,03951,039

51,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,04051,040

69,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,35469,354

69,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,35569,355

93,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,83993,839

Krucible Metals PtyKorella Phosphate Project

DERM Groundwater Bores Figure 1

LEGEND

S:\Hydrogeology\Projects\Geo-Hydro Search\Krucible Metals\Data\Hydrogeology.wor2011. Whilst every care has been taken to prepare this map, GHD (and DATA CUSTODIAN) make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitabilityfor any particular purpose and cannot accept liability and responsibility of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs(including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred by any party as a result of the map being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason.

C

201 Charlotte Street Brisbane QLD 4000 Australia 61 7 3316 3000 61 7 3316 3333 www.ghd.com.auT F W

Map Projection: Universal Transverse MercatorHorizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994

Grid: Map Grid of Australia, Zone 54

[email protected]

Job NumberRevision

Date

32-15953DRAFT12 JULY 2011

1:35,000

oClientLogo

(at A4)

Data source: GSQ, 1:100K Sheet 6854, 2007. GSQ, 1:250K Sheet NWER, 2007. DERM, Qld GWBD, 2010. Created by: MP

Ols - Ordovician-aged Swift Formation; siltstone, sandstone, chert.

Eme - Cambrian-aged Beetle Creek Formation; chert, siliceous shale with trilobite fossils, basal conglomerate.

Emt - Middle Cambrian-aged Thorntonia Limestone; grey crystalline limestone.

Elb - Cambrian-aged Mount Birnie beds; massive ferruginous sandstone, cross-bedded sandstone, conglomerate,red and green shale, mudstone, dolomite

Cz - Cainozoic-aged alluviual, colluvial and residual; sand, silt, gravel.

0

METRES

500 1000 1500

Project Area

5 km Buffer

Watercourse

" DERM Registered Bore

3


1.3 Groundwater Chemistry

In the absence of any site-specific background data, groundwater chemistry is assumed to be similar to that in the Beetle Creek Formation at Phosphate Hill. The groundwater chemistry is typically influenced by reaction with the carbonate minerals (Hill Berry and Forster 2000) resulting in elevated calcium and

carbonate/bicarbonate.

Typical Phosphate Hill groundwater chemistry (WMC Fertilisers, 2005) data are presented in Table 2. The data show a wide variation from fresh, high-quality water, within guideline limits for freshwater

aquatic (ANZECC & ARMCANZ 2000) ecosystems and drinking water (NHMRC & NRMMC 2004), to relatively saline water with metals, nutrients major and minor ions exceeding the guidelines. The groundwater quality is also likely to vary with depth, with fresher near the surface with salinity content

increasing with depth, with fresher found near preferential recharge areas such as trial mining pits. Only limited seasonal variation has been observed at Phosphate Hill (C & R Consulting 2010) although the low frequency (6 to 12-monthly) of sampling makes it difficult to determine a clear relationship with

rainfall. A clearer trend of increasing salinity with groundwater extraction has been noted (C & R Consulting 2010) which is consistent with gradually drawing deeper groundwater over time.

Low salinity levels were recorded in the Phosphate Hill mine area which was not expected, although this

is possibly due to the localised recharging of the system via trail pits prior to mine development in the early 2000s.

Previous reports (C & R Consulting 2010) suggested elevated sodium and chloride is due to halite

dissolution which is unlikely given the lack of observed halite and the depositional environment. The most likely source of elevated sodium and chloride is from the evapo-transpirative concentration of aerosol salts which commonly occurs in relatively arid regions.

Table 2 Regional Groundwater Chemistry (from WMC 2005)

Parameter Results Range

pH 6.9-7.9

EC 950-1530 μS/cm

Fluoride 0.48-1.5 mg/L

Chloride 88-260 mg/L

Total Dissolved Solids 610-1600 mg/L

Calcium 53-120 mg/L

Potassium 4-7 mg/L

Magnesium 32-50 mg/L

Sodium 84-170 mg/L

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.05-6.2 mg/L

Total Phosphorus 0.007-0.28 mg/L

4


Parameter Results Range

Arsenic 0.0006-0.0065 mg/L

Cadmium 0.002-0.01 mg/L

Lead 0.001-0.19 mg/L

Total Alkalinity 230-360 mg/L

Sulphate 33-135 mg/L

Silica 0.3-46 mg/L

1.4 Groundwater Recharge and Discharge

Groundwater recharge is likely to be primarily from direct rainfall recharge in the fractured and porous Beetle Creek Formation and alluvial aquifers, with additional streambed recharge occurring during periods of high flow. As noted above, local enhanced recharge may have occurred through former trial

pits at Phosphate Hill where the Beetle creek formation was exposed in the pits, which would have also collected surface water flow.

Rainfall recharge estimates using chloride analyses (rainfall values from Blackburn and McLeod, 1983)

suggest recharge to the aquifer is between 4 and 11 mm per year (PPK, May 2000) which is equivalent to 1-3% of Dajarra Average Annual rainfall of 382 mm/y.

Groundwater discharge is likely to be to local creeks and rivers in the eastern, lower areas of the half

basin. As groundwater flow to the east is likely to be blocked by the Mehaffey Fault, the areas of greatest groundwater discharge are likely to be immediately to the west of the fault.

1.5 Aquifer Hydraulic Properties

Key Beetle Creek Formation aquifer hydraulic properties at the Phosphate Hill Site (Hill Berry and Forster

2000) are:

Storativity 0.0001 (confined)

Specific yield (unconfined) 0.05 to 0.1

Transmissivity 1 to 2700 m2/day

Equivalent Hydraulic conductivity ~70 m/d

Recharge 4 to 11 mm/y

Mean thickness 24.7 m

The high permeability of the Beetle Creek Formation is reflected in the high yields obtained for

Phosphate Hill’s groundwater supply and dewatering operations, with some 200 L/s abstracted from four bores(C & R Consulting 2010). No data was available for the Thorntonia Limestone or Mount Birnie

5


Beds, but they are likely to be an order of magnitude (or more) lower, depending on local weathering and fracturing.

1.6 Depth to Groundwater

Bores registered on DERM’s GroundWater DataBase (GWDB) are marked on Figure 1. Hydrogeological

investigations within the Korella site lease in the late 1980s and early 1990s show that the depth to groundwater was at an average of 62.5 m in bore 69354 (Table 3), and an average of 61.6 m in bore 69355 (Table 4). No logs were available for these bores. This is in contrast to bores (51038 and 51040)

located a few kilometres north, outside the lease, which intersect groundwater at a depth of approximately 30 m. Unlike at the Phosphate Hill site to the north, this aquifer depth is unlikely to be intersected by open-pit mining operations.

Groundwater levels (Figure 2 and Figure 3) with monthly rainfall at Dajarra, and depths (Figure 4) are presented below. Figure 3 does not show any discernable change in water level with changing rainfall, even after high rainfall associated with the 1986/87 wet season.

Table 3 Groundwater data collected from DERM registered bore 69354 on the Korella lease site

Bore RN Easting Northing Date Datum (mAHD) GW Level (mAHD) GW Level (mAHD) 69354 394220 7573610 3/06/1985 280 -62 218 69354 394220 7573610 12/08/1986 280 -62.38 217.62 69354 394220 7573610 29/12/1987 280 -62.75 217.25 69354 394220 7573610 29/12/1988 280 -62.4 217.6 69354 394220 7573610 21/12/1989 280 -62.44 217.56 69354 394220 7573610 5/12/1990 280 -62.4 217.6

Table 4 Groundwater data collected from DERM registered bore 69355 on the Korella lease site

Bore RN Easting Northing Date Datum (mAHD) GW Level (mAHD) GW Level (mAHD) 69355 394232 7572784 3/06/1985 280 -60.87 219.13 69355 394232 7572784 12/08/1986 280 -61.52 218.48 69355 394232 7572784 29/12/1987 280 -62.8 217.2 69355 394232 7572784 29/12/1988 280 -61.55 218.45 69355 394232 7572784 21/12/1989 280 -61.55 218.45 69355 394232 7572784 5/12/1990 280 -61.56 218.44

6


Figure 2 Groundwater Elevation Time Series

7


Figure 3 Groundwater Elevation Time Series (69354 and 69355 only)

8


Figure 4 Groundwater Depth Time Series

1.7 Groundwater – Surface Water Interaction

There are several small drainage features within the mining lease which flow in various directions and enter the Bourke River, Kolar Creek, and Middle Creek. The drainage lines are ephemeral and only flow during, and for a short time after significant rainfall events.

The primary aquifer underlying the site is approximately 60 metres below the surface, and there is little information regarding the localised alluvial aquifers. Groundwater surface water interaction is expected to be limited and may include the following:

Drainage from perched/localised aquifers to surface waters directly after rainfall events, and;

Surface water drainage to aquifer, however as surface water drainage is ephemeral this is expected to be minimal.

9


Owing to the depth of groundwater in the region, and the ephemeral nature of the surface water systems, surface water groundwater interaction is likely to be limited, with greater hydraulic connectivity expected in the wet season. As the site is at the top of the catchment and does not cross any waterways there is

not expected to be any impacts to groundwater – surface water systems. Notwithstanding the above, there is potential for former mine pits to act as zones of preferential groundwater recharge if surface water is not diverted, as is suspected to have occurred at Phosphate Hill.

10


2. Discussion

2.1.1 Potential impacts

Potential adverse impacts on groundwater as the result of the project include:

Groundwater level:

– Groundwater extraction for consumptive use may lower groundwater levels and impact on discharge to streams and hence base flow; and

– Groundwater flow into mine workings from localised perched aquifers.

Groundwater quality

– Groundwater contamination through drainage from mine workings.

2.1.2 Groundwater Management and Monitoring

There are a number of factors that may mitigate mining operation impacts to the groundwater, and they

include:

The depth of mine operation is shallow, and work is not expected to intersect the primary aquifer;

The aquifer is approximately 60 metres below ground level, providing a significant thickness for

natural attenuation of contaminants;

Groundwater surface water interaction is expected to be minimal; and

Groundwater quality is variable.

To manage the potential impacts listed in section 2.1.1 the following will be implemented:

Install a groundwater monitoring network;

Carry out groundwater monitoring activities as listed in Table 12, section 5.6.3 of the EM Plan.

Monitoring of the groundwater levels using water level data loggers to assess groundwater response to recharge events;

Apply for groundwater abstraction permit, if a groundwater supply is required;

Install surface water monitoring points;

Carry out surface water monitoring in accordance with Table 12, section 5.6.3 of the EM Plan; and

Apply water management control strategies as listed in Table 7, Section 5.5 of the EM Plan.

11


3. References

Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ) 2000. Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality.

C&R Consulting Pty Ltd. 2010. Phosphate Hill Wider Aquifer Study, Comparison of the Saline Waters Beneath the Mine Site with Groundwaters of the District - Scientific Report of Results. Report Prepared

for: Incitec Pivot Limited & Dyno Nobel 5th November 2010

Hill C, Berry K, Forster D. 2000. Water Management for the Phosphate Hill Project Proceedings of the

"Hydro 2000" Conference, Perth, Western Australia, 2000

Land and Water Biodiversity Committee (LWBC), 2003. Minimum Construction Requirements for Water Bores in Australia.

PPK Environment & Infrastructure, May 2000, Surface & Groundwater Monitoring – Phosphate Hill – April 2000 Site Visit, Brisbane, QLD.

Rockwater, November 1985, Queensland Phosphate Limited: Phosphate Hill Water Supply, Evaluation of groundwater resources, November, 1985, Jolimont, WA

Rockwater, April 1990, Queensland Phosphate Limited – Groundwater Investigations February 1990 – Duchess Embayment, Queensland, April 1990, Jolimont, WA

Russell, R T & Trueman, N A , December 1971, The geology of the Duchess Phosphate Deposits, Northwestern Queensland, Australia, Economic Geology, Vol 66 No 8


GHD

10 Columnar Court, Burnie TAS 7320 PO Box 567, Burnie TAS 7320

T: 61 3 6432 7900 F: 61 3 6432 7901 E: [email protected]

© GHD 2011

This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose

for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

Document Status

Rev No.

Author Reviewer Approved for Issue

Name Signature Name Signature Date

0 Rob Virtue Cynthia Palfreyman

Rohan Koenig 28/07/11

32/15953/7699 Korella Phosphate Project

Environmental Management Plan

Appendix D

Korella Phosphate drill hole sample mass spectroscopy analysis

Korella Phosphate Project - Environmental Management Plan

Alu

min

ium

An

tim

on

y

Ars

en

ic

Ba

riu

m

Be

rylli

um

Bis

mu

th

Bo

ron

Ca

dm

ium

Ca

lciu

m

Ce

riu

m

Ce

siu

m

Ch

rom

ium

(III

+V

I)

Co

ba

lt

Co

pp

er

Ga

lliu

m

Ge

rma

niu

m

Go

ld

Ha

fniu

m

Ind

ium

Iro

n

La

nth

an

um

Le

ad

Lit

hiu

m

Ma

gn

es

ium

mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg

20 20 400 15 3 50 50 60 300

Location CodeSample Depth

Range (m) Sample Code

08CBRC-14 1-2 40026 18,900 0.15 3.1 300 0.79 0.13 10 0.07 26,400 39.7 1.31 24 9.9 14.6 5.71 <0.05 - 0.34 0.024 22,900 13.9 12.8 4.3 11,20008CBRC-14 16-17 40027 11,900 0.18 2.7 30 0.19 0.15 <10 0.02 10,900 17.6 1.3 20 0.4 9.2 6.53 <0.05 - 0.68 0.02 20,400 6.2 5.8 1.3 600008CBRC-14 32-33 40028 17,400 0.44 21 40 1.33 0.16 10 0.03 6300 3.6 3.56 54 4.8 69.1 5.54 0.05 - 0.51 0.063 58,500 1.6 1.6 3.7 470008CBRC-14 46-47 40029 18,200 0.59 10.1 310 4.12 0.25 10 0.13 13,400 70.6 4.81 31 13.9 72.7 6.75 0.07 - 0.22 0.036 26,900 33.5 7.5 10.2 870008CBRC-15 1-2 40034 18,800 0.55 19.5 1990 1.25 0.37 <10 0.07 4200 37.2 1.27 113 11.5 25.3 14.1 0.1 - 0.61 0.091 103,000 12.3 15.5 4.7 170008CBRC-20 1-2 40053 8000 0.59 14.8 40 3.06 0.12 20 1.36 42,300 22.9 1.1 23 4.3 41.3 2.59 0.05 - 0.23 0.016 18,600 11.8 218 3.7 100008CBRC-20 31-32 40054 10,400 0.32 1.6 40 0.91 0.35 10 <0.01 41,300 21.8 2.65 25 6.3 3.8 3.9 0.05 - 0.74 0.031 27,100 8.1 9.8 7.6 24,40008CBRC-21 1-2 40056 9100 0.42 1.6 130 1.01 0.49 20 0.02 24,400 13.3 3.4 26 6.2 4.3 3.52 0.05 - 0.58 0.033 28,700 5.6 4.7 6.8 16,60008CBRC-35 1-2 40099 22,300 0.57 11.9 1190 0.74 0.18 <10 0.03 8000 18.75 1.68 44 5.9 14 10.45 0.05 <0.001 0.5 0.035 42,400 7.8 7.9 6.2 300008CBRC-35 41-42 40100 15,900 0.48 5.9 1370 1.79 0.19 10 0.07 1800 56.7 2.76 18 4.6 29.2 5.42 0.06 0.001 0.46 0.03 18,400 24.9 5.3 7.3 320008CBRC-37 1-2 40105 23,000 0.5 11.3 330 0.97 0.14 <10 0.16 3300 21.5 1.16 54 5.7 18.9 10.75 0.05 0.001 0.41 0.058 54,300 8.4 7.4 6 210008CBRC-37 35-36 40106 8400 0.9 1 310 1.25 0.21 <10 0.05 3100 15.8 0.37 25 17.6 26 2.29 <0.05 <0.001 0.18 0.013 6800 9.4 29.4 3.5 30008CBRC-41 1-2 40117 15,800 2.24 12.5 980 0.96 0.19 10 0.04 14,400 20.3 1.07 69 5.6 17.3 7.53 0.07 0.005 0.44 0.043 57,900 10.7 11.4 3.9 370008CBRC-41 41-42 40118 23,900 1.97 2.3 230 2.28 0.31 10 0.19 5500 73.7 5.45 37 2.8 41.5 7.18 0.05 0.002 0.07 0.037 16,000 34.8 20.4 14.6 320008CBRC-46 1-2 40132 29,400 0.45 4.5 430 1.16 0.19 10 0.05 6500 48 2.04 44 13.5 20.3 9.3 0.06 0.007 0.46 0.036 34,700 16.8 15.1 9.5 450008CBRC-46 41-42 40133 23,100 1.13 9.7 150 4.75 0.25 10 0.64 19,600 79.2 10.4 39 47.1 76.2 7.52 0.08 <0.001 0.04 0.036 28,100 43.5 8.8 21.4 450009CBRC-123 1-2 40404 20,100 0.35 10.3 660 0.97 0.18 <10 0.04 2400 27.5 1.5 69 7.1 21.9 7.6 0.15 <0.002 0.38 0.056 59,400 11.9 14.5 8 240009CBRC-124 1-2 40407 19,200 0.78 6.3 990 0.86 0.17 <10 0.05 9700 35 1.24 34 7.7 16.6 8.66 0.11 0.007 0.37 0.037 31,700 15.1 23.9 5.5 330009CBRC-125 1-2 40410 17,900 0.34 5.5 300 0.66 0.14 <10 0.08 14,200 38.1 1.23 18 6.5 12.6 5.66 0.11 <0.002 0.35 0.026 22,100 15.1 13.8 4.4 540009CBRC-126 1-2 40413 19,800 0.37 10.5 1130 0.9 0.18 <10 0.09 4900 44.9 1.55 43 5.9 20.1 9.49 0.16 0.003 0.34 0.045 50,100 13.8 25.7 5.3 300009CBRC-126 38-39 40414 16,500 0.41 6 500 2.35 0.17 10 3.56 111,000 54.9 3.54 22 7.1 31 5.78 0.11 0.006 0.08 0.032 17,700 28 6.8 12.8 550009CBRC-127 1-2 40416 24,800 0.76 16 2380 3.2 0.18 10 0.3 39,600 73 4.05 34 10.8 50.2 7.99 0.22 0.007 0.05 0.048 51,000 35.9 14.8 10.1 360009CBRC-128 1-2 40419 24,300 0.3 12.6 510 1.01 0.17 <10 0.12 12,000 34.6 1.37 44 6.9 19.4 8.55 0.15 0.004 0.05 0.042 45,300 17.6 10.7 6.5 280009CBRC-129 1-2 40422 23,300 0.14 4.5 850 0.87 0.15 <10 0.04 3400 38.3 1.38 27 7 14.4 7.93 0.11 <0.002 0.4 0.033 30,900 13.2 9.6 7.3 260009CBRC-130 1-2 40425 15,800 0.14 2.7 2130 0.74 0.11 <10 0.02 2200 88.6 0.83 21 4.5 9.8 5.64 0.22 <0.002 0.2 0.024 16,400 48.5 6.7 4.7 100009CBRC-131 1-2 40428 32,800 0.42 19.8 1190 1.84 0.14 10 0.22 27,400 39.4 1.02 40 5.7 37.8 9.6 0.21 <0.002 0.03 0.081 83,800 19.3 71.3 7.4 240009CBRC-132 1-2 40431 9400 1.08 6.4 660 0.5 0.14 <10 0.04 28,500 15.05 0.34 27 3.1 27 5.03 0.07 <0.002 0.3 0.035 32,300 8.1 4.4 2.4 330009CBRC-134 1-2 40437 16,000 0.32 35.2 1500 1.9 0.1 <10 0.06 2300 23.4 0.34 66 2.8 37.6 7.09 0.34 0.003 0.04 0.08 202,000 18.7 6 2.8 100009CBRC-136 0-1 40443 9000 1.4 24.5 520 0.74 0.16 <10 0.04 11,700 11.55 0.3 29 6.4 29.1 5.77 0.19 0.003 0.19 0.053 123,500 5.5 6.8 2.1 130009CBRC-138 1-2 40449 10,400 0.22 15.9 660 0.44 0.29 <10 0.01 1500 10.85 0.73 50 4 11.5 9.67 0.12 <0.002 0.47 0.043 54,400 4 6.6 1.5 110009CBRC-138 28-29 40450 17,600 0.55 8.3 1830 2.54 0.28 10 0.11 3200 76.2 5.8 23 13.7 54.9 7.16 0.17 <0.002 0.17 0.044 32,700 36 7.9 10.7 310009CBRC-140 1-2 40455 10,600 0.81 74.3 280 1.89 0.07 <10 0.04 800 5.93 0.26 39 5.6 42.5 4.34 0.43 <0.002 0.03 0.075 258,000 2.6 2.9 1 30009CBRC-143 1-2 40464 19,000 0.28 10.3 780 1.03 0.18 <10 0.02 4300 26.8 1.11 54 7 20.5 8.34 0.12 <0.002 0.38 0.04 56,800 12.1 7.9 5.1 350009CBRC-143 30-31 40465 14,400 2.1 8 220 3 0.55 10 0.27 2800 63.4 4.17 32 21.3 59.1 7.07 0.14 <0.002 0.34 0.044 24,900 31.4 19.4 14.2 350009CBRC-150 1-2 40485 16,100 1.89 106.5 2830 1.09 0.25 <10 0.09 800 19.55 0.74 51 10.5 28.3 12.05 0.31 0.008 0.03 0.074 201,000 6.5 7.3 4.1 80009CBRC-155 1-2 40500 23,200 0.44 10.1 1230 0.95 0.23 <10 0.02 2400 26.9 1.54 59 7.7 17.5 10.65 0.13 0.004 0.47 0.043 56,600 12.3 9.2 7.2 370009CBRC-57 1-2 40165 22,300 3.78 14.6 900 1.05 0.42 <10 0.08 3300 48.8 1.53 105 9.8 21 12.75 0.15 0.002 0.29 0.081 86,300 10.5 16.2 7.7 150009CBRC-60 1-2 40174 23,200 0.99 4.7 390 0.98 0.18 <10 0.07 10,200 36.7 1.86 40 12.6 19.9 7.77 0.1 <0.002 0.41 0.034 33,000 15 10.5 6 480009CBRC-60 42-43 40175 22,200 2.1 15.5 200 4.48 0.3 10 0.76 29,400 60.7 3.46 21 12.9 84.6 6.85 0.12 <0.002 0.03 0.032 21,400 29.2 14.6 12 250009CBRC-62 1-2 40180 24,300 0.81 58.4 340 2.13 0.26 <10 0.06 2200 31.8 0.85 246 8.6 32.7 25.6 0.27 <0.002 0.04 0.322 164,000 10.7 15.4 6.2 80009CBRC-62 33-34 40181 1900 0.3 0.7 150 0.25 0.07 <10 <0.01 400 9.55 0.12 11 0.8 4.2 0.93 <0.05 0.003 0.06 0.005 7200 7 5.8 0.4 10009CBRC-63 1-2 40183 22,500 1.96 21.2 250 2.2 0.16 <10 0.07 3600 31.6 1.22 78 8.7 46.8 10.35 0.17 <0.002 0.04 0.084 99,700 12.4 10.3 4.9 260009CBRC-64 1-2 40186 18,900 2.4 111.5 120 2.58 0.14 <10 0.07 1900 19.05 0.43 166 3.2 58.6 11.05 0.32 0.084 0.04 0.275 228,000 8.3 9.3 3.3 90009CBRC-65 1-2 40189 30,100 2.42 19.2 100 1.65 0.25 <10 0.33 14,400 37 2.14 73 9.1 39.6 11.3 0.11 0.007 0.02 0.065 65,500 14.8 71.6 12.9 430009CBRC-66 1-2 40192 19,100 2.88 5 330 0.69 0.15 <10 0.04 13,200 31.2 1.42 37 9.7 20.8 6.84 0.07 0.005 0.36 0.032 31,700 12.3 10.4 5.1 420009CBRC-66 36-37 40193 28,400 1.06 11.1 8210 3.76 0.27 10 0.1 13,000 76 12.2 36 8.7 57.2 8.03 0.15 <0.002 0.05 0.04 27,800 44.4 9.4 16 460009CBRC-68 1-2 40198 19,900 4.76 4.1 330 0.73 0.16 <10 0.04 7900 35.5 1.62 35 10.4 17.8 7.23 0.07 <0.002 0.4 0.032 31,100 12.6 9.1 4.4 300009CBRC-69 1-2 40201 20,900 2.97 3.7 190 0.89 0.13 10 0.1 19,100 37.1 1.46 24 10.1 18.3 6.44 0.08 0.004 0.1 0.025 22,500 16.1 9.9 5.4 360009CBRC-69 50-51 40202 15,600 1.95 11.6 160 2.5 0.44 10 0.62 6900 71.3 8.38 30 26.8 66.5 6.67 0.1 0.003 0.06 0.036 31,600 33.2 15.6 12.3 300009CBRC-70 1-2 40204 25,200 1.06 3.3 100 0.81 0.14 10 0.05 23,500 34.6 1.69 28 10.4 15.9 7.56 0.07 0.002 0.48 0.03 26,000 12.1 8.4 6 490009CBRC-70 36-37 40205 11,500 2.76 14.9 360 2.13 0.31 <10 0.23 2100 50.5 3.43 19 15.9 39.7 5.35 0.09 <0.002 0.13 0.035 44,300 21.7 13.2 5.3 150009CBRC-71 1-2 40207 29,600 1.59 4.1 320 1.42 0.14 10 0.45 35,000 39.7 1.93 33 12.9 18.6 8.61 0.12 <0.002 0.03 0.033 27,100 20.2 21.3 9.4 430009CBRC-74 1-2 40216 27,300 5.66 3.7 350 0.79 0.15 10 0.03 19,500 32.1 1.59 32 9.7 16.1 8.07 <0.05 <0.002 0.42 0.03 29,900 12.9 7.2 6.6 500009CBRC-76 1-2 40222 26,600 1.27 4.4 630 0.93 0.18 10 0.04 12,200 37 1.63 44 11 18.3 8.7 <0.05 0.002 0.34 0.034 34,300 15 9.2 6.6 500009CBRC-78 1-2 40228 26,700 0.71 4.3 440 0.83 0.15 10 0.02 13,900 31.6 1.59 38 9.2 16.3 8.23 <0.05 <0.002 0.4 0.032 33,500 13 7 5.9 500009CBRC-79 1-2 40231 27,800 0.97 132.5 100 2.66 0.13 <10 0.06 900 24 0.78 124 4.2 40.1 11.6 0.22 <0.002 0.03 0.156 274,000 11.2 6.4 6.5 70009CBRC-80 1-2 40234 21,900 1.53 53.6 930 1.15 0.18 10 0.06 20,300 25 1.09 96 6.3 23.8 15 <0.05 <0.002 0.32 0.061 89,400 10 17.1 5.4 370009CBRC-83 1-2 40243 17,800 1.64 32.7 1570 1.93 0.13 <10 0.07 3800 17.8 0.63 72 3.6 25.6 8.99 0.08 <0.002 0.05 0.09 149,500 8.4 4 4.8 140009CBRC-84 1-2 40246 21,100 2.84 37.9 170 2.66 0.08 <10 0.05 1400 19.25 0.39 146 7 39.4 9.89 0.18 0.003 0.03 0.366 264,000 6 4.8 3.4 60009CBRC-91 1-2 40267 27,700 0.21 7.7 800 1 0.18 10 0.04 6300 34.7 1.76 50 10.4 19.7 9.91 <0.05 <0.002 0.39 0.042 40,900 12 9.4 7.1 350009CBRC-91 28-29 40268 14,300 2.07 8.9 340 1.9 0.61 10 0.11 1600 72.2 2.27 23 6.9 29.6 6.42 <0.05 <0.002 0.47 0.028 23,800 35 27 9.9 250009CBRC-92 1-2 40270 28,700 0.22 6.3 430 1.06 0.2 <10 0.03 5300 35.7 1.68 59 11 18.3 9.96 <0.05 <0.002 0.43 0.044 42,500 12.6 11.2 8.9 220009CBRC-93 1-2 40273 21,500 0.21 2.8 490 0.71 0.13 <10 0.03 10,600 30.9 1.46 27 10.2 15.2 6.89 <0.05 - 0.33 0.023 23,500 13.6 7.6 5.7 440009CBRC-93 42-43 40274 17,200 0.47 3.8 410 1.58 0.2 <10 0.08 1900 41.5 4.44 25 34.5 54.2 6.26 0.06 - 0.46 0.034 25,100 19.5 4.7 9.3 360009CBRC-94 1-2 40276 32,100 0.29 3.7 370 1.09 0.15 10 0.06 9200 39.3 2.01 36 13.7 28.5 10.05 0.07 - 0.23 0.036 28,500 14.6 10.7 9.9 360009CBRC-94 34-35 40277 10,200 1.55 11.3 260 1.79 0.33 <10 0.14 1400 60.3 0.51 19 3.6 33.6 5.23 0.05 - 0.33 0.034 17,800 26.8 15.9 2.4 500

Statistical SummaryNumber of Results 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 54 66 66 66 66 66 66 66Number of Detects 66 66 66 66 66 66 29 64 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 54 24 66 66 66 66 66 66 66Minimum Concentration 1900 0.14 0.7 30 0.19 0.07 <10 <0.01 400 3.6 0.12 11 0.4 3.8 0.93 <0.05 <0.001 0.02 0.005 6800 1.6 1.6 0.4 100Minimum Detect 1900 0.14 0.7 30 0.19 0.07 10 0.01 400 3.6 0.12 11 0.4 3.8 0.93 0.05 0.001 0.02 0.005 6800 1.6 1.6 0.4 100Maximum Concentration 32,800 5.66 132.5 8210 4.75 0.61 20 3.56 111,000 88.6 12.2 246 47.1 84.6 25.6 0.43 0.084 0.74 0.366 274,000 48.5 218 21.4 24,400Maximum Detect 32,800 5.66 132.5 8210 4.75 0.61 20 3.56 111,000 88.6 12.2 246 47.1 84.6 25.6 0.43 0.084 0.74 0.366 274,000 48.5 218 21.4 24,400Average Concentration 19,564 1.2 17 739 1.6 0.21 7.5 0.18 12,286 37 2.2 49 9.4 30 8.1 0.11 0.004 0.27 0.056 61,200 17 16 6.8 3647Median Concentration 19,500 0.77 9.9 380 1.09 0.18 5 0.06 6700 34.85 1.515 36.5 7.7 24.55 7.58 0.085 0.001 0.325 0.036 32,850 12.95 9.5 6 3200Standard Deviation 6625 1.1 26 1111 1 0.11 3.3 0.47 16,310 20 2.2 39 7.3 19 3.4 0.086 0.011 0.19 0.063 64,625 11 28 3.9 3638Number of Guideline Exceedances 0 0 12 32 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 21 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Number of Guideline Exceedances(Detects Only) 0 0 12 32 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 21 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Background RangesNEPM 1-50 100-3000 1 5-1000 1-40 2-100 2-200

DME (1995) Assessment and Management of Acid Drainage

NSW Radiation Control Regulation (2003)

Korella Phosphate Project - Environmental Management Plan

Location CodeSample Depth

Range (m) Sample Code

08CBRC-14 1-2 4002608CBRC-14 16-17 4002708CBRC-14 32-33 4002808CBRC-14 46-47 4002908CBRC-15 1-2 4003408CBRC-20 1-2 4005308CBRC-20 31-32 4005408CBRC-21 1-2 4005608CBRC-35 1-2 4009908CBRC-35 41-42 4010008CBRC-37 1-2 4010508CBRC-37 35-36 4010608CBRC-41 1-2 4011708CBRC-41 41-42 4011808CBRC-46 1-2 4013208CBRC-46 41-42 4013309CBRC-123 1-2 4040409CBRC-124 1-2 4040709CBRC-125 1-2 4041009CBRC-126 1-2 4041309CBRC-126 38-39 4041409CBRC-127 1-2 4041609CBRC-128 1-2 4041909CBRC-129 1-2 4042209CBRC-130 1-2 4042509CBRC-131 1-2 4042809CBRC-132 1-2 4043109CBRC-134 1-2 4043709CBRC-136 0-1 4044309CBRC-138 1-2 4044909CBRC-138 28-29 4045009CBRC-140 1-2 4045509CBRC-143 1-2 4046409CBRC-143 30-31 4046509CBRC-150 1-2 4048509CBRC-155 1-2 4050009CBRC-57 1-2 4016509CBRC-60 1-2 4017409CBRC-60 42-43 4017509CBRC-62 1-2 4018009CBRC-62 33-34 4018109CBRC-63 1-2 4018309CBRC-64 1-2 4018609CBRC-65 1-2 4018909CBRC-66 1-2 4019209CBRC-66 36-37 4019309CBRC-68 1-2 4019809CBRC-69 1-2 4020109CBRC-69 50-51 4020209CBRC-70 1-2 4020409CBRC-70 36-37 4020509CBRC-71 1-2 4020709CBRC-74 1-2 4021609CBRC-76 1-2 4022209CBRC-78 1-2 4022809CBRC-79 1-2 4023109CBRC-80 1-2 4023409CBRC-83 1-2 4024309CBRC-84 1-2 4024609CBRC-91 1-2 4026709CBRC-91 28-29 4026809CBRC-92 1-2 4027009CBRC-93 1-2 4027309CBRC-93 42-43 4027409CBRC-94 1-2 4027609CBRC-94 34-35 40277

Statistical SummaryNumber of Results

Number of Detects

Minimum Concentration

Minimum Detect

Maximum Concentration

Maximum Detect

Average Concentration

Median Concentration

Standard Deviation

Number of Guideline Exceedances

Number of Guideline Exceedances(Detects Only)

Background RangesNEPM

DME (1995) Assessment and Management of Acid Drainage

NSW Radiation Control Regulation (2003)

Ma

ng

an

es

e

Me

rcu

ry

Mo

lyb

de

nu

m

Nic

ke

l

Nio

biu

m

Ph

os

ph

oru

s

Po

tas

siu

m

Rh

en

ium

Ru

bid

ium

Sc

an

diu

m

Se

len

ium

Silv

er

So

diu

m

Str

on

tiu

m

Su

lph

ur

as

S

Ta

nta

lum

tellu

riu

m

Th

alli

um

Th

ori

um

Tin

Tit

an

ium

Tu

ng

ste

n

Ura

niu

m

Va

na

diu

m

Ytt

riu

m

Zin

c

Zir

co

niu

m

Ra

dio

ac

tiv

ity

mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg

500 1 4 60 3 20 5000 50 70 200

1

499 <0.01 0.69 11.2 0.05 90 1200 <0.001 19.2 5 0.3 0.08 1700 90.5 7500 <0.01 0.03 0.12 4.5 0.9 140 0.36 1.58 57 14.05 56 10.6 0.01786 <0.01 0.54 2.6 <0.05 70 500 <0.001 5.8 2.7 <0.2 0.06 500 27.7 <100 <0.01 0.02 0.07 2.8 1.4 70 <0.05 0.43 147 2.89 8 18.3 0.008138 <0.01 3.36 22.2 0.07 570 3100 <0.001 34.7 16.4 0.4 0.1 400 20.8 <100 <0.01 0.01 0.45 9.5 1.1 200 0.14 2.26 216 7.85 70 18.1 0.030128 <0.01 2.35 40.8 0.1 2800 5100 <0.001 79 6.7 0.6 0.1 400 295 100 <0.01 0.02 1 11 1.3 170 0.13 5.77 69 33.1 256 8.1 0.051234 0.01 1.84 19.4 0.15 430 1100 <0.001 16.8 10.5 1.1 0.24 700 76.3 500 <0.01 0.17 0.17 7.6 1.7 400 0.13 1.38 325 23 21 23.5 0.022202 0.26 3.33 34.7 0.53 21,600 2800 <0.001 12.4 2.4 0.6 0.34 300 30.1 300 <0.01 0.01 0.13 3.9 0.6 60 1.06 8.12 27 16.9 316 7.1 0.048

1410 <0.01 0.8 18.8 0.19 700 5200 <0.001 32.8 5.5 1.1 0.09 300 34.6 100 <0.01 0.02 0.15 7.3 1 400 0.28 1.43 40 13.85 20 23.2 0.0221010 0.02 1.13 15.9 0.17 750 4600 <0.001 35.8 5.2 <0.2 0.04 300 31.6 100 <0.01 0.02 0.19 7.6 1.1 370 0.41 1.78 38 9.54 19 17 0.024189 <0.01 1.22 12.9 0.08 340 1700 <0.001 18.7 5.2 0.5 0.02 900 79 500 <0.01 0.06 0.14 4.2 1.8 160 0.52 0.74 137 9.12 41 15.8 0.012131 0.01 1.08 28.8 0.06 960 3400 <0.001 50.9 6.4 0.3 0.06 300 103 <100 <0.01 0.01 0.7 8.4 1 110 0.34 3.31 56 21.3 224 14.6 0.033172 0.01 1.63 11 0.06 510 1000 <0.001 14.4 7.7 0.6 0.1 900 57.9 300 <0.01 0.07 0.13 4.1 1.7 210 0.12 1.02 172 12.4 28 16.6 0.013366 0.02 0.46 4.5 0.08 1640 800 <0.001 4.5 7.9 0.5 0.07 100 313 100 0.01 0.04 0.23 4 0.5 <50 1.74 6.18 29 141 10 6.7 0.039246 0.01 1.84 12 0.09 170 1000 <0.001 12.6 4.6 1.3 0.07 1000 89.4 2800 <0.01 0.12 0.13 5 1 200 0.36 1.69 165 12 25 15.1 0.01867 0.01 1.76 21.8 0.09 2930 6400 <0.001 48.6 8.1 0.6 0.11 300 143 <100 <0.01 0.03 0.94 11.5 1.5 150 0.2 5.02 168 23.7 166 3.3 0.048496 0.01 0.76 15.9 0.07 420 2300 <0.001 31.2 8.2 0.3 0.02 1600 93.8 1700 <0.01 0.06 0.25 6.2 1.3 230 0.19 1.3 90 16.85 34 15.2 0.019453 0.08 2.59 89 0.23 8880 7200 <0.001 96.2 8.9 0.8 0.35 400 79.2 200 0.01 0.03 1.15 11.1 1.4 240 0.29 5.55 95 68.1 306 2.5 0.050277 0.02 1.52 15.2 0.14 390 2000 0.001 23 6.5 0.9 0.08 100 46.1 200 <0.01 0.11 0.15 5.9 1.1 320 4.45 0.96 147 11.5 22 13.3 0.017213 0.01 2.83 12.5 0.09 550 1500 <0.001 19.5 6.2 0.7 0.02 1000 95.6 500 <0.01 0.1 0.15 5 1.6 170 0.37 1.48 127 15.25 43 13.3 0.017315 0.01 4.1 12.1 0.08 730 1500 <0.001 13.7 4 0.5 0.05 400 99.6 400 <0.01 0.05 0.68 3.7 0.9 120 1.11 1.22 61 8.11 61 11 0.014369 0.01 3 14.6 0.07 610 1700 0.001 18.1 5.9 1.5 0.05 900 72.1 700 <0.01 0.08 0.22 6.2 1.6 130 1.37 2.16 174 23.2 39 11.7 0.023301 0.21 1.75 111.5 0.13 3390 5600 0.001 43.9 6.4 1.2 0.08 300 179.5 300 <0.01 0.02 0.47 8.5 1.1 140 0.24 2.03 53 29.5 417 4.1 0.027110 0.03 2.7 51 0.31 17,700 4200 0.001 35.3 8.4 1.9 0.08 1200 260 1100 <0.01 0.07 0.26 7.5 1.3 210 1.57 8.61 116 63.8 283 2.2 0.058241 0.02 4.77 15 0.12 4190 1700 <0.001 17.9 6.8 1.1 0.03 800 91.5 500 <0.01 0.09 0.17 5.6 1.1 220 1.49 2.42 121 23 88 2.8 0.023171 0.02 0.6 12 <0.05 490 1600 0.001 20.3 6.2 0.6 0.02 700 81.3 600 <0.01 0.05 0.15 4.1 1.3 180 0.09 0.77 88 10.05 26 12.7 0.012145 <0.01 0.42 8.8 0.05 1640 800 0.001 10.4 5.4 1.4 0.02 100 895 800 <0.01 0.06 0.1 3 0.8 100 0.29 1.66 41 21.7 13 5.4 0.014181 0.09 2.99 23.8 0.19 6960 1400 0.001 13.1 8.6 1.3 0.13 300 192 600 <0.01 0.11 0.26 4.3 1.2 320 0.24 4.52 167 19.95 218 2.2 0.03152 0.01 1.43 14.5 0.11 430 1000 0.001 7 5.2 0.7 0.04 500 96.4 400 <0.01 0.06 0.05 4.5 1 120 0.13 0.85 158 7.7 75 9 0.01351 0.04 4.82 11.3 0.24 5210 300 0.001 3.6 19.4 4.8 0.08 300 322 700 <0.01 0.08 0.05 3.3 0.9 210 0.23 7.68 179 21.9 28 1.7 0.045321 0.01 8.41 28.2 0.27 1000 500 <0.001 4.8 6 1.1 0.08 800 45.5 1000 <0.01 0.08 0.04 3 1.1 170 0.71 1.44 157 9.35 88 8.6 0.013134 0.01 2.37 7.2 0.06 450 300 <0.001 5.2 4.4 0.9 0.02 300 40.2 200 <0.01 0.08 0.07 4.8 1.9 190 0.33 0.66 170 6.9 14 17.4 0.01384 0.01 1.7 42.5 0.15 2770 4900 0.001 48.6 7.1 3 0.1 200 263 100 0.01 0.03 0.41 11.7 1.3 190 0.26 4.88 78 104 148 5.5 0.048101 0.02 14.3 55.4 0.35 4710 300 <0.001 2.2 11.6 0.9 0.05 100 19.1 200 <0.01 0.05 0.03 2.5 0.5 190 0.2 3.3 222 11.45 170 1.7 0.022197 0.01 1.27 15.4 0.08 470 1800 <0.001 17.2 5.8 0.9 0.02 700 131 400 <0.01 0.06 0.13 5.6 1.3 180 0.22 1.02 121 12.15 41 12.9 0.01685 0.01 5.63 94.7 0.11 1670 5300 <0.001 47.8 7.1 1.5 0.14 200 63.2 100 <0.01 0.05 0.89 13.5 1.2 150 0.11 5.97 195 15.4 332 12 0.057193 0.01 15.95 67.8 0.41 2740 800 0.001 8.6 10 2.3 0.08 200 34.5 900 <0.01 0.09 0.12 6.9 2.1 380 0.21 2.4 268 18 306 2.9 0.026258 <0.01 1.57 13.7 0.07 310 1900 0.001 19.4 7.3 1.5 0.05 700 84 500 <0.01 0.09 0.25 5.6 1.8 230 0.15 1.09 162 12.15 27 15.9 0.017307 0.03 2.26 17.9 0.19 760 1200 0.001 16.3 8.1 1.4 0.2 <100 33 100 <0.01 0.2 0.22 7.7 2.2 360 0.74 1.57 270 11.2 36 12.8 0.023469 0.01 0.91 16.2 0.06 240 1900 <0.001 27 7.1 0.6 0.02 800 85.7 2400 <0.01 0.04 0.24 5.9 1.1 160 1.31 1.65 91 16.3 34 12.8 0.020306 0.01 6.96 77.4 0.2 14,150 5200 <0.001 37 9.2 1 0.2 200 94.9 <100 <0.01 0.07 3.05 10.8 1.3 170 0.43 6.98 146 46.8 201 1.4 0.05785 0.05 7.56 26.1 0.36 1960 900 <0.001 10.7 19.4 7 0.85 <100 30.6 100 <0.01 0.3 0.1 9.9 2 550 0.34 6.11 932 21.8 19 2.4 0.05049 <0.01 0.39 2.4 <0.05 370 300 <0.001 1.6 1.2 0.3 0.01 100 82 <100 <0.01 0.02 <0.02 2.7 0.4 <50 3.68 1.13 12 8.39 3 1.8 0.011340 0.02 2.94 20.3 0.17 1680 1200 <0.001 17 21.5 1.8 0.04 700 52.6 400 <0.01 0.16 0.15 5.1 1.4 310 0.3 10.75 448 22.7 35 1.7 0.06479 0.12 10.8 22.1 0.57 4000 400 0.001 4.3 42.4 3.7 0.28 100 17 100 <0.01 0.37 0.08 4.8 1.4 670 0.36 14.45 1150 25.2 24 1.7 0.082440 0.12 2.4 30.3 0.22 4030 2100 <0.001 27.8 9.7 1.2 0.25 200 43.6 100 <0.01 0.09 0.59 7.3 1.5 260 0.71 4.48 189 16.25 243 2.1 0.037320 0.01 0.88 12.9 0.07 250 1100 <0.001 17.9 5.3 0.7 0.03 1100 84.7 5300 <0.01 0.07 0.15 5.3 1 160 0.36 1.44 90 11.75 30 12.6 0.018100 0.01 3.32 37.4 0.22 11,400 6100 0.002 89.6 7.9 1.7 0.13 <100 321 200 <0.01 0.03 1.76 12.6 1.3 280 0.24 9.46 93 64 292 2.2 0.073388 0.01 0.76 12.4 0.05 460 1600 <0.001 24.3 7 0.5 0.02 1000 74.1 3200 <0.01 0.03 0.15 5.9 1.1 130 0.53 1.68 87 12.9 31 12.3 0.020346 0.02 0.68 14.3 0.09 2440 1300 <0.001 19.5 5.8 0.5 0.03 1300 101 8700 <0.01 0.02 0.13 5.2 0.9 160 0.87 4.32 63 20.2 42 4.9 0.032831 0.01 4.78 74.9 0.16 3280 5100 <0.001 51.3 7.5 1.6 0.12 200 69.4 100 <0.01 0.02 3.13 12.9 1.2 180 0.22 8.57 212 85.1 253 2.8 0.069369 <0.01 0.58 13.2 0.06 830 1500 <0.001 22.4 6.2 0.4 0.01 1900 110 15,700 <0.01 0.03 0.15 5.1 1.1 190 0.77 3.59 67 12.65 30 14.8 0.02872 <0.01 7.76 93.7 0.12 1790 2400 <0.001 22.2 5.8 0.9 0.06 100 147 100 <0.01 0.02 0.79 8.9 1 200 0.26 8.36 189 31.6 287 4.5 0.060324 0.02 0.77 14.9 0.18 9750 1600 <0.001 23.3 6.9 0.8 0.03 1300 149 7700 <0.01 0.09 0.25 5.5 1.1 250 1.11 14.55 73 37.5 53 2.8 0.084380 <0.01 0.57 12.8 0.05 270 1600 <0.001 22.8 6.7 0.4 0.01 1900 105.5 11,700 <0.01 0.03 0.16 5 1.1 250 0.5 1.35 74 12.15 27 13.5 0.017448 <0.01 0.71 13.7 <0.05 290 1500 <0.001 21.8 7.6 0.5 0.02 1300 100.5 4000 <0.01 0.04 0.18 5.4 1.3 230 0.36 1.44 91 15.45 28 11.3 0.018358 <0.01 0.64 12.8 0.06 280 1700 <0.001 22.3 6.9 0.5 0.02 1800 92.2 7700 <0.01 0.04 0.15 5 1.1 270 0.73 1.51 86 11.3 27 13.2 0.01875 0.02 23.1 23.2 0.41 3990 800 <0.001 9.4 20.9 3.6 0.05 100 69.1 400 <0.01 0.29 0.09 5.3 1.3 530 0.49 5.18 727 23.3 29 2.6 0.037176 0.01 5.26 14.8 0.09 1070 1500 <0.001 15 9.1 1.7 0.1 700 98.3 700 <0.01 0.08 0.28 5.7 1.9 260 0.43 1.97 427 10.65 37 14.5 0.02171 0.02 8.03 28.6 0.19 2840 700 <0.001 6.9 16.1 1.7 0.05 500 62.7 600 <0.01 0.13 0.06 3.3 1.2 240 0.29 2.7 292 13.6 84 3.7 0.02063 0.03 5.27 23.9 0.35 5150 400 <0.001 4.7 37.8 1.4 0.09 <100 22.2 <100 <0.01 0.35 0.05 3.7 1.1 350 0.21 8.05 1500 29.5 24 2.3 0.048394 <0.01 3.98 15.2 <0.05 240 1800 <0.001 25.2 8.3 0.6 0.03 1100 76.1 2000 <0.01 0.05 0.17 6 1.4 220 0.24 1.49 118 14.35 33 13.6 0.01935 <0.01 3.97 50.4 0.06 1420 4700 <0.001 30.2 6.1 0.9 0.04 200 239 100 <0.01 0.05 0.65 11.5 1.2 140 0.13 3.16 155 29.3 131 13.1 0.039310 0.01 2.75 15 0.05 610 2100 <0.001 26.6 8.2 0.4 0.04 200 45.6 100 <0.01 0.06 0.21 6.1 1.4 250 0.3 1.16 122 14.85 25 14.4 0.018339 0.01 2.47 10.9 0.12 210 1200 <0.001 17.6 5.2 0.4 0.02 1300 85.9 1100 <0.01 0.06 0.12 4.4 0.9 230 1.13 1.15 62 12.55 24 11 0.015257 0.02 1.36 37.7 0.11 540 4600 0.001 54 8.6 0.4 0.11 300 124.5 100 <0.01 0.01 0.88 8.1 1.2 170 0.15 2.41 61 7.87 152 18.4 0.028501 <0.01 5.77 13.6 0.08 1220 2100 <0.001 28.4 7.9 0.5 0.01 1200 81.7 2800 <0.01 0.05 0.17 5.1 1.3 220 0.74 1.95 73 17.85 38 8.9 0.02055 0.01 1.99 30.5 0.14 1490 1400 <0.001 7.8 6.4 0.8 0.1 100 208 100 <0.01 0.04 0.08 9.5 1.2 120 0.27 5.05 94 44.8 101 10.5 0.044

66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 6666 49 66 66 61 66 66 16 66 66 64 66 62 66 59 3 66 65 66 66 64 65 66 66 66 66 66 6635 <0.01 0.39 2.4 <0.05 70 300 <0.001 1.6 1.2 <0.2 0.01 <100 17 <100 <0.01 0.01 <0.02 2.5 0.4 <50 <0.05 0.43 12 2.89 3 1.4 0.00835 0.01 0.39 2.4 0.05 70 300 0.001 1.6 1.2 0.3 0.01 100 17 100 0.01 0.01 0.03 2.5 0.4 60 0.09 0.43 12 2.89 3 1.4 0.008

1410 0.26 23.1 111.5 0.57 21,600 7200 0.002 96.2 42.4 7 0.85 1900 895 15,700 0.01 0.37 3.13 13.5 2.2 670 4.45 14.55 1500 141 417 23.5 0.0841410 0.26 23.1 111.5 0.57 21,600 7200 0.002 96.2 42.4 7 0.85 1900 895 15,700 0.01 0.37 3.13 13.5 2.2 670 4.45 14.55 1500 141 417 23.5 0.084271 0.025 3.4 27 0.15 2671 2220 6E-04 24 8.9 1.1 0.092 603 115 1520 0.005 0.075 0.38 6.4 1.2 221 0.58 3.6 191 24 97 9.5 0.031

237.5 0.01 2.305 15.9 0.105 980 1600 5E-04 19.45 7.05 0.85 0.06 400 85.2 400 0.005 0.055 0.165 5.6 1.2 200 0.335 2.095 121.5 15.85 38.5 10.8 0.02229 0.044 4 24 0.12 4123 1764 3E-04 19 6.9 1.1 0.12 511 124 2972 0.001 0.076 0.58 2.8 0.36 115 0.74 3.2 252 24 106 6 0.019

4 0 17 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 14 0 04 0 17 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 14 0 0

850 0.03 5-500 20-500 10-300


APPENDIX G – C&R (2010) ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY

363

ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR PHM SOUTH PHOSPHATE PROJECT

PREPARED FOR:

KRUCIBLE METALS LTD

Date: July 2010

CLIENT: KRUCIBLE METALS LTD PROJECT: PHM SOUTH PHOSPHATE PROJECT REPORT: ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY DATE: JULY 2010

2

IMPORTANT NOTE No part of this document may be reproduced without written permission from the Clients and C&R Consulting Pty Ltd. If this report is to form part of a larger study, or is a response to a “Request for Additional Information” from a Compliance Agency, this report must be included as an Appendix within the full report without any additions, deletions or amendments. C&R Consulting Pty Ltd do not accept any responsibility in relation to any financial and/or business decisions made for any other property or development other than that for which this information has been provided.

Dr Chris Cuff Director C&R Consulting Geochemical and Hydrobiological Solutions Pty Ltd Date: 30 July 2010

Dr Cecily Rasmussen Director C&R Consulting Geochemical and Hydrobiological Solutions Pty Ltd Date: 30 July 2010


3

SUMMARY OF RELEVANT INFORMATION Project Title Draft Environmental investigation at the PHM

South Phosphate Project.

Property Location 55k 393939 UTM 7574619

Project Purpose A preliminary investigation of environmental factors including an Assessment of terrestrial fauna and flora values, sediment runoff analysis and dust particle investigation

Applicants Details

Nominated Representative Ray Koenig

Title/Position Director

Company Krucible Metals Ltd - Mineral Discovery Company

Telephone 0411 258 394


Survey Undertaken by: B Cuff, B Campbell, L Thorp, M Knott L.Harvey

Report Compiled by: B Cuff

Internal Review Dr Cecily Rasmussen

Acknowledgements Various people have assisted us during the preparation of this report. We would particularly like to thank the following people for their advice, logistical support and assistance: • Mr Greg Ford (Principal Ecologist) –

Balance! Environmental, Bat Call Analysis • Ms Georgeanna Story – Scats About,

Mammal Hair Sample Analysis • Mr Chris Corben – Hoarybat, Amphibian

Advice • Dr Betsy Jackes – Plant Systematics



4

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 8

1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ............................................................................9 1.2 SCOPE OF WORKS .......................................................................................9 1.3 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT................................................................................11

1.3.1 Federal Legislation – Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 ......................................................................................................11

1.3.2 Queensland Legislation – Nature Conservation Act (1992) / Regulation 2006........11 1.3.3 Queensland Legislation – Vegetation Management Act 1999 .................................12

2. SITE DESCRIPTION................................................................................................... 13 2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT...................................................................................13 2.2 CLIMATE ................................................................................................13 2.3 CURRENT CONDITION OF THE SITE..................................................................16 2.4 PREVIOUS SURVEYS ...................................................................................16

3. FLORA AND FAUNA SURVEY METHODOLOGY..................................................... 18 3.1 DESKTOP STUDY AND BACKGRROUND RESEARCH .................................................18 3.2 FLORA SURVEY.........................................................................................18

3.2.1 Regional Ecosystem Assessment ............................................................................19 3.2.2 Regional Ecosystem Definitions ...............................................................................19 3.2.3 Vegetation Management Act (1999) status ..............................................................19 3.2.4 Biodiversity Status ....................................................................................................20

3.3 FAUNA SURVEYS AND ASSESSMENTS ...............................................................21 3.4 SITE SELECTION .......................................................................................21 3.5 FAUNA SURVEY TECHNIQUES .......................................................................24

3.5.1 Pitfall traps ................................................................................................................24 3.5.2 Elliott Trap Surveys...................................................................................................25 3.5.3 Spotlighting ...............................................................................................................25 3.5.4 Anabat Surveys.........................................................................................................26 3.5.5 Habitat Searches for Reptiles and Amphibians ........................................................26 3.5.6 Diurnal Avifauna Surveys .........................................................................................26 3.5.7 Infrared Camera........................................................................................................27 3.5.8 Incidental Records ....................................................................................................27

3.6 RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES ...................................................................27 3.6.1 Target Species..........................................................................................................27

3.7 MIGRATORY SPECIES..................................................................................28 4. TAXONOMY AND NOMENCLATURE........................................................................ 29 5. FLORA AND FAUNA RESULTS................................................................................ 30

5.1 REGIONAL ECOSYSTEMS OF THE PROJECT AREA...................................................30 5.2 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES OF THE PROPOSED MINING AREA ..................................34

5.2.1 Mitchell Grass Plains on Heavy Clay Soils ...............................................................34 5.2.2 Spinifex Hummock Grasslands on Red Earths with Lateritic Gravel........................35 5.2.3 Hummock Grasslands with Snappy Gum Emergents ..............................................37 5.2.4 Mixed Shrublands .....................................................................................................38 5.2.5 Mixed Open Shrublands on Laterite and Lateritic Gravels .......................................40

5.3 FAUNA HABITATS ......................................................................................41 5.4 WEATHER CONDITIONS DURING THE SURVEY PERIOD ...........................................45


5

5.5 FAUNA SPECIES RECORDED DURING THE SURVEY ................................................45 5.5.1 Birds..........................................................................................................................45 5.5.2 Reptiles .....................................................................................................................51 5.5.3 Amphibians ...............................................................................................................51 5.5.4 Mammals ..................................................................................................................54

6. DISCUSSION AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON FLORA AND FAUNA............ 56 6.1 GENERAL................................................................................................56 6.2 REGIONAL ECOSYSTEMS ..............................................................................56 6.3 BIRDS ...................................................................................................56 6.4 MAMMALS...............................................................................................57 6.5 REPTILES ...............................................................................................57 6.6 AMPHIBIANS............................................................................................57 6.7 RARE AND THREATENED FLORA SPECIES ...........................................................58 6.8 RARE AND THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES RECORDED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING WITHIN

THE STUDY AREA .......................................................................................58 6.8.1 Square-tailed Kite (Lophoictinia isura)......................................................................58 6.8.2 Common Death Adder (Acanthophis antarcticus) ....................................................58 6.8.3 Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus)....................................................59 6.8.4 Pictorella Mannikin (Heteromunia pectoralis) ...........................................................59 6.8.5 Australian Painted Snipe (Rostratula australis) ........................................................59 6.8.6 Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) ......................................................................59 6.8.7 Striated Grasswren (Amytornis striatus) ...................................................................60 6.8.8 Purple-necked Rock Wallaby (Petrogale purpureicollis) ..........................................60 6.8.9 Julia Creek Dunnart (Sminthopsis douglasi) ............................................................60

7. SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 62 7.1 SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF ANALYSIS RESULTS ........................................................62 7.2 SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS ....................................................66

8. DUST.......................................................................................................................... 67 8.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................67 8.2 METHODOLOGY – SAMPLE COLLECTION OF DUST..................................................67

8.2.1 Equipment:................................................................................................................67 8.2.2 Equipment Constraints: ............................................................................................67 8.2.3 Sample Analyses ......................................................................................................68

8.3 RESULTS ................................................................................................68 8.4 ASSESSMENT ...........................................................................................71

9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS.............................................................. 72 9.1 FLORA ...................................................................................................72 9.2 FAUNA...................................................................................................72 9.3 SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF...............................................................................72 9.4 DUST ...................................................................................................73

10. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 74


6

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Proposed PHM South Phosphate Project – Study Areas for the Wet and Dry Season

Survey Periods ..................................................................................................................10 Figure 2: Vegetation cover of the PHM South Phosphate Project Area during the dry season. ......17 Figure 3: Vegetation cover of the PHM South Phosphate Project Area during the wet season. .....17 Figure 4: Survey site locations..........................................................................................................22 Figure 5: Photograph of vegetative cover within the proposed mine development footprint during

the dry season. ..................................................................................................................23 Figure 6: Photograph of vegetative cover within the proposed mine development footprint during

the wet season...................................................................................................................23 Figure 7: Distribution of Regional Ecosystems within the proposed mine area. ..............................31 Figure 8: Vegetation Management Act status of Regional Ecosystems within the proposed mine

area....................................................................................................................................32 Figure 9: Biodiversity status of Regional Ecosystems within the proposed mine area. ...................33 Figure 10: Spinifex Hummock Grasslands ........................................................................................37 Figure 11: Hummock Grasslands with Snappy Gum emergents.......................................................38 Figure 12 : Mixed Shrublands ..............................................................................................................40 Figure 13: Pitfall trap line located within the Mitchell Grass Plains ...................................................42 Figure 14: Fauna survey location looking west across the proposed mining area ............................42 Figure 15: Fauna survey location at freshwater bore located within Mitchell Grass Plains (Dry

season) ..............................................................................................................................43 Figure 16: Fauna survey location within Hummock Grasslands with Snappy Gum emergents .........43 Figure 17: Fauna survey location within the Spinifex Hummock Grasslands habitat ........................44 Figure 18: Fauna survey location within Mixed Shrubland habitat ....................................................44 Figure 19: a) Tesselated Gecko (Diplodactylus tesselatus); and b) Red-sided Ctenotus (Ctenotus

pulchellis) ...........................................................................................................................51 Figure 20: a) Stripe-faced Dunnart (Sminthopsis macroura) and b) House Mouse (Mus musculus) .54 Figure 22: Dust Monitoring Sites within the PHM South Phosphate Project area..............................69 Figure 23: (A) Typical Dust Deposit Gauge, and (B) Typical Deposit Gauge Stand ..........................70


7

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Annual rainfall averages recorded at The Monument (between 1976 and 2007) .............14 Table 2: Annual rainfall averages recorded at Phosphate Hill (between 1975 and 2007) ..............15 Table 3: Average and maximum monthly rainfall recorded at The Monument................................15 Table 4: Average and maximum monthly rainfall recorded at Phosphate Hill.................................16 Table 5: Vegetation Management Act 1999 and Biodiversity Status Descriptions .........................20 Table 6: Rare or threatened terrestrial fauna species, listed under Queensland and/or

Commonwealth legislation, predicted to occur within the area (R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered; I: Introduced) ...........................................................................................28

Table 7: Migratory species, listed under Commonwealth legislation, predicted to occur within the area....................................................................................................................................28

Table 8: Plant species within the Mitchell Grass Plains area ..........................................................35 Table 9: Plant Species within Spinifex Grasslands. ........................................................................36 Table 10: Plant species within Hummock Grassland with Snappy Gum...........................................37 Table 11: Plant species within Mixed Shrublands .............................................................................39 Table 12: Plant species within Mixed Open Shrublands on Laterite and Lateritic Gravel.................40 Table 13: Weather during the Dry Season Survey Period ................................................................46 Table 14: : Weather during the Wet Season Survey Period..............................................................47 Table 15: Birds recorded during the survey (M: Migratory; R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E:

Endangered) ......................................................................................................................48 Table 16: Reptiles species recorded during the survey (R: rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered) ....52 Table 17: Amphibian species recorded during the survey (R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E:

Endangered; *: Unconfirmed) ............................................................................................53 Table 18: Mammal species recorded during the survey (R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered) ..55 Table 19: Soil Samples Results compared to Investigation Thresholds for Contaminants in Soils

(DGAMCLQ 1998 and ANZECC 2000). ............................................................................64 Table 20: Water Quality within Creek Runoff from Phosphate Hill Mine Compared to ANZECC

Guidelines (2000). .............................................................................................................65 Table 21: Summary of Stream Sediment and Water Sample Results ..............................................66 Table 22: Co-ordinates for the PHM South Phosphate Project..........................................................67 Table 23: Dust Collection Results, PHM South Phosphate Project. .................................................69

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1: Regional Ecosystems observed within the study area, as described in the

Regional Ecosystem Description Database ................................................................77 Appendix 2 Flora Species List ........................................................................................................86 Appendix 3 Species predicted to occur within a 50km radius from the study area, using the

point coordinates: Latitude -21.58194 and Longitude 140.3838 .................................89 Appendix 4 Species previously recorded within 25km of the study area using the point

coordinates: Latitude -21.8638 and Longitude 139.9734 .............................................93 Appendix 5 Results of Anabat Microbat Call Analysis ....................................................................97 Appendix 6 Results of Dust Sampling……….…………………………………………………………105


8

1. INTRODUCTION C&R Consulting Pty Ltd (C&R) was commissioned by Krucible Metals Ltd to undertake a preliminary environmental investigation for the proposed PHM South Phosphate Project, situated immediately to the south of the current Phosphate Hill Mine (Figure 1). The study included:

• A baseline investigation for flora and fauna across the site.

• A preliminary investigation into water quality / in-stream sediments currently draining the site and,

• The establishment of dust monitoring sites across the area, with a preliminary evaluation of the dust particles to establish base line data prior to mine production.

This report outlines the findings of the above environmental investigations.

The flora and fauna component of the survey was undertaken over two periods (dry and wet seasons) to sample the seasonal variations in species assemblages. The dry season survey was conducted between 11th and 18th December 2009. The wet season survey period was undertaken during the 8th to the 15th April 2010 following significant rains in the area from late December to late March and focus on the whole of the PHM South Phosphate Project area . In stream sediments were taken as quickly as possible after a rainfall event during the wet season survey period. Dust monitoring stations were established during this same period.

The botanical surveys involved the mapping of vegetation types and classification of these communities in accordance with the methodology set down by Neldner (2005) in Methodology for survey and Mapping of Regional Ecosystems and Vegetation Communities in Queensland (Version 3.1. Updated September 2005). During both survey periods an inventory of vascular plants encountered across the study area was compiled.

The fauna survey techniques employed were selected to provide a comprehensive inventory of terrestrial vertebrate species occurring or utilising the study area. The surveys undertaken involved the use of pitfall traps and Elliott box traps, spotlighting surveys, active searches, a remote camera trial, anabat surveys and avifauna (bird) surveys. In addition, any opportunistic sightings of fauna were recorded.

Sediment samples from within the major gullies/creeks were taken to provide insight into the stream sediment load currently running off the proposed mining area.

Dust monitoring stations were established around the proposed mining area to establish background levels of dust currently being mobilised across the site. These dust monitoring stations will also be used during the mining operation.

The survey efforts were concentrated on the area delineated for proposed mining activities, according to the Krucible Metals Ltd Annual Report, additional details provided by Krucible Metals Ltd Management, and the Initial Advice Statement prepared for the establishment of the mining camp. To allow for consistency in any future, replicated studies, survey methods were developed in accordance with recognised and recommended Guidelines where this was possible and/or applicable to the site. Where the recommended Guidelines were not suited to the site, the survey methods used, and the sites selected for sampling, have been fully documented.


9

This report documents: • The survey methodologies adopted, • The findings of the survey, • The potential impacts on the project, and • Recommendations to reduce the potential for any deleterious impacts on the ecological

values within the area.

This report, therefore, provides input into the overall Conceptual and Feasibility Study for the project.

1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The objectives were to: • Undertake a fauna and flora survey during both wet and dry seasons to identify the

ecological values of the area that may potentially be impacted by the proposed PHM South Phosphate mining operation.

• Evaluate preliminary water and soil characteristics for runoff areas within the study site,. • Establish dust monitoring stations across the site to assess current dust levels and

establish a baseline for these levels. • Allow for initial characterisation of the pre-development ecological values and conditions

of the site. This information can then be used throughout the life of the mine project to set ecological priorities, comparisons and targets for conservation, guide and inform compliance monitoring, and assist future site rehabilitation and restoration following completion of the extraction activities;

• Produce a report detailing the findings of the survey and provide preliminary assessments of potential impacts of the proposed mine and mining activities on fauna and flora species, populations and communities, particularly those of conservation significance listed under Queensland and Commonwealth legislation;

• Produce an inventory of fauna and flora species detected and/or considered as potentially occurring within the site, and

• Provide recommendations including mitigation measures to ensure that any deleterious impacts on fauna and flora species within the study area are minimised.

1.2 SCOPE OF WORKS C&R Consulting were required to undertake the following tasks: • Detailed desktop analysis of existing data, reports and published papers; • Development of appropriate survey methodologies for terrestrial fauna, vegetation and

flora surveys for the project area, • Undertake seasonal field surveys for terrestrial fauna and flora, and • Provide an assessment of the potential deleterious impacts of the proposed mining

operations on the ecological values of the study and surrounding habitats.


10

Figure 1: Proposed PHM South Phosphate Project – Study Areas for the Wet and

Dry Season Survey Periods


11

1.3 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT Management of rare or threatened wildlife species is governed by Queensland and Commonwealth legislation. The main legislation relevant to the current study is outlined below.

1.3.1 FEDERAL LEGISLATION – ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION (EPBC) ACT 1999

The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), administered by the Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), provides a legal framework for the protection and management of Matters of National Environmental Significance (NES). These include: • Listed threatened species and ecological communities; • Migratory species protected under international agreements; • Ramsar wetlands of international importance; • The Commonwealth marine environment; • World Heritage properties; • National Heritage places; and • Nuclear actions.

Two matters of NES may be relevant to this study: • Nationally threatened species and ecological communities; • Migratory species protected under international agreements. Migratory species are

considered to be any species that migrates to Australia and its external territories, or passes through or over Australian waters during their annual migrations. All species on the list of migratory species are matters of national environmental significance under the EPBC Act.

The EPBC Act protects Australia's native species and ecological communities by providing: • Identification and listing of species and ecological communities as threatened; • Development of conservation advice and recovery plans for listed species and

ecological communities; • Development of a register of critical habitat; • Recognition of key threatening processes; and • Appropriate threat abatement plans.

Under the EPBC Act, an action will require approval from the Federal Environment Minister if the action has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on a listed species or another Matter of National Environmental Significance. Significant impacts include those that degrade areas of important habitats for listed species, or disrupt the lifecycle of ecologically significant populations of listed species.

1.3.2 QUEENSLAND LEGISLATION – NATURE CONSERVATION ACT (1992) / REGULATION 2006

The Nature Conservation Act 1992 is administered by the Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) for the conservation of nature. The Nature Conservation Act is based on principles to conserve biological diversity, ecologically sustainable use of wildlife, ecologically sustainable development and uses international criteria developed by the World Conservation Union (International Union for the


12

Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) for establishing and managing protected areas.

The object of the Nature Conservation Act (1992) is the conservation of nature through an integrated and comprehensive conservation strategy for the whole of Queensland that includes the following: • Gathering, researching and disseminating information on nature, identifying critical

habitats and areas of major interest, and encouraging the conservation of nature by education and co-operative involvement of the community;

• Dedication and declaration of areas representative of the biological diversity, natural features and wilderness of Queensland as protected areas;

• Managing protected areas; • Protecting native wildlife and its habitat; • ecologically sustainable use of protected wildlife and areas; • Recognition of the interests of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders and their co-

operative involvement in nature conservation; and • Co-operative involvement of landholders.

The Nature Conservation Act (1992) protects wildlife habitat and regulates the taking and use of wildlife. 'Wildlife' means any taxon or species of an animal, plant, protista, or virus. The Act, regulations and associated subordinate legislation provide protection for a range of rare and threatened species, which are considered to be “endangered”, “vulnerable”, “rare” and “near threatened” in Queensland.

1.3.3 QUEENSLAND LEGISLATION – VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ACT 1999

Queensland's vegetation management framework is a combination of existing legislation including State policies, Regional Vegetation Management Codes, Offset Policies, Regrowth Vegetation Codes, Material Change of Use and Reconfiguring a Lot Guidelines. Vegetation management is regulated through the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VMA), administered by the Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM). The purpose of this Act is to regulate the clearing of vegetation in a way that: • Conserves remnant vegetation that is:

- an Endangered Regional Ecosystem; or

- an Of Concern Regional Ecosystem; or - a Least Concern Regional Ecosystem; and

• Conserves vegetation in declared areas; • Ensures the clearing does not cause land degradation; • Prevents the loss of biodiversity; • Maintains ecological processes; • Manages the environmental effects of clearing to achieve the matters mentioned above,

and • Reduces greenhouse gas emissions.


13

2. SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT The PHM South Phosphate Project Area is located approximately 140km southeast of Mt Isa and 150km southwest of Cloncurry in the Georgina Basin of the Burke catchment. The site lies on the margin of the Mitchell Grass Downs Bioregion, immediately to the south of the existing Phosphate Hill Mine.


• Mitchell Grass Plains on heavy clay soils;

• Spinifex Hummock Grasslands on red earths with lateritic gravel;

• Hummock Grasslands with Snappy Gum (Eucalyptus leucophloia) emergents; and

• Mixed Shrublands.


The main land uses in the surrounding area include pastoral (in particular cattle grazing), and mining, with the Phosphate Hill Mine immediately to the north. Other large mines operating within 100km of the site include Osborne and Cannington. A number of smaller mines also operate within this area.


2.2 CLIMATE The area is within the seasonally arid tropics where rain of any significance only falls during the November to March wet season. Based on available data, the average rainfall for the area is approximately 320 mm a year (Table 1 and Table 2), with around 75% of the rain falling between November and March.

Climatic data are not available for the PHM South Phosphate Project. Hence, information had to rely on two adjacent Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) monitoring stations (Phosphate Hill, BOM Station 36016, and The Monument, BOM Station 36017). Rainfall from Phosphate Hill has been monitored since 1975, but missing data limits the usable rainfall information in this data set to an intermittent 25 year period. No supporting climatic data (temperature etc) has been collected at the Phosphate Hill Monitoring Station. Rainfall has been monitored at The Monument since 1976, supplemented by additional climatic information (temperature, humidity) from 2000. Missing data limits the usable rainfall information in this data set to an intermittent 33 year period, with 10 years of supporting climatic data, but no comparative information from other locations. In addition, The Monument is located approximately 20km from the PHM South Phosphate site and may, therefore, be subject to local variability’s.

From the usable rainfall data provided by these two stations, it would appear that rainfall typically only occurs during the November to March wet season (Table 3 and Table 4). The average rainfall within a year is approximately 320 mm, varying between 80.4 mm and 687.8 mm. This is typical of the dry tropics where long periods of aridity are interspersed by short periods of rainfall. Further, based on previous experience in the region, it is


14

common to have over 300 days in any year where evaporation exceeds rainfall, even on days of intense rainfall. Therefore, very little rainfall may actually remain on site, or be available for groundwater recharge.

Based on 2009 data for The Monument, annual temperature can fluctuate from 1.50C to 43.80C, while the 9am humidity can vary from 6% - 95%, with the average humidity around 40%. These factors combine to create high evaporation rates in the area. Also, during the winter there may be a variation of temperature of over 250C within a single day. This large change in temperature over a short period of time creates environmental conditions peculiar to the area.

The high variability within the climatic data suggests that the use of averages is not appropriate for any assessment of the environment. For example, in 1981 The Monument received 299 mm of rainfall within one month (almost equivalent to the yearly average), with almost half the annual total (150 mm) falling in a single day. These intense rainfall events are not uncommon in this area, with five events occurring in the past 30 years that have resulted in more than 100 mm rainfall in one day. Further, maximum rainfall for the area is over double the yearly average, with the minimum rainfall nearly a quarter of the annual average.

Therefore, to accurately reflect the rainfall and temperature within the site, it is also important to consider the intense variation within the site (Tables 1 to 4).

Table 1: Annual rainfall averages recorded at The Monument (between 1976 and 2007)

Year Rainfall

(mm) Year

(Cont) Rainfall

(mm) 1976 106.8 1993 396.5

1977 423.5 1994 118.7

1978 241.3 1995 260.5

1979 132.3 1996 224.4

1980 293.2 1997 826.8

1981 531.9 1998 432.7

1982 226 2001 262.6

1983 258 2002 53.7

1984 643 2003 388.5

1985 250.4 2004 396.1

1986 192.4 2005 373.9

1987 260.2 2006 298.9

1988 279.6 2007 350.4

1989 174.3 Average 313.5 1990 205.9 Minimum 53.7 1991 467.3 Maximum 826.8 1992 335.9


15

Table 2: Annual rainfall averages recorded at Phosphate Hill (between 1975 and 2007)

Year

Rainfall (mm)

Year (Cont)

Rainfall (mm)

1975 195.5 1989 216.5

1976 357.7 1990 137.6

1977 530.1 1997 687.8

1978 467.8 1998 445.4

1979 425.7 2001 279.6

1980 301.9 2002 80.4

1981 412.5 2003 598.1

1982 150.9 2004 419.9

1983 211.6 2005 306.4

1984 577.9 2007 261.6

1985 184.8 Average 327.0 1986 120.9 Minimum 80.4 1987 225.3 Maximum 687.8 1988 251.9

Table 3: Average and maximum monthly rainfall recorded at The Monument

Month Average Maximum January 84.7 299.0 February 66.2 203.3 March 26.8 232.0 April 15.9 125.2 May 19.7 103.0 June 13.1 79.4 July 10.7 75.0 August 5.9 47.8 September 5.1 37.0 October 14.0 66.2 November 28.9 119.0 December 50.9 220.0


16

Table 4: Average and maximum monthly rainfall recorded at Phosphate Hill

Month Average Maximum January 87.1 262.2 February 68.5 219.8 March 26.2 232.0 April 19.2 123.8 May 12.7 63.2 June 11.7 72.4 July 11.4 71.6 August 5.2 41.2 September 7.4 45.4 October 11.9 69.6 November 24.4 85.4 December 61.6 239.5

2.3 CURRENT CONDITION OF THE SITE Historically the study site and surrounding parcels of land have been extensively grazed. During the dry season surveys very little ground cover was present. This was partially attributed to heavy grazing in the drought-like conditions experienced at the end of the dry season, and the succession of poor rainfall years prior to the 2009 / 2010 wet season. In contrast, the vegetation cover observed during the wet season surveys was extensive with the majority of the study area dominated by perennial grasses, herbs and forbs. The most dominant species throughout the study area was Aristida inaequiglumis, which indicates declining, or poor, pasture condition.

Invasive plant species were also observed throughout the site, with Prickly Acacia (Acacia farnesiana) the most dominant weed species recorded.

Several small drainage features occur within the site. These features drain in several directions as the mining lease is located on a very shallow ridge line. No water was observed in any of these drainage features during the wet and dry study times of this survey. Surface water was located at Kolar Creek, which is approximately 200m outside the study area. This surface water is the result of dewatering processes from Phosphate Hill Mine. Surface water was also observed in the cattle dams located at the onsite bore.

2.4 PREVIOUS SURVEYS This combined wet and dry season survey constituted the first fauna and flora surveys undertaken on this site. It is understood that a number of surveys have been undertaken on the adjacent Phosphate Hill Mine lease. Extensive datasets of fauna and flora species known to occur in the area are likely to exist. However, at the time of preparation of this report, these previous reports were not available for review.

A desktop review of all other available literature relevant to the study site was conducted prior to field investigations undertaken in December 2009.


17

Figure 2: Vegetation cover of the PHM South Phosphate Project Area during the

dry season.

Figure 3: Vegetation cover of the PHM South Phosphate Project Area during the

wet season.


18

3. FLORA AND FAUNA SURVEY METHODOLOGY

3.1 DESKTOP STUDY AND BACKGRROUND RESEARCH The desktop study: • Accessed and reviewed available information, including but not limited to:

- Regional Ecosystem Description Database and Regional Ecosystem maps (DERM);

- Topographic data; - Aerial photographs and satellite imagery;

- Existing species lists; - Database searches including:

§ Wildlife Online Database search (Actual records - from point coordinates - Latitude: -21.8638 and Longitude: 139.9734 with a buffer distance of 25km);

§ Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 Protected Matters Report (predicted occurrence - from point coordinates – Latitude: -21.58194 and Longitude: 140.3838, with a buffer distance of 50km);

§ International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN); § JAMBA; CAMBA; and other international treaties for the conservation of

migratory species;

- Internet searches; - Previous reports;

- Review of fauna and flora survey guidelines, and - Review of all relevant legislation

§ Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 2006 of the Nature Conservation Act (1992)

§ Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 • Allowed for a preliminary assessment of current and potential impacts on significant

vertebrate fauna populations and habitats; • Summarised and collated a list of recorded fauna and flora species within the site and

an inventory of additional species likely to utilise or occur on the site and adjacent areas; and

• Pre-determined likely appropriate survey sites based on Regional Ecosystem mapping, habitat types and other relevant information.

The desktop review provided adequate background information to develop and design an appropriate survey methodology for the fauna and flora surveys.

3.2 FLORA SURVEY Preliminary flora surveys: • Provided on-ground verification of pre-selected survey sites based on extent of habitat

factors, Regional Ecosystems and other relevant site-specific features;


19

• Offered initial on-ground assessment of each pre-selected survey site to allow for informed additional site-selection for future terrestrial ecological surveys;

• Collected preliminary flora species data; • Reviewed preliminary onsite factors that may influence the biodiversity of the Project

area; • Assessed potential impacts to flora communities within the Project area.

3.2.1 REGIONAL ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT

The following section details the methodology adopted for the initial study of the vegetation communities within the survey area.

The Queensland Government has a recognised framework for the assessment and management of vegetation communities in Queensland. This framework, the Regional Ecosystem Framework, is linked closely to the Vegetation Management Act 1999.

A brief explanation of the Regional Ecosystem Framework is discussed in Section 3.2.2. Additional information is also readily available on the Queensland Government’s Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) website at (www.derm.qld.gov.au).

3.2.2 REGIONAL ECOSYSTEM DEFINITIONS

The Regional Ecosystem classification scheme is part of the Biodiversity Planning Framework that has been developed to assist the DERM to plan for the management of biodiversity both on and off Queensland Government reserves. The framework has been incorporated into several planning initiatives including the development of guidelines for clearing on leasehold lands under the Lands Act 1994 and more recently the Vegetation Management Act 1999. It has also been used in the preparation of, or amendments to, local government planning schemes, the assessment of the comprehensiveness, adequacy and representation of the conservation reserve networks and as a guide for proactive conservation actions by government and non-government organisations.

Regional Ecosystems have been defined by Sattler and Williams (1999) as vegetation communities in a bioregion that is consistently associated with a particular combination of geology, landform and soil types. Therefore, it is possible to have a very similar (almost identical) vegetation type with a different Regional Ecosystem code if the landform and soil types differ between areas. This situation is found on the PHM South Phosphate Project site in areas where the complex nature of the geology and the landforms differ, but the vegetation remains relatively similar. While this is of little consequence to the PHM South Phosphate Project, it needs to be noted for future assessment purposes.

Each Regional Ecosystem is allocated a conservation status under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Vegetation Management Act Status). A ‘Biodiversity Status’ as recognised by the DERM, is also assigned to each Regional Ecosystem based on the specific biodiversity characteristics of that habitat type.

3.2.3 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ACT (1999) STATUS

The Vegetation Management Act (1999) status is based on the Biodiversity Status of each Regional Ecosystem. Biodiversity Status is defined below in Section 3.2.4.

http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/


20

3.2.4 BIODIVERSITY STATUS

Biodiversity Status is defined by the Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM), and is based on an assessment of the condition of remnant vegetation in addition to the pre-clearing and remnant extent of a Regional Ecosystem. The status of a Regional Ecosystem for both the Vegetation Management Act and Biodiversity Status can be listed as ‘Endangered’, ‘Of Concern’ or ‘Not of Concern’. The explanation of these terms is given below (Table 5).

Table 5: Vegetation Management Act 1999 and Biodiversity Status Descriptions

Vegetation Management Act / Biodiversity Status

Description

Endangered A Regional Ecosystem is listed as ‘Endangered’ under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 if: • Remnant vegetation is less than 10 per cent of its pre-clearing

extent across the bioregion, or • 10-30 per cent of its pre-clearing extent remains and the

remnant vegetation is less than 10,000 hectares. In addition to the criteria listed for an endangered Regional Ecosystems under the Vegetation Management Act 1999, for biodiversity planning purposes the DERM also classifies a Regional Ecosystem as Endangered if: • Less than 10 per cent of its pre-clearing extent remains

unaffected by severe degradation and/or biodiversity loss; or • 10-30 per cent of its pre-clearing extent remains unaffected by

severe degradation and/or biodiversity loss and the remnant vegetation is less than 10,000 hectares; or

• It is a rare Regional Ecosystem subject to a threatening process. Of Concern A Regional Ecosystem is listed as ‘Of Concern’ under Vegetation

Management Act 1999 if: • Remnant vegetation is 10-30 per cent of its pre-clearing extent

across the bioregion; or • More than 30 per cent of its pre-clearing extent remains and the

remnant extent is less than 10,000 hectares. In addition, for biodiversity planning purposes the DERM also classifies a Regional Ecosystem as ‘Of Concern’ if: • 10-30 per cent of its pre-clearing extent remains unaffected by

moderate degradation and/or biodiversity loss. No Concern at Present

A Regional Ecosystem is listed as ‘Least concern’ under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 if: • Remnant vegetation is over 30 per cent of its pre-clearing extent

across the bioregion, and the remnant area is greater than 10,000 hectares.

In addition to the criteria listed for ‘Least concern’ Regional Ecosystems under the Vegetation Management Act 1999, for biodiversity planning purposes a Regional Ecosystem is listed with a Biodiversity Status of ‘No concern at present’ if: • the degradation criteria listed above for ‘Endangered’ or ‘Of

concern’ Regional Ecosystems are not met.


21

3.3 FAUNA SURVEYS AND ASSESSMENTS Dry and wet season fauna surveys were undertaken (11th to 18th December 2009 and 8th to 16th April 2010 respectively) to maximise the probability of detection of vertebrate fauna species and to identify trends in species assemblages and habitat utilisation associated with seasonality.

The dry season survey was limited to the proposed development area with 6 formal sites established. The wet season survey expanded the study area in order to determine the spatial representation of vegetation communities and the associated habitats outside the proposed development footprint. This included the establishment of a further 10 sites within the mine lease.

The survey was conducted under the following licences and permits: • CA 2008/01/236 Animal Ethics Approval for Fauna Surveys in Queensland – C&R

Consulting, issued by DPI&F Community Access Animal Ethics Committee; and • WISP04976108 Scientific Research and Educational Purposes Permit, issued by

Queensland DERM.

3.4 SITE SELECTION Survey sites were pre-selected based on aerial photograph interpretation to ensure representative stratification units were adequately sampled across the study area. The analysis of vegetation, landform and soils was undertaken on phototype patterns from digitised photography at a scale of 1:5,000.

Six trapping sites were established in the field concentrating on the proposed mining area for the dry season survey. An additional 10 pitfall sites were established in areas proximal to the proposed development footprint for the wet season survey. The locations of the dry and wet season survey sites are shown in Figure 4 below.


22

Figure 4: Survey site locations


23

Figure 5: Photograph of vegetative cover within the proposed mine development

footprint during the dry season.

Figure 6: Photograph of vegetative cover within the proposed mine development

footprint during the wet season.


24

3.5 FAUNA SURVEY TECHNIQUES Fauna surveys techniques involved: • Pitfall trapping, predominantly for reptiles but also targeting amphibians and small

mammals; • Elliott trapping for small mammals; • Opportunistic habitat searches for reptiles and amphibians; • Spotlighting for nocturnal fauna; • Anabat surveys; • Diurnal surveys for birds, identified by sight and call; • Use of an infrared camera to capture photographic evidence of wildlife activity; • Searches for signs of fauna activity (including scats and pellets, tracks, diggings,

scratch marks, nests, shed skins), and • Opportunistic observations within and outside the study area.

Section 3.5.1 to 3.5.8 below outline the survey effort and survey methodologies used in both the dry and wet season survey periods.

3.5.1 PITFALL TRAPS

3.5.1.1 DRY SEASON SURVEYS

A total of six pitfall trap-lines comprised one PVC bucket (200 mm diameter, 400 mm deep) set into the ground with the lip flush with the ground surface, and 20 metres of drift fencing, also dug into the ground (400 mm high).

Two pitfall traps were established at each site, set approximately 30m-50m apart, depending on the habitat, terrain and conditions at each site, with drift fencing positioned at right angles to each other. A total of 12 pitfall traps were established across the six sites in the study area. Traps were checked twice daily in the early morning and late afternoon.

All pitfall traps were opened for five consecutive days/nights. In total 60 pitfall trap nights were undertaken during the dry season surveys.

3.5.1.2 WET SEASON SURVEYS

The pitfall trapping programme was expanded during the wet season surveys to include an additional 10 pitfall trap line sites, and included the re-establishment of the 6 dry season pitfall trap-line sites. At one of these sites only one of two original trap lines were re-established as the second pitfall line was not able to be located due to vegetation growth during the wet season precluding the

While the additional pitfall lines were generally established in accordance with the configuration for the wet season surveys, a number of the pitfall trap lines were not fenced on the first night of the trapping and, based on the trap success equating to the established fenced trap-line, some of the outlying trap lines were not fenced for the entire period (trap sites N1, N10).

All pitfall traps were opened for five consecutive days/nights. In total, 155 pitfall trap nights were undertaken during the wet season surveys.


25

3.5.2 ELLIOTT TRAP SURVEYS


Elliott traps were deployed at each survey site. Each trap-line consisted of seven traps, with the exception of Site 6 where six Elliott traps, spaced approximately 10m apart, were installed. These lines were placed approximately 30m from, and parallel to, the pitfall traps. A small bait of peanut butter, rolled oats, honey and mixed dried fruit was placed in all Elliott traps. As there was little cover under which to place them, all Elliott traps were left open at night and closed each morning to avoid overheating of animals that may have potentially been caught during the day.

All Elliott traps were opened for four consecutive nights giving a trap effort of 164 trap nights for the dry season surveys


Elliott traps were deployed at each of the 5 survey sites. Each trap-line consisted of ten traps, spaced approximately 10m apart. These lines were installed approximately 30m from, and parallel to, the pitfall traps. As reported for the dry season survey, a small bait of peanut butter, rolled oats, honey and mixed dried fruit was placed in all Elliott traps. Again, all Elliott traps were left open at night and closed each morning to avoid the potential of inadvertent trapping and overheating during the day.

All Elliott traps were opened for four consecutive nights giving a trap effort of 200 trap nights for the wet season surveys.

3.5.3 SPOTLIGHTING

Spotlighting, both on foot (using head torches, handheld torches and variable intensity spotlights) and by car, was undertaken, targeting reptiles, amphibians, bats, terrestrial mammals and nocturnal birds during both the survey periods.


Spotlighting surveys on foot were conducted along transects at each site, and along the nearby creek with several hundred metres surveyed in a set time frame. Each foot survey was conducted in the first two hours after sunset, while spotlighting from the car occurred between 21:00 hours and 23:30 hours. Three experienced observers conducted each survey for a period of three nights.


Spotlighting during the wet season was undertaken by two teams of two people over three nights using a combination of both vehicle and pedestrian traverses. Each survey was in excess of one hour and all habitats within the study were surveyed. In total more than 12 person hours were undertaken during the wet season surveys.


26

3.5.4 ANABAT SURVEYS

During both survey periods (dry and wet season surveys), microchiropteran bats were targeted using Anabat SD1 units. Active monitoring was undertaken at each survey site following the same transects as the spotlighting surveys, and along the nearby creek.

Anabat analysis was undertaken by Anabat Echolocation Call Analysis Specialist, Greg Ford.


Monitoring commenced at dusk (approximately 19:30 hours) and continued until the completion of nocturnal surveys (approximately 23:30 hours). No potential microbat roost sites were observed within the survey area. As such, the anabat was used for general recording throughout the survey area. Microbats were also observed by spotlight to assist identification during active monitoring sessions. Any calls detected were recorded at each survey site.


During the wet season surveys the Anabat SD1 units were deployed at 4 sites with each replicated on two nights. To maximise the probability of detection of the suite of microchiropteran species likely to utilise the area, sites were selected where high bat activity was most likely (e.g. water sources). To detect microchiropteran bat activity throughout the entire night, two Anabat SD1 units were deployed at dusk and collected the following morning.

3.5.5 HABITAT SEARCHES FOR REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS

General habitat searches were undertaken opportunistically at each site to survey for reptiles within the study area. This involved hand searches of suitable microhabitats, such as under bark, under and in fallen logs and timber, under grass and spinifex tussocks, and in and around termite mounds.

3.5.6 DIURNAL AVIFAUNA SURVEYS


Systematic bird surveys were conducted at each site as close to sunrise as possible (i.e. between 05:15 hours and 09:00 hours), and during the late afternoon, opportunistically, between 17:00 hours and 20:00 hours. Incidental records were collected at all other times when on the property.

Surveys were carried out by a minimum of two experienced observers walking a transect over a 60 minute period with a further observation period of between 30-60 minutes per site. Birds were identified by sight with the aid of binoculars or by their characteristic calls.


Additional avifauna surveys were undertaken during the wet season survey period to supplement the dry season results. The lack of avifauna activity during the first days of the surveys consequently led to the decision to restrict formal surveys to the water source


27

within the site. This decision was based on an informal species area curve approach, whereby the majority of bird species occurring in most habitats are usually detected within the first 5-10 minutes of survey time. As such, the avifauna surveys for the wet season were primarily opportunistic sightings made during the numerous traverses across the site, supplemented by a formal survey of the on-site water source.

3.5.7 INFRARED CAMERA

An infrared, motion-sensor camera was deployed at one survey site during the dry season sampling period to trial its effectiveness. The camera site was baited daily with fresh chicken to capture photographic evidence of fauna activity.

Based on the limited results obtained during the dry season surveys the method was not implemented for the subsequent wet season sampling period.

3.5.8 INCIDENTAL RECORDS

Non-systematic sampling was conducted across all sites and throughout the remainder of the survey area. The presence of all vertebrate species was recorded wherever and whenever possible. Opportunistic sampling included the following:

3.5.8.1 INCIDENTAL SIGHTINGS

The presence of all vertebrate species encountered while working and travelling within the study area during the day and night, and during trap line establishment, was recorded as an incidental sighting.

When moving to, from, or between, survey sites at night, roads were traversed in a vehicle at low speed. Any fauna (predominantly reptiles, frogs and nocturnal birds) detected within headlights was recorded as an incidental sighting. Unconfirmed or suspected observations were also noted.

3.5.8.2 SECONDARY EVIDENCE

The presence of evidence or activity, including tracks, scratches, diggings, burrows, dens and nests were recorded wherever and whenever possible. Photographic records were taken where possible.

3.6 RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES

3.6.1 TARGET SPECIES

Three threatened terrestrial fauna species listed under Commonwealth legislation were identified through a search of the EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool as having the potential to occur in the study area. In addition, six rare or threatened fauna species, listed under Queensland legislation, were also considered. This was based on the known distribution and ecological requirements of each species (refer Table 6 and Appendix 4). Some are considered more likely to occur on the site than others. This list of potential rare or threatened species was then refined in the field, based on the actual habitat and environmental conditions observed within the site. In addition, it was noted that other rare or threatened species could occur in the area, even though not triggered under the legislation.


28

Table 6: Rare or threatened terrestrial fauna species, listed under Queensland and/or Commonwealth legislation, predicted to occur within the area (R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered; I: Introduced)

Conservation status

Group Common name Species name

EPBC NCA

Australian Painted Snipe Rostratula australis V R

Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis E E

Square-tailed Kite Lophoictinia isura R

Birds

Striated Grasswren Amytornis striatus R

Julia Creek Dunnart Sminthopsis douglasi E E Mammals

Purple-necked Rock Wallaby

Petrogale purpureicollis V

3.7 MIGRATORY SPECIES A number of migratory species were also identified through a search of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Protected Matters Search Tool (Appendix 3), as having the potential to occur in the area (Table 7). Table 7: Migratory species, listed under Commonwealth legislation, predicted to

occur within the area

Group Common name Species name

White-bellied Sea-eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster

Rainbow Bee-eater Merops ornatus

Migratory terrestrial birds

Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis

Great Egret Ardea alba

Cattle Egret Ardea ibis

Oriental Pratincole Glareola maldivarum

Migratory wetland birds

Painted snipe Rostratula benghalensis s. lat.

Migratory marine birds

Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus


29

4. TAXONOMY AND NOMENCLATURE Nomenclature and taxonomy of vertebrate species generally follows that of the Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), and Queensland Museum.

Field identification was generally based on the following field guides:

General • Tracks, Scats and Other Traces (Triggs 2006).

Mammals • The Mammals of Australia (Van Dyke and Strahan 2008). • A Field Guide to Mammals of Australia (Menkhorst and Knight 2001). • Australian Bats (Churchill 1998).

Birds • Reader’s Digest Photographic Field Guide to Birds of Australia (Flegg and Madge

1995). • Reader’s Digest Complete Book of Australian Birds (1997). • The Slater Field Guide to Australian Birds (Slater 2003). • Field Guide to Australian Birds (Morcombe 2003).

Amphibians and Reptiles • A Field Guide to Australian Frogs (Barker, Grigg and Tyler 1995). • A Photographic Guide to Snakes and Other Reptiles of Australia (Swan 1996). • A Field Guide to Reptiles of Queensland (Wilson 2005). • Complete Guide to the Reptiles of Australia (Wilson and Swan 2003).


30

5. FLORA AND FAUNA RESULTS

5.1 REGIONAL ECOSYSTEMS OF THE PROJECT AREA As of May 2010 (the most recent survey period) the 1:250 000 Regional Ecosystem map sheet had not been published for the area. Therefore, no official Regional Ecosystem information was available for the study site.

However, based on local knowledge and a thorough understanding of the surrounding Regional Ecosystem types and bioregion conditions, vegetation communities were delineated consistent with the surrounding Regional Ecosystems for all of the preliminary survey area (that is, the area proposed for the mining development footprint). For the purpose of this report, these vegetation communities were called Regional Ecosystems and assigned an appropriate Regional Ecosystem number. This was achieved by desktop interpretation of aerial photography to define vegetation zones.

Vegetation zones were then ground-truthed in the field across the whole of the site. Within each delineated vegetation type a quarterly observation was made and detailed in a proforma. Where vegetation communities were observed to change, the border of the vegetation community was traversed and mapped.

The distribution and status of the vegetation communities identified across the study area is shown below (Figures 7, 8 and 9). A full description of each Regional Ecosystem recorded within the study area has been included in Appendix 1.


31

Figure 7: Distribution of Regional Ecosystems within the proposed mine

area.


32

Figure 8: Vegetation Management Act status of Regional Ecosystems

within the proposed mine area.


33

Figure 9: Biodiversity status of Regional Ecosystems within the proposed

mine area.


34

5.2 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES OF THE PROPOSED MINING AREA The following is a description of the vegetation communities of the PHM South Phosphate Project area, broadly taking landform into account. The major criteria for assessment are vegetation presence and structure. Within these vegetation communities, the corresponding Regional Ecosystems that make up these broader vegetation types are mentioned, and for the purposes of the report are termed as Regional Ecosystems. A full description of the Regional Ecosystems across the site is included as Appendix 1.

Four different vegetation communities were observed within the survey area. ◊ Mitchell Grass Plains ◊ Spinifex Hummock Grasslands ◊ Hummock Grassland ecosystem with Snappy Gum ◊ Mixed open shrublands.

These communities are described in the following sections.

5.2.1 MITCHELL GRASS PLAINS ON HEAVY CLAY SOILS

The Mitchell Grass Plains ecosystems are the most widely spread vegetation community across the whole of the study area. These ecosystems are dominated by micro-topographical (gilgai) features with small hummocks and depressions indicating swelling and shrinking clays. Throughout these ecosystems, lateritic gravels are present at the surface and within the first metre of the soil profile.

The dominant landform features within these zones are the gilgai micro-relief. As there is considerable horizontal and vertical movement within these swelling and shrinking clays, the establishment of trees and shrubs is limited by the lack of tensile strength within the roots, leading to the dominance of grasses, herbs and forbs.

The Mitchell Grass Plains within the study area were dominated by Feathertop (Aristida inaequiglumis) and Buffel Grass (Cenchrus cillaris). Other less dominant grass species included Barley Mitchell Grass (Astrebla pectinata) and Grader Grass (Themeda quadrivalvis). A full species list for these areas is shown in Table 8. It should be noted that grazing pressure over the past few years has limited species diversity within these grasslands to the extent that despite the good rains of the 2009/2010 wet season, the grasslands continued to show signs of heavy grazing pressure during the May 2010sampling period.

It should also be noted that there is a moderate infestation of Prickly Acacia (Acacia farnesiana), particularly along drainage channels.


35

Table 8: Plant species within the Mitchell Grass Plains area

Malvaceae Abutilon otocarpum Amaranthaceae Alternanthera nana Poaceae Aristida inaequiglumis Poaceae Astrebla pectinata Convolvulaceae Bonamia media Poaceae Digitaria brownii Poaceae Enneapogon polyphyllus Myoporaceae Eremophila latrobei Convolvulaceae Evolvulus alsinoides var. villosicalyx Haloragaceae Haloragis sp Pentapetaceae Melhania oblongifolia Pentapetaceae Melhania ovata Asteraceae, no flowers to confirm species.

Pterocaulon sp

Amaranthaceae Ptilotus nobilis ss. nobilis Caesalpiniaceae Senna artemisioides. Solanaceae Solanum echinatum Poaceae Sporobolus australasicus Poaceae Themeda quadrivalvis Poaceae Triodia longiceps

Regional Ecosystems that are represented within the Mitchell Grass Plains zones include: • Regional Ecosystem 1.3.1 (Mitchell grass (Astrebla spp.) grassland on alluvial

plains). Within the site, these areas comprise current alluvium associated with creek lines (as shown in Figure 7).

• Regional Ecosystem 4.4.1 (Astrebla pectinata +/- Aristida latifolia +/- Eulalia aurea grassland on Tertiary sediments overlying limestone)

• Regional Ecosystem 4.4.1/4.5.3 (Astrebla pectinata +/- Aristida latifolia +/- Eulalia aurea grassland on Tertiary sediments overlying limestone / Acacia aneura, Triodia brizoides or Triodia molesta tall open shrubland on Tertiary sand sheets).

5.2.2 SPINIFEX HUMMOCK GRASSLANDS ON RED EARTHS WITH LATERITIC GRAVEL

The Spinifex Hummock Grasslands are found in the west portion of the proposed mining area (Figure 9). These areas generally comprise clayey loam soils of uniform texture, with lateritic gravels present at the surface and throughout the soil profile.

The Spinifex Hummock Grasslands are generally dominated by an understorey of Grey Spinifex (Triodia longicepes) and Feathertop (Aristida inaequiglumis). There is also a very sparse shrub layer throughout these areas. Species within this shrub layer include Spotted Fuchsia-bush (Eremophila latrobei), Limestone Cassia (Senna artemisioides ssp oligophylla), Senna artemisioides ssp sturtii, Turpentine (Acacia chrisholmii) and (Acacia tenuissima). A full list of species observed in this area is


36

presented in Table 9. Although naturally sparse, these areas have also been subjected to extreme grazing pressure. Table 9: Plant Species within Spinifex Grasslands.

Mimosaceae Acacia chisholmii Mimosaceae Acacia tenuissima Poaceae Aristida contorta Poaceae Aristida inaequiglumis Convolvulaceae Bonamia media Poaceae Cleistochloa subjuncea Poaceae Enneapogon polyphyllus Myoporaceae Eremophila latrobei Chenopodiaceae Maireana villosa Haloragidaceae Haloragis (Minuaria??) Caryophyllaceae Polycarpaea breviflora Portulaceae Portulaca oleracea Asteraceae Pterocaulon serrulatum Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (green) clementii Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (pale) polystachyus Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (mauve) schwartzii Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena sp Caesalpiniaceae Senna Caesalpiniaceae Senna notabilis Malvaceae Sida fibulifera Malvaceae Sida sp. Solanaceae Solanum echinatum Poaceae Triodia longiceps

Currently none of the Regional Ecosystems in Landzone 5 within the Northwest Highlands and the Mitchell Grass Downs adequately represent the species composition on the site .Currently the best Regional Ecosystems representing these zones include: • Regional Ecosystem 4.5.8/4.5.3 (Triodia pungens Hummock Grassland wooded

with Acacia spp. +/- Eucalyptus spp. on Quaternary sand sheets / Acacia aneura, Triodia brizoides or T. molesta Tall Open Shrubland on Tertiary sand sheets)

• Regional Ecosystem 4.5.3/4.5.8 (Acacia aneura, Triodia brizoides or T. molesta Tall Open Shrubland on Tertiary Sand Sheets / Triodia pungens Hummock Grassland wooded with Acacia spp. +/- Eucalyptus spp. on Quaternary Sand Sheets)


37

Figure 10: Spinifex Hummock Grasslands

5.2.3 HUMMOCK GRASSLANDS WITH SNAPPY GUM EMERGENTS

The Hummock Grassland ecosystem with Snappy Gum (Eucalyp[tus leucophloia) emergents has a limited distribution across the study site (Figure 10). Floristically, it is similar to the Spinifex Hummock Grasslands, with a dominant understorey of Grey Spinifex (Triodia longicepes) and Feathertop (Aristida inaequiglumis).There is also a mixed shrub layer throughout these areas. Species within this shrub layer include Spotted Fuchsia-bush (Eremophila latrobei), Limestone Cassia (Senna artemisioides ssp oligophylla), Senna artemisioides ssp sturtii, and Turpentine (Acacia chrisholmii).

A sparse taller stratum of Snappy Gum (Eucalyptus leucophloia) emergents with isolated Western Bloodwood (Corymbia terminalis) trees distinguishes this habitat type from the Spinifex Hummock Grasslands observed in other parts of the study area. A list of plant species found within this area is shown in Table 10

Table 10: Plant species within Hummock Grassland with Snappy Gum

Mimosaceae Acacia chisholmii Mimosaceae Acacia tenuissima Poaceae Aristida contorta Poaceae Aristida inaequiglumis Convolvulaceae Bonamia media Myrtaceae Corymbia terminalis Poaceae Cleistochloa subjuncea Poaceae Enneapogon polyphyllus Myoporaceae Eremophila latrobei Myrtaceae Eucalyp[tus leucophloia Proteaceae Grevillea striata Chenopodiaceae Maireana villosa


38

Haloragidaceae Haloragis (Minuaria??) Caryophyllaceae Polycarpaea breviflora Portulaceae Portulaca oleracea Asteraceae Pterocaulon serrulatum Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (green) clementii Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (pale) polystachyus Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (mauve) schwartzii Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena sp Caesalpiniaceae Senna Caesalpiniaceae Senna notabilis Malvaceae Sida fibulifera Malvaceae Sida sp. Solanaceae Solanum echinatum Poaceae Triodia longiceps

Regional Ecosystems that are represented within these zones include: • Regional Ecosystem 4.5.3/1.5.7 (Acacia aneura, Triodia brizoides or T. molesta

Tall Open Shrubland on Tertiary sand sheets / Bloodwood (Corymbia terminalis) and/or Mulga (Acacia aneura) Low Open Woodland on sandy red earth plains)

Figure 11: Hummock Grasslands with Snappy Gum emergents

5.2.4 MIXED SHRUBLANDS

The Mixed Shrubland habitats are dominated by a mixture of Acacia, Eurimophila and Cassia shrub species in relatively dense thickets of vegetation (Figure 12). Shrubs within these areas include Spotted Fuchsia-bush (Eremophila latrobei), Limestone cassia (Senna artemisioides ssp oligophylla), Senna artemisioides ssp sturtii, Turpentine (Acacia chrisholmii)) and Acacia tenuissima.


39

Sparse small trees are also observed within these areas, including Gidgee (Acacia cambagei), Snappy Gum (Eucalyptus leucophloia), Western Bloodwood (Corymbia terminalis), Beefwood (Grevillea striata) and Bull Oak (Hakea chordophylla). These areas are also dominated by an understorey of Grey Spinifex (Triodia longicepes) and Feathertop Grass (Aristida inaequiglumis). However, they have been extremely heavily grazed. A full list of species found within the mixed shrublands is shown in Table 11

Table 11: Plant species within Mixed Shrublands

Mimosaceae Acacia cambagei Mimosaceae Acacia chisholmii Mimosaceae Acacia tenuissima Poaceae Aristida latifolia Poaceae Astrebla pectinata Poaceae Brachyachne convergens Myrtaceae Corymbia terminalis) Fabaceae Desmodium??? Poaceae Eragrotis setifolia Myoporaceae Eremophila latrobei Myrtaceae Eucalyptus leucophloia Proteaceae Grevillea striata Proteaceae Hakea chordophylla Poaceae Iseilema vaginiflorum Malvaceae Malvastrum americanum Poaceae Panicum laevinode Portulacaceae Portulaca filifolia Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea Asteraceae Pterocaulon serrulatum Fabaceae Rhynchosia minima Caesalpiniaceae Senna artemisioides ssp

oligophylla Caesalpiniaceae Senna artemisioides ssp sturtii, Malvaceae Sida fibulifera malvaceae Sida trichopoda Poaceae Sporobolus actinocladus Asteraceae Streptoglossa adscendens

These areas are represented by the Regional Ecosystem 4.5.3 - Acacia aneura, Triodia brizoides or T. molesta Tall Open Shrubland on Tertiary sand sheets.


40

Figure 12 : Mixed Shrublands

5.2.5 MIXED OPEN SHRUBLANDS ON LATERITE AND LATERITIC GRAVELS

The mixed open shrublands on Laterite and Lateritic Gravel is observed in the south of the site. It is dominated by an understory of Grey Spinifex (Triodia longicepes) and Feathertop (Aristida inaequiglumis). Several different shrubs are seen through these areas including (Eremophila latrobei), Limestone cassia (Senna artemisioides ssp oligophylla), Senna artemisioides ssp sturtii, Turpentine (Acacia chrisholmii). Exposed laterite is present in some areas with other areas having ironstone and lateritic gravels present at the surface. A full species list of plants found within these areas is shown in Table 12.

Table 12: Plant species within Mixed Open Shrublands on Laterite and Lateritic Gravel

Malvaceae Abutilon sp.

Malvaceae Abutilon fraseri ssp fraseri

Malvaceae Abutilon macrum

Mimosaceae Acacia chisholmii

Mimosaceae Acacia tenuissima

Poaceae Aristida contorta

Poaceae Aristida inaequiglumis

Poaceae Austrochloris dichanthioides

Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia schomburkiana

Convolvulaceae Bonamia media

Poaceae Enneapogon polyphyllus

Poaceae Eriachne mucronata


41

Myoporaceae Eremophila latrobei

Malvaceae Gossypium ? australe

Haloragidaceae has Minuaria? on specimen

Haloragis sp

Asteraceae, Streptoglossa on label.

Peripleura obovata

Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea

Asteraceae Pterocaulon serrulatum

Amaranthaceae Ptilotus obovatus

Poaceae, on label will be avenacea

Themeda quadrivalvis

Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena cornishiana

Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena eriantha

Caesalpiniaceae Senna artemisioides ssp oligophylla

Caesalpiniaceae Senna artemisioides ssp sturtii,

Malvaceae Sida fibulifera

Solanaceae Solanum echinatum

Poaceae Sporobolus australasicus

Poaceae Tragus australianus

Poaceae Triodia longiceps

These areas are represented by the Regional Ecosystem.4.7.4 Acacia cambagei open shrubland/ tall open shrubland (Ht 4-7m; density 25-150/ha), with scattered Apophyllum anomalum shrubs (Ht1m) present frequently and Senna artemisioides subsp. oligophylla and/or S. phyllodinea shrubs (Ht <1m) locally prominent. Scattered Cassia spp., Eremophila spp. and Hemichroa diandra shrubs occurs infrequently. The ground stratum is sparse to open (PFC <10-15%) and usually dominated by Triodia brizoides, T. longiceps, or in some areas T. pungens. The perennial grass Enteropogon acicularis and short-lived Dactyloctenium radulans and Enneapogon polyphyllus occur frequently, while Aristida latifolia may be locally common. A variety of other ephemeral grasses, including Enneapogon spp. and Sporobolus spp, and forbs, including many species from the Chenopodiaceae, occur infrequently but maybe seasonally important. Occurs on lower slopes (slopes 2-12%) of scarp retreat zones formed from Cretaceous fine grained sediments (Land Zone 9) with a dense surface ironstone or lateritic gravel cover derived from weathered Tertiary land surface. Soils are predominantly very shallow to shallow, stony red clays with minor desert loams. Lithosols occurs adjacent to the scarp minor cracking clays occurs lower in the landscape. Ironstone and lateritic gravel occur throughout the profile and on the surface. Surfaces are usually crusty.

5.3 FAUNA HABITATS The surveys sampled all vegetation communities with representation of the habitats within the proposed development area and surrounding study area. Multiple fauna survey sites were located within the Mitchell Grass Plains ecosystems, as these were found to be the most widely spread vegetation community across the whole of the study area.


42

Figure 13: Pitfall trap line located within the Mitchell Grass Plains

Figure 14: Fauna survey location looking west across the proposed mining

area


43

Figure 15: Fauna survey location at freshwater bore located within Mitchell

Grass Plains (Dry season)

Figure 16: Fauna survey location within Hummock Grasslands with Snappy

Gum emergents


44

Figure 17: Fauna survey location within the Spinifex Hummock Grasslands

habitat

Figure 18: Fauna survey location within Mixed Shrubland habitat


45

5.4 WEATHER CONDITIONS DURING THE SURVEY PERIOD Weather conditions experienced at the site during the wet and dry season surveys were as expected for the time of year, based on historical data obtained from the weather stations at Phosphate Hill and The Monument. The data for both survey periods is given below in Table 9.

5.5 FAUNA SPECIES RECORDED DURING THE SURVEY A total of 109 terrestrial fauna species were recorded during the survey. In total, 4 species listed as Rare pursuant to Schedule 4 of the Nature Conservation Regulation 2006 were detected with in the study area or surrounding habitats; the Square-tailed Kite (Lophoictinia isura), the Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus), the Pictorella Mannikin (Heteromunia pectoralis).and the Common Death Adder, Two species, the Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus) and the Great Egret (Ardea alba) which are listed as migratory species on the EPBC Act, were recorded outside the survey area.

5.5.1 BIRDS

A total of 69 species were recorded including three species listed as Rare umder Schedule 2 of the Nature Conservation Act Regulation 2006; the Square-tailed Kite (Lophoictinia isura), the Black-necked Stork (Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus) and the Pictorella Mannikin (Heteromunia pectoralis).

During the dry season surveys raptor species were prolific across the survey area, and the Black Kite (Milvus migrans) was the most commonly observed bird species overall. Australian Ravens (Corvus coronoides) were also abundant. Australian Pratincoles (Stiltia isabella) were observed throughout the entire survey area and in the immediate vicinity of the site.

The avifauna activity, diversity and abundance was observed to be lower during the wet season surveys than recorded during the first surveys. This is expected to be directly correlated to rain experienced over the wet season and as such the bird species were likely to be spread further in the region. The highest diversity of birds during both survey periods were recorded at the two water sources in the area at the bore and the creek. Both locations attracted a number of water birds that were not recorded elsewhere throughout the site.

Overall, most bird species were observed in the Hummock Grasslands, the Mixed Shrublands, or around the water sources; the bore and creek site. Very few species were recorded throughout the Mitchell Grass Plains.

46

Table 13: Weather during the Dry Season Survey Period

Day Date Temp. Min Max

Relative Humidity @

9am (%)

Rain (mm)

Wind Sp (max gust

km/hr)

Wind Dir.

Other comments

Friday 11.12.09 25.8 40.3 26 0 72 S Initial site inspection late afternoon. Very windy, hot and dry. Some cloud cover (3/8)

Saturday 12.12.09 23.7 38.1 16 0 52 S Completely overcast (8/8) until ~ 10:00 hours, Partially overcast (4/8) all day. Cooler than previous day. Gusty with wind picking up late morning, continuing all day.

Sunday 13.12.09 24.6 33.1 25 0 56 SSE Completely overcast (8/8) all day. Warm but not hot. Light breeze with some wind gusts.

Monday 14.12.09 22.3 31.8 52 0 48 ESE Overcast (7/8) all day. Light breeze with some gusts. Cooler during the day. Clearing by late afternoon / early evening.

Tuesday 15.12.09 23.1 38.6 41 0 59 NE Very hot, clear day. Very light breeze. Patchy, light cloud (1/8 - 2/8) during day. Storm with shower, lightning. Heavy but brief localised rain near PHM, but not on site.

Wednesday 16.12.09 23.4 38.0 37 0.4 44 NNW Overcast morning, clearing to very hot by 09:30 hours. Clear night.

Thursday 17.12.09 27.6 37.1 53 0 41 N Very hot and still during the day. Clear in the morning, overcast (8/8) in the afternoon, and partially clearing by 18:00 hours. Very hot and humid early evening. Very quiet all day – nothing moving around. Severe electrical storm warning at 20:00 hours, and large storm front moving in very quickly. Packed up remaining traps to avoid animal exposure to adverse weather conditions.

Friday 18.12.09 26.0 38.0 51 0 57 NW Final day. Incidental sightings only recorded.

47

Table 14: : Weather during the Wet Season Survey Period

Day Date Temp. Min Max

Relative Humidity @ 9am

(%)

Rain (mm)

Wind Sp (max gust

km/hr)

Wind Dir.

Other comments

Thursday 8 22.9 37.4 51 0 30 E Extremely hot, clear skies. Friday 9 22.1 37.0 41 0 44 S Extremely hot, clear skies. Saturday 10 21.5 N/D 51 0 N/D N/D Clear conditions, hot. Sunday 11 N/D 33.2 65 0 46 S Clear conditions, hot Monday 12 19.8 28.0 64 0 35 SE Stiff breeze continued into night Tuesday 13 18.0 25.5 81 0 39 ESE Stiff breeze continued into night Wednesday 14 13.0 30.5 48 0 31 S Clear conditions cool overnight Thursday 15 13.6 31.8 45 0 31 S Traps checked and collected in morning

48

Table 15: Birds recorded during the survey (M: Migratory; R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered)

Locations recorded outside survey area

Status Species Name Common Name Species recorded within the study area during Dry Season Surveys

Species recorded within the study area during Wet Season Surveys Immediate

area Creek / PHM Monument EPBC NCA

Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu ü ü

Pelecanus conspicillatus Australian Pelican ü

Anhinga melanogaster Darter ü ü

Phalacrocorax varius Pied Cormorant ü ü

Phalacrocorax melanoleucos Little Pied Cormorant ü ü

Phalacrocorax carbo Great Cormorant ü

Phalacrocorax sulcirostris Little Black Cormorant ü ü

Ardea novaehollandiae White-faced Heron ü ü ü

Ardea alba Great Egret ü M

Ardea intermedia Intermediate Egret ü

Dendrocygna arcuata Wandering Whistling Duck ü ü

Chenonetta jubata Australian Wood Duck ü

Elanus axillaris Black-shouldered Kite ü

Milvus migrans Black Kite ü ü ü ü ü

Lophoictinia isura Square-tailed Kite ü R Haliastur sphenurus Whistling Kite ü ü ü

Aquila audax Wedge-tailed Eagle ü ü ü ü

Hieraaetus morphnoides Little Eagle ü

Circus assimilis Spotted Harrier ü

Falco subniger Black Falcon ü

Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon ü ü

Falco berigora Brown Falcon ü ü ü ü

Falco cenchroides Australian (Nankeen) Kestrel ü ü ü

49





Turnix velox Little Button-quail ü ü

Grus rubicundus Brolga ü ü

Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus Black-necked Stork ü R Ardeotis australis Australian Bustard ü ü ü

Vanellus tricolor Banded Lapwing ü ü ü

Stiltia isabella Australian Pratincole ü ü

Geopelia placida Peaceful Dove ü ü ü

Geopelia cuneata Diamond Dove ü ü ü ü

Phaps histrionica Flock Bronzewing ü

Geophaps lophotes Crested Pigeon ü ü

Geophaps plumifera Spinifex Pigeon ü ü ü ü ü

Cacatua roseicapilla Galah ü ü ü ü

Cacatua pastinator Little Corella ü ü ü ü

Leptolophus hollandicus Cockatiel ü ü

Melopsittacus undulatus Budgerigar ü ü ü

Barnardius barnardi Mallee Ringneck ü

Eurostopodus argus Spotted Nightjar ü

Tyto alba Barn Owl ü ü

Todiramphus pyrrhopygius Red-backed Kingfisher ü

Todiramphus sanctus Sacred Kingfisher ü

Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater ü ü M

Mirafra javanica Singing Bushlark ü ü ü

Hirundo ariel Fairy Martin* ü

Anthus novaeseelandiae Richard’s Pipit ü ü ü

50





Coracina novaehollandiae Black-faced Cuckoo Shrike ü ü ü

Lalage tricolor White-winged Triller ü ü ü

Petroica goodenovii /Epthianura tricolor

Red-capped Robin* /Crimson Chat*

ü

Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail ü ü ü

Eremiornis carteri Spinifexbird ü ü

Pomatostomus temporalis Grey-crowned Babbler ü ü

Cinclorhamphus cruralis Brown Songlark ü ü ü

Malurus lamberti Variegated Fairy-wren ü ü

Malurus leucopterus White-winged Fairy-wren ü

Manorina flavigula Yellow-throated Miner ü

Lichenostomus penicillatus White-plumed Honeyeater ü ü

Lichenostomus virescens Singing Honeyeater ü

Conopophila rufogularis Rufous-throated Honeyeater ü

Taeniopygia guttata Zebra Finch ü ü ü

Heteromunia pectoralis Pictorella Mannikin ü R Artamus cinereus Black-faced Woodswallow ü ü ü

Grallina cyanoleuca Australian Magpie-lark ü ü

Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird ü ü

Gymnorhina tibicen Australian Magpie ü ü ü ü

Corvus coronoides Australian Raven ü ü ü ü

Corvus orru Torresian Crow ü ü

* Positive identification to species level could not be made during the survey


51

5.5.2 REPTILES

A total of 18 species of reptiles were detected within the surveys, including two species were noted opportunistically at The Monument. Although no species of conservation significance were recorded within the project area the Common Death Adder (Acanthophis antarcticus), listed as a Rare species under the Queensland Nature Conservation Regulation 2006, was detected at The Monument, approximately 20km from the project area. Given that the project area contains habitat suitable for this habitat generalist, its presence is also likely within the project area.

Figure 19: a) Tesselated Gecko (Diplodactylus tesselatus); and

b) Red-sided Ctenotus (Ctenotus pulchellis)

5.5.3 AMPHIBIANS

During the dry season surveys only two species of Frogs were detected. During the wet season surveys an additional three species of frog were detected. All species were recorded at either of the watersources, i.e. the bore and associated cattle troughs, and along the creek, outside of the survey area. No species of conservation significance were recorded and no cane toads were observed within the site or in the surrounding environment during this survey.

a) b)

52

Table 16: Reptiles species recorded during the survey (R: rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered)

Species Name Common Name Species recorded within the study area during Dry Season Surveys

Species recorded within the study area during Wet Season Surveys

Comments

Diplodactylus conspicillatus Fat-tailed Gecko ü

Diplodactylus tesselatus Tesselated Gecko ü

Gehyra robusta Robust Dtella ü

Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella ü ü

Rhynchoedura ornata Beaked Gecko ü

Ctenotus lateralis Gravelly-soil Ctenotus ü ü

Ctenotus pulchellis Red-sided Ctenotus ü ü

Ctenotus robustus Eastern Striped Skink ü ü

Amphibolurus gilberti Gilbert’s Dragon ü

Amphibolurus temporalis Northern Water Dragon ü

Pogona henrylawsoni Downs Bearded Dragon ü

Pogona vitticeps Central Bearded Dragon ü ü

Tympanocryptis cephalus Pebble Dragon ü ü

Varanus spenceri Spencer's Monitor ü

Liasis childreni Children's Python ü

Pseudechis australis King Brown Snake ü

Suta punctata# Little Spotted Snake ü

Acanthophis antarcticus Common Death Adder ü

# Tentative identification

53

Table 17: Amphibian species recorded during the survey (R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered; *: Unconfirmed)

Species Name Common Name Dry Season Surveys

Wet Season Surveys

Comments

Limnodynastes ornatus Ornate Burrowing Frog ü Captured in pitfalls near bore site

Cyclorana brevipes Short-footed Frog ü Captured in pitfalls near bore site

Cyclorana novaehollandiae New Holland Frog ü Abundant at bore site

Litoria caerulea Green Tree Frog ü ü Captured at water trough at bore site

Litoria electrica* Buzzing Tree Frog ü ü Captured at water trough at bore site


54

5.5.4 MAMMALS

During the dry season surveys a total of 11 terrestrial mammal species were directly observed or captured within the project area and one species was recorded through secondary evidence (i.e. the presence of scats or tracks) (Table 12). The Red Kangaroo was the most commonly recorded species, observed at all sites across the Project area. Rodents and Dasyurids were also commonly encountered (Figure 20). No terrestrial mammal species of conservation significance were recorded during this survey.

Eleven positively identified bat species were detected using anabat detectors across the survey sites. Of these, nine bats were confidently identified to the species level. This uncertainty in call identification can result from a number of factors. For example, poor or short call sequence recordings due to distance or direction of flight of the bat from the recorder, or as a result of interference, can inhibit accurate identification. In addition, the call frequency of some bat species may overlap, making it difficult to determine specific species. No bat species of conservation significance were confirmed during the survey.

During the wet season surveys an additional rodent species was captured in the pitfall traps, the Sandy Inland Mouse (Pseudomys hermannsburgensis)

Figure 20: a) Stripe-faced Dunnart (Sminthopsis macroura) and

b) House Mouse (Mus musculus)

a) b)

55

Table 18: Mammal species recorded during the survey (R: Rare; V: Vulnerable; E: Endangered)


Species Name Common Name Dry season Surveys

Wet season Surveys

Immediate area Creek / PHM Monument

Planigale tenuirostris Narrow-nosed Planigale ü ü

Sminthopsis crassicaudata Fat-tailed Dunnart ü ü

Sminthopsis macroura Stripe-faced Dunnart ü ü

Macropus robustus Common Wallaroo ü ü ü

Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo ü ü ü ü ü

Pseudomys desertor Desert Mouse ü ü

Pseudomys hermannsburgensis Sandy Inland Mouse ü

Mus musculus # House Mouse ü ü

Canis lupus dingo # Dingo ü ü

Sus scrofa # Feral Pig ü ü

Camelus dromedarius # Camel ü ü

Saccolaimus flaviventris Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat ü ü

Vespadelus finlaysoni Inland Cave Bat ü ü ü

Chalinolobus gouldii Gould’s Wattled Bat ü ü ü

Scotorepens greyii Little Broad-nosed Bat ü ü

Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat ü ü

Mormopterus beccarii* Beccari’s Freetail Bat ü ü

Taphozous species (Possibly T. georgianus, ,or T. troughtoni)*

Common Sheathtail Bat, Hill’s Sheathtail Bat or Troughton’s Sheathtail Bat

ü ü

Chaerephon jobensis Northern Freetail Bat ü

Nyctophilus Sp ü

Vespadelus baverstocki Inland Forest Bat ü

Veaspadelus caurinus Western Cave Bat ü

# Introduced species; * Unconfirmed record


56

6. DISCUSSION AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON FLORA AND FAUNA

6.1 GENERAL The survey has resulted in a comprehensive snapshot of the fauna and flora species utilising the site during the late dry season and late wet season.

Weather conditions during the survey were not necessarily optimal for some of the survey techniques employed. For example, during most spotlighting nights, the conditions were very windy, which would likely have reduced the activity, and possibly visibility, of fauna. Excessively windy conditions are also not optimal for the use of hand held Anabat detectors. In addition Mist net surveys were planned during the wet season surveys but due to windy conditions were not undertaken as the effectiveness of this method is extremely reduced as a result of wind.

6.2 REGIONAL ECOSYSTEMS All of the vegetation communities mapped during this survey are consistent with Regional Ecosystems that are currently classified as ‘Of Least Concern’ under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 and ‘Of no Concern’ at present under the associated Biodiversity Status, as listed by the DERM. From a botanical perspective, providing specific Performance requirements can be met for Vegetation management, it is considered unlikely that vegetation on this site will pose an impediment to the proposed mining activities.

6.3 BIRDS Bird diversity and abundance was moderately high during the dry season survey. Overall, the species recorded within the PHM South Phosphate Project Site in December 2009 were those that would be expected to be common in the habitats present in the area. Areas that had some canopy and mid story vegetation had fairly high bird abundance and diversity. Sites located throughout the Mitchell Grass Plains had fewer individuals and fewer species. The influence of nearby creeks on bird fauna was demonstrated by the presence of waterbird species, such as cormorants and egrets, within the project area.

In contrast the bird diversity during the wet season survey was relatively low. It is thought that this drop in diversity may be due to birds being attracted to the area during the dry season as there is a lack of water in the surrounding landscape .When more water is present in the surrounding landscape ( In the wet season) birds will disperse from permanent water of the bore and the nearby creeks.

Two bird species (the Square-tailed Kite and Pictorella Mannikins) are of conservation significance was recorded during the survey more information on rare and threatened fauna can be obtained in section 6.8 of this document.


57

6.4 MAMMALS The mammalian fauna detected was found to vary in relative abundance between the two seasonal survey periods. The most commonly recorded species of terrestrial mammal recorded during the dry season survey was the Red Kangaroo (Macropus rufus), which was observed throughout the entire survey area, however this species was seen only two occasions within the study area during the wet season surveys.

During Both the dry season and wet season survey two species of rodents were recorded frequently around the bore. Three species of Dasyurid, the Stripe-faced Dunnart (Sminthopsis macroura) the Narrow-nosed Planigale (Planigale tenuirostris) and the Fat-tailed Dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) were also recorded from a number of survey sites. These species inhabit cracking clay soils and tend to occur sympatrically with one another.

Bat call recordings were limited during this survey. Low bat numbers within the project area are likely a result of the general lack of suitable roosting habitat within the project area (i.e. very few mature trees with potential hollows exist within the site, no caves, crevices or boulder piles are present). Low bat numbers may also be attributed to poor weather conditions during the survey (e.g. high winds, some rain). In addition, a seemingly low abundance of prey species (arthropods) observed throughout the area may be the result seasonal influences or heavy grazing over the majority of the survey area, resulting in a loss of vegetation. A total of eleven bat species were recorded during the survey period,

While no species of conservation significance were positively confirmed during the survey, it is possible that at least two listed species use the area when the conditions are appropriate.

6.5 REPTILES Gravelly-soil Ctenotus (Ctenotus lateralis) was the most commonly recorded species, recorded from three survey sites. This species was probably the most commonly recorded because most of the site habitats are favoured habitat or contain elements of favoured habitat for this species, with the cracking clays providing shelter.

Whilst no species of state or national conservation significance were recorded within the Project area during the survey, one species, the Common Death Adder (Acanthophis antarcticus), listed as rare, was recorded incidentally on the road near The Monument, approximately 20km from the site. Given that the project area contains suitable habitat for this species, a habitat generalist, it can be presumed that the Common Death Adder also occurs within the Project area.

6.6 AMPHIBIANS During the dry season the recorded amphibian diversity and relative abundance was low throughout the project area, with only three amphibian species recorded from only one site the bore within the survey area, and along the nearby creek. The wet season surveys recorded a higher diversity and relative abundance of amphibian species with a total of 5 species recorded within the study area. No amphibians of conservation significance were recorded during this survey.


58

6.7 RARE AND THREATENED FLORA SPECIES A search of relevant databases and existing literature, including the EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool (with a buffer distance of 50km from the study site) and the Wildlife Online database (with a buffer distance of 25km from the study site), was conducted to identify any rare or threatened flora species that may occur within the area (Appendix 3 and 4).

No rare or threatened flora species have previously been recorded for this site, nor are any threatened species predicted to occur within the area. In addition, no rare or threatened flora species were recorded during the surveys.

6.8 RARE AND THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES RECORDED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING WITHIN THE STUDY AREA The term ‘threatened’ refers to species listed as vulnerable or endangered under relevant legislation. No threatened species were recorded during the survey period. However, two rare fauna species, listed under the Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 2006 were recorded. The following (sections (6.8.1-6.8.10) is an assessment of rare and threatened fauna that was recorded on, near or may occur on the site.

6.8.1 SQUARE-TAILED KITE (LOPHOICTINIA ISURA)

The Square-tailed Kite (Lophoictinia isura) was identified flying over the site. This species has been described as a solitary hawk of open forest, rocky hillsides, woodland, scrub, heath and other lightly treed country of tropical and temperate Australia (Birds Australia 2010). It is primarily found within 250km of the coast, and less commonly inland along timbered watercourses (NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service 2010).

Bird surveys were conducted to target general avifauna occurring within the site, including this rare species. One Square-tailed Kite was observed flying overhead during the present study. As such, this species presence is considered to be confirmed in the study area. However, no raptor nests, including nests of the Square-tailed Kite, were observed within the study area, suggesting no breeding has occurred on this site during the present breeding season. It is likely that if this species is breeding in the area, nesting would occur along one of the nearby treed watercourses (Birds Australia 2010).

6.8.2 COMMON DEATH ADDER (ACANTHOPHIS ANTARCTICUS)

The Common Death Adder (Acanthophis antarcticus) occurs in a wide variety of habitats, usually in association with deep leaf litter. Habitats include rainforests, wet sclerophyll forests, open woodland, grasslands, shrublands, heathlands and rocky outcrops (DERM 2010a; Pilbara Pythons 2010). This widespread species, once abundant in many areas, has experienced a dramatic reduction in numbers in recent times (DERM 2010a).

The Common Death Adder was recorded approximately 20km from the survey site and as such, its presence within the general area is confirmed. It is also considered likely that this species would occur throughout the survey area.


59

6.8.3 BLACK-NECKED STORK (EPHIPPIORHYNCHUS ASIATICUS)

The Black-necked Stork was observed along the creek near the proposed access road route. This species utilises a variety of wetland types including freshwater and estuarine environments.

The proposed development is unlikely to affect the occurrence of this species as no nest of the species were detected and the habitats along the creek would be largely unaffected by the proposed development.

6.8.4 PICTORELLA MANNIKIN (HETEROMUNIA PECTORALIS)

A small aggregation of Pictorella Mannikins (Heteromunia pectoralis) were recorded frequenting the water at the farm dam fed by the on-site bore. This species habitat is generally described as acacia shrublands that have a grassy understorey and in Triodia hummock grassland, where they feed on seeds on the ground, as well as insects.

The species was found to regularly utilise the bore site as a watering point which occurs outside the proposed development footprint. As such the proposed development is unlikely to impact on this species occurrence within the area.

6.8.5 AUSTRALIAN PAINTED SNIPE (ROSTRATULA AUSTRALIS)

The Australian Painted Snipe (Rostratula australis) is listed as vulnerable under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999, and rare under the Nature Conservation Act (NCA) 1992. It is also listed as a migratory species under the EPBC Act 1999 as it is listed in the China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (CAMBA).

It is usually found in shallow inland wetlands, either freshwater or brackish, that are either permanently or temporarily filled. It nests on the ground amongst tall reed-like vegetation near water, and feeds near the water’s edge and on mudflats, taking invertebrates, such as insects and worms, and seeds (DEWHA 2010a). The Murray–Darling drainage system appears to have been a key area for this species, as many records of this species come from this region. Although the Australian Painted Snipe can occur across Australia, the areas of most sensitivity to the species are those wetlands where the birds frequently occur and are known to breed (DEWHA 2010a).

It is possible that the Australian Painted Snipe occurs in this area, particularly along some of the nearby watercourses where water remains in the landscape throughout the year. However, habitat within the majority of the site is not consistent with the habitat requirements of this species.

No Australian Painted Snipes were recorded during the survey period.

6.8.6 NIGHT PARROT (PEZOPORUS OCCIDENTALIS )

The Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) is listed as an endangered species under the EPBC Act 1999 and the NCA 1992. It is restricted to remote parts of the arid zone where there is dense, low vegetation, such as Spinifex (Triodia sp.) (Australian Museum 2010). This species is believed to spend most of its time on the ground, running between shelter when possible or making short, low flights, quickly diving back into the vegetation (Australian Museum 2010), and it is most active at night.


60

However, it is a very little known species, believed to have been extinct in the wild until its rediscovery in 1979 (Australian Museum 2010).

The Night Parrot inhabits arid and semi-arid areas that are characterised by having dense, low vegetation. Based on accepted records, the habitat of the Night Parrot consists of Spinifex (Triodia) grasslands in stony or sandy environments (DEWHA 2010b) and of samphire and chenopod shrublands, including genera such as Atriplex, Bassia and Maireana, on floodplains and claypans, and on the margins of saltlakes, creeks or other sources of water (DEWHA 2010b). The Night Parrot has also been recorded, on one occasion, in Acacia woodland, and a carcass found near Boulia in Queensland was recovered from the side of a road in an area comprised of low, sparse Astrebla, Calotis and species of chenopods, with some patches of exposed gibber (DEWHA 2010b).

No Night Parrots were recorded during the survey period, and the majority of the habitats of the site is generally not consistent with the preferred habitat requirements of this species.

6.8.7 STRIATED GRASSWREN (AMYTORNIS STRIATUS)

The Striated Grasswren (Amytornis striatus) is listed as a rare species under the NCA 1992.

This species prefers open mallee country, with a sparse layer of shrubs and a groundcover dominated by Spinifex, in which this species nests and shelters (Government of South Australia 2010). Much of this habitat has been lost through clearing, resulting in the fragmentation of Striated Grasswren populations across their range.

No Striated Grasswrens were observed during the survey, and the habitat across the site is generally not consistent with the habitat preferred by this species. However, historical records of this species exist in western Queensland, and some elements of preferred habitat are found in the area. Based on the large expanse of similar habitat within the area, it is considered that the project site if utilised by the species would be on an occasional basis and is unlikely to be utilised for any important life cycle processes.

6.8.8 PURPLE-NECKED ROCK WALLABY (PETROGALE PURPUREICOLLIS)

The Purple-necked Rock Wallaby (Petrogale purpureicollis) is listed as a vulnerable species under the NCA 1992. This species inhabits rocky outcrops, boulder piles, cliffs and gorges (Rootourism 2010) as well as hummock grasslands and Mulga (Menkhurst and Knight 2001). The Purple-necked Rock Wallaby is most active at night, sheltering by day in cool caves and crevices (Menkhurst and Knight 2001).

This vulnerable species was not recorded on the site during the study, and the habitat within the site is not consistent with the specific denning and foraging habitat requirements of this species.

6.8.9 JULIA CREEK DUNNART (SMINTHOPSIS DOUGLASI )

The Julia Creek Dunnart (Sminthopsis douglasi) is listed as an endangered species under the EPBC Act 1999 and the NCA 1992.

This species is restricted to Mitchell Grass Downs country in north western Queensland (DEWHA 2010c; DERM 2009), where it shelters in clay soil cracks


61

during the dry season or among the low grass and shrubs following summer rain (DERM 2010b). Prior to 1992, all known individuals were recorded within a short radius of Julia Creek and Richmond (DERM 2009). However, recent surveys indicate a wider, albeit patchy, distribution within both Mitchell Grass Downs and Desert Uplands bioregions (DERM 2009).

The proposed PHM South Phosphate Project area is approximately 230km to the south-west of Julia Creek, which is outside the current known distribution for this species. However, habitat within the site is considered consistent with the known habitat of the Julia Creek Dunnart, and as such, it is possible that this species could occur. In addition, the known ranges of the two dunnart species recorded during this survey overlap with the Julia Creek Dunnart in its known range. No Julia Creek Dunnarts were recorded during the survey.


62

7. SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF ANALYSIS Soil sampling was conducted at 6 sites within the PHM South Phosphate area to establish initial background levels for nutrients and metals inside the proposed mining area . Due to the timing of the sampling effort (i.e. the inability to access the site before the beginning of the dry season and end of the wet season) there was little water remaining within the study area, therefore sediment samples from within the major gullies/creeks were taken in order to obtain insight into the stream sediment load. This is a regularly used technique in stream sediment geochemistry.

Six soil sites were sampled across the study area, KRB1-6, and one water sample (creek crossing) was taken from the road leading to the site (Figure 21). This creek receives runoff from Phosphate Hill Mine upstream of the sampling point. However, it receives runoff from the study area downstream of the sampling point. Sediment samples taken were analysed for total metals and the water sample was assessed for total metals, major cations, major anions, non-metallic inorganics and organics. All samples were analysed by a NATA accredited laboratory.

The results of the analyses are compared against the Draft Guidelines for the Assessment & Management of Contaminated Land in Queensland (DGAMCLQ 1998) and the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council Water Quality Guidelines (ANZECC) (2000) below.

7.1 SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Comparison of the soil samples results with the guideline values (Table 19) shows that only one sample (Chromium at site KRB1) exceeds all values given.. It should be noted that Chromium at site KRB1 (136 mg/kg) exceeds the ANZECC (2000) Guideline for sediment quality (80 mg/kg) and, together with KRB2, also exceeds the Environmental Investigation Level for Chromium (50 mg/kg; (DGAMCLQ 1998). However, the Chromium levels found at KRB1 and KRB2 are most likely the product of a weathering laterite as Chromium is immobile. Similarly the enhancement of Vanadium in the samples of KRB1 and KRB2 is also due to the immobility of the element and therefore is also residual from weathered lateritic soils.

The water quality results are all within the ANZECC (2000) Guideline values, with the exception of total nitrogen and total phosphorus (Table 20). However, these parameters can be highly variable in natural conditions and the values given by ANZECC (2000) are inclusive for the whole of northern Australia and therefore should be viewed as only an indicative number, rather than a threshold. It is for this reason that the results recorded are considered to be not of concern.


63

Figure 21: In stream runoff sampling sites for the PHM South Phosphate project

64

Table 19: Soil Samples Results compared to Investigation Thresholds for Contaminants in Soils (DGAMCLQ 1998 and ANZECC 2000).

Health-based Investigation Levels

Metal KRB1

(mg/kg)

KRB2

(mg/kg)

KRB3

(mg/kg)

KRB4

(mg/kg)

KRB5

(mg/kg)

KRB6

(mg/kg)

Background

Levels (mg/kg)

Environmental Investigation

Levels (mg/kg)

Standard Residential

(mg/kg)

Commercial / Industrial (mg/kg)

ANZECC Sediment

Quality Guidelines

(mg/kg) Arsenic (As) 5 6 4* 4* 4* 4* 0.2 – 30 20 100 500 20 Barium (Ba) 100 180 190 170 150 160 20 – 200 - - - - Beryllium (Be) 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* - - 20 100 - Cadmium (Cd) 1 0.8* 0.08* 0.08* 0.08* 0.08* 0.04 – 2 3 20 100 1.5 Chromium (Cr) 136 72 19 29 24 18 0.5 – 110 50 12% 60% 80 Cobalt (Co) 3 6 5 9 8 11 2 – 170 - - - - Copper (Cu) 13 13 18 12 14 10 1 – 190 60 1,000 5,000 65 Lead (Pb) 11 17 11 8 11 8 <2 – 200 300 300 1,500 50 Manganese (Mn)

165 191 129 316 241 426 4 – 12,600 500 1,500 7,500 -

Mercury (Hg) 0.08* 0.08* 0.08* 0.08* 0.08* 0.08* 0.001 – 0.1 1 15 75 0.15 Nickel (Ni) 7 9 8 7 7 8 2 – 400 60 600 3,000 21 Vanadium (V) 226 134 41 54 56 44 - - - - - Zinc (Zn) 12 15 35 28 20 14 2 – 180 200 7,000 35,000 200

* Has not been detected. Therefore, given a value of 80% of the limit of recording. Note – Bold figures are above ANZECC guideline values.


65

Table 20: Water Quality within Creek Runoff from Phosphate Hill Mine Compared

to ANZECC Guidelines (2000).

Parameter

Creek Crossing (mg/L)

Freshwater trigger values – 95% protection level (ANZECC

2000) (mg/L)

Alkalinity Bicarbonate Alkalinity (as CaCO3)

229 -

Dissolved major anions Sulfate (as SO4

2-) 55 - Dissolved major cations Calcium (Ca) 68 - Magnesium (Mg) 33 - Sodium (Na) 72 - Potassium (K) 4 - Total metals Arsenic (As) 0.002 0.024 Barium (Ba) 0.178 - Manganese (Mn) 0.039 1.9 Uranium (U) 0.006 - Non-metallic inorganics Ammonia (as N) 0.04 0.9 Chloride 125 - Fluoride 0.6 - Organics Total nitrogen (N) 0.2 0.15 Total phosphorus (P) 0.04 0.01

Note – Bold figures are above guideline values.


66

7.2 SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS The results indicate that both stream sediments and water samples are generally compliant. The results are summarised in Table 21.

Table 21: Summary of Stream Sediment and Water Sample Results

Sediments: Element Comments/conclusion Arsenic Below Environmental investigation limits. Barium Within Background levels. Beryllium Below recommended health guidelines. Cadmium Within Background levels and below Environmental investigation

limits. Chromium High Chromium levels are found in KRB1and KRB2. These are

slightly above background and Environmental investigation levels but are well below the Health based investigation levels. High Cr3+ in these samples may be explained due to the source of the weathered sediments (most probably from highly weathered lateritic profiles). Cr3+ residual is immobile and associated with the iron oxides in the soil.

Cobalt Within Background levels. Copper Below Environmental investigation limits. Lead Below Environmental investigation limits. Manganese Below Environmental investigation limits. Nickel Below Environmental investigation limits. Vanadium Vanadium levels are considered to be within the background levels

for the area. Higher levels may be experienced due to the immobile nature in ferruginised soils.

Zinc Below Environmental investigation limits.

Waters: Element Comments/conclusion Barium Barium is considered to be high but is consistent with

phosphate/carbonate geology. Uranium The detectable levels of uranium are consistent with the presence of

phosphate/apatite.

All other values for waters are below the freshwater trigger values for 95% species protection level or are considered consistent when taken in context of the site.


67

8. DUST

8.1 INTRODUCTION Dust sampling was undertaken to obtain a preliminary baseline for dust levels in the vicinity of the site. The positions of the six sites are shown in Figure 22. The GPS coordinates are tabulated in Table 22. The results of the analysis were compared against Table 7.1 of Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) NSW (2005). AS/NZS 3580 2009: Methods for Sampling and Analysis of Ambient Air, NEPM (1998) and the Environmental Defender’s Office NSW (2006). Reference was also made to NEPM (July 2010) and NERDDC (1988); Air Pollution from Surface Coal Mining: Measurement, Modelling and Community Perception. Table 22: Co-ordinates for the PHM South Phosphate Project

Site No Easting Northing RL

Crsite1 394434.3 7573966 266.1687 Crsite2 394455.6 7573084 266.8896 Crsite3 394118.6 7572777 265.688 Crsite4 393858 7573225 269.2931 Crsite5 393735.4 7573736 266.1687 Crsite6 393841.5 7574154 265.4478

8.2 METHODOLOGY – SAMPLE COLLECTION OF DUST AS/NZS 3580 identifies the equipment to use in collecting a dust sample (Australian/New Zealand Standard 3580: Methods for sampling and analysis of ambient air: Method 10.1: Determination of particular matter – deposited matter – gravimetric method (AS/NZS 3580).

8.2.1 EQUIPMENT • A deposit gauge (150x10mm diameter funnel inserted into a minimum 4 litre size glass

bottle through a rubber stopper (refer Figure 23A). • A stand (approximately 2m tall) and an external canister to protect the glass bottle from

sunlight (refer Figure 23B). • A tight fitting lid to seal the glass bottle for transport to the laboratory.

8.2.2 EQUIPMENT CONSTRAINTS

Several procedural constraints need to be observed so that dust samples are collected in a standard manner. These were - • The bottle was cleaned prior to use and rinsed with 10ml of copper sulphate solution to

prevent algal growth. • The deposit gauge was set on a stand of sufficient height that the top of the funnel was

2m ± 0.2m above the ground level of the immediate surrounding area.


68

• The glass bottle also collected rainwater and other material (e.g. bugs, leaf litter, etc). This did not contaminate the sample and was not removed in the field. All extraneous matter was noted and included as part of the sample identification process to assist with the correct interpretation of the results (such as high content of insoluble matter) during laboratory analysis. Information to collected and identified during the collection process, included: - Sample identification number; - Time and date of collection; - Extraneous matter present (e.g. bird droppings, leaf litter, sticks, spider webs,

Christmas beetles, moisture, etc); and - Bottle condition [e.g. bottle breakage].

• After 30 days ± 2 days, any deposited matter in the funnel was washed into the glass bottle using distilled water.

• The funnel was removed and the glass bottled sealed with a screw cap. • The glass bottle was identified with a label showing site location, that date sampling

began and ended, and the funnel diameter to the nearest millimetre. • The funnel was obtained from ALS and was supplied at standard size. • A stand, as supplied by ALS was used so that the funnel was horizontal and the height

of the top of the funnel to be 2m ± 0.2m above he surrounding ground level.

In accordance with AS/NZS 3580, the samples were collected after 60 ± 2 days.

AS/NZS 3580 recommends that dust gauges should be located at sensitive receivers, defining a sensitive receiver as “a location where people are likely to work or reside; including a dwelling, school, hospital, office or public recreational area”.

In the absence of infrastructure across the proposed mine site, but to gain an approximation of the background dust levels, dust gauges were located at the proposed camp site, and upstream of the dominant wind direction across the mining lease (refer Figure 22).

8.2.3 SAMPLE ANALYSES

Dust samples were analysed at the laboratories of ALS, Brisbane for: • Insoluble solids (matter that does not dissolve in water); • Ash content (matter remaining after the sample has been combusted in the laboratory).

Ash content provides an indication of the mineral content (or soil dust) of the sample. The mineral content may be attributable to mining, but may also be attributable to other sources such as agriculture, unsealed roads, etc. The matter making up the insoluble solids that had been combusted was not attributable to mining or other sources because this was mostly organic matter.

8.3 RESULTS Results for the analysis of the six sampling sites for the sixty days from April 9th 2010 are given in Appendix (6). Table (2e) shows the total solids content (insoluble matter + soluble matter (i.e. ash content + combustible matter) + soluble matter in g/m2/month and total insoluble matter in g/m2/month


69

Table 23: Dust Collection Results, PHM South Phosphate Project.

SITE 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total solids (g/m2/month) 1.5 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.8 3.2

Total insoluble matter (g/m2/month) 1.1 0.5 0.4 0.6 1.4 2.4

Figure 22: Dust Monitoring Sites within the PHM South Phosphate Project area


70

`

` Figure 23: (A) Typical Dust Deposit Gauge, and (B) Typical Deposit Gauge Stand

Figure 23A

Figure 23B


71

8.4 ASSESSMENT Data in Table 7.1 of DEC (2005) shows two impact assessment criteria for deposited dust as insoluble solids as defined by AS 3580.10.1, and as stipulated by NERDDC (1988). These criteria recommend that (for an averaging period) in areas where a baseline exists, that an annual increase in deposited dust of 2g/m2/month was possible. In areas where baseline data do not exist, an absolute value of 4g/m2/month was permissible for insoluble matter.

There are currently no baseline data for the PHM South Phosphate site. As seen in Table 23 above, levels of insoluble matter range from 0.4 to 2.4 g/m2/month and are, therefore, well below the recommended permitted level. Furthermore, only the level of insoluble matter for Site 6 is above the recommended increase in baseline level (2g/m2/month).

The testing period of the current data set was only approximately 60 days and consequently further data are needed to obtain an annual average for g/m2/month. However, the current preliminary data indicate that baseline levels are within acceptable limits for surface mining activities.

It should be noted that Site 6, the collection point where the highest levels of dust were found, is the site that is the closest (200m) to the activities of the existing Phosphate Hill Mine.


72

9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS

9.1 FLORA Vegetation of the mining lease area has been mapped in accordance with Methodology for Survey and Mapping of Regional Ecosystems and Vegetation Communities in Queensland (Version 3.1. Updated September 2005). All of the vegetation communities mapped on the site are considered to be “Least Concern” under the Vegetation Management Act and have a “No Concern at Present” biodiversity status. Provided that all requirements can be met under the Regional Vegetation Management Code for the Western Bioregions, there should be no impediment to the further development of the site. No flora of conservation significance was observed during this study.

9.2 FAUNA A comprehensive fauna survey for both the wet and dry season found:

• No mammal species of conservation significance were recorded during this survey.

• No reptilian species of conservation significance were recorded within the project area, although the Common Death Adder (Acanthophis antarcticus), listed as a Rare species under the Queensland Nature Conservation Regulation 2006, was detected approximately 20km from the project area. Given that the project area contains habitat suitable for this habitat generalist, its presence is also likely within the project area.

• No amphibian species of conservation significance were detected.

• Three bird species listed as Rare under the Queensland Nature Conservation Regulation 2006 (Square-tailed Kite (Lophoictinia isura), the Black-necked Stork (Epiphorhincus asiaticus) and the Pictorella Mannikin (Heteromunia pectoralis) ) were observed on the site. In addition, two migratory bird species listed in the Environmental Protection Biodiversity and Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999; the Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus) and the Great Egret (Ardea alba), were also recorded along the nearby creek.

Provided a Fauna Management Plan is implemented for the above species, potential impact is considered to be minimal. Continual monitoring of fauna on the site should take place as part of normal site based management operations. Monitoring should target the listed species found on the site, (Square-tailed Kite, Black-necked Stork, Pictorella Mannikin, Rainbow Bee-eater, Great Egret) and other listed species identified within this document (e.g. Common Death Adder) that may occur on the site.

9.3 SEDIMENT AND RUNOFF The current wet season study was of a preliminary nature. To establish a viable baseline, more data are needed over several wet seasons. With this proviso, the results indicate that both stream sediments and water samples are generally compliant with the appropriate standards.


73

Consequently, it is considered that this report forms the start of an environmental baseline for the site. Future monitoring and analysis should include:

• Water and stream samples taken from drainage features across the site during or immediately after rainfall events;

• Continual monitoring of theses points after runoff events before and during the suspected mining operation; and an

• Assessment of ground water from the established on site bore for suitability as a potable water supply.

9.4 DUST Levels of insoluble matter range from 0.4 to 2.4 g/m2/month, well below the recommended, permitted levels as stipulated by NERDDC. According to these Guidelines, these values are permissible in areas where no baseline information exists.

As the level of insoluble matter for Site 6 was (a) above a recommended level of increase, but not an absolute permissible level, and (b) restricted to a testing period of only 60 days, it may be necessary to collect further data to obtain an annual average for g/m2/month.

However, it should also be noted that Site 6, the collection point with the highest level of dust, is the closest site (200m) to the activities of the existing Phosphate Hill Mine.


74

10. REFERENCES

Australian Museum (2010), Night Parrot, http://australianmuseum.net.au/Ornithology-Collection-Night-Parrot, 18 January 2010

ANZECC 2000: Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water

Quality. Australian Government, Canberra. Barker, J. S. F, Tyler, M. J., & Grigg, G. C. (1995), A field guide to Australian frogs,

Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton, N.S.W. Birds Australia (2010), Square-tailed Kite Lophoictinia isura,

http://www.birdsaustralia.com.au/our-projects/square-tailed-kite-wbc.html, 18 January 2010

Birds in Backyards (2010a), Rainbow Bee-eater,

http://birdsinbackyards.net/species/Merops-ornatus, 14 January 2010 Birds in Backyards (2010b), Great Egret, http://birdsinbackyards.net/species/Ardea-alba,

14 January 2010 Brooker, M. I. H & Kleinig D. A ( 2004). Field Guide to Eucalypts Volume 3 Northern

Australia Volume 3. Bloomings Books Melbourne Australia Churchill, S.K. (2009). Australian bats - Second Edition. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Cogger, H.G., E.E. Cameron, R.A. Sadlier & P. Eggler (1993). The Action Plan for

Australian Reptiles. [Online]. Canberra, ACT: Australian Nature Conservation Agency. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/action/reptiles/index.html.

Department of Environment and Resource Management (2009), National recovery plan for

the Julia Creek Dunnart (Sminthopsis douglasi). Report to the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane.

Department of Environment and Resource Management (2010a), Common Death Adder,

http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/wildlife/az_of_animals/common_death_adder.html, 18 January 2010

Department of Environment and Resource Management (2010b), Julia Creek Dunnart,

https://www.epa.qld.gov.au/nature_conservation/wildlife/threatened_plants_and_animals/endangered/julia_creek_dunnart.html, 21 January 2010

Department of Environment and Resource Management (2010) Regional Ecosystems,

http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/biodiversity/regional_ecosystems/, 13 January 2010

Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2010a), Australian Painted

Snipe (Rostratula australis), Fact Sheet, Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/painted-snipe.pdf , 18 January 2010

http://australianmuseum.net.au/Ornithology-Collection-Night-Parrot

http://australianmuseum.net.au/Ornithology-Collection-Night-Parrot

http://www.birdsaustralia.com.au/our-projects/square-tailed-kite-wbc.html

http://birdsinbackyards.net/species/Merops-ornatus

http://birdsinbackyards.net/species/Ardea-alba

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/action/reptiles/index.html

http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/wildlife/az_of_animals/common_death_adder.html

http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/wildlife/az_of_animals/common_death_adder.html

https://www.epa.qld.gov.au/nature_conservation/wildlife/threatened_plants_and_animals/endangered/julia_creek_dunnart.html

https://www.epa.qld.gov.au/nature_conservation/wildlife/threatened_plants_and_animals/endangered/julia_creek_dunnart.html

http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/biodiversity/regional_ecosystems/

http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/biodiversity/regional_ecosystems/

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/painted-snipe.pdf

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/painted-snipe.pdf


75

Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2010b), Pezoporus occidentalis – Night Parrot, http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=59350, 18 January 2010

Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2010c), Australian Threatened

Species Julia Creek Dunnart Sminthopsis douglasi, http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/tsd05julia-creek-dunnart.pdf, 21 January 2010

DGAMCLQ 1998: Draft Guidelines for the Assessment & Management of Contaminated

Land in Queensland. Department of Environment and Resource Management. Queensland Government, Brisbane.

Flegg J and Madge S (1995), Birds of Australia: Reader’s Digest photographic field guide.

Reader’s Digest, Surrey Hills, New South Wales. Government of South Australia (2010), Threatened Species of the South Australian

Murray-Darling Basin – Striated Grasswren (sandplain subspecies) Amytornis striatus striatus, http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/biodiversity/pdfs/striated_grasswren.pdf, 21 January 2010

Jackes, B.R & Jackes E. M (1993), A Pictorial key to some grass genera found between

Charters Towers and Hughenden. James Cook University of North Queensland. Jackes, B.R. (1996), A guide to the plants of the Burra Range. James Cook University of

North Queensland. Menkhurst, P and Knight, F (2001) A Field Guide to the Mammals of Australia, Oxford

University Press Milson , J. (2000), Pasture Plants of north-west Queensland, Department of Primary

Industries, Queensland. Milson , J. (2000), Trees and Shrubs of north-west Queensland , Department of Primary

Industries, Queensland. Morcombe, M (2003), Field Guide to Australian Birds. Steve Parish Publishing Pty Ltd,

Archerfield, Queensland. Neldner VJ, Wilson BA, Thompson EJ, Dillewaard HA (2005) Methodology for survey and

mapping of Regional Ecosystems and vegetation communities in Queensland. Version 3.1. Updated September 2005. Queensland Herbarium, Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane

New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service (2010), Threatened Species

Information – Square-tailed Kite, http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/tsprofileSquaretailedKite.pdf, 18 January 2010

Pilbara Pythons (2010), Southern / Common Death Adder Acanthophis antarcticus,

http://pilbarapythons.com/stndeathadder.htm, 18 January 2010 Rootourism (2010), General Information, http://www.rootourism.com/fsheet52.htm, 19

January 2010

http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=59350

http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=59350

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/tsd05julia-creek-dunnart.pdf

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/pubs/tsd05julia-creek-dunnart.pdf

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/biodiversity/pdfs/striated_grasswren.pdf

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/tsprofileSquaretailedKite.pdf

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/tsprofileSquaretailedKite.pdf

http://pilbarapythons.com/stndeathadder.htm

http://www.rootourism.com/fsheet52.htm


76

Sattler, P. & Williams, R. (1999) The Conservation Status of Queensland’s Regional Ecosystems. Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland Government.

Slater, P, Slater, P and Slater, R (2003), The Slater Field Guide to Australian birds.

Landsdowne Publishers, The Rocks, New South Wales. Strahan, R (2008), Mammals of Australia, 2nd Edition, Australian Museum, Australia.

Swan, G (1996), A Photographic Guide to Snakes & other reptiles of Australia, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.

Triggs, B (2006), Tracks, Scats and Other Traces – A Field Guide to Australian Mammals, Oxford University Press

Wilson, S (2005), A Field Guide to Reptiles of Queensland, Reed New Holland

Wilson, S and Swan G (2003), A Complete Guide to the Reptiles of Australia, New Holland Publishers


77

APPENDIX 1

Regional Ecosystems observed within the study area, as described in the Regional

Ecosystem Description Database


78

Regional Ecosystem 1.3.1 Regional Ecosystem: 1.3.1

Vegetation Management Act status (December 2005):

Least concern

Biodiversity Status: No concern at present

Subregion: 2, 3, 1, (4.2)

Estimated Extent: In December 2006, remnant extent was > 10,000 ha and >30% of the pre-clearing area remained.

Extent in Reserves: Low

Wetland: Contains palustrine wetland (e.g. in swales).

Short Description: Mitchell grass (Astrebla spp.) grassland on alluvial plains

Structure Category: Grassland

Description: Astrebla pectinata tussock grasslands, occasionally with Acacia cambagei or Eucalyptus microtheca emergents. Astrebla elymoides in depressions. Occurs on plains on Quaternary alluvium; calcareous grey or brown clays. Major vegetation communities include: 1.3.1x1: Contains palustrine wetland (e.g. in swales). Mixed tussock grassland including Astrebla

pectinata, Aristida latfolia, Bothriochloa ewartiana, Eulalia aurea, Chrysopogon fallax, Sarga spp. and Iseilema spp. often with emergent trees of Corymbia terminalis and/or Eucalyptus leucophylla and/or Lysiphyllum cunninghamii. Occurs on alluvium within landscapes of Cambrian limestone.

Protected Areas: Boodjamulla (Lawn Hill) NP

Fire management guidelines: Season: Storm burns when sufficient fuel. Link fire with rain. Intensity: Occasional. Interval: > 3 years. Strategy: Small patch burns, natural mosaic, burn <30% of area. Issues: Encroachment of woody-stemmed plants (Acacia/Atalaya) through over-grazing and lack of burning.


79



Least concern


Subregion: 1



Short Description: Eucalyptus coolabah +/- E. camaldulensis +/- Acacia georginae open woodland on drainage lines/plains

Structure Category: Very sparse

Description: Eucalyptus coolabah usually predominates forming a distinct but discontinuous upper canopy layer. E. camaldulensis is conspicuous in sandy or gravelly channels. A lower tree understorey or tall shrub layer with Acacia georginae frequently present often occurs. Low shrubs frequently occur and in places form a distinct layer. The ground layer is variable being composed of grasses and forbs with either predominating depending on seasonal conditions. Asteraceae spp. particularly prevalent following favourable seasons. Occurs on levees and banks of major drainage channels on braided alluvial plains. Soils very deep, brown or grey clays with sand and silt bands common in profile.

Protected Areas: Diamantina NP


80



Least concern

Biodiversity Status: No concern at present.

Subregion: 7, 2, (1.1), (1.3)



Short Description: Astrebla pectinata +/- Aristida latifolia +/- Eulalia aurea grassland on Tertiary sediments overlying limestone

Structure Category: Grassland

Description: Astrebla pectinata tussock grassland to open tussock grassland. With A. elymoides or A. lappacea infrequently co-dominate. Aristida latifolia occurs frequently, but is rarely abundant. A number of ephemeral grasses including the frequently occurring Iseilema vaginiflorum, and infrequently occurring Iseilema vaginiflorum, and infrequently occurring Dichanthium spp., Panicum spp. and others, may be seasonally co-dominant with the perennial grasses. The forb diversity is high, and many species are ephemerals, which may also become seasonally prominent. Frequent species include Abutilon malvifolium, Sclerolaena glabra, S. lanicuspis, Calotis hispidula, Crotalaria dissitiflora, Chamaesyce drummondii, Salsola kali, Sida fibulifera and S. trichopoda. Other species including many from the Asteraceae, Brassicaceae, Chenopodiaceae, Convolvulaceae, Euphorbiaceae Fabaceae, Liliaceae, Malvaceae and Zygophyllaceae occur infrequently. Occurs extensively on flat plains formed from Tertiary sediments overlying limestone overlying limestone deposits. Soils generally red and brown, heavy cracking clays with surface stone present in some areas. Major vegetation communities include: 4.4.1a: Scattered Atalaya hemiglauca +/- Ventilago viminalis +/- Grevillea striata +/- Acacia

sutherlandii and a ground layer dominated by Aristida latifolia, Enneapogon polyphyllus. Occurs on gravel lag on fine textured Tertiary alluvium.

4.4.1b: Astrebla spp. grassland wooded with Acacia sutherlandii. Occurs on fine textured Tertiary alluvium.

4.4.1x2: Floodplain (other than floodplain wetlands). Eucalyptus microtheca low open-woodland - woodland and woodland. Occurs on older alluvium; self-mulching clays.

4.4.1x3: Acacia cambagei low woodland with a sparse tussock grass ground layer of Astrebla spp., Iseilema spp. and Eulalia aurea. Occurs on older alluvium; self-mulching clays.

4.4.1x4: Astrebla pectinata (5-25% cover) predominates and forms a tussock grassland. In places, A. lappacea and A. elymoides may be co dominant. Aristida latifolia and Iseilema vaginiflorum occur frequently and may be abundant in some areas. Other short lived grasses may be abundant in wet summers. A large number of forbs may occur, particularly in a wet winter. Occurs on flat to undulating plains (slopes 0-3%) formed on Cainazoic deposits. Soils deep, weakly gilgaied, stony surface, red cracking clays.

Protected Areas: Camooweal Caves NP


81



Least concern


Subregion: 1, 2, (1.3)



Short Description: Acacia aneura, Triodia brizoides or Triodia molesta tall open shrubland on Tertiary sand sheets.


Description: Acacia aneura tall scrubland to tall open shrub land (Ht 4-7m: density 25-750/ha) with a sparse hummock grass stratum dominated by either Triodia brizoides or T. sp aff. T. molesta (Ht 1m; PFC 5-10%). Scattered Acacia bivenosa (ex subsp. wayi), Senna artemisioides subsp. helmsii and Senna artemisioides subsp. oligophylla shrubs (Ht 1m) occur frequently, and other Acacia spp., Cassia spp. and Eremophila spp. infrequently. The ground cover hummocks are usually sparse, but the grasses Amphipogon caricinus and Aristida spp. may become prominent. The forb Chamaesyce inappendiculata occurs frequently, and species from other families including Chenopodiaceae, Fabaceae and Malvaceae are present infrequently. Occurs on flat to gently undulating tops of dissected residual tablelands and associated plains. Soils shallow, gravelly red clays, gravelly red earths and loamy red earths. Lateritic gravel common on surface.

Protected Areas: No representation


82



Least Concern


Subregion: 1, 2, 7, (3), (1.3)


Extent in Reserves: No representation

Short Description: Triodia pungens hummock grassland wooded with Acacia spp. +/- Eucalyptus spp. on Quaternary sand sheets


Description: Triodia pungens open hummock grassland (Ht < 1m, PFC 10-20%) with a sparse to open shrub stratum frequently present. Dominant shrub species Eremophila obovata (Ht <0.5m), Acacia melleodora (Ht 1-2m), A. bivenosa (ex subsp. wayi), A. coriacea, A. cowleana and Grevillea juncifolia (Ht 2-6m). Codonocarpus cotinifolius (Ht 5-7m), Keraudrenia integrifolia, Rulingia loxophylla and Streptoglossa macrocephala (ht <1m) may be locally dominant. In run-on area, Acacia cowleana tall shrub land with a soft spinifex hummock grass stratum may be present. The ground between the grass hummocks and shrubs supports a variety of perennial and ephemeral herb. Frequent species include the grass Aristida holathera, A. ingrata and Schizachyrium perplexum and the forbs Goodenia triodiophila, Sida cardiophylla, S. filiformis and Stackhousia viminea. In local areas, Acacia adsurgens, A. ancistrocarpa and A. cowleana (run-on areas) may form tall shrublands with a T. pungens ground layer. Occurs on flat, Aeolian sand plains. Soils are deep to very deep sandy red earths and associated red earthy sands in run-on areas. Soils have a slight acid to medium acid, hard setting surface often with a crust. Soils become strong alkaline at depth with soft lime present. Structure maybe weakly developed at depth. Major vegetation communities include: 4.5.8a: riodia pungens dominates the ground layer forming a hummock grassland (<0.7m high).

Scattered low shrubs such as Senna oligophylla var. zygophylla, Crotalaria eremaea, Acacia bivenosa, and A. coriacea are frequent present. The ground cover between the hummocks and shrubs is sparse and dominated by short-lobed perennial and ephemeral herbs. The grass Aristida holathera and forb Rutidosis helichrysoides and Synaptantha tillaeacea occur most frequently. Occurs on Quaternary sand sheets.

4.5.8b: Corymbia terminalis, Triodia pungens +/- Acacia spp., Senna spp., Eucalyptus spp. Low open woodland on sand plains. Occurs on Quaternary sand sheets.



83



Least concern


Subregion: 1, 3, 4.2, (4.1), (4.7)



Short Description: Bloodwood (Corymbia terminalis) and/or mulga (Acacia aneura) low open woodland on sandy red earth plains


Description: Low open-woodland of Corymbia terminalis and Acacia aneura. Associated species include Grevillea striata, Acacia excelsa, Corymbia aparrerinja, Owenia spp. and Hakea lorea subsp. lorea. Shrubby understorey. Sparse ground cover dominated by Triodia spp. +/- other perennial and annual grasses. Occurs on Tertiary and Quaternary outwash sand plains, in places reworked by wind; deep loamy red earths. Major vegetation communities include: 1.5.7a: Low open-woodland of Acacia aneura, often groved and often including Eucalyptus

leucophloia and/or Acacia cambagei as sub-dominant species with a variable shrub layer of Senna spp. and Acacia spp. and ground layer of tussock grasses and Triodia spp. Occurs on sand sheets.

1.5.7b: Low open-woodland of Corymbia capricornia, usually with C. aparrerinja and Eucalyptus odontocarpa with a ground layer of Triodia pungens and/or Aristida hygrometrica. Occurs on older alluvium around low metamorphic hills.

1.5.7x1: Low open-woodland of Eucalyptus microtheca on shallow red soils over limestone. Occurs on shallow red soils overlying limestone.

1.5.7x2: Erythrina vespertilio and Corymbia aparrerinja low open-woodland. Occurs on sandy residual soils.

Protected Areas: Camooweal Caves NP

Comments Season: 1.5.7, 1.5.7a: Wet season - early dry season, 1.5.7b: Storm season to early dry season.

1.5.7x1, 1.5.7x2: Early dry season to ensure patchy fire. Intensity: 1.5.7, 1.5.7a and b: Various. 1.5.7x1, 1.5.7x2: n/a, tussock grass will not burn as

intensely as spinifex. Interval: 1.5.7, 1.5.7a: >30 years. 1.5.7b: 4 - 10 years. Ensure some areas are long (10-20 years)

unburnt. 1.5.7x1, 1.5.7x2: As per surrounding spinifex vegetation types. Strategy: 1.5.7b: Large, landscape scale burns. Ensure some patches are burnt every year but also

ensure some patches remain long unburnt. Maintain burnt areas < 30%. 1.5.7x1, 1.5.7x2: Natural mosaic.

Issues: 1.5.7, 1.5.7a: Needs fire for recruitment (but make sure long intervals).


84



Least concern


Subregion: 3, 2, 5.3, 1, (5), (6)



Short Description: Acacia cambagei tall open shrubland with Triodia spp. +/- Senna spp. near eroding edges of Tertiary plateaus


Description: Acacia cambagei open shrubland/ tall open shrubland (Ht 4-7m; density 25-150/ha), with scattered Apophyllum anomalum shrubs (Ht1m) present frequently and Senna artemisioides subsp. oligophylla and/or S. phyllodinea shrubs (Ht <1m) locally prominent. Scattered Cassia spp., Eremophila spp. and Hemichroa diandra shrubs occurs infrequently. The ground stratum is sparse to open (PFC <10-15%) and usually dominated by Triodia brizoides, T. longiceps, or in some areas T. pungens. The perennial grass Enteropogon acicularis and short-lived Dactyloctenium radulans and Enneapogon polyphyllus occur frequently, while Aristida latifolia may be locally common. A variety of other ephemeral grasses, including Enneapogon spp. and Sporobolus spp, and forbs, including many species from the Chenopodiaceae, occur infrequently but may be seasonally important. Occurs on lower slopes (slopes 2-12%) of scarp retreat zones formed from Cretaceous fine grained sediments (Land Zone 9) with a dense surface ironstone or lateritic gravel cover derived from weathered Tertiary land surface. Soils mainly very shallow to shallow, stony red clays with minor desert loams. Lithosols occurs adjacent to the scarp minor cracking clays occurs lower in the landscape. Ironstone and lateritic gravel occur throughout the profile and on the surface. Surfaces are usually crusty.

Protected Areas: Diamantina NP, [Lochern NP]


85



Least concern


Subregion: 1, 2


Extent in Reserves: No representation

Short Description: Eucalyptus leucophylla low open woodland


Description: Acacia chisholmii low shrubland. Other Acacia species and or scattered Eucalyptus spp. may be present. The ground layer is dominated by Triodia spp. Acacia chisholmii low shrubland.



86

APPENDIX 2

Flora Species List


87

Flora Species List Fanily species Amaranthaceae Ptilotus obovatus Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (green) clementii Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (pale) polystachyus Amaranthaceae Ptilotus (mauve) schwartzii Amaranthaceae Alternanthera nana Amaranthaceae Ptilotus nobilis ss. nobilis Asteraceae Pterocaulon serrulatum Asteraceae Streptoglossa adscendens Asteraceae, best fit need flowers Pterocaulon serrulatum Asteraceae, no flowers to confirm species. Pterocaulon sp Asteraceae, Streptoglossa on label. Peripleura obovata Caesalpiniaceae Senna Caesalpiniaceae Senna notabilis Caesalpiniaceae Senna artemisioides. Caryophyllaceae Polycarpaea breviflora Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena cornishiana Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena eriantha Chenopodiaceae Maireana villosa Convolvulaceae Bonamia media Convolvulaceae Evolvulus alsinoides var. villosicalyx Fabaceae Rhynchosia minima Fabaceae Desmodium??? Haloragaceae Haloragis sp Haloragidaceae Haloragis (Minuaria??) Haloragidaceae Haloragis sp Malvaceae Abutilon sp. Malvaceae Abutilon fraseri ssp fraseri Malvaceae Abutilon macrum Malvaceae Gossypium ? australe Malvaceae Sida sp. Malvaceae Abutilon otocarpum Malvaceae Malvastrum americanum Malvaceae Sida fibulifera malvaceae Sida trichopoda Malvaceae –. Sida fibulifera Mimosaceae Acacia chisholmii Mimosaceae Acacia tenuissima Myoporaceae Eremophila latrobei Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia schomburkiana Pentapetaceae Melhania oblongifolia Pentapetaceae Melhania ovata Poaceae Aristida contorta Poaceae Aristida inaequiglumis Poaceae Austrochloris dichanthioides


88

Poaceae Enneapogon polyphyllus Family Species Poaceae Eriachne mucronata Poaceae Sporobolus australasicus Poaceae Tragus australianus Poaceae Triodia longiceps Poaceae Aristida contorta Poaceae Cleistochloa subjuncea Poaceae Enneapogon polyphyllus Poaceae Triodia longiceps Poaceae Digitaria brownii Poaceae Enneapogon polyphyllus Poaceae Sporobolus australasicus Poaceae Themeda quadrivalvis Poaceae Triodia longiceps Poaceae Aristida latifolia Poaceae Astrebla pectinata Poaceae Brachyachne convergens Poaceae Eragrotis setifolia Poaceae Iseilema vaginiflorum Poaceae Panicum laevinode Poaceae Sporobolus actinocladus Poaceae – (bit smaller than the usual ones) Aristida inaequiglumis Poaceae, Themeda quadrivalvis Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea Portulacaceae Portulaca filifolia Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea Solanaceae Solanum echinatum


89

APPENDIX 3

Species predicted to occur within a 50km radius from the study area, using the point coordinates:

Latitude -21.58194 and Longitude 140.3838 (An Extract from the EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool)

CLIENT: KRUCIBLE METALS LTD PROJECT: PHM SOUTH PHOSPHATE PROJECT REPORT: FLORA AND FAUNA STUDY DATE: JULY 2010

93

APPENDIX 4

Species previously recorded within 25km of the study area using the point coordinates:

Latitude -21.8638 and Longitude 139.9734 (An extract from the Queensland Wildlife Online Database)


94


95


96


97

APPENDIX 5

Results of Anabat Microbat Call Analysis (Report by Greg Ford of Balance! Environmental)


98


99


100


101


102


103


APPENDIX 6

Results of Dust Sampling

32/15953/7699 Korella Phosphate Project

Environmental Management Plan

GHD

72 McNamara St, Orange, NSW 2800 PO BOX 950, Orange, NSW 2800

T: (02) 6393 6400 F: (02) 6393 6401 E: [email protected]

© GHD 2011

This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose

for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

Document Status

Rev No.

Author Reviewer Approved for Issue

Name Signature Name Signature Date

0 G Metcalfe D Scott

D Usher D Usher* D Usher D Usher* 16/11/2010

1 G Metcalfe R F Koenig R Koenig* R F Koenig R Koenig* 09/08/2011

* Digital approval on file


APPENDIX H – REGULATED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT MAP

473

19/03/2015 11:39:42Longitude: '139.972507' Latitude: '-21.972507'


Vegetation Management Act 1999 - Extract from the essential habitat database - version 4.0

Essential habitat is required for assessment under the:

• State Development Assessment Provisions - Module 8: Native vegetation clearing which sets out the matters of interest to the state for development assessment under the Sustainable PlanningAct 2009; and

• Self-assessable vegetation clearing codes made under the Vegetation Management Act 1999

Essential habitat for one or more of the following species is found on and within 1.1 km of the identified subject lot/s or on and within 2.2 km of an identified coordinate on the accompanying essential habitatmap.

This report identifies essential habitat in Category A, B and Category C areas.

The numeric labels on the essential habitat map can be cross referenced with the database below to determine which essential habitat factors might exist for a particular species.

Essential habitat is compiled from a combination of species habitat models and buffered species records.

The Department of Natural Resources and Mines website (http://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au) has more information on how the layer is applied under the State Development Assessment Provisions - Module 8:Native vegetation clearing and the Vegetation Management Act 1999.

Regional ecosystem is a mandatory essential habitat factor, unless otherwise stated.

Essential habitat, for protected wildlife, means a category A area, a category B area or category C area shown on the regulated vegetation management map-

1) (a) that has at least 3 essential habitat factors for the protected wildlife that must include any essential habitat factors that are stated as mandatory for the protected wildlife in the essential habitatdatabase; or

2) (b) in which the protected wildlife, at any stage of its life cycle, is located.

Essential habitat identifies endangered or vulnerable native wildlife prescribed under the Nature Conservation Act 1994.

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation species record) areas:2200m Species Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation species record) areas:2200m Regional Ecosystems Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation) areas:2200m Species Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation) areas:2200m Regional Ecosystems Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category C (High value regrowth vegetation) areas:2200m Species Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category C (High value regrowth vegetation) areas:2200m Regional Ecosystems Information

(no results)

http://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au


APPENDIX I – VEGETATION MANAGEMENT MAP – CLOSEST ESSENTIAL HABITAT

477


Vegetation Management Act 1999 - Extract from the essential habitat database - version 4.0

Essential habitat is required for assessment under the:

• State Development Assessment Provisions - Module 8: Native vegetation clearing which sets out the matters of interest to the state for development assessment under the Sustainable PlanningAct 2009; and

• Self-assessable vegetation clearing codes made under the Vegetation Management Act 1999

Essential habitat for one or more of the following species is found on and within 1.1 km of the identified subject lot/s or on and within 2.2 km of an identified coordinate on the accompanying essential habitatmap.

This report identifies essential habitat in Category A, B and Category C areas.

The numeric labels on the essential habitat map can be cross referenced with the database below to determine which essential habitat factors might exist for a particular species.

Essential habitat is compiled from a combination of species habitat models and buffered species records.

The Department of Natural Resources and Mines website (http://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au) has more information on how the layer is applied under the State Development Assessment Provisions - Module 8:Native vegetation clearing and the Vegetation Management Act 1999.

Regional ecosystem is a mandatory essential habitat factor, unless otherwise stated.

Essential habitat, for protected wildlife, means a category A area, a category B area or category C area shown on the regulated vegetation management map-

1) (a) that has at least 3 essential habitat factors for the protected wildlife that must include any essential habitat factors that are stated as mandatory for the protected wildlife in the essential habitatdatabase; or

2) (b) in which the protected wildlife, at any stage of its life cycle, is located.

Essential habitat identifies endangered or vulnerable native wildlife prescribed under the Nature Conservation Act 1994.

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation species record) areas:2200m Species Information

Label Scientific Name Common Name NCA Status Vegetation Community Altitude Soils Position inLandscape

888 Petrogalepurpureicollis

Purple-neckedRock-wallaby

V Boulder-strewn ridges of rocky ranges/gorges/rock outcrops,within sparse eucalypt or acacia (mulga) woodlands generallyassociated with spinifex (Triodia).

100-450m. Limestone, lateriteand granitesubstrates.

Rocky areas.

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation species record) areas:2200m Regional Ecosystems Information

Label Regional Ecosystem (this is a mandatory essential habitat factor, unless otherwise stated)

888 1.3.2, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.3.6, 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.3.9, 1.5.1, 1.5.2, 1.5.3, 1.5.4, 1.5.5, 1.5.6, 1.5.7, 1.5.8, 1.5.9, 1.7.1, 1.7.2, 1.9.1, 1.9.2, 1.9.3, 1.9.4, 1.9.6, 1.9.7, 1.10.1, 1.10.2, 1.10.3,1.10.4, 1.10.7, 1.10.8, 1.11.1, 1.11.2, 1.11.3, 1.11.4, 1.12.1, 1.12.2, 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.3.3, 4.3.4, 4.3.5, 4.3.6, 4.3.8, 4.3.10, 4.3.11, 4.3.21, 4.4.1, 4.5.4, 4.5.5, 4.5.9, 4.7.2, 4.7.3, 4.7.4,4.9.1, 4.9.6, 4.9.12, 4.9.14, 4.9.18, 5.3.1, 5.3.2, 5.3.3, 5.3.4, 5.3.5, 5.3.6, 5.3.7, 5.3.8, 5.3.9, 5.3.10, 5.3.20, 5.5.6, 5.7.4, 5.7.8

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation) areas:2200m Species Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category A and B (Remnant vegetation) areas:2200m Regional Ecosystems Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category C (High value regrowth vegetation) areas:2200m Species Information

(no results)

Essential habitat in Category C (High value regrowth vegetation) areas:2200m Regional Ecosystems Information

(no results)

http://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au


APPENDIX J – MAP OF REFERABLE WETLANDS

481

140 °3 0'0 "E

140 °3 0'0 "E

140 °0 '0"E

140 °0 '0"E

139 °3 0'0 "E

139 °3 0'0 "E

21

°3

0'0

"S

21

°3

0'0

"S

22

°0

'0"S

22

°0

'0"S

Map of Referable WetlandsWetland Protection Areas

¯ © The State of Queensland, 2015

Requested By: [email protected]: 18 Mar 15 Time: 15.45.38

Centred on Lot on Plan:13 SP223510

This product is projected into GDA 1994 MGA Zone 54

0 8000 16000 24000 32000 40000 m

LOCALITY D IAGRAM

Selected Land ParcelCadastral Boundary

Wetland Protection AreasWetlandTrigger Area

Note:This map shows the location of wetland protection areas whichare defined under the Environmental Protection Regulation 2008.Within wetland protection areas, certain types of developmentinvolv ing high impact earthworks are made assessable underSchedule 3 of the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009.

The Department of State Development Infrastructure andPlanning is the State Assessment Referral Agency (SARA) underSchedule 7 of the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 forassessable development involving high impact earthworks withinwetland protection areas. The Department of Environment andHeritage Protection is a technical agency.

The policy outcome and assessment criteria for assessing theseapplications are described in the State Development AssessmentProvisions (SDAP) Module 11: Wetlands and wild rivers.

This map is produced at a scale relevant to the s ize of the lot onplan identified and should be printed at A4 size in portraitorientation. Consideration of the effects of mapped scale isnecessary when interpreting data at a large scale.

For further information or assistance with interpretation of thisproduct, please contact the Department of Environment andHeritage Protection at www.ehp.qld.gov.au or [email protected].

Page 1 of 2

140 °30 '0 "E

140 °30 '0 "E

140 °0'0"E

140 °0'0"E

139 °30 '0 "E

139 °30 '0 "E

21

°3

0'0

"S

21

°3

0'0

"S

22

°0

'0"S

22

°0

'0"S

Map of Referable Wetlands for theEnvironmental Protection Act 1994

¯ © The State of Queensland, 2015

Requested By: [email protected]: 18 Mar 15 Time: 15.45.42

Centred on Lot on Plan:13 SP223510

This product is projected into GDA 1994 MGA Zone 54

0 8000 16000 24000 32000 40000 m

LOCALITY D IAGRAM

Selected Land Parcel

Cadastral Boundary

HES WetlandGES Wetland

Note:This map shows the location of wetlands on the Map ofReferable Wetlands which are defined under the EnvironmentalProtection Regulation 2008.

Wetlands are assessed for ecological significance using theenvironmental values for wetlands in section 81A of theEnvironmental Protection Regulation 2008. Wetlands areconsidered either High Ecological Significance (HES) or ofGeneral Ecological Significance (GES) for the purposes ofthe environmental values.

This map is produced at a scale relevant to the size of the loton plan identified and should be printed at A4 size in portraitorientation. Consideration of the effects of mapped scale isnecessary when interpreting data at a large scale.

For further information or assistance with interpretation of thisproduct, please contact the Department of Environment andHeritage Protection at <www.ehp.qld.gov.au> or email<[email protected]>

Page 2 of 2


APPENDIX K – PROTECTED PLANTS FLORA SURVEY TRIGGER MAP

484


APPENDIX L – EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN

486

VENUS PHOSPHATE

EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN


Date: 22nd April 2015

CLIENT: AUSTRALIA VENUS RESOURCE PTY LTD PROJECT: VENUS PHOSPHATE TRIAL PIT REPORT: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN DATE: APRIL 2015

IMPORTANT NOTE


____________________________ Dr Chris Cuff Director 22nd April 2015 ____________________________ Date

____________________________ Dr Cecily Rasmussen Director 22nd April 2015 ____________________________ Date

2



Project Title Venus Phosphate Erosion and Sediment Control Plan


Project Purpose Manage potential impacts from soil erosion and sedimentation associated with the site.

Clients Details




Telephone (07) 3147 8007


DOCUMENT CONTROL


Draft 1 Mr. M. Knott 19/03/2015 Mr. B. Cuff (C&R) 20/03/2015

Draft 2 Mr. M. Knott 20/03/2015 Mr. J. Cheng &

Mr. M. Li (AVR)

31/03/2015

FINAL Mr. M. Knott 01/04/2015 - -

Amended Mr. M. Knott 22/04/2015 - -

3



TABLE OF CONTENTS


2. SETTING .........................................................................................................................9 2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT................................................................................... 9 2.2 CLIMATE ................................................................................................ 9 2.3 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................. 11 2.4 SOILS ................................................................................................. 11 2.5 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................... 15



3. DRAINAGE AND WATER TRANSPORT .....................................................................19 3.1 CATCHMENT CLASSIFICATION ...................................................................... 19 3.2 WATER STORAGES .................................................................................. 21 3.3 WATER AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT ............................................................ 21

4. SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL..............................................................22 4.1 ISSUES................................................................................................ 22 4.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF EROSION ................................................................. 22 4.3 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES............................................................................ 22 4.4 REHABILITATION AS A TOOL TO REDUCE EROSION RISK ....................................... 23

5. SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL INFRASTRUCTURE............................24 5.1 STEEP SLOPE AREAS (SPOIL DUMPS) ............................................................ 24

5.1.1 Contour Banks ..........................................................................................................24 5.1.2 Drop Structures.........................................................................................................25

5.2 OTHER AREAS........................................................................................ 26 5.2.1 Diversion Drains and Bunds .....................................................................................26 5.2.2 Catch Drains .............................................................................................................26 5.2.3 Check Dams .............................................................................................................26 5.2.4 Ponding.....................................................................................................................27 5.2.5 Sediment Dams ........................................................................................................27

5.3 DESIGN CRITERIA.................................................................................... 28

6. MANAGEMENT OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL......................................29 6.1 TRIAL PIT............................................................................................. 29 6.2 SPOIL DUMPS ........................................................................................ 29

6.2.1 Control Measures......................................................................................................29 6.3 HAUL ROADS AND RAIL LOOP...................................................................... 30 6.4 STOCKPILES .......................................................................................... 30 6.5 CRUSHING AND SCREENING AREA ................................................................ 30 6.6 WORKSHOP........................................................................................... 31 6.7 OFFICE AREA......................................................................................... 31 6.8 ON-SITE SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT................................................................ 31

6.8.1 Sediment Dam Maintenance ....................................................................................31 6.8.2 Handling of Silt From Sediment Dams .....................................................................31

6.9 SITE MANAGEMENT OF DISTURBANCE............................................................. 32

7. ESCP ADMINISTRATION.............................................................................................33 7.1 IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ESCP ............................................ 33 7.2 MONITORING AND REVIEW OF ESCP ............................................................. 33 7.3 CONSTRUCTION AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS ................................................... 33 7.4 RESPONSIBLITIES.................................................................................... 34

4


5

7.5 REPORTING........................................................................................... 35

8. REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................36

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: ML90209 regional setting ....................................................................................................7 Figure 2: Recorded annual rainfall at The Monument and Phosphate Hill .......................................10 Figure 3: Mapped soil units from the Atlas of Australian Soils within ML90209 ...............................13 Figure 4: Location of trial pit infrastructure in relation to atlas of Australian soil units......................14 Figure 5: Receiving environments ....................................................................................................16 Figure 6: Catchment delineation around mine infrastructure............................................................20 Figure 7: An example of temporary or permanent graded banks .....................................................24 Figure 8: Typical cross-section of a rock lined drop structure (channel) implemented on a spoil

dump..................................................................................................................................25 Figure 9: Check dams (Catchments & Creeks, 2012)........................................................................26 Figure 10: Two road configurations typically used at mines...............................................................30

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Relevant Environmental Authority conditions......................................................................8 Table 2: Average and maximum monthly rainfall ............................................................................10 Table 3: Dam characteristics with ESCP function ...........................................................................21 Table 4: Sediment control structures...............................................................................................28 Table 5: NEPC (1999) HIL−E assessment levels for selected analytes .........................................31 Table 6: ESCP performance targets................................................................................................34 Table 7: Personnel responsibilities towards effective ESCP management.....................................34


1. INTRODUCTION



Prior to any works commencing the holder of the EA must submit to the administering authority a Plan of Operations (PoO) including a Financial Assurance (FA) and several management plans for review. As such, C&R Consulting (Geochemical and Hydrobiological Solutions) Pty Ltd (C&R) was commissioned by Australia Venus Resource Pty Ltd (AVR), a wholly owned subsidiary of ANB, to produce an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) for the project.

Erosion is an important issue on mine sites. If not correctly managed erosion processes may lead to environmental degradation and unsafe working conditions. Open-cut mining often involves removing highly weathered sedimentary layers overlying the target resource. Within a few years of extraction, these sedimentary layers often break down to sand/gravel sized particles. Out-of-pit overburden stockpiles present the largest risk to erosion and subsequent water quality degradation through sedimentation.

6



7


1.1 OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this ESCP are to clearly outline methods and strategies to control soil erosion and minimise sediment transport by addressing conditions C6 and C7 of the EA (Table 1). An integral part of this plan is to identify areas that are likely to be affected by erosion and detailing mitigation measures to reduce the levels of risk to downstream environments. The first step in reducing risks associated with erosion is classifying mine-affected, sediment-laden and clean-water catchments across the project site to minimise the amount of sediment-laden water captured on site.

These objectives will be achieved by:

Describing the background conditions present on site that have the potential to influence erosion and sedimentation processes;

Classifying catchments across the project site and performing an analysis to reduce sediment laden catchments sizes;

Identifying targeted issues of concern;

Discussing mitigation measures appropriate for different landforms/structures;

Detailing maintenance requirements for soil erosion and sediment control infrastructure; and

Outlining procedures for training staff as well as monitoring and reporting incidents.


Number Condition

C6 An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be developed by an appropriately qualified person and implemented for all stages of the mining activities on the site to prevent or minimise erosion and the release of sediment to receiving waters and the contamination of storm water.

C7 The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be included in the Plan of Operations, and provides for at least the following stormwater management functions. A copy of the erosion and sediment control plan and/or a review of the erosion and sediment control plan must be provided to the administering authority on request:

(a) Prevent or minimise the contamination of stormwater;

(b) Diverting uncontaminated stormwater run-off around areas disturbed by mining activities or where contaminants or wastes are stored or handled;

(c) Contaminated stormwater runoff, incident rainfall and leachate is to be collected;

(d) Roofing or minimising the size of areas where contaminants or wastes are stored or handled;

(e) Using alternate materials and or processes (such as dry absorbents) to clean up spills that will minimise the generation of contaminated waters;

(f) Erosion and sediment control structures area placed to minimise erosion of disturbed areas and prevent the contamination of any waters;

(g) Procedures to ensure that erosion and sediment control structures are maintained and adequate storage is available in sediment dams in accordance with design criteria; and

(h) Training of staff that will be responsible for maintenance and operations of sediment and erosion control structures.

8


2. SETTING







Mixed Shrublands.




2.2 CLIMATE




The high variability within the climatic data suggests that the use of averages is not appropriate for any assessment of the environment. For example, in 1981 The Monument received 299 mm of rainfall within one month (almost equivalent to the yearly average), with almost half the annual total (150 mm) falling in a single day. These intense rainfall

9


events are not uncommon in this area, with at least five events occurring in the past 35 years that have resulted in more than 100 mm rainfall in one day. Further, maximum rainfall for the area is over double the yearly average, with the minimum rainfall nearly a quarter of the annual average (Figure 2 and Table 2). Therefore, to accurately reflect the climatic conditions at the site it is important to consider this intense variation.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

Year

An

nu

al r

ain

fall

(mm

)

The Monument

Phosphate Hill

Average





January 89.5 459.4 86.7 388.5

February 72.4 223.2 68.3 219.8

March 28.6 232.0 26.5 232.0

April 13.7 125.2 15.7 123.8

May 17.5 103.0 10.8 63.2

June 10.7 79.4 7.7 59.0

July 10.4 75.0 10.3 71.6

August 4.8 47.8 4.3 41.2

September 6.7 46.1 6.4 45.4

October 11.6 41.6 9.8 69.6

November 31.1 119.0 27.4 85.4

December 52.2 220.0 60.7 239.5

10


2.3 GEOLOGY

The project will target the Korella phosphate deposit (also known as the Corella Bore Prospect). The Korella phosphate deposit is a marine sedimentary phosphorite hosted in the Beetle Creek Formation of the early Palaeozoic Georgina Basin, northwest Queensland. The Korella deposit lies 5 km south of PHM, Queensland’s most significant producer of high-quality diammonium and monoammonium phosphate fertilizer for domestic and export markets (Denaro et al., 2013).

The Beetle Creek Formation (BCF) is a Middle Cambrian package of basal siltstone (up to 60 m thick) and overlying phosphorite, phosphatic siltstone, chert and limestone (up to ~ 40 m). At Korella, the BCF forms part of the Narpa Group of the Burke River Structural Belt, a fault bounded north-south elongate basin of mostly Palaeozoic strata about 180 km long and 60 km wide. The BCF overlies the Thorntonia Limestone and is overlain by the Inca Formation, comprising up to 150 m of silty siliceous shale, chert and carbonaceous calcareous mudstone (Jell, 2013). Regionally, this contact is interpreted as an onlapping disconforrmity (Jell, 2013) but mine-scale interpretation of this surface is as a fault disconformity (GDH, 2011).



2.4 SOILS






- Trial pit Dump;

- Site Office;

11


12

- Crushing Plant;







- Haul Road.





13



14


15








16




GHD (2011) analysed water quality sampling results collected by PHM in Kolar Creek’s feeder creeks, Deadhorse Creek and Galah Creek. A summary of the results displayed in Table 8 of the GHD (2011) EM Plan found:



All other monitored analytes were generally compliant with guideline values where available. Note, the Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (2009) state that no guideline values are available for the area and those allocated within ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000) are most likely irrelevant. Therefore, site specific water quality objectives (WQOs) must be determined as soon as possible.










Topsoil stockpile;




17


18

Roads; and

Power.









3. DRAINAGE AND WATER TRANSPORT

The project is located within the Georgina River Basin within the Burke River catchment. The trial pit mining area is at the very top of the Southern Creek catchment which confluences with the Middle Creek over 8 km downstream before entering the Burke River a further ~65 km downstream. Kolar Creek has the potential to receiving sediment laden runoff from the haul road and access road via Eastern Gully before entering Burke River ~22 km downstream. The Kolar Creek catchment upstream of the mine site supports scattered bushland, remnant vegetation grazing land, and PHM. There are no other mines located within the either Kolar Creek or Middle Creek catchments.

Southern Creek and Eastern Gully are highly ephemeral systems that only flow for short periods (< 1 week) after storm events. The catchment areas for each of Southern Creek and Eastern Gully are ~9 km2 and 19.5 km2 respectively.

All runoff that occurs on the project site reports to either Southern Creek or Eastern Gully via direct runoff or uncontrolled releases from ESCP infrastructure. The current EA does not allow for controlled releases of mine affected water.

3.1 CATCHMENT CLASSIFICATION

To identify and manage surface water efficiently, the trial pit mining operations have been divided into a series of catchments that include end points. A plan of these catchments has been derived using local topography and proposed/developed drainage channels (Figure 6).

Catchments were delineated using detailed mine plans presented within GHD (2011). Figure 6 also classifies catchments according to the following definitions:

Clean-water catchment – A catchment containing no (or very little) disturbance as a result of mining activities;

Sediment-laden catchment – Contains disturbance by mining activities, but disturbances are unlikely to increase contaminant levels in local drainage paths and waterways except for increased suspended solids and decreased turbidity; and

Mine-affected catchment – A catchment containing disturbances that are likely to increase contaminant levels in local drainage lines and waterways. This also includes disturbances that are likely to significantly change the aesthetics (colour, smell, etc.) of the water. Where this definition and the definition in the EA differ, the EA is to take precedent.

19


Figure 6: Catchment delineation around mine infrastructure

20


3.2 WATER STORAGES

The project has one designated water storage that plays a key role in soil erosion and sediment control across the site. This storage is expected to be classed a hazardous dam requiring appropriately engineered construction and a Hazard Category rating as stipulated in the Manual for Assessing Consequence Categories and Hydraulic Performance of Structures (EHP, 2013). Table 3 outlines basic characteristics of the dam involved with erosion and sediment control associated with trial pit operations. A site water balance has been assessed in the GHD (2011) EM Plan for the Korella Phosphate Project.

Table 3: Dam characteristics with ESCP function

Dam Hazard Category Volume Catchment Area

Spills to

Type of Storage

Settlement pond

Requires assessment under new guidelines

1.7 ML 9,696 m2 No release

Mine-affected

3.3 WATER AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT

The purpose of the storage outlined in Table 3 is to protect water quality in the receiving environment by capturing and retaining potentially contaminated runoff prior to re-use on site for dust control measures. The Settlement Pond is designed to function as a no-release structure for a Q20 24 hr event over the crushing and screening area as well as site administration and workshop areas. No releases of mine affected water are permitted under the current EA conditions. Therefore all non-mine affected waters must be diverted away from the site to reduce the overall catchment area of the Settlement Pond.

The cheapest and most commonly used option to reduce the catchment area of the dams is by constructing diversion banks or catch drains. The most efficient method of achieving this option would be to place a diversion bank around all mine infrastructure so that non-mine affected runoff is bypassed and reports directly to local waterways. This will also drastically reduce the volume of sediment input to the Settlement Pond, thus decreasing the frequency the dam needs to be de-silted. Further, it is suggested that a large sediment dam, or a series of smaller sediment dams, with the ability to passively release during large flow events will be situated at the downstream end of the diversion bank around the spoil dumps. Runoff associated with the spoil dumps is predicted to be only affected by increased sediment loading and therefore additional retention time prior to passive release is recommended and easily achieved through the adopted diversion banks (GHD 2011).

21


4. SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL

4.1 ISSUES

To minimise the potential for erosion of soil and transportation of sediment across and off the site during rainfall events, the following potential issues have been identified:

Increased sediment concentrations and turbidity levels in onsite dams during rainfall events;

Long time periods with disturbed areas prior to stabilisation and establishment of ground cover;

Erosion of soil from disturbed areas by wind and subsequent reduction of air quality;

Erosion of earthwork surfaces by concentrated rainfall runoff; and

Movement of sediment via construction plant/machinery.

4.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF EROSION

Activities that have the potential to cause or increase erosion, and subsequently increase the generation of sediment at the site include exposure of soils during construction of mine infrastructure (i.e. during vegetation clearance, soil stripping and earthworks activities), ongoing mining activities involving clearing and stripping and stockpiling of mine materials. The following components have the potential to generate sediment:

Open cut trial pit;

Ore crushing and screening area;

Out of pit waste emplacements, bunds and topsoil stockpiles;

Ore stockpiles;

Access and haul roads;

Water management infrastructure (pumps, pipelines, dams, pit, sumps and drains); and

General construction works on site.

4.3 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The objective of this soil erosion and sediment control plan is to clearly outline methods and strategies to control soil erosion and minimise sediment transport. This can be achieved by minimising sediment movement and containing eroded material close to the source of erosion and thereby minimising the potential for mine activities to adversely affect downstream water quality. This will be achieved by applying the following methods, where relevant, across the site:

Development and subsequent adoption of a Permit to Disturb system to ensure that activities at the mine are controlled; with erosion and sediment controls implemented;

Installation of erosion and sediment control measures as the first step in the process for land disturbance;

Separation of runoff from disturbed and undisturbed areas where practically possible;

Construction of sediment dams or use of existing/modified water storages to contain runoff up to a specified design criterion;

Progressive rehabilitation/stabilisation of disturbed areas and mine infrastructure areas;

Construction of surface drains to control and manage surface runoff;

Capture of all mine affected/sediment laden stormwater runoff on site where practically possible;

22


23

Establishment of temporary (12 months or less) soil erosion and sediment control measures to create temporary controlled drainage areas;

Treatment, relocation and stabilisation of settled sediment in retention basins to appropriate on-site locations;

Minimisation of concentrated flows through disturbed areas; and

Reduction of flow velocities to reduce scouring.

4.4 REHABILITATION AS A TOOL TO REDUCE EROSION RISK

Areas presenting the highest risk of soil erosion at the project site are spoil dumps. As part of ongoing management of erosion at the site, outer faces of spoil dumps should be progressively rehabilitated. Rehabilitation involves:

Regrading spoil to a nominal 20 degrees gradient to reduce erosion;

Placement of pre-stripped topsoil on erosion at a depth of 200mm to provide a growth medium;

Installation of temporary graded banks (where applicable) to limit initial topsoil losses prior to vegetation establishment;

Seeding (via manual seeding or aerial seeding); and

Manual planting of tree and bush species (as tube-stock).

This method is employed to reduce the overall volume of sediment transported from relatively dispersive tertiary spoil dumps into the receiving environment.

Inspections of all rehabilitation are required on a yearly basis. These inspections will report on the success of the rehabilitation methods via several indices as well as identifying amendments to rehab techniques that may increase the success in future years.


5. SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL INFRASTRUCTURE

The following is a summary of the soil erosion and sediment control infrastructure that should be adopted across the project site. Some of this infrastructure is particularly suitable for rehabilitation practices.

5.1 STEEP SLOPE AREAS (SPOIL DUMPS)

5.1.1 CONTOUR BANKS

Contour banks are small walls of earthen material installed along the contour. These are used to reduce the velocity of overland flow down the bank of rehabilitated spoil dumps. The presence of these contour banks minimises the chances for rill and gully erosion to develop by intercepting the downward flow of the waters.

Contour banks are often stand-alone features used to minimise runoff velocities. However, they can be used to deliver sediment-laden water to more permanent, armoured drop structures travelling normal to the contour.

It is recommended that contour banks be designed for the 10 minute Q100 ARI (0.01 AEP) storm event. The size (height) of the contour bank will determine its effectiveness in preventing erosion down-slope. Figure XX displays an example of appropriate installation techniques for a contour bank (graded bank) with a maximum separation distance of 50 m. It is expected that the contour banks adopted across the spoil dump on site will be substantially closer together to help limit downhill velocities.

Figure 7: An example of temporary or permanent graded banks

24


25

5.1.2 DROP STRUCTURES

Drop structures are installed normal to the contour with their main purpose being to channel concentrated flows down steep gradients with minimal erosion. They are commonly used in rehabilitation works at the end of contour banks to deliver waters to capture drains or sediment dams.

These structures have very steep gradients. To reduce soil erosion because of high water velocities, the walls of drop structures must be heavily armoured to resist erosion and migration of the drain. The drains must be designed to convey the 10 minute duration storm event discussed in Section 5.1.1. A typical channel cross-section of a rock lined waterway is provided in Figure 8.

Drop structures carry a high risk of catastrophic failure resulting from high flow velocities associated with the steep gradients. The design principles for drop structures are to ensure that velocities are maintained as low as possible (preferably <2.5 m/sec). This is accomplished by:

Using stable, over-sized, rock that is not prone to high rates of weathering or degradation; or

Ensuring drains are designed to be relatively wide for the specified flow rate, thus minimising channel depth.

Figure 8: Typical cross-section of a rock lined drop structure (channel) implemented on a spoil dump


5.2 OTHER AREAS

5.2.1 DIVERSION DRAINS AND BUNDS

Diversion drains are used to divert clean stormwater around areas of disturbance. Clean waters entering the mine’s water management system only increase the volume of water requiring management. The applicability of diverting a high volume of clean stormwater away from management infrastructure should be assessed during the design of all major earthmoving works across the site, and diversion drains installed accordingly.

The Technical Guidelines for Environmental Management of Exploration and Mining in Queensland (DME 1995) suggest that diversion of overland flows should not cause velocities to exceed 1.0 m/sec. This is the recommended design strategy for diversions across the project site.

5.2.2 CATCH DRAINS

As an alternative to diversion drains, catch drains are designed to capture sediment-laden waters and deliver them to water quality improvement devices such as sediment dams. Heavily vegetated catch drains can perform water quality improvement by slowing flow velocities sufficiently to result in sediment deposition. However, under these conditions the maintenance requirements of the catch drains are greatly increased.

Catch drains should be used when excessive sediment is being entrained into sheet-flows. Catch drains can be installed along the contour, or perpendicular to the direction of overland flow to capture sediment-laden waters and deliver them to sediment dams.

Note; catch drains installed in dispersive soils can require high degrees of maintenance, can fail, or exacerbate erosion. If catch drains are to be installed in dispersive soils, they must be lined with a non-dispersive material.

5.2.3 CHECK DAMS

Check Dams are obstructions installed across a drainage pathway to promote sediment retention (Figure 9). They are often used in catch drains beside roadways to capture and store sediment. Check dams typically have a low height to prevent waters from overflowing and diverting out of the drain. Sandbags (in drains <0.5 m deep) or rocks (in drains >0.5 m deep) can be used to form the check dams (Figure 9). These should be adopted along roads associated with site operations.

Figure 9: Check dams (Catchments & Creeks, 2012)

26


5.2.4 PONDING

According to open channel hydraulics, the Manning’s equation and the Bernoulli principle, installation of depressions within a drainage line will decrease flow velocities. The depression will increase the area available for flow, decreasing velocities and resulting in an increased water depth. Velocity decreases will reduce the potential for erosion and will also promote sediment deposition. This strategy is commonly used, but has substantial risks as these depressions may result in the formation of a knick point.

5.2.5 SEDIMENT DAMS

Sediment dams are non-regulated dams that capture overland flows for a proportion of the time. During water detention, when water velocities are greatly reduced, coarse and medium sediment is deposited in the dam.

The greater the retention time for sediment dams, the greater water quality improvement. During the wet season, the retention time in sediment dams can be greatly reduced if the dam is at or near capacity. New waters entering the dam under these conditions have a relatively low residence time and therefore the ability to improve the quality of the water prior to discharge is minimised.

Sediment dams will eventually fill with sediment, thereby reducing the volume of water that can be retained and consequently reducing the retention time of the sediment impacted waters. For the dam to remain effective the accumulated sediment must be removed and either disposed of, or used for other works. If sediment is not removed, small dams can completely silt up, resulting in subsequent damage to nearby and/or associated infrastructure such as embankment walls or roads.

5.2.5.1 DESIGN OF DAMS FOR SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL

It is advised that sediment dams are constructed so that they do not exceed a volume of 2 ML in order to prevent possible rating as ‘Significant’ hazard structures due to contaminant concentrations exceeding those outlined in the Dams Manual. However, there may be instances where the volume of runoff needing treatment exceeds 2 ML. In these cases, multiple dams should be constructed in sequence so that one overflows into another.

To determine the volume of sediment requiring treatment, the following method should be applied:

Determine the catchment area needing treatment

Apply the RUSLE equation to determine net annual sediment loss in t/ha/yr

Divide the RUSLE answer by six to determine two months of soil loss. Convert the volume in t/ha/2months to m3/ha/2months. This volume is the Sediment Volume that must be stored by the dam;

Determine the runoff produced by the 80th percentile 5 day rainfall event. This is then known as the Settling Zone.

Add the volume (in m3) of the Settling Zone and the Sediment Volume. This will provide the total volume to be stored by a series of sediment dams.

5.2.5.2 PREVENTING REGULATED DAMS

Sediment Dams should be constructed so that they will have no possibilities of being assessed as ‘Significant’ hazard structures under the Manual for assessing consequence categories and hydraulic performance of dams (the Dams Manual) (EHP, 2013). If a Sediment Dam is triggered as a ‘Significant’ or ‘High’ hazard dam under the Dams Manual, it must not overflow and will need to be upgraded to ensure it meets a number of performance targets which contravene the design intent of a sediment dam.

27


28

Contaminant levels are the most commonly triggered criteria for hazardous dams. Waters that are detained in dams for significant periods can steadily rise in several quality characteristics as minerals are dissolved from the surrounding subsoils. This can then trigger the dam to be rated as a ‘Significant’ hazard dam.

5.3 DESIGN CRITERIA

The design criteria and function for sediment control infrastructure within the project site is summarised in Table 4.

Table 4: Sediment control structures

Sediment Control Structure

Function Design Capacity

Upslope diversion drains

Reduce runoff from undisturbed areas onto disturbed areas

Peak flow calculated for 1 in 10 year critical duration rainfall event

Downslope capture drains

Intercept and convey disturbed area runoff water to sediment dams/sumps

Peak flow calculated for 1 in 10 year critical duration rainfall event

Sediment dams Containment of sediment laden runoff from disturbed areas with more than150 m3/yr estimated soil loss

Settling Zone: Capacity to store the runoff produced from the 80th percentile, 5-day rainfall event

Sediment Zone: Two months calculated soil loss estimated using RUSLE

Sediment fences and/or straw bale filters

Retention/filtration of suspended sediments

Limit flow to less than 50L/s in the design 1 in 10 year critical duration rainfall event


6. MANAGEMENT OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL

6.1 TRIAL PIT

Erosion of material into the pit is not deemed to require control unless the erosion exposes contaminated material, results in, or will result in, geotechnical instability, or threatens rehabilitation actions and final landform profiles across the site.

There is negligible risk of pit overtopping during current operating procedures. Nominal erosion into the pit (most likely occurring from spoil dumps) will not detrimentally affect water quality in the pit. Gully and rill erosion of un-rehabilitated spoil dumps into the pit will have negligible impact on the factors outlined above and will serve to slightly minimise the surface area of the void in the long-term.

All runoff from disturbed catchments must be diverted into the pit floor or sediment dams. The pit must be internally draining to prevent the exit of sediment laden water. All effluent from pit dewatering should be diverted to the Settlement Pond.

6.2 SPOIL DUMPS

6.2.1 CONTROL MEASURES

Methods to minimise soil erosion and to control sediment movement associated with spoil dumps, are generally installed and monitored during rehabilitation works. However, the following general principles of spoil management should be implemented within the site:

Spoil piles must not be in locations subject to flooding;

Spoil piles must not be located adjacent to water bodies or watercourses;

Spoil piles must be constructed to minimise material loss through surface run off; and

Spoil piles should be dampened to reduce dust problems.

Infrastructure to reduce soil erosion and to control sediment movement from spoil dumps include:

Diversion Drains: Placed around the contoured spoil dump to divert clean water runoff into waterways while collecting runoff from the dumps and directing it into sediment dams.

Contour banks: Placed across the contour at a specified length down–slope on the spoil dumps.

Capture Drains: Intercept runoff at the base of the slope of the spoil dump and convey disturbed area runoff water to sediment dams/sumps.

Sediment Dams: Receive sediment laden water from capture drains.

Drop Structures: Placed to attempt to remove water from spoil dumps in a controlled and stable manner.

The design parameters for this infrastructure are determined during the rehabilitation design phase. Rehabilitation of spoil dumps is the best option to reduce soil erosion from this domain. Further information on rehabilitation methods/techniques is provided in the Post Mine Land Use Plan (C&R, 2015).

29


6.3 HAUL ROADS AND RAIL LOOP

There are generally two configurations used for haul roads at mines:

1. Berm configuration (Figure 10). However, larger flows can result in the failure of berms and the migration of flows off the haul road and into the receiving environment.

2. Catch drain configuration (Figure 10). Catch drains installed beside haul roads can have a number of ESCP measures installed, including check dams. For long-term erosion protection, any catch drains should be seeded with appropriate/native grass species.

Figure 10: Two road configurations typically used at mines

All sediment control measures must be routinely inspected for damage and repaired or replaced accordingly.

6.4 STOCKPILES

Stockpiling of earth should be limited. However, if stockpiling of earth is required the following recommendations should be followed:

Stockpiles must not be in locations that are subject to flooding;

Stockpiles must not be located adjacent to water bodies or watercourses;

Stockpiles must be constructed to minimise soil loss through surface run off;

Stockpiles should be covered during storm events; and

Stockpiles should be dampened to reduce dust problems.

It may be feasible to include sediment control measures around the base of stockpiles if erosion is anticipated to be severe. Such measures would include the installation of a capture drain diverted to a sediment dam. Any non-mine affected water flowing into an area containing stockpiled material should be diverted using an upslope diversion drain. Topsoil stockpiles should be seeded with appropriate vegetation to prevent erosion until such time as the topsoil is needed for remediation works.

Stockpiling of ore should only occur in mine affected areas where downstream drainage is terminated by a sediment dam. If stockpiling of ore is to occur on-site it is recommended that additional temporary soil erosion and sediment control devices be provided in drains and areas of accumulated runoff to ensure that there is no downstream effect. Stockpiling of material outside of pits, or designated areas, should only be permitted in emergency situations.

6.5 CRUSHING AND SCREENING AREA

ROM and product stockpiles require strict soil erosion and sediment controls to ensure sediments are contained on the designated pad. All runoff from the crushing and screening area is to be channelled into the Settlement Pond. Drains should be adopted around crushing and screening infrastructure and stockpiles for this purpose. These catch

30


drains will prevent sediment from escaping the ROM pad, while the diversion drains ensure that clean-water flows are diverted around contaminated materials.

Regular inspection of the containment bunds as well as clean water diversion drains is needed to ensure that all structures are functioning correctly, have not been subjected to erosion, or that stockpiles have not slumped and overtopped containment bunds.

6.6 WORKSHOP

All areas in the workshop should be internally draining. This runoff will eventually enter the Settlement Pond. This is generally acceptable for soil erosion and sediment control for this area.

6.7 OFFICE AREA

Runoff from the office area should also be directed into the Settlement Pond via the appropriate erosion and sediment control structures (e.g. catch drains, etc.).

6.8 ON-SITE SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT

Several sediment dams are recommended across the project site to (a) retain sediment laden water; and (b) to allow suspended matter to settle out of the water column before the water is released. This latter process may be facilitated by the application of flocculants (e.g. gypsum) to the dam water if additional water quality improvement is required. Routine water quality testing by a suitably qualified person will determine the baseline quality of these sediment dams, allowing the performance of the sediment dams to be assessed and remediation undertaken accordingly.

6.8.1 SEDIMENT DAM MAINTENANCE

As the retention time increases for sediment dams, the volume of sediment settled out of the water column onto the base of the water storage area will also increase. Gradual build-up of this sediment decreases the available storage capacity and consequently the performance of the sediment dam. Routine de-silting is required to remove the accumulated material and restore the performance of the sediment dam.

The following criteria are recommended as triggers to de-silting sediment dams across the site:

Removal of collected sediment when the sediment dam’s storage capacity has been reduced by >30% of the design capacity and it is deemed safe to remove the material from the site.

6.8.2 HANDLING OF SILT FROM SEDIMENT DAMS

Either prior to, or following the de-silting of, a sediment dam, an assessment should be made of the contamination status of the sediment. Samples must be taken to assess against HIL-E levels as outlined in NEPC (1999) (Table 5).

Table 5: NEPC (1999) HIL−E assessment levels for selected analytes

Analyte Value (mg/kg)



As 200 Cu 2000 Zn 14000

31


32

Be 40 Pb 600 B 6000

Cd 40 Mn 3000 Free cyanide

500

Cr (III) 24% Methyl mercury

20 Sulphate 2000

Cr (VI) 200 Inorganic mercury

30

Co 200 Ni 600

Sediments that are compliant with HIL-E values as outlined in NEPM (1999) can be re-used on-site. Depending on the soil quality results, the following options may be available for on-site disposal:

1. Sediment re-use in rehabilitation works. The sediment deposited in the sediment dam is likely to be high in nutrients and minerals. Mixing this material with topsoil may allow an increase in the available material for use at rehabilitation sites.

2. Top–dressing: Depending on quality, the sediment material may serve as a suitable ‘top-dressing’ material that can be spread lightly (<2 cm) on rehabilitation works prior to seeding.

If contaminant testing of the sediments reveals that it is not compliant with HIL-E values, disposal or treatment of the sediment may be required. The following options may be used to dispose and treat the sediment:

1. Transport the contaminated material off-site to a licensed landfill facility capable of accepting contaminated waste.

2. Mix the contaminated soil with non-contaminated soil at the required rate to ensure contaminants are not above recommended levels during the next sampling period.

3. Disposal of contaminated material within spoil dumps. This can be undertaken by placing the material within pits / spoil dumps prior to a bulk-push that will cover the material. Care must be taken to ensure that the placement area selected is not situated on a palaeo-channel, or other geomorphological feature of known water movement.

6.9 SITE MANAGEMENT OF DISTURBANCE

Disturbances should be managed on-site by a “Permit to Disturb” as well as a “Permit to Disturb a Watercourse” system. This permit system generates a register of disturbances on the mine-site, allowing Venus Phosphate management staff to keep a track of works that increase the disturbance footprint of the mine. This allows for erosion and sediment controls to be placed around any works that risk increasing the volume or rate of sediment delivery to local waterways.


7. ESCP ADMINISTRATION

7.1 IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ESCP

This ESCP is to be implemented and maintained in accordance with this report. The developer has sole and full responsibility for ensuring:

The erosion and sediment control measures are in place prior to construction; and

The monitoring and maintenance of these measures is continued.

7.2 MONITORING AND REVIEW OF ESCP

The erosion and sedimentation control measures should be monitored and details should be included in any reviews required by the EA. Details should include:

Photos of working erosion and sedimentation control measures;

Surface water quality samples and results after rainfall events; and

Overall performance of the ESCP (refer to Section 7.3).

The ESCP should be reviewed once a transitional strategy for hazardous dams is known. The ESCP measures should then be incorporated into capital expenditure estimates.

7.3 CONSTRUCTION AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS

Several construction and performance targets must be met during construction, excavation and remediation activities:

1. All runoff water and sediment laden water originating on the mining lease will be retained on site until such time as it is deemed fit for release by a suitably qualified person;

2. No sediment laden water will be directly released to the receiving environment;

3. Sheet and gully erosion of spoil piles on faces that drain internally to pit catchments is acceptable;

4. All efforts will be made to minimise sheet and gully erosion on the outward faces of spoil piles that drain to water management infrastructure;

5. Gully and rill erosion must be minimised in rehabilitated areas and areas of noncompliance should be documented in annual rehabilitation inspections;

6. Soil erosion and sediment control devices must be implemented, routinely inspected and maintained;

7. Soil piles, pit bunds, ROM pads, drainage ditches and other infrastructure will be inspected regularly for blockages, slumping and erosion, especially during and after rain, and continually maintained;

8. Roads, soil piles and other areas at risk of wind erosion will be wetted for dust suppression;

9. Vehicles must be washed in specific areas so that effluent water can be collected and stored;

10. Once the mine is exhausted, mined areas are stabilised as close as possible to original gradients and rehabilitated with vegetation designed to limit erosion; and

11. Rehabilitated areas are monitored and managed by a suitably qualified person(s) until they are self-sustaining, or an endpoint is reached which is satisfactory to the relevant Regulatory Authority.

Table 6 summarises specific performance targets for soil erosion and sediment control.

33


Table 6: ESCP performance targets

Measure Analysis tool

Target Required Method of Measurement

Measurement

Water Quality of Smoky Creek and Billy’s Gully

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Release from sediment dams to Southern Creek and Eastern Gully are to be set at the 80th percentile of the upstream background.

Monitoring daily during times of release (first sample within 2 hours of release)

During runoff events and before release

Sediment control measures

Visual Inspection

Measures are functioning correctly

Inspection by Contractor

After rainfall events >70 mm in 24 hours;

OR

Immediately prior to the wet season

Diversion Drains

Visual Inspection

Structures are functioning correctly

Inspection by Contractor / Site Supervisor

After rainfall events > 70mm in 24 hours;

OR

Immediately prior to the wet season

Revegetation of disturbedareas

Visual inspection

70% cover Inspection by suitably qualified personnel

During annual rehabilitation monitoring

Maintenance Visual Inspection

Maintenance is undertaken immediately after damage

Inspection by Contractor / Site Supervisor

As Required

Non-conformance with any of the above performance targets should result in an immediate investigation. Photographic evidence of any non-conformance should be collected and all written correspondence regarding the matter should be stored for future reference.

7.4 RESPONSIBLITIES

Responsibilities of all personnel associated with the site towards the effective management of erosion and sediment control are outlined in Table 7.

Table 7: Personnel responsibilities towards effective ESCP management


Site Senior Executive Shall ensure that a formal review of this management plan is made.





34


35



Shall comply with this management plan and ensure all erosion and sediment control issues are adequately dealt with.

7.5 REPORTING

Monitoring of on site water storages are required under conditions C2 – C5 of the EA. These conditions also state the reporting requirements for the holder of the EA should an exceedence of contaminant limits be determined. Refer to the EA for further information.


8. REFERENCES


Catchments & Creeks. 2012. Erosion and Sediment Control – A Field Guide for Construction Site Managers.


DERM 2012. Manual for Assessing Hazard Categories and Hydraulic Performance of Dams.




36

appendix c – post mine land use plan · appendix c – post mine land use plan 264. venus...

Documents