Buckland Project - der.wa.gov.au · MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet Mtpa Megatonnes per annum (1 Megatonne = 1 million tonnes) OEPA Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

´Figure 2: W5699/2014/1 Amendment/Licence to Operate Application

File : S:\GIS\02.BUCKLAND HILLS\Maps\BU-17005.mxd

Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50Projection: Transverse Mercator

Scale (A4):

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

Low GradeFines

L 47/681

DragonPit

West Pit

EastPit

East Pit

EastDumpEast

Dump

DragonDump

Bore 1

Bore 5Bore 6

M 47/1464-I

1

2

3

4567

8910

11121314

15 1617 18

1920

21

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 5475

6367

7m. N

63

64 64

65 65

66 66

67 67

68 68

69 69

70 70

71 71

0 1 20.5Kilometres

Buckland Project

Legend

!( Premise Boundary Points

Exploration Camp

Accommodation Camp

Buckland_Mine_Design

Mine Tenement Boundary

C&S Plant Locations

Mine Disturbance Area

Premise Boundary

Level 1, 15 Rheola StreetWest Perth WA 6005www.bciron.com.au

Point Easting Northing1 444934.779 7570964.3532 453714.55 7565499.1963 455271.918 7566675.4564 455275.909 7565264.8435 453555.702 7565259.8646 451835.487 7565254.7067 450115.347 7565249.3678 450109.517 7567094.2219 448389.096 7567088.68210 446668.674 7567082.96311 446666.392 7567759.18312 446240.36 7567651.59913 445996.181 7567702.25214 445722.458 7567862.10215 445721.024 7568289.35916 446083.479 7568361.27617 446328.697 7568606.49418 446663.765 7568537.87119 446662.449 7568927.81820 444941.896 7568921.90921 444935.472 7570766.664

WORKS APPROVAL APPLICATION

IRON ORE HOLDINGS LIMITED BUNGAROO SOUTH PTY LTD

BUCKLAND PROJECT

BUNGAROO SOUTH MINE MINE DEWATERING

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ORE PROCESSING FACILITIES

CLASS II LANDFILL

REV 1

JUNE 2014

This document has been prepared by:

Talis Consultants Pty Ltd 8/663 Newcastle St Leederville WA 6007 Ph: 1300 251 070 www.talisconsultants.com.au

Ennovate Environmental Consulting Tel: 0407 263 635 www.ennovateconsulting.com.au

Rev Description of Revisions Date Prepared By Reviewed By

A Issued for Internal Review 25/05/2014 AM/ND MG

B Incorporating review feedback 03/06/2014 ND

Iron Ore Holdings Ltd - Bungaroo South Pty Ltd Works Approval Application – Bungaroo South Mine

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Premises overview .................................................................................................................. 1

1.1.1 Mine dewatering ............................................................................................................. 2

1.1.2 Wastewater treatment plant .......................................................................................... 2

1.1.3 Ore processing facility ..................................................................................................... 2

1.1.4 Class II landfill .................................................................................................................. 2

2 Premises details .............................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Legal Land Description ............................................................................................................ 4

2.1.1 Local Government ........................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Location ................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2.1 Coordinates ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.3 Topography ............................................................................................................................. 4

2.4 Land use .................................................................................................................................. 6

2.5 Environmental Features .......................................................................................................... 6

2.6 Water Resources ..................................................................................................................... 6

2.7 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................ 6

2.7.1 Regional Hydrogeology ................................................................................................... 7

2.8 Vegetation & Flora .................................................................................................................. 9

2.9 Fauna and Fauna Habitat ...................................................................................................... 10

2.9.1 Fauna ............................................................................................................................. 10

2.9.2 Habitat ........................................................................................................................... 11

2.9.3 Short Range Endemics .................................................................................................. 11

2.9.4 Subterranean fauna ...................................................................................................... 12

2.10 Heritage ................................................................................................................................. 12

3 Stakeholder consultation .............................................................................................................. 13

4 Prescribed premises category ....................................................................................................... 14

4.1.1 Current DER Licences/Registrations/Works Approvals ................................................ 14

4.2 Documents associated with this proposal ............................................................................ 15

4.3 Other Relevant Licences/Permits .......................................................................................... 15

4.3.1 Office of the EPA ........................................................................................................... 15

4.3.2 Department of Water ................................................................................................... 16

4.3.3 Department of Mines and Petroleum ........................................................................... 16

i


4.3.4 Local Government ......................................................................................................... 16

4.3.5 Department of Health ................................................................................................... 17

5 Proposal description ..................................................................................................................... 18

5.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 18

5.2 Mine Dewatering .................................................................................................................. 19

5.2.1 Contingency disposal system ........................................................................................ 19

5.2.2 Dewatering requirements ............................................................................................. 20

5.3 Wastewater Treatment Plant ............................................................................................... 21

5.3.1 Feed wastewater ........................................................................................................... 21

5.3.2 Design and performance specifications ........................................................................ 21

5.3.3 Irrigation of treated effluent ......................................................................................... 22

5.3.4 Commissioning .............................................................................................................. 23

5.4 Ore Processing Facility .......................................................................................................... 24

5.4.1 Dry processing ............................................................................................................... 25

5.4.2 Wet processing ............................................................................................................. 28

5.5 Class II Landfill ....................................................................................................................... 34

5.5.1 Facility description ........................................................................................................ 34

5.5.2 Waste Transfer Facility .................................................................................................. 36

5.5.3 Landfarm ....................................................................................................................... 36

5.5.4 Composting ................................................................................................................... 36

6 Environmental Management ........................................................................................................ 37

7 Emissions ....................................................................................................................................... 38

7.1 Air emissions ......................................................................................................................... 38

7.1.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 38

7.1.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant ....................................................................................... 38

7.1.3 Ore Processing Facility .................................................................................................. 38

7.1.4 Class II Landfill ............................................................................................................... 38

7.2 Dust Emissions ...................................................................................................................... 38

7.2.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 38




7.3 Odour Emissions ................................................................................................................... 39

7.3.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 39

ii





7.4 Noise Emissions ..................................................................................................................... 39

7.4.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 39




7.5 Light Emissions ...................................................................................................................... 40

7.5.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 40




7.6 Discharges to Water .............................................................................................................. 41

7.6.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 41




7.7 Discharges to Land ................................................................................................................ 42

7.7.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 42




7.8 Solid and Liquid Waste .......................................................................................................... 43

7.8.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 43




7.9 Hydrocarbon/Chemical Storage ............................................................................................ 45

7.9.1 Mine Dewatering .......................................................................................................... 45




7.10 Contaminated Sites ............................................................................................................... 45

iii


8 Rehabilitation and closure ............................................................................................................ 46

9 Cost of project ............................................................................................................................... 48

10 Summary of Commitments ....................................................................................................... 49

11 References ................................................................................................................................ 56

FIGURES

Figure 1: Location of the Buckland Project and Bungaroo South mine .................................................. 3

Figure 2: Proposed layout of the Bungaroo South mine and access ...................................................... 5

Figure 3: Primary and secondary crushing ............................................................................................ 25

Figure 4: Ore Processing Facility - Process flow chart .......................................................................... 26

Figure 5: Tertiary crushing and screening ............................................................................................. 27

Figure 6: Product sampling and stockpiling .......................................................................................... 28

Figure 7: Scrubbing and secondary wet screening ............................................................................... 29

Figure 8: Classification/De-sliming ........................................................................................................ 29

Figure 9: Location and layout of proposed WFSF ................................................................................. 31

Figure 10: ANCOLD terminology (top) and WFSF embankment design detail ..................................... 32

Figure 11: Location of proposed landfill facility .................................................................................... 35

iv


ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Statement 960, 11 February 2014

Attachment 2: EPBC Act Assessment Decision, 19 July 2013

v


ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviation Definition

AH Act Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972

API Assess on Proponent Information

ARRP Act Agriculture and Related Resources Protection Act 1976

BAM Act Biosecurity and Agricultural Management Act 2007

BCWSB Buckland Coastal Water Supply Borefield

DAA Department of Aboriginal Affairs

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation (now DER and DPaW)

DER Department of Environment Regulation

DoH Department of Health

DotE Commonwealth Department of the Environment (formerly the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities)

DoW Department of Water

DPaW Department of Parks and Wildlife

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

IOH Iron Ore Holdings Pty Ltd

LGA Local Government Authority

mbgl Metres below ground level

MRWA Main Roads WA

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet

Mtpa Megatonnes per annum (1 Megatonne = 1 million tonnes)

OEPA Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

OPF Ore Processing Facility

PDWSA Public Drinking Water Supply Area

PEC Priority Ecological Community

SRE Short Range Endemic

TEC Threatened Ecological Community

WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

vi


Occupier Details

The occupier (Company) of the land subject to this Works Approval application is:

Bungaroo South Pty Ltd ACN: 152 574 528 Level 1, 1 Altona Street West Perth, Western Australia.

Bungaroo South Pty Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of Iron Ore Holdings Limited (ABN 17 107 492 517).

The contact person for the Works Approval is as follows:

Mr Michael Klvac General Manager Corporate Affairs Iron Ore Holdings Ltd Phone: +61 8 9483 2000 Fax: +61 8 9321 0322 Email: [email protected]

vii

mailto:[email protected]


1 Introduction

The Buckland Project (the Project) is a proposed iron ore operation located in the west Pilbara region of Western Australia (WA) approximately 45 kilometres (km) south-southeast of Pannawonica. The Project involves mining iron ore from three deposits, processing the ore on site and transporting the iron ore product by road to the customer delivery point at Cape Preston East (note: Cape Preston East does not form part of the Project). The Project incorporates all necessary mine infrastructure (pits, processing plant, waste disposal and the like) and transport infrastructure (haul roads) to allow for operations to progress.

The general location of the Project is provided in Figure 1.

The Buckland Project has recently undergone environmental impact assessment pursuant to Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) through the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). Iron Ore Holdings Limited (IOH) as the Proponent referred the proposal to the EPA on 19 November 2012 and the EPA determined to assess the Project at the ‘Assessment on Proponent Information’ (API) Level of assessment on 7 January 2013. A scoping guideline for the environmental impact assessment was issued by the EPA on 12 February 2013 and a final API document was prepared by Strategen Consultants Pty Ltd (Strategen) in November 2013.

IOH made an application to the EPA on the 24 June 2013 under section 43A of the (EP Act) to change the Buckland Project. In response, the Chairman of the EPA considered and consented to the proposed changes on the basis that they are unlikely to significantly increase any impact that the proposal may have on the environment. The main change was additional clearing for the haul road.

The EPA released its report on the proposal on 4 December 2013 and the subsequent ‘Statement That A Proposal Might Be Implemented’ (Statement 960) was published by the Minister for the Environment on 12 February 2014 which contains binding conditions governing the Project’s implementation (Attachment 1).

The proposal was also referred to the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (now Department of the Environment) in May 2013 pursuant to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). On 19 July 2013 the delegate of the Commonwealth Minister for Environment determined that the proposed action was not a controlled action provided specific measures, as identified in the decision, were taken to avoid significant impacts on the Northern Quoll (Attachment 2).

Following these processes, the Project additionally requires approvals pursuant to Part V of the EP Act in terms of the Prescribed Activities being undertaken. Works Approvals and Licences are being sought for the following activities:

• The Buckland Project Bungaroo South iron ore mine (including the processing operations, wastewater treatment plant, dewatering activities and site landfill)

• The Buckland Project haul road (crushing and screening).

The expected mine life is 15-20 years and will involve disturbance of up to 2,050 hectares (ha) for the mine area and haul road.

1.1 Premises overview

This document provides the necessary information to support an Application for Works Approval for the various aspects of the Bungaroo South mine that are Prescribed pursuant to Part V of the EP Act (and therefore require Works Approval), being:

1


• Mine Pit Dewatering - Category 6 • Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) – Category 54 • Ore Processing Facilities (OPF) – Category 5 • Class II Landfill – Category 64.

1.1.1 Mine dewatering

The Project will require local dewatering of the Bungaroo South Channel Iron Deposits (CID) formation to access the iron ore resource. A network of dewatering bores will be installed along the CID to abstract up to 4.75 gigalitres (GL) per annum, predominantly over the first five years of the Project. The abstracted groundwater will be used to supply the needs of the mine but in the initial years, up to 4.5GL per annum will require disposal by reinjection/infiltration back into the CID further downstream of the mine.

1.1.2 Wastewater treatment plant

A self-contained (package) wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) will be constructed to treat up to 135 m3 per day of wastewater from the proposed accommodation village (including ablutions, kitchen and laundry facilities) and from ablution facilities located at the mine and support areas. Treated wastewater will be disposed of through spray irrigation to a designated site located on upland areas away from the floodplain.

Although the method of disposal will be irrigation to a restricted area, the WWTP has been designed to produce effluent meeting the Medium Exposure Risk Level (ERL) quality standards as specified in Department of Health (DoH) guidelines (2011). Water of this quality would normally be suitable for use in dust suppression on roads, material handling equipment and stockpiles. The additional treatment level is in response to the site’s location within the Priority 1 (P1) Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve (see section 2.6).

1.1.3 Ore processing facility

The OPF will process mined ore to ensure it meets sale requirements. The OPF is a fixed plant which consists of a number of interconnected conveyors, crushing, washing and screening hubs. It will consist of both dry and wet operations; with the wet process circuit supported by a thickener/clarifier to remove waste fines from the wash water, allowing the wash water to be re-used. The OPF will have a throughput of up to 8 million tonnes per annum.

1.1.4 Class II landfill

The landfill will be a Class II landfill facility which will accept putrescible and inert waste material generated at the Project. The landfill will be constructed within a used borrow pit for the haul road and located outside of the P1 Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve.

2

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

!

Customer Delivery Point

Red Hi ll C r eek

Mait land Riv er

Kumin a C r e e k

F o r te s cu e R i v e r

B o o ye e m a Poo l C re e k

R obe Ri ver

Mu nn i M

unni C reek

Pannawonica

Nor

th W

est C

oast

al H

ighw

ay

Pannawonica Road

Red Hill Road

Pannawonica Millstream Road

Ma rdie Road

Balmoral Road

Forte scue Rive r Road

Pannawonica Millstream Road

Mardie

Yalleen

Karratha

Red Hill

Deepdale

Balmoral

Yallalong

Yarraloola

Millstream Outcamp

Robe River R

ailroad

boo Outstation

400000 45000076

0000

0

7600

000

7650

000

7650

000

7700

000

7700

000

0 10 20

kilometres

Exmouth Pannawonica

Port Hedland

Figure : Regional location o Buc land Pro ect

Legend

Existing features and infrastructurePopulated places

" HomesteadsExisting roads

Principal roadSecondary roadMinor road

Rivers and creeksRTIO railwayGas PipelineBungaroo Creek water reserveProposed West Hamersley Range Conservation Park

Cape Preston

Datum:Projection:

Sources:

File:

Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994Map Grid Australia, Zone 50

Topography: Geoscience Australia, GEODATATopo 250KV3, © Commonwealth of Australia, 2006Imagery: Bing Maps, WMS Service

001\057_MW03661_RevD (HR 05/11/2013)

1:450,000Scale (A3):

Dampier B

unbury Natural Gas Pipeline

Goldfields G

as T ransmiss ion Pipeline

Level 1, 1 Altona StreetWest Perth, WA 6005P.O. Box 1761, West Perth 6872

Ph: +61 8 9483 2000Fax: +61 8 9321 0322

[email protected]

Proposal Area

Proposed Haul RoadDevelopment Envelope

Mine Development Area


2 Premises details

2.1 Legal Land Description

The proposed Project is located on Mining Lease 47/1464 (M47/1464) on Unallocated Crown Land. The dewatering disposal area is located on Miscellaneous Lease L47/712 and the Class II landfill is located on Miscellaneous Lease L47/680 (see also Table 1).

2.1.1 Local Government

All local government approvals required will be obtained from the Shire of Ashburton prior to commencement of any site activities.

2.2 Location

The Bungaroo South mine site is located in the western Pilbara region of Western Australia, approximately 45 kilometres (km) south southeast of Pannawonica (Figure 1).

2.2.1 Coordinates

This Works Approval Application is for the Mine Pit Dewatering, WWTP, OPF and Class II Landfill.

The proposed locations of these facilities (and associated infrastructure) are shown in Figure 2. The centre coordinates (MGA Zone 50 (GDA 94)) are shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Proposed Prescribed Activities Coordinates

Facility Easting (MGA z50) Northing (MGA z50) Tenement

Mine Pit Dewatering

Abstraction 448 800 7 567 500 M47/1464

Disposal 449 000 7 570 500 L47/712

Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) 447 150 7 567 800 M47/1464

Ore Processing Facility (OPF) 447 800 7 567 550 M47/1464

Class II Landfill 438 050 7 566 900 L47/680

Waste Fines Storage Facility (WFSF) 450 300 7 567 200 M47/1464

2.3 Topography

The Bungaroo South mine is situated within the major physiographic unit of the Hamersley subregion. This consists of rounded hills and ranges made up of jaspilite and dolomite with some shale, siltstone and volcanics. The width of the Bungaroo Creek valley varies from over 1 km wide at the upper end of the catchment to approximately 3 km wide at its lower extent (Old Yalleen Well). The upper catchment (Bungaroo South) comprises relatively rugged topography with deeply incised watercourses while the main valley is relatively flat with adjacent ridges rising steeply above the valley floor (RPS 2012a).

The proposed Mine Pit Dewatering, WWTP, OPF and Class II Landfill all fall within the Newman Land System which comprises of hills and ranges, with stony and alluvial plains (Van Vreeswyk et al 2004).

4

Was

tew

ater

Tre

atem

ent

Plan

t

Pit

Pit W

Pit E

East

Dum

p

Low

Gra

deSt

ockp

ileD

rago

nPi

t

Dra

gon

Dum

p

TSF

Wal

l 1

Taili

ngs

1

TSF

Wal

l 2

Taili

ngs

2

Proc

ess

Wat

er D

am

RO

M A

rea

HV

Wor

ksho

p

Stoc

kpile

Are

a

Stor

es

Proc

essi

ng A

reaW

ashd

own

Pad

Fuel

Farm

and

Pad

HV

Serv

ice

Are

a

Min

ing

Offi

cean

d C

rib

Gat

ehou

se a

rea

LV W

orks

hop

& L

aydo

wn

Adm

in C

ar P

ark

Ref

uelli

ng A

rea

Acc

omod

atio

nA

rea

M 4

7/14

64-I

4480

0045

0000

4520

0045

4000

7566000

7566000

7568000

7568000

Dat

um:

Proj

ectio

n:

Sour

ces:

File

:

025

050

075

0

Met

ers

´Fi

gure

:

Bun

garo

o So

uth

Min

e La

yout

Lege

nd Min

ing

Tenu

re -

M 4

7/14

64-I

Floo

d Ar

ea

Min

e La

yout

Adm

inis

tratio

nBu

ndD

umps

Low

Gra

de S

tock

pile

Mec

hani

cal A

rea

Nor

ther

n C

utaw

ayPi

tPr

oces

s W

ater

Dam

Proc

essi

ng A

rea

RO

MR

efue

lling

Area

Stoc

kpile

Are

aTS

F W

all

Tailin

gsW

aste

wat

er T

reat

emen

t Pla

nt

Irrig

atio

n ar

eaSi

te R

oads

Geo

cent

ric D

atum

of A

ustra

lia 1

994

Map

Grid

Aus

tralia

, Zon

e 50

Topo

grap

hy: G

eosc

ienc

e Au

stra

lia, G

EOD

ATA

Topo

250

KV3,

© C

omm

onw

ealth

of A

ustra

lia, 2

006

Bung

aroo

_sou

th_v

eg_s

urve

y (2

0140

501)

1:25

,000

Scal

e (A

3):

!

!

!

We

ste

rnW

es

tern

Au

str

ali

aA

us

tra

lia

Map

Area

PER

TH

NEW

MAN

POR

T H

EDLA

ND

Leve

l 1, 1

Alto

na S

tree

tW

est P

erth

, WA

6005

P.O

. Box

176

1, W

est P

erth

687

2

Ph: +

61 8

948

3 20

00Fa

x: +

61 8

932

1 03

22w

ww

.iron

oreh

oldi

ngs.

com

info

@iro

nore

hold

ings

.com


2.4 Land use

The Buckland Project is located entirely in the Pilbara Region of WA. Land use in the Pilbara region consists predominately of pastoral activities, mining, conservation, Unallocated Crown Land, Crown reserves and occasional urban areas. The Bungaroo South mine is located entirely within Unallocated Crown Land.

2.5 Environmental Features

The proposed prescribed premises are located within the boundaries of the proposed West Hamersley Range Conservation Park (Figure 1). The proposed conservation park was initially recommended in 2002 to ensure species and floristic communities recorded from summit (upland) habitats in the Hamersley Ranges are protected within the conservation estate (CALM 2002). The recommendation to create the conservation park acknowledges the mineral prospects and existing Mining Act 1978 tenure in the area. Consultation with the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW) confirms the prospective conservation park will be managed within a multiple-use framework that does not exclude mining activities.

2.6 Water Resources

The mine area and part of the proposed Stage 1 haul road is within the Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve (Figure 1), which is a public drinking water supply area, but are not near the wellhead protection zones that have been established around the water supply borefield. The Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve is a future groundwater source for the supply of drinking water into the West Pilbara Water Supply Scheme.

The Department of Water (DoW) has established the Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve as a Public Drinking Water Supply Area (PDWSA) under the Country Areas Water Supply Act 1947 to protect the water source for the Bungaroo Coastal Water Supply Borefield (BCWSB) and the Bungaroo and Jimmawurrada Creek catchment areas that recharge the aquifer. DoW has recommended that the water reserve be managed for Priority 1 source protection, with 500 metre (m) wellhead protection zones established around all production bores, to help protect the source of water used for abstraction and potable supply. DoW defines Priority 1 areas as water sources requiring management to ensure there is no degradation of the quality of the drinking water source using the principle of risk avoidance.

2.7 Hydrology

The majority of the stream flow in the Pilbara region occurs during the summer months as a direct response to seasonal rainfall. The region encounters vast changes in stream flow, with variations detected in groundwater levels. The intense cyclonic rainfall events account for the majority of groundwater recharge.

The larger water courses, such as main river channels, drain the greater catchment areas. As a result of tropical cyclones, these water courses may flow and contain water for several weeks (possibly months) following such rainfall. Stream flow in the smaller rivers and creek channels typically expire after a short time period following rainfall.

Base flow variability is quite common with flow characteristics being uneven or non-existent. Typical base flows, in some years, may exhibit no flow or extremely low flow in creek systems and in other years exhibit relatively high flow. This flow variability is generally attributed to once off large rain events such as cyclones, or multiple smaller events.

6


2.7.1 Regional Hydrogeology

The mine area is shown in the Geological Survey of Australia (GSWA), 1:100,000 Geological Map series Pannawonica (2154). The mine is situated in the Hamersley Group, which comprises the following geological units (listed from oldest to youngest):

• Wittenoom Formation (Bee Gorge Member): overall, the Wittenoom Formation is divided into three Members. The youngest is the Bee Gorge Member and in the Buckland area, only the Bee Gorge Member has been intersected by drilling. The Bee Gorge Member is dominated by thinly laminated graphitic argillite with subordinate carbonate, chert, volcaniclastic rock and iron formation. The distinctive graphitic shales of the Bee Gorge Member have commonly been intersected in the project area.

• Mt Sylvia Formation: the Mount Sylvia formation is 30 m to 50 m thick and comprises shale, dolomitic shale and three prominent banded iron formation (BIF) layers. Two of these represent the top and base of the unit. The upper BIF band is the Bruno’s band, which forms a very distinctive marker horizon in the area.

• Mount MacRae Shale: the MacRae Shale is 60 m to 90 m thick and is dominated by shale and dolomitic shale with thinly bedded chert in the upper units.

• Brockman Iron Formation -Dales Gorge Member: is an alternating assemblage of BIF macrobands and shale macrobands. These units persist throughout the entire Hamersley Province.

The CID contains the main aquifer of interest, which is typically characterised by bedrock (Hamersley Group) of fractured rock nature, folds and faults, where weathering may increase secondary permeability.

The Dales Gorge Formation is predominantly a fractured rock aquifer. The McCrae Shale and Bruno’s Band is noted to be of low permeability and often recognised as a regional aquitard. The underlying Mt Sylvia Formation and Bee Gorge Members may also be intersected and are typically not identified as regionally prospective aquifers, although localised fracturing can be productive.

The conceptual hydrogeology of the mine area consists of the following units, in order from youngest to oldest (RPS 2013a):

• Shingle/coarse channel sediments: recent sediments incised into older alluvium beneath the Bungaroo Creek channel. The unit is an unconfined aquifer consisting of very coarse sediments with little fine material present and is assumed to have a relatively high hydraulic conductivity. It is up to 60 m thick with a watertable approximately 20 m below ground level (mbgl) and is assumed to have significant groundwater storage capacity.

• Alluvium: underlies the Bungaroo Creek valley floor downstream of the mine site and comprises unconsolidated alluvial clays, silt, sand and gravel. Hydraulic conductivity is assumed to be lower than the coarse channel sediments. It forms an unconfined aquifer and a major source of groundwater storage.

• CID (mineralised zone): Generally covered by 0– 60 m of alluvium, but does outcrop in places close to valley walls. The CID is generally fully saturated, has a moderate to high hydraulic conductivity and will transmit most of the groundwater flow down the valley. IOH has mapped clay rich zones within and underlying the CID, where the CID does directly overlie bedrock. The clays may present significant resistance to the vertical flow within the CID.

• Bedrock: surrounds the palaeochannel aquifers described above and is composed of Brockman Iron Formation, Mt McRae Shale (containing potentially acid-forming black shales [URS 2013]), Mt Sylvia Formation, Wittenoom Formation and Marra Mamba Formation. The bedrock immediately surrounding the palaeochannel has been shown to have higher

7


hydraulic conductivities than might be expected for weathered bedrock. Away from this zone it is assumed the bedrock has lower hydraulic conductivity typical of other locations in the Pilbara.

The watertable in the creek is generally between 8–30 mbgl and is subject to significant fluctuations as a result of recharge during streamflow events (RPS 2013a). Groundwater flow is generally in a northwest direct towards the Robe River. The combined groundwater throughflow in the CID and alluvial aquifers downstream of Bungaroo has been estimated to be approximately 2.3 GL/a (RPS 2013a).

For the areas that are the subject of this Application for Works Approval, the mineral resource comprises of several stratified geological domains. From top to bottom these are:

• Quarternary Alluvium: typically unconsolidated or partially consolidated shingle, gravel and sand fill in the current drainage. This type of sediment collection is typically associated with high-energy environment of large river systems, in this case the Robe River. These alluvial deposits are fairly dense, but poorly cemented.

• Detrital Iron Deposits: locally developed thin zones, typically low grade. They are derived from colluvial fans adjacent to bedded iron deposits and described as poorly sorted, angular to sub-angular uncemented clasts of BIF/chert within a silty matrix.

• Upper CID: a thick sheet of higher grade CID (in the Eastern Zone the Upper CID is overlain by a second widespread Internal Clay Band with local relict caps of a third CID unit). The CID is generally well cemented and classified as highly to extremely weathered with a strength range of extremely weak to medium strong rock. Typically, it is rich in ochreous and vitreous goethite with varying amounts of hematite.

• Internal Clay Band: a thin sheet of lower grade CID, conglomerate and clay rich layers and pods. The major clay unit in this deposit is generally thicker in the middle section and extends into the pit slopes. The internal clay material can be classified as sandy clayey silt with predominantly medium to high plasticity fine fractions

• Lower CID: a thick sheet of higher grade CID. • Basal Conglomerate CID: a thin sequence of lower grade CID of scree and conglomerate with

abundant basement lithic material, filling the base of the channel overlying and draped on the basement.

• Basement: Hamersley Group rocks.

The Lower CID unit forms a widespread continuous sheet, while the Upper CID is eroded and incised by the recent drainage systems and, as a result, is variable in thickness and continuity.

The basement lithologies consist of the Dales Gorge member and the Mount McRae Shale. Weathering of the drill cores collected for these units varied from slightly to extremely weathered, but typically moderately weathered.

Three primary soil types were observed in the Project area (URS 2012):

• Red loamy earths • Stony soils • River bed soils (channels).

The red loamy earths were considered suitable for capping, however the other soil types lacked structure and were not considered suitable for capping. URS (2012) advised that the soils located within the Project area are likely to be soils with limited hard-setting surfaces and with relatively medium to coarse topsoil textures exhibiting low moisture retention.

8


2.8 Vegetation & Flora

A number of previous studies of the Project area have been undertaken. Sixteen land systems (Van Vreeswyk et al. 2004) occur within the Proposal development envelope. These are described in Onshore 2013a, 2013b and 2013c. Of these land systems, Newman accounts for over 50% of the development envelope and the remaining land systems comprise less than 10%. The extent of each of these land systems in the development envelope, relative to the mapped extent in the Pilbara, is small.

Shepherd et al. (2002) refined historical systematic flora mapping of the Pilbara originally completed by Burbidge (1959) and Beard (1975), providing pre-European extent of vegetation associations and sub-associations. Five vegetation associations comprising 19 sub-associations have been mapped across the Proposal area; these are described in Onshore (2013a, 2013b and 2013c). These associations are well distributed with a low risk of significant effects as a result of the Proposal (Onshore 2013a, 2013b and 2013c).

As part of the recent studies undertaken specifically for the Buckland Project, nine vegetation units from seven broad floristic formations were identified within the Bungaroo South and Dragon deposit (Buckland) survey area. Vegetation condition ranged from good to excellent. Drainage lines and floodplains were in comparatively poorer condition due to impacts associated with stock grazing and weed invasion.

No Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) or Priority Ecological Communities (PECs) occur within, or adjacent to the Buckland survey area. Five PECs occur within a 90 km radius of the Buckland survey area (Onshore 2013a), two of which are vegetation communities (the remainder are invertebrate assemblages). The vegetation related PECs are known as:

• Triodia sp. Robe River assemblages of mesas of the West Pilbara (Priority 3) • Sand Sheet vegetation (Robe Valley) (Priority 1).

186 plant taxa from 97 genera and 44 families were recorded within the Buckland survey area. No Threatened or listed flora species pursuant to the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 (WC Act) or EPBC Act were recorded. Four Priority flora taxa were recorded within the survey area:

• Indigofera sp. Bungaroo Creek (P3) • Sida sp. Barlee range (P3) • Triodia sp. Robe River (P3) • Rhynchosia bungarensis (P4).

All four Priority taxa were found at the Bungaroo South deposits. The only Priority taxon recorded at the Dragon deposit and infrastructure areas was Triodia sp. Robe River (P3). This species was typically found as scattered individuals on plateau slopes, minor drainage lines, ravines and gullies.

In terms of Groundwater dependent vegetation there was a single tree species that was identified as potentially being at moderate risk from groundwater drawdown(Onshore 2013d), Eucalyptus victrix (Coolibah). This was restricted to the major drainage channel (Bungaroo Creek) within the Project area. The majority of vegetation in the Proposal area and surrounds comprise xerophytic species that have no interaction with groundwater and hence would not be impacted by groundwater drawdown.

Eight introduced weed species were identified within the Buckland survey area (Onshore 2013a). No weed species were recorded at the Dragon deposit. None of the recorded introduced taxa is listed as Declared Plants under the Agriculture and Related Resources Protection Act 1976 (ARRP Act; now replaced by the Biosecurity and Agricultural Management Act 2007 [BAM Act]).

9


Vegetation surveys were undertaken in the Buckland Project in May and September 2012. No Threatened Ecological Communities or Priority Ecological Communities were identified within, or adjacent to the Buckland survey area (Onshore 2013).

Six plant taxa listed Priority Flora taxon by the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) were recorded from the study area: Dicladanthera glabra (Priority 2), Indigofera sp. Buckland Creek (Priority 3), Sida sp. Barlee Range (Priority 3), Terminalia supranitifolia (Priority 3), Triodia sp. Robe River (Priority 3) and Rhynchosia bungarensis (Priority 4).

2.9 Fauna and Fauna Habitat

2.9.1 Fauna

Fauna surveys were undertaken in the Buckland Project in April, May and July 2012 by Phoenix Environmental Services (Phoenix 2012).

290 vertebrate fauna species were identified in the area of the desktop review comprising: 133 birds, 112 reptiles, 42 mammals and three amphibians. Two additional species were recorded during surveys. Sixteen vertebrate fauna species of conservation significance may occur in the Bungaroo South survey area. The Bungaroo South area has the potential to support seven species listed under the WC Act:

• Northern Quoll (Schedule 1) (recorded) • Pilbara Olive Python (Schedule 1) • Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat (Schedule 1) (recorded) • Fork-tailed swift (Schedule 3) • Eastern Great Egret (Schedule 3) • Oriental Pratincole (Schedule 3) • Rainbow Bee-eater (Schedule 3).

Of these species, only the following were recorded within the mine development envelope (Phoenix 2012):

• Northern Quoll • Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat • Rainbow Bee-eater.

Creeklines provide high quality habitat for a range of conservation significant fauna. Studies confirmed the presence of Northern Quoll along the creeklines and along the base of the cliffs near the pit boundaries. Based on assessment of the potential impacts of the flood bunds on the flow regime, the proponent has concluded that increased flood heights and widths are unlikely to create significant flood regime changes and only limited and temporary impact on the creek edge habitat is expected to occur (Phoenix, 2012b).

Low-level activity of Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat in the mine development envelope indicates the species forages in the proposal area; however, results strongly suggest a roost is not present in the proposal area (Phoenix, 2012b).

Single individuals of the Rainbow Bee-eater were sighted on two occasions along Bungaroo Creek in the Bungaroo South area. The steep banks and deposit zones of Bungaroo Creek provide nesting and foraging habitat. They are often associated with creeklines supporting sandy banks in which burrows can be created. This type of habitat is extensive outside the mine development envelope (Phoenix, 2012b).

10


A targeted survey was also undertaken for several fauna species of conservation significance in July 2012 (Phoenix 2012b). Of the eight species targeted, only the Northern Quoll was recorded during the survey. With the exception of the Black-flanked Rock Wallaby, habitat suitable for all species targeted was found within the survey area. Approximately 50 ha of denning/shelter habitat and 240 ha dispersal/foraging habitat have been mapped in the mine survey area. Northern Quoll records indicated movement of individuals up and down creek systems but there is no evidence of movement overland.

Given the recorded presence of Northern Quoll, a regional survey was undertaken within an area defined by four drainage channels to the west and south that converge in the Bungaroo South survey area. This survey confirmed that the regional survey area represents fauna habitat of varying quality and is a largely continuous extension of the habitats within the Bungaroo South survey area. An additional 158 ha of denning/shelter habitat and 1768 ha dispersal/foraging habitat have been mapped in the regional survey area. No critical habitat (i.e. permanent pools) for Pilbara Olive Python is present in the survey area, though temporary habitat at one of two localities may form where temporary pools occur after large episodic rainfall events. Some individuals may also occasionally move through the survey area to reach permanent pools outside the survey area.

2.9.2 Habitat

In terms of habitat, there were four broad terrestrial vertebrate fauna habitat types identified in the Bungaroo South survey area including:

• plateau of undulating spinifex grassland (78% of the survey area) • major creeklines (11% of the survey area) • rocky foot slope and depositional material (9% of the survey area) • gully and rocky slope (2% of the survey area).

The major creeklines and gully and rocky slope habitat types are likely to present high value habitat. In terms of the footprint of the proposed OPF and WWTP, only the spinifex grassland was impacted. Being the dominant habitat in the region it is not considered to be of particular conservation significance.

2.9.3 Short Range Endemics

Five hundred and seventy-six individual specimens from four short range endemic (SRE) target groups were collected from the mine development envelope. No confirmed SREs were recorded. Three taxa considered likely to be SREs and four potential SRE taxa were recovered. All likely and potential SRE taxa recorded have been identified outside the mine area development envelope with the exception of the isopod Philosciidae 'pannawonica' although suitable habitat is well represented throughout the creek system (Phoenix, 2012a)

Species identification of three of the likely and potential taxa was not possible; as such, specimens recorded within the Bungaroo South survey area may not be the same species as specimens recorded outside the survey area.

From an SRE habitat perspective, six sites were assessed in the Bungaroo South survey area representing the majority of available SRE habitats within the survey area. Nine sites were also selected within the broader regional survey area. The majority of SRE taxa were recovered from the habitat type ‘gullies and rocky slope’ (ten SREs) and rocky foot slopes (six SREs). Two potential SREs were recorded in the habitat type ‘creekline’.

11


This indicates that shelter and moist conditions may be a factor in the distribution of SREs; however, no major vegetation was found in the Bungaroo South survey area to support creekline SREs. All likely and potential SRE taxa recorded from the Bungaroo South survey area have been identified outside of the survey area with the exception of the isopod Philosciidae 'pannawonica'. This taxa was found in ‘rocky foot slope’ habitat that is well represented throughout the Bungaroo Creek system, outside of the Bungaroo South survey area.

2.9.4 Subterranean fauna

The survey work undertaken for subterranean fauna was undertaken in general accordance with the general principles laid out in EPA Guidance Statements Nos 54 and 54A (EPA 2003, 2007). Sampling was organised around clusters of bores inside the proposed mine pits. Reference areas, sampled to determine whether species recorded within the mine pits occur more widely, were located outside but in the vicinity of the proposed mine pits.

The work yielded 280 troglofaunal animals representing 15 Orders and 40 species. The majority of species were collected from both impact and reference areas. 32 species are known only from the survey. 15 species are currently known only from within the proposed mine pits, of which 10 are singletons and one doubleton. The review indicates that species currently only known from the proposed mine pits are unlikely to be restricted to the pits. It is likely that the apparently localised ranges of these 15 species are artefacts of them occurring at low abundance.

Stygofauna sampling recorded at least 28 species represented by 10 higher taxonomic levels. Eight of the stygofauna species collected are known to be widespread in the western Pilbara or beyond. Six species are known to occur widely in the Robe catchment. On the basis of existing data, 12 species are known only from within the survey area, including nine identified species and three taxa only identified to family or genus. The review indicates that species currently only known from the survey area are unlikely to be restricted to that area.

2.10 Heritage

The Buckland Project is located on the land of the Kuruma Marthudunera People who hold native title rights over the area under the Native Title Act 1993. Land Access Deeds with the Kuruma Marthudunera people have been successfully negotiated.

Consistent with the requirements under both the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (AH Act) and Land Access Deeds, extensive site identification, archaeological and ethnographic heritage surveys have been completed over the proposed Buckland Project footprint. As a result, the heritage landscape within the Buckland Project area is well understood with a number of heritage places identified within the proposed footprint.

All necessary heritage consents have now been granted to allow project implementation, including those required under Section 18 of the AH Act.

The following steps have been taken to manage the potential impacts to cultural values identified in the Buckland Project footprint:

• Where possible, designs were modified to preserve places of importance • Regular meetings with the claimant groups were undertaken to discuss the proposed

impacts and agree suitable management strategies • Regular consultation with the Department of Aboriginal Affairs (DAA) was undertaken to

assist and facilitate the Section 18 assessment processes.

12


3 Stakeholder consultation

Iron Ore Holdings has undertaken extensive stakeholder and community consultation in regards to the Buckland Project including with:

• Kuruma Marthudunera People • Shire of Ashburton and Roebourne • Department of Environment Regulation • Office of the Environmental Protection Agency • Department of Mines and Petroleum • Department of Water • Department of Indigenous Affairs • Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities • Department of State Development • Dampier to Bunbury Natural Gas Pipeline • Other iron ore miners including Australian Premium Iron, Coz Iron, Rio Tinto and Red Hill

Iron.

IOH has undertaken a broad consultation program with the above key stakeholders and is committed to continuing its engagement to ensure ongoing consultation for the life of the operations. To date, the consultation strategy has centred on identifying and engaging with key government agencies at the federal, state and local level, as well as traditional owners and relevant neighbouring commercial interests. Most consultation has been in the form of face-to-face meetings with IOH representatives providing presentation material describing the Proposal and relevant matters such as available study results prior to receiving stakeholder feedback and advice and then reaching agreement on follow-up actions.

Advice from the Shire of Ashburton and other government agencies will assist the identification of any local stakeholders not already engaged, or other potential stakeholders, such as key community-based conservation groups. These will be approached and engaged through the EIA process where interest in the Proposal is indicated.

13


4 Prescribed premises category

The proposed works are Prescribed activities pursuant to Part V of the EP Act and described within the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 per the following Table 2.

Table 2: Proposed Prescribed Activities

Activity Category Number Description of Category Production or Design

Capacity

Ore Processing Facility

5

Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore: premises on which — a) metallic or non-metallic ore is crushed, ground, milled or

otherwise b) processed; c) tailings from metallic or non-metallic ore are

reprocessed; or d) tailings or residue from metallic or non-metallic ore are

discharged into a containment cell or dam.

50,000 tonnes or more per year

Mine Dewatering 6 Premise on which water is extracted and discharged into the environment to allow mining of ore.

50 000 tonnes or more per year

Wastewater Treatment Plant

54

Sewage facility: premises – a) on which sewage is treated (excluding septic tanks); or b) from which treated sewage is discharged onto land or

into waters.

More than 100 m3 per day

Landfill 64 Class II or III putrescible landfill site: premises on which waste is accepted for burial.

20 tonnes or more per year

The EP Act requires that, given the nature and size of the activities described above, they hold:

• A Works Approval for the construction of the facilities • A Licence for their operation.

A Works Approval provides information for the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) to assess the environmental acceptability of a proposal against standards and policies. Works approvals contain conditions to ensure the premises operates in an environmentally acceptable manner and that the works themselves do not cause unacceptable environmental impacts. The types of conditions that can be applied to a works approval are detailed under Section 62A of the EP Act.

4.1.1 Current DER Licences/Registrations/Works Approvals

The Bungaroo South Exploration Camp is an existing fly camp and is of insufficient size to require any DER Part V approvals.

IOH are progressing a concurrent approvals process with the DER in order to seek a Works Approval for the proposed crushing and screening activities associated with the construction of Stage 1 of the

14


Haul Road (Category 12). This process is the subject of a separate Application for Works Approval and supporting documentation.

4.2 Documents associated with this proposal

As described in section 1, The Buckland Project has been assessed and approved under Part IV of the EP Act. The following documents arising from that process are available (Table 3).

Table 3: Supporting information

Factor Study area Study effort

Vegetation Mine area Two-season, Level 2 survey

Mine area + surrounds

Desktop GDE assessment

Haul Road – All Level 1 review

Haul Road – Stage 1

Two -season, Level 2 survey

Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna


Habitat assessments; targeted surveys



Terrestrial Short-Range Endemic Invertebrate Fauna

Mine area Habitat assessments; targeted surveys



Subterranean Fauna

Mine area Desktop reviews; targeted surveys; habitat assessment

Soils And Landforms

Mine area Desktop review; site inspection

AMD Risk Mine area Static testing of drill samples, Leachate, waste fines and process liquor

Water Resources Mine area Desktop review; field tests; groundwater model; catchment model; particle transport model

Environmental Assessments

Mine area and Haul Road

Assessment on Proponent Information

Copies of all documentation referred to above are available on request.

4.3 Other Relevant Licences/Permits

4.3.1 Office of the EPA

The Buckland Project has been referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). The project level of assessment was set at Assess on Proponent Information (API). The EPA released their report on 4 December 2013 and the subsequent Ministerial Statement 960 was published on 12 February 2014.

15


Ministerial Statement 960 contains a range of legally-binding conditions covering both the mining operations.

4.3.2 Department of Water

Four groundwater abstraction licences have been granted for the project area as outlined in Table 4. These licences allow the taking of water for dust suppression, earthworks, construction, exploratory drilling operations, general campsite use, geotechnical investigation, mineral exploration and potable water supply.

Table 4: Current Groundwater Licences

Licence Aquifer Annual Allocation Kilolitres (kL) Licence Expiry

GWL158473(5) Hamersley – Fortescue 45,000 13 November 2022

GWL164672(4) Hamersley – Fractured Rock 45,000 30 October 2017

GWL171847(2) Wittenoom – Wittenoom 45,000 13 November 2022

GWL177962(1) Hamersley – Fractured Rock 212,000 4 September 2018

4.3.3 Department of Mines and Petroleum

As noted earlier in this documentation, the proposed Buckland mining operations and associated infrastructure require a Mining Proposal to be granted by the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP). At the time of writing, IOH was preparing a final draft of the Mining Proposal documentation for submission to DMP.

This Mining Proposal describes:

• the mining of iron ore from the three deposits - initially from above the water table and then proceeding to below the water table for two of the three deposits

• the processing of ore on site at the Buckland Project on Mining Lease 47/1464 and the associated infrastructure on Miscellaneous Licences L47/679, L47/681 and L47/712

• a 103 km-long private haul road (‘Stage 1’) linking the mine area to the North West Coastal Highway (L47/680 and L08/101).

An approval for the storage of Dangerous Goods will also be required for fuel storage onsite.


All Local Government approvals required including building licences, will be obtained from the Shire of Ashburton prior to commencement of construction.

The proposed operations and Stage 1 haul road will be constructed and operated in accordance with approvals issued under the Mining Act 1978. As such, this infrastructure will not be subject to the Planning and Development Act 2005 or any other local government planning by-laws.

IOH will continue to liaise with Shore if Ashburton with regards to construction and operation of the haul road and mine.

16


4.3.5 Department of Health

Working endorsements will be required from the Department of Health for Potable water and the WWTP. These were being progressed at the time of writing.

17


5 Proposal description

5.1 General

The three Buckland iron ore deposits are:

• Bungaroo South West – mining above and below water table in a single pit. • Bungaroo South East – mining above and below water table in two separate pits. • Dragon – mining above water table only in a single pit.

The proposed mine will consist of:

• the four pits and associated flood-protection bunding (apart from Dragon) • ore processing facilities • groundwater dewatering and disposal systems • waste rock dumps • waste fines storage facilities • internal roads, accommodation village and supporting infrastructure.

The Project construction is anticipated to commence in late 2014 with the first truckload of ore occurring in H1 2016, depending on receipt of all necessary approvals and funding arrangements. It is expected to have an operational life of approximately 15–20 years.

The Project is located within the Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve, which is a Priority 1 public drinking water supply area (PDWSA). The disposal of surplus mine dewater and possible seepage or spillage of contaminants from waste storage and operational areas has the potential to impact the quality of surface and groundwater downstream, specifically the Bungaroo Creek Water Supply Borefield (BCWSB, located 19 km downstream of the Project area (EPA 2013). The Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve downstream of the Buckland Project, including the BCWSB, falls within areas covered by the Iron Ore (Robe River) Agreement Act 1964, namely Mineral Lease 248 SA, which is held by Robe River Limited, a subsidiary of Rio Tinto Iron Ore Pty Ltd (RTIO).

By the end of operations, waste fines storage facilities and the majority of the waste rock associated with the two Bungaroo South deposits will have been removed and used to backfill the below water table mining voids, in order to prevent the formation of permanent pit lakes. This measure, as well as the development of management plans on the advice of the Department of Water (DoW) and in consultation with RTIO, is part of an integrated approach to ensuring the BCWSB and the water quality in the PDWSA is not unduly impacted by the Project.

All disturbed areas will be rehabilitated in accordance with standard practices, statutory requirements issued by DMP and the Minister for the Environment. These requirements are reflected in a mine closure plan (MCP) which has been developed. This MCP is largely indicative at this early stage of the project’s life and will be routinely revised as the project progresses.

The following aspects of the operations are the subject of this documentation and are described in further detail in the following sections:

• Mine Dewatering • Wastewater Treatment Plant • Ore Processing Facility • Landfill.

18


5.2 Mine Dewatering

Mining below the watertable can only proceed by dewatering of the CID aquifer intersected by the Bungaroo South pits. Dewatering would proceed at a rate of up to 4.75 GL/a (approximately 150 L/s), which will occur mostly over the first five years of mining. However, recharge of the CID aquifer may occur following significant rainfall and dewatering (at up to approximately 100 L/s) would recommence as a result, continuing until the water level was once again below the base of the pit. Dewatering of the CID will be undertaken via a network of dedicated bores constructed along the perimeter of the western and eastern pits.

The groundwater in the CID aquifer is fresh (i.e. EC < 700 μS/cm) with a neutral to slightly alkaline pH and the dewatering bores will also be used as the principle source of water for the operations. Under a number of conditions, including peak dewatering during the first five years, dewatering volumes will far exceed site water requirements and this surplus water will require disposal to the surrounding environment, using the preferred option of recharging the groundwater table down-gradient of the mining area (LA47/712).

Total water supply requirements (construction and operation) are expected to be up to 1.36 GL/a for processing, dust suppression and potable water supply. Raw water for the Bungaroo site will be sourced from dewatering bores. Water will be pumped to central storage tank for process and general use. Distribution will be via pumps and a steel and high density polyethylene pipe network.

Volumes in excess of those required for the site operations will be discharged via re-injection, with the main target for the reinjection system being an area within the Bungaroo Creek floodplain, several kilometres downstream of the mine site off-lease, and located to reduce recirculation of water back into the pits (Figure 2). The water table at this location is generally about 25–30 m below ground level in a deep bed of alluvium, overlying CID. The system will consist of the following components:

• a balance tank and pipeline, designed and situated to produce a head loss large enough to ensure a positive pressure is maintained at the headworks and therefore prevent air entrainment into the aquifer during system operation

• an in-line flow and quality (pH and EC) monitoring system • up to six reinjection bores (and headworks) at 500 m intervals, screened in the tertiary CID

and basal conglomerates, with each bore designed to reinject a peak of 25 L/s • a constructed infiltration area consisting of trenches or sumps (infiltration gallery) located

sufficiently north of the reinjection bores to maximise disposal volumes without compromising the environmental objectives

• a network of groundwater monitoring bores.

As previously described, the disposal system will experience peak loads during the first 3 to 5 years of operation and will then be in a maintenance mode that also responds to inflows from recharge events (floods in Bungaroo Creek). The depth to watertable in the injection area is expected to be sufficient to avoid any adverse effects of water table rise as a result of the injection program.

5.2.1 Contingency disposal system

A monitoring programme will be established to ensure the reinjection process is not having any unacceptable impacts on the aquifer (in terms of quality or mounding). Where monitoring suggests that the reinjection process is not performing as required, discharge will occur via multiple discharge locations in minor creeklines. Multiple outlets would reduce the volume and continuity of discharge to any one creek, thereby reducing potential for erosion and/or waterlogging. This system would consist of one or more pipelines running along the IOH lease boundary with valved connections to

19


discharge into the north facing steep rocky hillside water courses and would be designed and managed to meet the following objectives:

• scouring/ erosion of drainage channels is avoided to the greatest extent practicable • minimisation of the wetting front and associated soil waterlogging and vegetation change • no permanent or semi-permanent pooling of water around the discharge points or lower

down the creeklines.

If necessary, other discharge points with catchments sufficiently large enough to avoid excess environmental impact would be considered. No surface water from the mine site or associated areas would be disposed to the environment through this system unless agreed discharge water quality criteria can be reliably met, to ensure catchment and groundwater quality is not compromised. The design and placement details, environmental safeguards and monitoring program, including baseline assessments, will be described in a specific environmental management plan.

The contingency disposal system will not be implemented as a permanent replacement system for reinjection. Disposal to surface water would constitute a temporary contingency action while issues associated with the reasons for ceasing reinjection are resolved. The duration of the surface water discharges is not expected to exceed three months on any one occasion, and discharges would be rotated between the multiple outlets to limit any potential impacts

5.2.2 Dewatering requirements

Prediction of dewatering requirements was based on three cases, covering different rainfall and water management scenarios:

• Dewatering of Bungaroo West and East Pits; no recharge from Bungaroo Creek (i.e. no to low rainfall during the mine life, consider the least likely of the scenarios).

• Dewatering of Bungaroo West and East Pits; recharge from Bungaroo Creek. • Dewatering of Bungaroo West and East Pits; recharge from Bungaroo Creek; reinjection of

excess dewater; Bungaroo Coastal Water Supply project abstraction included.

Water will be required approximately two years prior to the commencement of mining for construction of the haul road and the mine site. Access below the watertable to facilitate dry mining conditions will be required for approximately seventeen of the estimated nineteen years of mining, commencing in year two. It is proposed to dewater using bores located on the perimeter of the West and East pits with dewater supply used to meet the Proposal water demand where possible. When dewatering exceeds water supply requirements, the excess will require disposal. At the end of mining and pit backfilling, dewatering will cease. Groundwater levels will then recover to a final or equilibrium level in the dewatered areas (RPS 2013a).

Prediction results also found that the dewatering requirements will exceed the projected water supply requirements and disposal of excess water will be required for most of the life of the mine (i.e. from the approximately the third year of mining to closure). Dewatering and disposal is predicted to peak at approximately 4.75 GL/a and 4.5 GL/a respectively in the third year of mining (first year of mining below the watertable) and then gradually decrease (variably – cyclone events will result in result in short term spikes that may require addition in-pit removal of surface water due to flood events collecting at the bottom of the pit). Demand will exceed supply in approximately year 12 and in the final year of mining.

Additional dewatering and disposal was indicated in years 6 to 9 at the Bungaroo South West Pit, and years 15 and 18 at the East Pit (RPS 2013a). Dewatering of the two Bungaroo South pits would

20


cause a gradual elongated cone of depression constrained within the palaeochannel and its tributaries. Maximum drawdown of approximately 85 m at the West Pit will occur after ten years from commencement of mining and continue until closure. Maximum drawdown of 145 m is predicted to occur at the East Pit at the end of mining. The drawdown cone (5 m drawdown contour) will extend approximately 6 km downstream from the West Pit and no more than 4 km upstream of the East Pit. Abstraction from the proposed Bungaroo Coastal Water Supply borefield is expected to be in the order of 10 GL/a, which will result in its own drawdown cone within the palaeochannel, predicted to be a maximum of 40 m at its borefield.

A network of upstream and downstream monitoring bores will be installed to provide regular assessment of the dewatering activities and allow for management to be refined.

5.3 Wastewater Treatment Plant

It is proposed to construct and operate a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) near the future site of the accommodation village (Figure 2). In addition to the village (85-120 m3/day), the WWTP will also receive wastewater from the Site Administration Area (5-10 m3/day) and the Mine Service Area (5 m3). These two areas will be serviced by 20 m3 sullage tanks, which will be pumped out regularly and the sewage transferred by tanker to the WWTP.

5.3.1 Feed wastewater

Feed wastewater will be raw wastewater from toilets, bathrooms, kitchen, crib room and laundry facilities and is expected to have the following characteristics (Table 5).

Table 5: Proposed WWTP feed characteristics

Parameter Unit Feed Water Quality Range

Biological oxygen demand (BOD) mg/L 200-400

Chemical oxygen demand (COD) mg/L 400-900

Total Nitrogen mg/L 40-80

Total Phosphorous mg/L 10-25

Total suspended solids (TSS) mg/L 250-450

pH 6.5-8.5

Oil and grease mg/L <200

Industrial oils mg/L Nil

5.3.2 Design and performance specifications

The WWTP will be of a widely used design, such as an Aerobic Treatment Unit (ATU) or a Membrane Bio-reactor (MBR) system. The unit will be capable of reliably meeting the expected performance standards specified in Table 6.

21


Table 6: Performance Standards of the Proposed WWTP

Parameter Expected Performance Standard ANZECC Guideline (1) ‘Medium’ Exposure Risk

Level Guideline (2)

E. coli <10 cfu/100ml (3) 105-106 org/100ml <10 cfu/100ml

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)

<5 mg/L 20-30 mg/l <20 mg/L

Total suspended solids (TSS)

<5 mg/L 25-40 mg/l <30 mg/L

Total nitrogen <15 mg/L 20-50 mg/l -

Total phosphorous <8 mg/L 6-12 mg/l -

pH 6.5-8.5 - 6.5-8.5

Turbidity <5 NTU(4) (95th percentile) - <5 NTU (95th percentile)

Disinfection 0.2-2.0 mg/L residual chlorine -

0.2-2.0 mg/L residual chlorine

(1) ANZECC 1997. Values are for irrigation of wastewater that has undergone secondary treatment (Class C) (2) DoH 2011. Guidelines for the non-potable uses of recycled water in Western Australia - values for a medium exposure risk level. (3) cfu = colony-forming units (4)NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units

The WWTP is designed not to discharge any liquids to the environment under any operating conditions and include provision to retain likely spillages, such as those arising during maintenance operations and potential plant upset conditions. As a minimum, all aspects of design and construction will also comply with the following standards and guidelines:

• Sewerage Code of Australia (Water Services Association of Australia) • Design Standard 50 (Water Corporation) • AS 3500.2 Sanitary Plumbing and Drainage (Standards Australia).

The WWTP will be fenced using 1.8 m high chain-link and will be fitted with red warning lights visible from all points around the fence line to indicate system failure, tank high level or other fault. Manual sampling points will be fitted where required.

5.3.3 Irrigation of treated effluent

Holding tank

The WWTP will be equipped with a 200 m3 holding tank to store treated effluent (approximately 1.5 days’ capacity) prior to irrigation. The tank will be fitted with level indicators and alarms.

Irrigation area

The designated irrigation area is situated on a hill crest to the east of the accommodation village, and approximately 75 m from the edge of the mesa landform (Figure 2). The soils have been described in Onshore 2013 as “Red/brown silty or sandy loam with ironstone boulders, cobbles and pebbles”, in an area that is within the Newman Land System, as mapped by van Vreeswyk et al (2004).

22


The soil in this area is conservatively classified as fine grained soil of low eutrophication risk of surface waters within 500 m of the irrigation site. This places it in risk category D as defined in the Department of Water’s (DoW’s) ‘Irrigation with Nutrient Rich Wastewater Guidelines’ – Water Quality Protection Note (WQPN) 22.

The appropriate area to ensure that recommended nutrient loadings are not exceeded is determined by applying the maximum loadings defined in WQPN 22. Based on the maximum loading Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorous (P) described in Table 7, the minimum area required for total P loading was 3.7 Ha and total N loading was 3.4 Ha (as calculated in Table 8).

Table 7: Nitrogen and Phosphorus Application Rates

Irrigated Soil Vulnerability Category

Maximum Inorganic Nitrogen (as N)

Maximum Reactive Phosphorous (as P)

D – Fine Grained Soils 480 kg/ha/year 120 kg/ha/year

Table 8: Loading Rates and Irrigation Area

Total Wastewater Discharge

Discharge to irrigation 135 m3/day (design rate) Annual discharge to irrigation 135 x 365 = 49,275 m3/year

Total Phosphorus Loading

Phosphorus in effluent 8 mg/L (8 x 10-3 kg/m3) Annual loading 49,275 x 8 x 10-3 = 394 kg

Minimum irrigation area (Risk Category D) 394/120 = 3.3 ha

Total Nitrogen Loading

Nitrogen in effluent 30 mg/L (8 x 10-3 kg/m3) Annual Loading 49,275 x 30 x 10-3 = 739 kg

Minimum irrigation area (Risk Category D) 739/480 = 1.5 ha

A minimum 3.3 ha irrigation area is therefore proposed to be used in the event that this contingency measure is required.

The irrigation area will be fenced with 1.8 m high chain link, and signposted as per DoH guidelines (2011).

5.3.4 Commissioning

It is requested that commissioning of the plant be undertaken under the Works Approval and prior to submission of the required Compliance Document and granting of a Licence to enable various components to be trialled and tested. This will enable testing of equipment whilst the licence is being assessed.

Commissioning will consist of three stages, pre-commissioning, wet commissioning, load commissioning and is expected to take a maximum of three months. Pre-commissioning will consist of the electrical and mechanical testing of the equipment without any fluids being introduced to the system. This will involve running or live testing all items of equipment to confirm that they operate as per their intended function. Wet commissioning will not commence until all items of equipment

23


are pre-commissioned and confirmed as operating correctly. The system will then be filled with clean water and the plant operated in automatic mode to test and confirm all control functions. Dosing chemicals will then be added to the system to confirm correct operation of this equipment.

When authorised and the system is balanced and operating correctly under the wet commissioning stage the load commissioning stage will commence by the addition of activated sludge at a pre-determined rate from a nearby WWTP .Influent will then be introduced into the system with the operation closely monitored daily by the site WWTP operators and any adjustments made if required. Samples of final effluent will be collected by the WWTP operators on site and sent to a National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accredited laboratory for analysis, as per the monitoring and analysis schedule set out in Table 9.

Validation monitoring will be conducted during commissioning by WWTP supplier to ensure the WWTP’s adequacy to treat the wastewater in accordance with DoH and DER requirements. Validation and verification monitoring will be conducted by obtaining raw wastewater and recycled water samples for at least six weeks at specific locations within the treatment trains. The frequency and locations of samples will be determined during consultation with the supplier. The samples will be analysed against quality standards provided for Medium Risk end uses (such as dust suppression), as shown in Table 8 below.

Table 9: Recommended validation and verification monitoring standards

Parameter Medium ERL Effluent Compliance Value

Influent Monitoring Frequency

Effluent Monitoring Frequency

Flow rates not applicable Continuous online Continuous online

E. coli <10 cfu/100mL Weekly Twice Weekly

BOD <10 mg/L Not Required Weekly

Suspended Solids <10 mg/L Not Required Weekly

pH 6.5 – 8.5 Weekly Weekly

Turbidity <5 NTU (95th %ile) Weekly Weekly

Disinfection Cl 0.2 – 2 mg/L residual NA Continuous Online

An operations and maintenance manual for the WWTP and irrigation area including all incorporated equipment will be kept within the WWTP. In addition, it will include supplier’s recommendations, health/safety/environmental procedures, emergency response plans and monitoring programs.

5.4 Ore Processing Facility

The OPF will dry process the mined ore to ensure it meets the correct sizing requirements for direct shipping. The OPF is a fixed plant (located per Figure 2) which will consist of a number of interconnected conveyors, crushing hubs, and screening hubs.

The key components of the DSOPP are:

• Run of Mine (ROM) feed stockpile • Primary crusher • Fixed rock breaker • Tertiary cone crusher • Product screening • Product stockpiles.

24


A general process is detailed in Figure 11. Mined ore from the pit is transported to the ROM feed stockpile. Ore is fed into the initial crushing circuit using front end loaders. The ore is constantly screened and crushed until the desired particle size is achieved. The end product will be transferred to the stockpile for storage prior to shipment to port for export.

5.4.1 Dry processing

For at least the first two and a half years, ore will be mined from above the water table and processed through a dry crushing and screening plant which will have a nominal throughput of up to 1400 tonnes per hour (dry) and produce a single 12 mm product (direct shipping ore). In terms of deliverable product, the moisture content of ore mined from above the watertable will be approximately 9%. To progress to mining ore below the watertable, the dry processing plant will be expanded to include additional crushing, washing and wet-screening processes to remove clay fines (material less than 1 mm in diameter) from the crushed ore (Figure 4).

The combined plant location has been set back from major creeklines to reduce interference with the banks and as a buffer for managing area runoff.

ROM pad and primary crusher

The ROM bin and primary crusher (sizer) are located in a single structure adjacent to the ROM pad (Figure 2). Ore will be hauled to the ROM pad and tipped directly from the mine haul trucks into the ROM bin (primary crusher feed bin), or alternatively temporarily tipped onto the ROM pad for reclaim by front-end loader (FEL), thus allowing some level of blending to be achieved on the ROM pad.

From the ROM bin, ore will be fed, via an apron feeder, into the primary crusher and across the primary (wobbler) screen (Figure 3). Provision has been made for installing a future rock breaker to reach into the primary crusher. The nominal maximum discharge lump size produced by the primary crushers is 250 mm, which is then transported to the secondary crusher building by conveyor.

Figure 3: Primary and secondary crushing

25

Iron Ore Holdings Ltd ‐ Bungaroo South Pty Ltd Works Approval Application – Bungaroo South Mine

29

Figure 4: Ore Processing Facility ‐ Process flow chart


Primary screen and secondary crusher

The primary screen will separate out the 0- 50 mm material and allow it to bypass the secondary crusher, thus reducing wear. The secondary crusher is similar to the primary rusher, but a smaller capacity unit, designed to receive 50 to 250 mm material and reduce it to a maximum size of 75 to 90 mm.

Discharge from the primary screen and secondary crusher will report to a 13 m long reversing conveyor. In one direction the reversing conveyor delivers product to the tertiary screening plant. By reversing the conveyor, discharge is instead directed to the wet plant feed conveyor, which in turn feeds the wet scrubbers.

Tertiary screening and crushing

There will be two parallel tertiary (dry) screening circuits in the Tertiary Screening Building (Figure 5). There are two surge bin / feeder sets, each allocated to a tertiary screen. All screen undersize material of less than 12 mm reports to the product conveyor and the remaining oversize material reports to the tertiary crusher conveyor. Under dry plant operation, the tertiary crushers crush oversize material from the tertiary (dry) screens. When the wet plant is running, the tertiary crushers treat over size material conveyed from the secondary (wet) screening building, as well as re-treating oversize material from the tertiary screens.

Product sampling and stockpiling

The product management circuit (Figure 6) will consist of the product conveyor that collects product from the dry tertiary screens, the wet secondary screens and the belt filters, a sample station, a stockyard conveyor and a radial stacking conveyor.

Stockpile product is reclaimed using a FEL to load long haul road trains. Provision has been made for dust suppression on the stockpiles by the installation of pivoting water monitors able to apply water spray over the stockpile surface. As the stockpile pad will be subject to a significant amount of wheeled traffic, a standpipe and water truck will be also operating in the area.

Figure 5: Tertiary crushing and screening

27


Figure 6: Product sampling and stockpiling

5.4.2 Wet processing

The wet plant is designed to process below water table ore with variable moisture content (average 17%). To minimise freight costs associated with trucking/shipping water a nominal product moisture content of 9% is targeted.

The wet plant circuit will be added to the dry plant circuit when required by the mining plan and progress, and the ultimate dry and wet plant installation will allow the use of either plant. Switching between dry plant operation and wet plant operation is expected to require interruption of ore feed for no more than five minutes.

Scrubbing and secondary wet screening

After secondary crushing, ore is transported via conveyor to two wet scrubbers (Figure 7). Each scrubber will be capable of receiving 787 tph (dry) of ore at a feed solids content of 50 – 55 %. The scrubbers wash gangue clay material from the ore and each scrubber discharges to a secondary wet double deck vibrating banana screen. The wet screens’ top deck has an aperture of 12 mm and the bottom deck has an aperture of 1 mm.

Large volumes of scrubber water will report to the top of each scrubber feed chute via a dedicated scrubber pump system. The water will assist in minimising build-up of feed material in the feed chutes. Provision has been made to install an isolation gate in the scrubber feed chutes to enable maintenance activities to be conducted on one scrubber while the other scrubber is in operation.

28


Figure 7: Scrubbing and secondary wet screening

Classification (de-sliming) and thickening

The classification installation includes two parallel modules of primary (rougher) and secondary (cleaner) cyclone clusters, each circuit allocated to the fines flow from one of the two secondary (wet) screens (Figure 8). The two modules allow maintenance activities to be undertaken on one module while the other is still operating.

The circuit is permanently configured with the rougher cyclone underflow (product) being pumped to the cleaner cyclones for final desliming and cleaning. Water is added to the rougher cyclone underflow hopper at a controlled rate to provide a consistent 30% solids content feed stream to the cleaner cyclones.

Figure 8: Classification/De-sliming

29


Wet product thickening and filtering

Product discharged from the de-slime circuit cyclones will be dewatered to less than 12% moisture, prior to being discharged through product chutes to the product conveyor, where it mixes with -12 mm product received from the secondary and tertiary screens, and is then sent to the product stockpile at a combined product moisture of <10%.

Underflow from the de-sliming cyclones is fed to the product thickener at a solids content of approximately 35% where a flocculent is added at a dose rate of approximately 15 g/t. Overflow from the cyclones contains the waste fines.

Thickener overflow water is fed back to the process water pond, where it can be recycled back into the process plant. The product is thickened to 60 % solids, and discharges to two belt filter modules in the adjacent filter building.

Fines thickener and disposal

The overflow from the de-sliming cyclones contain approximately 9.5% solids (waste fines), which is fed into the waste fines thickener. Suitable flocculants are added to the thickener feed, with the resulting underflow averaging 55% solids. The thickened fines are sent to a pumping tank for mixing with other lower solids content waste streams, such as process area sumps and overflows, prior to being pumped to the waste fines storage facility or backfill area. Overflow water is sent to the process water pond for recycling.

Waste fines storage facility (WFSF)

For the first five to six years of wet processing at the mine, waste fines from the process water treatment plant will be stored in a waste fines storage facility (WFSF), which will consist of two dams constructed on prepared areas to the north of the Bungaroo South pits (Figure 9).

30

Buck

land

Pro

ject

Figu

re 9

Lo

catio

n an

d la

yout

of t

he p

ropo

sed

was

te fi

nes

stor

age

faci

lity

Buckland Project

Figure 10 A

NC

OLD

terminology (top) and W

FSF em

bankment design detail (bottom

)


A two-pond system will facilitate improved consolidation and drying of the waste fines, and will minimise overall embankment heights. The civil and structural design of the two dams will comply with, as a minimum, the Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994, the DMP (draft) Code of Practice for Tailings Storage Facilities in WA (DMP 2013), the WA Government Water Quality Protection Guidelines and relevant ANCOLD guidelines and Australian Standards.

Once mining in the western pit is completed, waste fines from the processing plant will then be disposed in combination with waste rock to the pit as backfill. The WFSF will then also be used as backfill for the Bungaroo South pits, once its contents have dried sufficiently to enable rehandling.

The combined capacity of the two dams will be sufficient to accommodate five years generation of fines with an additional one-year volume as a contingency, as well as freeboard and additional allowances for flood protection and earthquake hazard (Figure 10). For the purposes of flood protection in a P1 Water Reserve, the design storage allowance will be sufficient to accommodate (i.e. without overtopping) the larger of the following two probabilities:

• the 100-year ARI wet season runoff (no evaporation, runoff coefficient being 1 and 70% of annual rainfall), which equates to 253 mm

• the 100-year ARI, 72-hour cyclone event, which equates to 5.26 mm/hour over 72 hours or 379 mm.

Initial calculations are that the design flood storage (100-year ARI cyclone event) would exceed the required storage for a 1000-year ARI (Significant) or Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) event under peak inflow and total runoff conditions. However, the impoundments may still spill if the PMF event is exceeded and, as per ANCOLD guidelines for tailings dams (ANCOLD 2012), an emergency spillway will be included in each embankment design. The height between the base of the spillway and the crest of the dam wall will be a minimum of 1m (as a safeguard to accommodate settling or slumping for seismic events), with a minimum 1m freeboard above the maximum operating level of the pond.

Inflows to the ponds from the surrounding catchments will be minimised by constructing cut-off berms across valleys in the northern sections , which will also function as haul roads for waste rock. As a precautionary measure, the design storage of the ponds will be based on the total catchment area. All pipes to and from the WFSF that are not within controlled and supervised areas will be fitted with automatic cut-off systems to safeguard against loss of material to the environment in the event of pipe failure.

The decant system to collect and return supernatant to the process water circuit for re-use has been designed to accommodate the rate of return flows, including the majority of rainfall. This will minimise residence time and limit opportunity for downward infiltration or seepage through the dam walls. Any infiltration, which is expected to be minimal, will be captured at the base of each valley in interception trenches or, as groundwater, will flow towards the site dewatering bores.

Seepage through the wall will be collected in toe drains and will, along with any leachate recovered in the interception trenches, be monitored (volume and chemistry) and pumped to the decant system for return to the process water circuit. The option of installing basin interception drainage systems within the WFSF was considered but determined to be too prone to blockage given the nature of the fines materials, as well as potentially reducing the structural integrity of the embankments. However, the final design remains subject to the approval of the DMP (DMP 2013).

The geochemistry of the waste fines has been assessed (URS 2013), based on a limited number (six) of fines samples from pilot studies conducted as part of the project feasibility studies. Where suitable and sufficient material was available, the following tests were conducted:

33


• pH, EC, major ions, acid-base accounting (ABA), exchangeable ions and multi-elementanalysis (XRF) on dried waste fines

• pH, EC, major ions, alkalinity and multi-element analysis on supernatant liquid supplied withthe fines sample and, where collected, leachate from the fines samples.

All six waste fines samples were classed as NAF-Uncertain-Barren (URS 2013). All supernatant samples and all leachate samples satisfied either the water quality criteria specified in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (NHMRC & NRMMC 2011) or were below naturally occurring levels in Bungaroo South groundwater, or both.

The process of re-mining the waste fines and the embankments for backfilling the Bungaroo South mining voids will be carefully managed to ensure that the risk of stormwater flushing fines and other debris from the valleys and into Bungaroo Creek is thoroughly minimised. Safeguards and contingencies will include:

• conducting works during the dry season (negligible risk of rainfall)• staging works to specific areas• maintaining interception and monitoring facilities• construction of additional interception and sedimentation facilities along flow lines.

Where appropriate, sedimentation basins may remain after closure to protect the catchment until stabilisation and revegetation of the site is complete. These aspects of site closure will be described in detail in the Mine Closure Plan (to be submitted and approved by DMP as part of the Mining Proposal).

5.5 Class II Landfill

Waste from the construction and operation of the Buckland Project will be managed by a range of facilities in order to achieve the greatest waste diversion from landfill and include:

• Waste Transfer Station• Landfarm• Composting.

It must be noted that the Class II Landfill will require a licence in accordance with the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987, whereas the Waste Transfer Station, Landfarm and Composting will not exceed the production or design capacity to warrant the prescribed premise justification.

5.5.1 Facility description

Putrescible and inert waste will be disposed of at the dedicated Class II landfill facility which is the subject of this Works Approval Application. The landfill facility will have an estimated capacity of 500 tonnes per year and will be operated in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002.

The landfill will be constructed within a borrow pit for the haul road and located outside of the P1 Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve (Figure 11).

The landfill will consist of a series of trenches, potentially 15 m wide by up to 50 m long (excluding access ramp) by 2 m deep. The sides of the trench will be sloped at an angle of 1 in 2, therefore potentially giving a tipping face 7 m in width with all waste to be placed below ground level. Two trenches will be open at any one time, one for putrescible waste and one for inert waste.

34


Waste will be covered with excavated trench material to minimise odour and prevent access to fauna including feral animals. A 1.8 m high cyclone mesh fence will be constructed around the perimeter of the facility with locked 1.8 m high gates to control access of personnel and mobile equipment. Signage will include type of allowable waste disposed at the facility and contact information for entry authorisation and in case of emergency.

Surface water will be restricted from entering the landfill and once a trench’s capacity to accept waste has been exhausted the cell will be immediately covered to prevent storm water ingress.

5.5.2 Waste Transfer Facility

Waste from the Buckland Project will be sent to a dedicated Waste Transfer Facility on site for sorting and storage of all waste prior to being disposed at its final location. The waste transfer facility acts as a collection point for all non-mineral waste where it will be sorted into specific waste streams including recyclables (plastic, glass, tyres, steel etc.), hydrocarbon, hazardous, inert and putrescibles waste. Recyclable, hydrocarbon and hazardous waste will be collected periodically and transported to an appropriately licensed facility for disposal by an appropriately licensed transport contractor. The transfer facility will not accept enough waste material to cause it to become a Prescribed Activity and, as such, it does not require consideration via Works Approval.

5.5.3 Landfarm

The project may also incorporate a landfarm for the management of hydrocarbon contaminated soils. Landfarming is an above ground bioremediation process that involves spreading of contaminated soil in a thin layer on impermeable material and is both watered and aerated periodically to stimulate aerobic microbial activity resulting in the degradation of absorbed petroleum products. The landfarm would be constructed and operated to ensure potentially contaminated stormwater is contained within the landfarm where it will be allowed to evaporate. If a landfarm is constructed it will be in proximity to the landfill facility.

The landfarming activities are not Prescribed and therefore should not be considered in terms of this Works Approval process.

5.5.4 Composting

A food dehydrator and composting facility may also be established to both reduce the amount of waste been buried at the landfill, and to return a useful product in the form of nutrient rich soil for landscaping purposes. The dehydrating plant would be located within a dedicated building in proximity to the camp kitchen and would accept putrescible kitchen waste where it would treated to produce a sterile biomass and potable water. The use of this system results in a reduction of kitchen waste of approximately 90%.

The composting activities are not Prescribed and therefore should not be considered in terms of this Works Approval process.

36


6 Environmental Management

All works associated with the construction of the proposed prescribed premises outlined within this document will be undertaken to comply with all IOH Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) and Works Approval conditions and commitments. During operation, similar controls will be in place, although operational management is dealt with through the DER Licensing process.

The key documents that will regulate environmental management of the proposed activities are as follows:

• Buckland Project Assessment on Proponent Information - Environmental Review Mining Proposal (Strategen 2013)

• Report and recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority – Buckland Project, Iron Ore Holdings Ltd, Report 1496 (December 2013)

• Ministerial Statement That a Proposal May Be Implemented No. 960 (February 2014) • IOH Buckland Project Mining Proposal • Water Resources Operating Strategy and Water Quality Monitoring and Management Plan • Environmental Monitoring Program • Threatened Fauna (Northern Quoll) Management Strategy • Acid and Metalliferous Drainage Management Plan • Mine and camp construction EMP • Works Approval (to be issued – the subject of this document) • Licence (to be issued – the subject of further documentation).

Whilst there are other documents that may be relevant, those above are considered of primary importance in terms of ongoing compliance with respect to environmental management.

As part of the environmental approvals process referred to above, the proponent has committed to developing Construction Environmental Management Plans for the mine and the haul road (Strategen, 2013) and the Minister for the Environment has imposed a series of statutory requirements covering the operations via Ministerial Statement 960 to ensure that the proponent minimises impacts to the environment.

The key issues for consideration for the proposed Mine Pit Dewatering, WWTP, OPF and Class II Landfill are outlined in the following sections.

37


7 Emissions

7.1 Air emissions

7.1.1 Mine Dewatering

The Mine Pit Dewatering operation will emit an insignificant volume of air emissions from the pumps utilised during the process.

7.1.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant

The main air emission from the Camp WWTP will be from the breakdown of organic matter (see section 7.3.2 for odour impacts and management).

7.1.3 Ore Processing Facility

Apart from dust, there will be no air emissions from the OPF.

7.1.4 Class II Landfill

The decomposition of waste within the landfill will produce carbon dioxide and methane. Given the size and the volume of waste, levels of carbon dioxide and methane emitted are expected to be negligible. The landfill will not be located in proximity to any sensitive receptors.

7.2 Dust Emissions


The Mine Pit Dewatering will not create any dust emissions.


Minor earthwork activities have the potential to generate dust during the construction of the WWTP. Dust generation will be managed by minimisation of ground clearing and dust suppression through the application of water during earthworks. Water will be sourced from existing licensed sources. The operation of the WWTP will not result in the generation of dust emissions.


Minor earthwork activities have the potential to generate dust during the construction of the OPF. Dust generation will be managed by minimisation of ground clearing and dust suppression through the application of water during earthworks. Water will be sourced from existing licensed sources.

The operation of the OPF has the potential to generate significant dust through material handling and crushing of the ore. The OPF will be fitted with specialist dust elimination and mitigation processes including water sprays on material transfer points to keep material moist. Crushing and screening of ore will be undertaken within specialist crushing and screening housings designed to capture dust emissions.

The OPF will also be situated approximately 700 m from the from the accommodation units to further minimise potential dust impacts. Based on the configuration of the operations, there are no significant environmental receptors that are likely to be affected by any dust that is generated through the OPF activities.

38



Dust emissions may be generated during the construction and operation of the Landfill through a number of activities, including:

• site clearing and levelling • earthmoving activities • vehicle movement on unsealed access tracks • wind-blown dust generated from cleared areas and stockpiles.

Dust generated during construction works will be reduced through the regular watering of the Landfill access road and active construction areas.

Dust generated during the operation phase of the landfill will be primarily from vehicular traffic accessing the site and placement of soil on top of the waste. Vehicular dust will be managed by implementing a speed limit designed to limit generation of excessive dust. Placement of soil on the landfill will not be undertaken on excessively windy days to ensure the potential for dust generation is minimised. Water carts will be used when needed to minimise dust generation.

7.3 Odour Emissions


The Mine Pit Dewatering will not emit any odour.


The WWTP will be fully enclosed and utilise carbon filters to all vents to remove any odour and therefore eliminate impacts on residents. The treated effluent will be treated in response to a ‘Medium’ risk classification (DOH 2011) therefore significantly reducing the potential for odour emissions. The irrigation area for the treated effluent will be located as far from accommodation units as practical to further eliminate potential odour concerns.


The OPF will not emit any odour.


If not properly managed, landfill facilities do have the potential to generate odour emissions. Accordingly, the landfill facility will be operated in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002, and due to the proposed location of the landfill, the risk posed by odour emissions is considered to be very low.

7.4 Noise Emissions


Noise generated by the pumps during the dewatering process will create low levels of localised noise. Given the anticipated low noise level and proximity to sensitive receptors, noise is not expected to be an issue as a part of the dewatering process at the Project.

All operations will be expected to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 (noting that Clause 13 of the Regulations covers construction noise and how it is managed through the Regulations).

39



Minor earthworks during construction will result in the generation of some construction noise which will be undertaken in accordance with Australian Standard 2436-1981 “Guide to Noise control on Construction, Maintenance and Demolition Sites”.

Operation of the WWTP will not result in the generation of significant vibrations or noise emissions as all pumps will be located below ground or within the plant itself.


The OPF has a significant potential to generate noise emissions through mechanical movement of material on the conveyors, and the crushing and screening of the material. Conveyors will be regularly maintained to ensure rollers are well lubricated to minimise friction. Crushing and screening will be undertaken in housings which will attenuate noise. Given that there are no sensitive receptors in proximity to the OPF, noise is not expected to be an issue.



Noise from the construction and operation of the landfill will be limited to earthwork machinery. Due to the operation only being undertaken during the day, the environmental risk posed by noise emissions is considered to be very low.


7.5 Light Emissions


No lighting is required for the dewatering process.


Whilst the WWTP plant will be lit in the event of plant failure, there will be minimal light required and given the plant will be located away from the accommodation area and there are no other sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the plant it is unlikely that such emissions will cause a significant impact.


Given the nature of the operations, there will be an inherent requirement for lighting on and around the OPF. The design of these systems will be such that light spill to the surrounding environment will be minimised as far as practicable.


No lighting is proposed for the landfill facility as construction and operation will only be undertaken during daylight hours.

40


7.6 Discharges to Water


The proposed approach for discharge of water abstracted through mine dewatering will be to dispose of this water into the regional aquifer at a location several kilometres downstream of the mine site (Figure 2).

RPS (2013, ) estimate that disposal volumes of recovered groundwater from the dewatering system will peak at 4.75 GL/a during the third year of mining (being the first year of mining below the water table). Disposal volumes will decrease rapidly after this point, approaching zero after the eighth year of mining, except for those periods where recharge is received into the aquifer from rainfall and floods.

Given that dewatering will abstract water from the same aquifer it is recovered from, the quality of the reinjected water is expected to be consistent with the receiving environment. Monitoring of quality and depth will be undertaken in the vicinity of the reinjection wells. Mounding would be considered excessive if the watertable were observed to cause adverse impacts to vegetation through waterlogging, or if the watertable penetrated the surface.

Particle tracking (RPS 2013a) indicates any contaminant from the mine would take 70–80 years to reach the first BCWSB production bore; which is consistent with the 30 years predicted by RTIO for its future mining that is proposed between the IOH tenement and the BCWSB production bores (as reported in DOW 2012b). The risk to the BCWSB will be mitigated by the slow rates of groundwater movement, combined with dilution, diffusion and dispersion processes, which are expected to reduce any contaminant concentrations of concern to levels below any drinking water quality guideline values, such that the Proposal presents no risk to the quality of water available to the BCWSB.

Contingency disposal system

As previously mentioned, surface water disposal will be utilised as a contingency measure in the event of the proposed aquifer re-injection system becoming partially or wholly unusable. IOH will transfer discharge to a surface disposal system consisting of multiple discharge locations in minor creeklines. Multiple outlets would reduce the volume and continuity of discharge to any one creek, thereby reducing potential for erosion and/or waterlogging. This system would consist of one or more pipelines running along the IOH lease boundary with valved connections to discharge into the north facing steep rocky hillside water courses and would be designed and managed to meet the following objectives:



If necessary, other discharge points with catchments sufficiently large enough to avoid significant environmental impact would be considered. No surface water from the mine site or associated areas would be disposed to the environment through this system unless agreed discharge water quality criteria can be reliably met, to ensure catchment and groundwater quality is not compromised.

The contingency disposal system will not be implemented as a permanent replacement system for reinjection. Disposal to surface water would constitute a temporary contingency action while issues associated with the reasons for ceasing reinjection are resolved. The duration of the surface water

41


discharges is not expected to exceed three months on any one occasion, and discharges would be rotated between the multiple outlets to limit any potential impacts


Given that the intention is to treat effluent received within the WWTP to a standard suitable for non-potable re-use, there is unlikely to be any discharge to water resulting from the WWTP activities.

There are no major drainage lines present within the proposed irrigation area, and the rate of application of water will be insufficient to activate surface water drainage. The irrigation system will not be operated during high rainfall events to prevent nutrient transport through surface water flow.


There will be no discharges to water from the OPF. The only output from the OPF is dry crushed ore suitable for direct shipping which will be stockpiled for transport to the customer.


The landfill is proposed to be situated in an area specifically chosen to limit surface water catchment and possible flooding. Surface water will be restricted from entering the landfill site through a combination of diversion drains and bunds to prevent potential contamination through mixing with waste. Individual trenches will be further protected by rollover bunds immediately around active trenches. Any water that falls within the trench will drain away from the waste by sloping the bottom of the trench away from the waste front. The excavated trench floor may be divided by an additional roll over bund to further segregate stored waste from any storm water that enters the trench. Any storm water entering the open trench will be retained and will evaporate. No contaminated water will be allowed to flow from the open trenches to the surrounding environment.

Groundwater monitoring bores will be established both upstream and downstream of the proposed landfill. Regular monitoring of groundwater quality will be undertaken to ensure the landfill is not a source of groundwater contamination.

7.7 Discharges to Land


The primary mechanism for mine dewatering disposal will be via aquifer recharge.

Where this is unavailable, surface disposal consisting of multiple discharge locations in minor creeklines will be utilised as a contingency.

Multiple outlets would reduce the volume and continuity of discharge to any one creek, thereby reducing potential for erosion and/or waterlogging. This system would consist of one or more pipelines running along the IOH lease boundary with valved connections to discharge into the north facing steep rocky hillside water courses and would be designed and managed to meet the following objectives:



42


If necessary, other discharge points with catchments sufficiently large enough to avoid significant environmental impact would be considered. No surface water from the mine site or associated areas would be disposed to the environment through this system unless agreed discharge water quality criteria can be reliably met, to ensure catchment and groundwater quality is not compromised.

The contingency disposal system will not be implemented as a permanent replacement system for reinjection. Disposal to surface water would constitute a temporary contingency action while issues associated with the reasons for ceasing reinjection are resolved. The duration of the surface water discharges is not expected to exceed three months on any one occasion, and discharges would be rotated between the multiple outlets to limit any potential impacts.


As indicated previously, the primary disposal mechanism for effluent treated through the WWTP will be through its irrigation to land. The soil in this area is conservatively classified as fine grained soil of low eutrophication risk of surface waters within 500 m of the irrigation site. This places it in risk category D as defined in the Department of Water’s (DoW’s) ‘Irrigation with Nutrient Rich Wastewater Guidelines’ – Water Quality Protection Note (WQPN) 22 (2008).

The appropriate area to ensure that recommended nutrient loadings are not exceeded is determined by applying the maximum loadings defined in WQPN 22 as calculated in Table 7.

A minimum 3.4 ha irrigation area is therefore proposed to be used for the irrigation of treated wastewater.


There will be no discharges to water from the OPF. The only output from the OPF is dry crushed ore suitable for direct shipping which will be stockpiled for transport to the customer.


Landfill will be managed to minimise pollution from the facility. Waste will be covered as necessary to prevent windblown litter, and a 1.8 m fence placed around the entire facility to capture as much fugitive waste as practical.

7.8 Solid and Liquid Waste


Given that mine dewatering activities involve the abstraction of water directly from the aquifer, no solid or liquid waste is generated through this process.


The WWTP will also produce sludge as part of the treatment process. Sludge will be removed on a quarterly basis from the WWTP and transported offsite for disposal by an appropriately licensed transport contractor at an appropriately licensed facility.


The key waste produced from the OPF is in the form of a slurry/paste made up of the fines generated from the processing of ore. As detailed in Section 4.4, for the first five to six years of wet processing at the mine, waste fines from the process water treatment plant will be stored in a waste

43


fines storage facility (WFSF), which will consist of two dams constructed on prepared areas to the north of the Bungaroo South pits (Figure 7). The civil and structural design of the two dams will comply with, as a minimum, the Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994, the DMP (draft) Code of Practice for Tailings Storage Facilities in WA (DMP 2013), the WA Government Water Quality Protection Guidelines and relevant ANCOLD guidelines and Australian Standards.

Once mining in the western pit is completed, waste fines from the processing plant will then be disposed in combination with waste rock to the pit as backfill. The WFSF will then also be used as backfill for the Bungaroo South pits, once its contents have dried sufficiently to enable rehandling.

The combined capacity of the two dams will be sufficient to accommodate five years generation of fines with an additional one-year volume as a contingency, as well as freeboard and additional allowances for flood protection and earthquake hazard (Figure 8). For the purposes of flood protection in a P1 Water Reserve, the design storage allowance will be sufficient to accommodate (i.e. without overtopping) the larger of the following two probabilities:

• the 100-year ARI wet season runoff (no evaporation, runoff coefficient being 1 and 70% of annual rainfall), which equates to 253 mm

• the 100-year ARI, 72-hour cyclone event, which equates to 5.26 mm/hour over 72 hours or 379 mm.

The decant system to collect and return supernatant to the process water circuit for re-use has been designed to accommodate the rate of return flows, including the majority of rainfall. This will minimise residence time and limit opportunity for downward infiltration or seepage through the dam walls. Any infiltration, which is expected to be minimal (Table 6), will be captured at the base of each valley in interception trenches or, as groundwater, will flow towards the site dewatering bores.

Seepage through the wall will be collected in toe drains and will, along with any leachate recovered in the interception trenches, be monitored (volume and chemistry) and pumped to the decant system for return to the process water circuit. The option of installing basin interception drainage systems within the WFSF was considered but determined to be too prone to blockage given the nature of the fines materials, as well as potentially reducing the structural integrity of the embankments. However, the final design remains subject to the approval of the DMP (DMP 2013).

The geochemistry of the waste fines has been assessed (URS 2013), based on a limited number (six) of fines samples from pilot studies conducted as part of the project feasibility studies. All six waste fines samples were classed as NAF-Uncertain-Barren (URS 2013). All supernatant samples and all leachate samples satisfied either the water quality criteria specified in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (NHMRC & NRMMC 2011) or were below naturally occurring levels in Bungaroo South groundwater, or both.

The process of re-mining the waste fines and the embankments for backfilling the Bungaroo South mining voids will be carefully managed to ensure that the risk of stormwater flushing fines and other debris from the valleys and into Bungaroo Creek is thoroughly minimised. Safeguards and contingencies will include:

• conducting works during the dry season (negligible risk of rainfall) • staging works to specific areas • maintaining interception and monitoring facilities • construction of additional interception and sedimentation facilities along flow lines.

Where appropriate, sedimentation basins may remain after closure to protect the catchment until stabilisation and revegetation of the site is complete. These aspects of site closure will be described

44


in detail in the Mine Closure Plan (to be submitted and approved by DMP as part of the Mining Proposal).


The landfill facility will not receive any liquid waste from the camp or greater project.

It will have an estimated capacity of 500 tonnes per year and will be operated in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002 and will not generate any solid or liquid waste.

7.9 Hydrocarbon/Chemical Storage


No hydrocarbons or chemicals are required to operate the Mine Pit Dewatering process. Maintenance of the pumps may generate hydrocarbon contaminated waste (oily rags etc.) which will be disposed of with other waste hydrocarbons by a licensed contractor and returned to site for disposal or to an appropriately licensed facility.


Hazardous materials will be stored in a chemical storage area designed and constructed in accordance with Australian Standard 1940:2004 “The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids” and Dangerous Goods Safety (Storage and Handling of Non-Explosives) Regulations 2007. The facility will include lockable gates, signage and spill containment tray. Procedures for bringing chemicals to site will be followed including requirements listed in each chemical’s Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS).


No hydrocarbons or chemicals are required to operate the OPF other than the inclusion of a minor quantity of flocculants used as part of the processing. Maintenance of the OPF may generate hydrocarbon contaminated waste (oily rags etc.) which will be disposed of with other waste hydrocarbons by a licensed contractor and returned to site for disposal or to an appropriately licensed facility.

These flocculants will be stored in appropriate locations onsite.


No hydrocarbon or chemical waste will be disposed of in the landfill, nor will the landfill generate these wastes. The waste transfer facility will act as a storage location for hydrocarbons and chemicals prior to their transport off site by a licensed contractor and disposed of in an appropriately licensed facility.

Hydrocarbon waste will be stored in tanks/drums that are either self bunded, or within a bunded area. Chemicals will be stored as per the manufacturer’s instructions and the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) in appropriate weatherproof cabinets/containers.

7.10 Contaminated Sites

No known contaminated sites exist within the proposed premise boundary. No known contaminated sites exist within the proposed premises boundary. The works proposed are also unlikely to give rise to any contamination given the safeguards proposed in this document.

45


8 Rehabilitation and closure

From a general mining perspective, activities and impacts of the Proposal most relevant to rehabilitation and closure include:

• pit bunds – presence of large artificial structures within the confines of the Bungaroo Creek will affect the natural hydrological regime of the creek system and may be unstable or unsafe in the long term

• pit voids – potential for creation of permanent lakes on recovery of watertable to pre-mining levels which has the potential to adversely impact groundwater

• waste dumps – if not designed, constructed and rehabilitated correctly these permanent landforms may lead to unacceptable levels of erosion, contaminant/acid leachate and support weedy or poorly revegetated habitat

• processing, dewatering, dewater disposal, haul roads, borrow pits, river crossing infrastructure and other miscellaneous infrastructure (e.g. mine camp, landfill) – potential for erosion, soil and water contamination, weedy or poorly revegetated habitat.

The location of the Proposal within a P1 Water Reserve is one of the main drivers for closure performance. As described previously, the two Bungaroo South pits will be backfilled to a level above the pre-mining water table, which is about 15 m below the floor of the creek. This will require all waste materials from the WRD and WFSF areas in order to make up the materials balance. The flood protection bunds will remain to prevent low flows from terminating in the remaining shallow voids; however, the bunds will be recontoured to a flatter and more durable profile. The shallow voids are expected to gradually fill with alluvial shingle transported during high flow (i.e. >10-year ARI) events.

The re-mining of the waste landforms will be conducted at a time and in a manner that minimises the risk of stormwater runoff transporting sediments and potential leachates into Bungaroo Creek. The upper catchments will be managed so that flows pass through sedimentation basins prior to any discharge.

All site infrastructure will be decommissioned and disposed or otherwise removed from site, and areas recontoured and treated to address compaction. A site contamination audit will be conducted, as per the Contaminated Sites Act 2003 and appropriate remediation undertaken if required.

A Mine Closure Plan (MCP) will be prepared to satisfy the requirements of the ANZMEC/MCA Strategic Framework for Mine Closure (ANZMEC/MCA 2000). This will be based on the methodology and approaches outlined in the DMP/EPA Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans (DMP and EPA 2011) and Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) Leading Practice Sustainable Development in Mining (DITR 2008) handbooks and the Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit (ICMM 2008).

Assessment of the MCP will be addressed under the Mining Act 1978 through the Mining Proposal application and approval process. Management strategies to be incorporated into the MCP include:

• Rehabilitation requirements integrated into site clearing and development procedures, such as:

o survey and mapping o targeted seed collection o raised-blade clearing o topsoil recovery and stockpiling, with cleared vegetation spread over stockpiles.

46


• Rehabilitation based on leading practice for industry and the area, for example: o backfill to above (pre-disturbance) watertable to prevent permanent pools o construct integrated drainage o plan for prioritisation of erosion management o deep rip across contour prior to topsoil respreading o re-seed if required (based on monitoring) o construct fauna habitats if material available o remove litter, contaminated soil, infrastructure, etc. o decommission all bores to DOW requirements. o rehabilitation of borrow pits, graded and contoured to allow egress of small

terrestrial vertebrate fauna. • Rehabilitation of other landforms:

o a substantial proportion of the waste rock dump will be removed as backfill and the underlying areas rehabilitated

o the WFSF will be (if not re-mined for pit backfill) capped with an engineer-designed inert cover (any requirements for the addition of neutralising material such as lime will be determined prior to closure)

o a single drainage collection point will be incorporated into the design and this will be managed dependent on monitoring results (e.g. passive treatment).

The WWTP and OPF are permanent infrastructure which are required for the life of the project. Once the project is complete, they will be decommissioned and removed from site, and the land rehabilitated as per the MCP which is currently been finalised.

The landfill will be operational for the life of the Buckland Project. It will be incorporated into the closure planning for the project and will comply with internal closure requirements. Open trenches will be progressively rehabilitated as waste is deposited and covered with topsoil.

47


9 Cost of project

The estimated capital cost of the Mine Pit Dewatering, WWTP, OPF and Class II Landfill are highlighted in Table 10.

Table 10: Cost of Facilities

Prescribed Premise Category Capacity Capital Cost

Mine Pit Dewatering 6 4.9 mtpa $5,693,000

WWTP 54 135 m3/day $577,500

OPF 5 8 mtpa $47,800,000

Class II Landfill 64 30 tpa $122,000

TOTAL $54,192,500.00

This equates to a Works Approval fee of $30,178.00.

48


10 Summary of Commitments

The assessment completed by IOH in relation to the proposed Prescribed Activities suggests that there will be no unacceptable risk to the environment.

Despite this assessment, IOH has proposed a range of management measures to minimise potential impacts associated with the activities covered by the Works Approval. These have been described in this document and are summarised in Table 11.

49


Table 11: Summary of management commitments

Environmental Factor Potential Impacts Proposed Management Works Approval Application Section Number Commitment

PIT DEWATERING

Discharges to Water • Contamination of the aquifer

• Groundwater mounding (and resulting impacts on soils and vegetation)

• Monitoring of receiving aquifer depth and quality.

• Monitoring of abstracted water quality and volume.

• Use of contingency measures (surface discharge) where reinjection is likely to have an unacceptable impact.

7.6.1 • Monitor abstracted water quality and volumes

• Monitor aquifer at site of reinjection

• Use of surface water discharge in circumstances where impacts are likely through reinjection

•

Discharges to Land Scouring/ erosion of drainage channels. Soil waterlogging and vegetation change Pooling of water around the discharge points or lower down the creeklines.

Use of this approach as a contingency only. Multiple discharge locations in minor creeklines via valved connections. Monitoring of abstracted water quality and volume. Monitoring of receiving environment water quality. Limiting discharge duration to three months and rotating discharge locations.

7.7.1 Abstracted water will only be discharged to creek systems where reinjection is not appropriate. Monitor abstracted water quality and volumes Monitor creek water quality at site of reinjection Surface discharge will be limited in duration to a maximum period of three months Surface discharge locations will be rotated

Native Vegetation Excessive clearing of native vegetation

Clearing will be undertaken to comply with relevant approvals.

6 Clearing will be undertaken in accordance with all requirements of API, Mining Proposal and Ministerial

50



Statement 960

Rehabilitation Failure to rehabilitate upon completion of operations

Equipment associated with dewatering will be removed and disturbance rehabilitated upon project completion.

8 Equipment will be removed and disturbance rehabilitated as per closure planning.

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT Discharges to air Release of odour from biological

breakdown of organic matter. Enclose WWTP to limit potential for odour egress. Locate sprayfield to prevent odour impacting sensitive receptors.

7.3.2 • Ensure WWTP is completely enclosed.

• Fit carbon filters to vents. • Locate irrigation area

downwind from sensitive receptors including accommodation.

• Ensure water is treated to proposed specifications.

Discharge to air Dust generated from construction the WWTP

Dust control measures including water suppression and minimised clearing during construction activities.

7.2.2 • Use of water carts to minimise dust generation.

• Minimise clearing to only what is required.

Discharges to Water Eutrophication of waterways through nutrient loading.

Create adequate sized irrigation area to ensure the correct rate of evaporation and infiltration of effluent. Regular servicing to maintain optimal output parameters.

7.6.3 • Ensure irrigation area is sufficient to avoid ponding of effluent.

• Maintain system to ensure output parameters are not exceeded.

Discharges to Land Excessive nutrient loading from effluent disposal. Contamination through disposal of sludge.

WWTP system to be designed and commissioned to meet discharge performance criteria. Regular Monitoring and Testing

7.7.2 • Loading rate at end of commissioning below relevant criteria

• Irrigation area fenced and within area proposed.

51



• Sludge to be disposed of at an appropriate facility.

Chemical Storage Chemical spill leading to contamination of surrounding land and waterways.

Store and handle chemicals appropriately to avoid the potential for spills.

7.9.2 • Hazardous materials will be stored in a chemical storage area designed and constructed in accordance with Australian Standard 1940:2004 The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids and Dangerous Goods Safety (Storage and Handling of Non-Explosives) Regulations 2007.


Clearing will be undertaken to comply with relevant approvals.

6 • Clearing will be undertaken in accordance with all requirements of API, Mining Proposal and Ministerial Statement 960

ORE PROCESSING FACILITY Discharge to air Dust generated from

construction and operation of the OPF

Dust mitigation to reduce and eliminate dust.

7.2.3 • Use of water sprays to keep material wet to limit dust generation.

• Crush and screen in enclosed facilities to capture dust generated.

Noise Emissions Excessive noise from movement of material and crushing and screening activities

Reduce noise emissions through maintenance and attenuation.

7.4.3 • Ensure conveyors are maintained regularly to ensure friction is minimised.

52



• Crush and screen in enclosed facilities to attenuate noise emissions.

Light Emissions Light spill on surrounding habitat Ensure light spill is minimised 7.5.3 • Ensure lighting is positioned to limit light spill outside of required area.

Hydrocarbon/Chemical Storage Contamination of surrounding land

Manage potential contamination 7.9.3 • Hydrocarbon contaminated waste from maintenance of the OPF will be disposed to a licensed controlled waste facility.


Clearing will be undertaken to comply with Part IV approval.

6 • Clearing will be undertaken in accordance with all conditions of pending Part IV approval.

Rehabilitation Failure to rehabilitate upon closure of the plant

Plant and associated equipment will be removed and disturbance rehabilitated upon project completion.

8 • Plant and associated equipment will be removed and disturbance rehabilitated as per closure planning.

LANDFILL FACILITY Dust Emissions Localised dust loading on flora

species. Enforce a speed limit, and restrict vehicles to designated roads to prevent dust generation. Keep ground disturbance to a minimum.

7.2.4 • Speed limits shall be set with due consideration to minimising creation of dust.

• Limit handling of soil/rock material on excessively windy days.

• The facility will be surrounded by a 1.8 m high

53



cyclone fence with 1.8 m high lockable gates to dissipate force from prevailing winds.

Odour Emissions Localised generation of odour. Cover waste periodically to prevent odour generation.

7.3.4 • Waste will be covered routinely to minimise the generation of odour (and windblown waste).

• Locate landfill downwind from the camp to eliminate impact of odour on personnel.

Discharges to Water Contamination of standing surface water and/ or ground water. Littering the surrounding project area.

Create bunds and diversion drains where needed to prevent ingress and egress of stormwater from the facility. Create bunds around each trench to prevent stormwater ingress. Engineer trench floor to drain stormwater falling within the trench away from the waste front.

7.6.5 • Earthen bunds will be placed around the open and active trench to control storm water entering and leaving the excavation.

• Ramping to the open trench will feature a roll over bund to control storm water entering and leaving the excavation.

• Trench floor will be divided by a roll over bund to further separate out storm water from stockpiled rubbish.

• Trenches will be constructed so that storm water entering

54



the open trench will be retained and allowed to evaporate off.

• Monitoring bores will be installed and regularly monitored.

Discharges to Land Generation of windblown litter. Ensure the tipping face is limited to prevent large faces of waste being exposed to the elements. Ensure waste is periodically covered to limit fugitive waste and construct a cyclone fence around the facility to capture fugitive waste.

7.7.4 • Tipping face less than 6 m in width.

• The facility will be surrounded by a 1.8 m high cyclone fence with 1.8 m high lockable gates.

• Regular premise inspections and audits will be undertaken focusing on retrieval and appropriate disposal of wind-blown litter.


Clearing will be undertaken to comply with Part IV approval.

6 • Clearing will be undertaken in accordance with all conditions of pending Part IV approval.

Rehabilitation Failure to decommission facility appropriately once made redundant.

Landfill will be closed and rehabilitated as part of the greater project closure plan.

8 • Rehabilitation of the Landfill will be incorporated into the closure planning for the project and will comply with internal closure requirements.

55


11 References

Australian and New Zealand Minerals Energy Council/Mineral Council of Australia (ANZMEC/MCA) 2000, Strategic Framework for Mine Closure, Canberra.

Australian Standard 2436-1981 “Guide to Noise control on Construction, Maintenance and Demolition Sites

Australian Standard 1940:2004 “The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids

Beard JS 1975, Pilbara, Explanatory Notes and Map Sheet 5, 1:1 000 000 Series Vegetation Survey of Western Australia, University of Western Australia Press, Nedlands.

Burbidge NT 1959, Notes on Plants and Plant Habitats observed in the Abydos-Woodstock area, Pilbara District, Western Australia, CSIRO Div. Plant Ind. Tech. Paper 12, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Melbourne

Department of Conservation and Land Management (CALM) 2002, Botanical Survey of the Hamersley Range Uplands, National Reserve System Project N709, May 2002, Government of Western Australia.

Department of Health (Health) 2011, Guidelines for the Non-potable Uses of Recycled Water in Western Australia, Government of Western Australia

Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) (Now Department of Resources Energy and Tourism) 2008, Leading Practice Sustainable Development in Mining handbooks, [Online],

Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) and Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2011, Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans, Government of Western Australia, Perth.

Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) 2013, Tailings storage facilities in Western Australia, Draft for public comment. [Online], Government of Western Australia

Department of Water (DoW) 2008, Irrigation with Nutrient Rich Wastewater Guidelines’ – Water Quality Protection Note 22, Government of Western Australia

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2003, Guidance Statement No. 54, Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors, Consideration of Subterranean Fauna in Groundwater and Caves during Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, Environmental Protection Authority, Perth.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2007, Draft Guidance Statement No. 54a, Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors, Sampling Methods and Survey Considerations for Subterranean Fauna in Western Australia, Environmental Protection Authority, Perth.

Environmental Protection Authority (2013), Report and recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority Report 1496 Buckland Project Iron Ore Holdings Ltd, December 2013

International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM) 2008, Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit, ICMM, London.

Minister for the Environment 2014, Statement that a Proposal may be Implemented (Pursuant to the Provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986), Statement No. 960, February 2014

National Health and Medical Research Council & Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council ((NHMRC & NRMMC) 2011, Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 6 National Water Quality Management Strategy, Australian Government, Canberra.

56


Onshore Environmental (Onshore) 2013, Flora and Vegetation Survey, Buckland and Snake Projects, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Ltd, January 2013.

Onshore Environmental (Onshore) 2013a, Flora and Vegetation Survey, Buckland and Snake Projects, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, January 2013.

Onshore Environmental (Onshore) 2013b, Flora and Vegetation Survey, Bungaroo South to API Rail Head, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, April 2013.

Onshore Environmental (Onshore) 2013c, Literature and Desktop Review – Flora and Vegetation, Proposed Cape Preston Transport Corridor, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, July 2013.

Phoenix Environmental Sciences (Phoenix) 2012c, Terrestrial Fauna Survey for the Buckland Project Haul Road, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, November 2012.

Phoenix Environmental Sciences (Phoenix) 2013a, Level 1 terrestrial fauna survey for the Buckland Project Stage 2 haul road, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, March 2013.

Phoenix Environmental Sciences (Phoenix) 2013b, Level 2 vertebrate fauna survey for the Buckland Project Haul Road, report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, June 2013

RPS Aquaterra (RPS) 2012a, South Bungaroo Project Surface Water Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, July 2012.

RPS Aquaterra (RPS) 2012b, Bungaroo South pre Feasibility Dewatering Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, October 2012.

RPS Aquaterra (RPS) 2013, Bungaroo South – Numerical Modelling of the Impacts of Mining on the Hydrogeology, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Limited, June 2013.

Shepherd D, Beeston G & Hopkins A 2002, Native Vegetation in Western Australia. Extent, Type and Status, Resource Management Technical Report 249, Department of Agriculture, Perth.

Strategen Consultants Pty Ltd (Strategen) 2013, Buckland Project Assessment on Proponent Information - Environmental Review prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Ltd, November 2013

Trudgen M 1995, A Flora Survey of the Valley of the Bungaroo Creek and Three Rail Options Linking it to the Existing Robe River Iron Associates Railway, prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, Perth.

URS 2012, Bungaroo South and Dragon Project, Soils and Landforms Preliminary Study, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings, November 2012.

URS 2013, Acid and Metalliferous Drainage Assessment, Buckland Project, unpublished report prepared for Iron Ore Holdings, September 2013.

Van Vreeswyk, A., Payne, A.L., Leighton, K.A. and Hennig, P 2004. An inventory and condition survey of the Pilbara region, Western Australia. Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin No. 92, 2004.

Williams IR, 1968, Yarraloola Western Australia Sheet SF/ 50-6Geological Survey of Western Australia, 1:250,000 Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Government of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia.

57

ATTACHMENT 1. STATEMENT 960

THIS DOCUMENT

This document has been produced by the Office of the Appeals Convenor as an electronic version of the original Statement for the proposal listed below as signed by the Minister and held by this Office. Whilst every effort is made to ensure its accuracy, no warranty is given as to the accuracy or completeness of this document.

The State of Western Australia and its agents and employees disclaim liability, whether in negligence or otherwise, for any loss or damage resulting from reliance on the accuracy or completeness of this document. Copyright in this document is reserved to the Crown in right of the State of Western Australia. Reproduction except in accordance with copyright law is prohibited. Published on: 12 February 2014 Statement No: 960

STATEMENT THAT A PROPOSAL MAY BE IMPLEMENTED

(PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT 1986)

BUCKLAND PROJECT

Proposal: To develop and operate an iron ore mine, processing

facilities and supporting infrastructure, 45 km south-south-east of Pannawonica in the Shire of Ashburton, and a 176 km haul road from the mine site to the customer delivery point near Cape Preston, as documented in Schedule 1 of this statement.

Proponent: IRON ORE HOLDINGS LTD

Australian Company Number 107 492 517 Proponent Address: Level 1

1 Altona Street WEST PERTH WA 6005

Assessment Number: 1957 Report of the Environmental Protection Authority Number: 1496 This Statement authorises the implementation of the proposal described and documented in Columns 1 and 2 of Table 2 of Schedule 1. The implementation of the proposal is subject to the following implementation conditions and procedures and Schedule 2 details definitions of terms and phrases used in the implementation conditions and procedures. 1 Proposal Implementation 1-1 When implementing the proposal, the proponent shall not exceed the

authorised extent of the proposal as defined in Column 3 of Table 2 in Schedule 1, unless amendments to the proposal and the authorised extent of the proposal has been approved under the EP Act.

Page 2 of 13

2 Contact Details 2-1 The proponent shall notify the CEO of any change of its name, physical address

or postal address for the serving of notices or other correspondence within 28 days of such change. Where the proponent is a corporation or an association of persons, whether incorporated or not, the postal address is that of the principal place of business or of the principal office in the State.

3 Time Limit for Proposal Implementation 3-1 The proponent shall not commence implementation of the proposal after the

expiration of five (5) years from the date of this Statement, and any commencement, within this five (5) year period, must be substantial.

3-2 Any commencement of implementation of the proposal, within five (5) years

from the date of this Statement, must be demonstrated as substantial by providing the CEO with written evidence, on or before the expiration of five (5) years from the date of this Statement.

4 Compliance Reporting 4-1 The proponent shall prepare and maintain a compliance assessment plan to the

satisfaction of the CEO. 4-2 The proponent shall submit to the CEO the compliance assessment plan

required by condition 4-1 at least six months prior to the first compliance assessment report required by condition 4-6, or prior to implementation, whichever is sooner. The compliance assessment plan shall indicate: (1) the frequency of compliance reporting; (2) the approach and timing of compliance assessments; (3) the retention of compliance assessments; (4) the method of reporting of potential non-compliances and corrective

actions taken; (5) the table of contents of compliance assessment reports; and (6) public availability of compliance assessment reports.

4-3 The proponent shall assess compliance with conditions in accordance with the

compliance assessment plan required by condition 4-1. 4-4 The proponent shall retain reports of all compliance assessments described in

the compliance assessment plan required by condition 4-1 and shall make those reports available when requested by the CEO.

4-5 The proponent shall advise the CEO of any potential non-compliance within

seven days of that potential non-compliance being known.

Page 3 of 13

4-6 The proponent shall submit to the CEO the first compliance assessment report fifteen (15) months from the date of issue of this Statement addressing the twelve (12) month period from the date of issue of this Statement and then annually from the date of submission of the first compliance assessment report. The compliance assessment report shall: (1) be endorsed by the proponent’s Managing Director or a person delegated

to sign on the Managing Director’s behalf; (2) include a statement as to whether the proponent has complied with the

conditions; (3) identify all potential non-compliances and describe corrective and

preventative actions taken; (4) be made publicly available in accordance with the approved compliance

assessment plan; and (5) indicate any proposed changes to the compliance assessment plan

required by condition 4-1. 5 Public Availability of Data 5-1 Subject to condition 5-2, within a reasonable time period approved by the CEO

of the issue of this statement and for the remainder of the life of the proposal the proponent shall make publicly available, in a manner approved by the CEO, all validated environmental data (including sampling design, sampling methodologies, empirical data and derived information products (e.g. maps)) relevant to the assessment of this proposal and implementation of this Statement.

5-2 If any data referred to in condition 5-1 contains particulars of:

(1) a secret formula or process; or (2) confidential commercially sensitive information; the proponent may submit a request for approval from the CEO to not make this data publicly available. In making such a request the proponent shall provide the CEO with an explanation and reasons why the data should not be made publicly available.

6 Inland Waters Environmental Quality 6-1 The proponent shall ensure that mining operations do not change the quality of

surface and groundwater downstream of the mine development envelope so as to cause water quality parameters to exceed the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2011 Guideline Values, except for those parameters that show natural exceedences as identified in condition 6-2(2), through the implementation of conditions 6-2 to 6-7.

Page 4 of 13

6-2 Prior to construction, the proponent shall prepare a Water Quality Monitoring and Management Plan, in consultation with the Department of Water, to the requirements of the CEO. The Water Quality Monitoring and Management Plan shall: (1) when implemented, substantiate whether condition 6-1 is being met; (2) include, where surface water is sufficient to gather water quality data, the

results of baseline groundwater quality and surface water quality representative of seasonal variation;

(3) include a geochemical report of kinetic testing results of representative material to be backfilled, within two years of the commencement of mining;

(4) include a description of procedures for monitoring drainage from the waste fines storage facility and waste rock landforms, and groundwater in the vicinity of the waste material landforms and downstream of all potential sources of contamination, that includes: a. monitoring and sampling methodology in accordance with the

Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2011 and ANZECC Guidelines; b. monitoring sites; c. frequency of monitoring; d. water quality criteria; and e. provision for volume and flow measurement of run-off and seepage,

(5) identify water quality criteria to trigger implementation of management and/or contingency measures to ensure condition 6.1 is met; and

(6) identify management and/or contingency measures to be implemented in the event that criteria identified required by condition 6-2(5) have been exceeded.

6-3 The proponent shall implement the approved Water Monitoring and

Management Plan required by condition 6-2 and continue implementation until otherwise agreed by the CEO.

6-4 In the event that monitoring required by condition 6-2 indicates water quality

criteria required by condition 6-2(5) have been exceeded the proponent shall: (1) investigate to determine the likely cause(s) of the water criteria required by

condition 6-2(5) being exceeded; (2) if the exceedence is likely to be the result of activities undertaken in

implementing the proposal, implement management and/or contingency measures required by condition 6-2(6) and continue implementation until criteria required by condition 6-2(5) are being met, or until otherwise agreed by the CEO; and

(3) provide a report that describes the investigation required by condition 6-4(1) and measures required by condition 6-4(2) to the CEO within 21 days of identification that criteria required by condition 6-2(5) has been exceeded.

Page 5 of 13

6-5 The proponent may review and revise the Water Quality Monitoring and Management Plan to the requirements of the CEO.

6-6 The proponent shall review and revise the Water Quality Monitoring and

Management Plan as and when directed by the CEO. 6-7 The proponent shall implement the approved revisions of the Water Quality

Monitoring and Management Plan required by conditions 6-5 and 6-6. 7 Flora and Vegetation 7-1 The proponent shall ensure that the elements of Stage 2 of the haul road

described in Table 2 of Schedule 1 and delineated in Figure 2, are located to minimise the adverse impacts from construction on Threatened Ecological Communities, Priority Ecological Communities, threatened flora species, declared rare flora and priority flora species through the implementation of conditions 7-2 to 7-5.

7-2 Prior to commencement of any ground disturbing activities within Stage 2 of the

haul road development envelope, unless agreed by the CEO, the proponent shall prepare a Vegetation Management Plan which is to be approved by the CEO.

7-3 The Vegetation Management Plan required by condition 7-2 shall:

(1) demonstrate the haul road will be located to minimise direct and indirect impacts on Threatened Ecological Communities, Priority Ecological Communities, threatened flora species, declared rare flora and priority flora species; and

(2) include spatially accurate, rectified and geographically referenced maps showing the location of the terrestrial infrastructure.

7-4 The proponent shall implement the approved Vegetation Management Plan

required by condition 7-2. 7-5 Revisions to the Vegetation Management Plan may be approved by the CEO. 8 Residual Impacts and Risk Management Measures 8-1 In view of the significant residual impacts and risks as a result of

implementation of the proposal, the proponent shall contribute funds for the clearing of ‘good to excellent’ condition native vegetation, including the loss of habitat for conservation significant species in the Hamersley IBRA subregion, and calculated pursuant to condition 8-2. This funding shall be provided to a government-established conservation offset fund or an alternative offset arrangement providing an equivalent outcome as determined by the Minister.

Page 6 of 13

8-2 The proponent’s contribution to the initiative identified in condition 8-1 shall be paid biennially, the first payment due on 31 May in the second year following the commencement of ground disturbance. The amount of funding will be made on the following basis and in accordance with the approved Impact Reconciliation Procedure required by condition 8-3: (1) $750 AUD (excluding GST) per hectare of ‘good to excellent’ condition

native vegetation cleared within the mine development envelope delineated in Figure 1 within the Hamersley IBRA subregion; and

(2) $750 AUD (excluding GST) per hectare of ‘good to excellent’ condition native vegetation cleared for “haul road and related infrastructure” within the haul road development envelope delineated in Figure 2 within the Hamersley IBRA subregion.

8-3 Prior to ground-disturbing activities, the proponent shall prepare an Impact

Reconciliation Procedure to the satisfaction of the CEO. 8-4 The Impact Reconciliation Procedure required pursuant to condition 8-3 shall:

(1) include a methodology to identify clearing of ‘good to excellent’ condition native vegetation in the Pilbara bioregion;

(2) include a methodology for calculating the amount of clearing undertaken during each biennial time period;

(3) include a methodology for calculating the amount of temporary vegetation clearing for the haul road and related infrastructure that has commenced rehabilitation within twelve months of final commissioning of the haul road;

(4) state the biennial time period commences on the 1 March prior to commencing ground disturbance and the due date for submitting the results of the Procedure for approval of the CEO as 31 March following the end of the first biennial period; and

(5) identify that any areas cleared within the haul road development envelope (Figure 2) in the Pilbara bioregion that have not commenced rehabilitation within 12 months of final commissioning of the haul road are to be considered part of the “haul road and related infrastructure” and must be included in the area subject to condition 8-2.

8-5 The real value of contributions described in condition 8-2 will be maintained

through indexation to the Perth Consumer Price Index (CPI), with the first adjustment to be applied to the first contribution.

[Signed 11 February 2014] Albert Jacob MLA MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT; HERITAGE

Page 7 of 13

Schedule 1 Table 1: Summary of the Proposal Proposal Title Buckland Project

Short Description The proposal is to develop and operate an iron ore mine, processing facilities and supporting infrastructure, 45 km south-southeast of Pannawonica in the Shire of Ashburton, and a 176 km haul road from the mine site to the customer delivery point near Cape Preston.

Table 2: Location and authorised extent of physical and operational elements

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Element Location Authorised Extent

Mine pits and infrastructure area

Figure 1 Clearing of not more than 650 ha of vegetation within the 1,600 ha mine development envelope.

Haul road Figure 2 Stage 1: mine area to North West Coastal Highway Stage 2: North West Coastal Highway to Customer Delivery Point

Clearing not more than 1,400 ha vegetation within a 5,800 ha haul road development envelope

Disposal of surplus dewater

Figure 1 Dewater disposal through the water use hierarchy: 1. Use on site; 2. Subsurface reinjection; and 3. Controlled discharge to surface

drainage at multiple discharge locations as a contingency measure only. Duration of surface discharge is not to exceed three months at any one time.

Backfilling of mine pits

Figure 1 Progressive backfilling of mine voids so that the final surface levels are at a higher elevation than the pre-mining groundwater levels.

Page 8 of 13

Table 3: Abbreviations Abbreviation Term

ha hectares

km kilometres

GST Goods and Services Tax Figures (attached) Figure 1 Development envelope for mine area Figure 2 Development envelope for haul road corridor

Page 9 of 13

Figure 1: Development envelope for mine area

Page 10 of 13

Figure 2: Development envelope for haul road corridor

Page 11 of 13

Schedule 2 Term or Phrase

Definition

CEO The Chief Executive Officer of the Department of the Public Service of the State responsible for the administration of section 48 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986, or his delegate.



ANZECC Guidelines

Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand 2000, Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters

Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2011

National Water Quality Management Strategy, Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2011 (and its updates). Prepared by the National Health and Medical Research Council, January 2011.

IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia

Page 12 of 13

Schedule 3 BUCKLAND PROJECT Coordinates that define the Development Envelopes Coordinates defining the Development Envelopes as shown in Figure 1 and 2 of the Ministerial statement are held by the Office of the EPA, dated 6 November 2013.

Page 13 of 13

Notes The following notes are provided for information and do not form a part of the implementation conditions of the Statement:

• The proponent for the time being nominated by the Minister for Environment under section 38(6) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 is responsible for the implementation of the proposal unless and until that nomination has been revoked and another person is nominated.

• If the person nominated by the Minister, ceases to have responsibility for the proposal, that person is required to provide written notice to the Environmental Protection Authority of its intention to relinquish responsibility for the proposal and the name of the person to whom responsibility for the proposal will pass or has passed. The Minister for Environment may revoke a nomination made under section 38(6) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and nominate another person.

• To initiate a change of proponent, the nominated proponent and proposed proponent are required to complete and submit Post Assessment Form 1 – Application to Change Nominated Proponent.

• The General Manager of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority was the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of the Public Service of the State responsible for the administration of section 48 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 at the time the Statement was signed by the Minister for Environment.

ATTACHMENT 2: EPBC ACT ASSESSMENT DECISION

Bungaroo South Pty Ltd

Works Approval W5666/2014/1

Amendment / Licence to Operate

Application Category 5

BC Pilbara Iron Ore Pty Ltd

W5699/2014/1 Amendment / LTO Cat 5 Application

| Page 3 of 37

Version Date Description Author Checked Approved

A 1 June 2017 W5699/2014/1 Amendment Cat 5 L. Purves M. Klvac

0 12 June 2017 W5699/2014/1 Amendment Cat 5 L. Purves M. Klvac M. Klvac



| Page 4 of 37

Synopsis

This document presents information required for:

An amendment to Works Approval W5699/2014/1, Category 5 (the addition of a mobile

Crushing and Screening Plant with a capacity of 1 million tonnes per annum); and

The application for a Licence to Operate the above-mentioned Crushing and Screening plant.

This document has been prepared for submission to the Department of Environment Regulation.



| Page 5 of 37

Table of Contents

1 PREMISE DETAILS ..................................................................................................................... IX

1.1 Applicant / Occupier Details ..................................................................................................... ix

2 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1

2.1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................ 1

3 PREMISES DETAILS ................................................................................................................... 4

3.1 Legal Land Description .............................................................................................................. 4

3.2 Location ....................................................................................................................................... 4

3.3 Prescribed Premise Category / Coordinates ............................................................................ 4

4 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................... 6

5 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ............................................................................................. 6

6 PRESCRIBED PREMISES CATEGORY ...................................................................................... 8

6.1 Current DER Licences/Registrations/Works Approvals ......................................................... 8

6.2 Documents associated with this proposal ............................................................................... 8

6.3 Other Relevant Licences/Permits .............................................................................................. 9

6.3.1 Office of the EPA .............................................................................................................. 9

6.3.2 Department of the Environment and Energy .................................................................... 9

6.3.3 Department of Water ...................................................................................................... 10

6.3.4 Department of Mines and Petroleum.............................................................................. 10

6.3.5 Local Government .......................................................................................................... 10

6.3.6 Department of Health ..................................................................................................... 11

7 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... 12

7.1 Approved Buckland Project Description ................................................................................ 12

7.2 Project Description – Mobile Crushing and Screening Plant ............................................... 13

7.2.2 Competency of the Operator .......................................................................................... 14

7.3 Water supply .............................................................................................................................. 15

7.4 Power supply ............................................................................................................................. 15

7.5 Sensitive Receptors / Separation Distances .......................................................................... 15

7.6 Commissioning ......................................................................................................................... 16

8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................... 17

8.1 Clearing of Native Vegetation .................................................................................................. 17

8.1.1 Ground Disturbance / Topsoil Management .................................................................. 17

8.2 Emissions .................................................................................................................................. 17

8.2.1 Air and Gaseous emissions ............................................................................................ 17

8.2.2 Dust Emissions ............................................................................................................... 17

8.2.3 Odour Emissions ............................................................................................................ 18

8.2.4 Noise Emissions ............................................................................................................. 18

8.2.5 Light Emissions .............................................................................................................. 19

8.3 Discharges to Water.................................................................................................................. 19



| Page 6 of 37

8.3.1 Surface and Groundwater Management ........................................................................ 19

8.4 Discharges to Land ................................................................................................................... 20

8.5 Solid and Liquid Waste Management ...................................................................................... 20

8.6 Hydrocarbon/Chemical Storage .............................................................................................. 20

8.7 Contaminated Sites ................................................................................................................... 21

8.8 Other Emissions and Discharges ............................................................................................ 21

9 INCIDENT RESPONSE .............................................................................................................. 22

9.1 Spill Response ........................................................................................................................... 22

9.2 Incident Response .................................................................................................................... 22

9.3 Complaints ................................................................................................................................. 23

10 REHABILITATION AND CLOSURE .......................................................................................... 24

11 COST OF PROJECT .................................................................................................................. 25

12 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS ............................................................................................... 26

1 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 28

Table 1 Definitions Table ........................................................................................................................ vii

Table 2 Current approved, WAA and LTO capacities .............................................................................. 2

Table 3: Proposed Prescribed Activities .................................................................................................. 8

Table 4: Supporting information ............................................................................................................. 9

Table 5: Current Groundwater Licences ................................................................................................ 10

Table 6: Cost of Facilities ....................................................................................................................... 25

Table 7 Summary of management commitments ................................................................................. 27

Figure 1 Location of the Buckland Project and Bungaroo South mine ................................................... 3

Figure 2: W5699/2014/1 Amendment/Licence to Operate Application ................................................ 5

Figure 3 Typical C&SP Layout ................................................................................................................ 13

Figure 4 Process flow chart for a typical C&S circuit, as per the proposed Buckland works ................ 14



| Page 7 of 37

ABBREVIATIONS

Table 1 Definitions Table

Abbreviation Definition

AH Act Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972

API Assess on Proponent Information

ARRP Act Agriculture and Related Resources Protection Act 1976

BAM Act Biosecurity and Agricultural Management Act 2007

BCWSB Buckland Coastal Water Supply Borefield

C&SP Crushing and Screening Plant

DAA Department of Aboriginal Affairs

DER Department of Environment Regulation

DoH Department of Health

DotEE Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Energy (formerly the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities)

DoW Department of Water

DPaW Department of Parks and Wildlife



EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

IOH Iron Ore Holdings Pty Ltd

LGA Local Government Authority

mbgl Metres below ground level

MRWA Main Roads WA

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet

Mtpa Mega-tonnes per annum (1 Mega-tonne = 1 million tonnes)

OEPA Office of the Environmental Protection Authority

OPF Ore Processing Facility

PDWSA Public Drinking Water Supply Area

WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant



| Page 9 of 37

Occupier Details

1 PREMISE DETAILS

1.1 Applicant / Occupier Details

The occupier (Company) of the land subject to this Works Approval application amendment / Licence

to Operate application is:

Bungaroo South Pty Ltd

ACN: 152 574 528

Level 1, 1 Altona Street

West Perth, Western Australia.

Bungaroo South Pty Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of BC Pilbara Iron Ore Pty Ltd (CAN 137 224

849).

The contact person for this Works Approval amendment / Licence to Operate application is:

Mr Les Purves

Senior Environmental Advisor

BC Iron Ltd

Phone: +61 8 63113422

Mobile: 0415680491

Fax: +61 8 6311 3449

Email: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



| Page 1 of 37

2 INTRODUCTION

The Buckland Project (the Project) is a proposed iron ore operation located in the West Pilbara region

of Western Australia (WA) approximately 45 kilometres (km) south-southeast of Pannawonica (See

Figure 1). The Project involves mining iron ore from three deposits, processing the ore on site and

transporting the iron ore product by road to the customer delivery point at Cape Preston East (note:

Cape Preston East does not form part of the Project). The Project incorporates all necessary mine

infrastructure (pits, processing plant, waste disposal and the like) and transport infrastructure (haul

roads) to allow for operations to progress.

The expected mine life is 15 years and will involve disturbance of up to 2,050 hectares (ha) for the mine

area and haul road.

The Buckland Project has undergone a full impact assessment process under Part IV of the

Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) and the Mining Act 1978. For further information on all

approvals applicable to the Project, please refer to Section 3.3 Other Approvals/ Permits.

Additionally, the Project required approvals pursuant to Part V of the EP Act in terms of the Prescribed

Activities to be undertaken. Works Approvals (WA) for the following activities have been granted:

The Buckland Project Bungaroo South iron ore mine (including the processing operations,

wastewater treatment plant and dewatering activities; W5699/2014/1); and

The Buckland Project haul road (crushing and screening W5689/2014/1).

2.1 Purpose

The purpose of this document is to amend W5699/2014/1 and to apply for a Licence to Operate (LTO)

for the respective WA amendment (WAA). This document therefore provides the necessary information

to support:

1. An application for an amendment to Category 5 of Works Approval W5699/2014/1; namely to

increase the design capacity from 8 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) to 9Mtpa (dry capacity).

This increase will be undertaken by the addition of a mobile crushing and screening plant

(C&SP) with a 1Mtpa capacity. Please note that there will be no change to the approved 10Mtpa

wet capacity currently approved under W5699/2014/1; and

2. An application for a Licence to Operate, Category 5 for the above-mentioned WA amendment.

Please note that the licence being applied for will only be for the amended component of

W5699/2014/1 (the mobile C&SP) and not the existing components already approved under

W5699/2014/1 (i.e. not the current Category 5 Ore Processing Facility (OPF), Category 6 Mine

Dewatering infrastructure or the Category 54 Sewage Facility).



| Page 2 of 37

The WAA and LTO Category 5 capacity being applied for is outlined below in Table 2.

Table 2 Current approved, WAA and LTO capacities

Category Number

Category Description

Category production or design capacity

Approved premise production or design capacity

Amended capacity for Works Approval Amendment

Design capacity for licence to operate

05 Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore


8,000,000 tonnes per annual period (dry) 10,000,000 tonnes per annual period (wet)

9,000,000 tonnes per annual period (dry) 10,000,000 tonnes per annual period (wet) – No change

1,000,000 tonnes per annual period

06 Mine dewatering


4,500,000 tonnes per annual period

No change Not applied for

54 Sewage facility 100 cubic metres or more per day

135 cubic metres per day

No change Not applied for

As stated, the proposed C&SP is a mobile plant with a capacity of 1 Mtpa. The intent is to be able to

construct, operate and relocate the C&SP anywhere within the current prescribe premise boundary

(except locations in the creek floodplain and within 50 m of mesa edges), as approved in W5699/2014/1.

Refer to Figure 2 below and Section 4.2 ‘Mobile Crushing and Screening Plant’ for more details.

!

!(!

RED HILL CREEK

ROBE RIVER

FORTESCUE RIVER

!(! ±Figure 1:



| Page 4 of 37

3 PREMISES DETAILS

3.1 Legal Land Description

The proposed Project is located on Mining Lease 47/1464 (M47/1464) on Unallocated Crown Land.

3.2 Location

The Bungaroo South mine site is in the western Pilbara region of Western Australia, approximately 45

kilometres (km) south southeast of Pannawonica (Figure 1).

3.3 Prescribed Premise Category / Coordinates

The proposed locations of the mobile C&S plant are anywhere in the mine disturbance area (within the

prescribed premise boundary) except for locations in the creek floodplain or within 50 m of mesa edges.

Further information is provided in Figure 2 which also shows the C&SP proposed locations in respect

to the currently approved mine disturbance area and associated infrastructure.

´Figure 2: W5699/2014/1 Amendment/Licence to Operate Application

File : S:\GIS\02.BUCKLAND HILLS\Maps\BU-17005.mxd

Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50Projection: Transverse Mercator

Scale (A4):

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

Low GradeFines

L 47/681

DragonPit

West Pit

EastPit

East Pit

EastDumpEast

Dump

DragonDump

Bore 1

Bore 5Bore 6

M 47/1464-I

1

2

3

4567

8910

11121314

15 1617 18

1920

21

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 5475

6367

7m. N

63

64 64

65 65

66 66

67 67

68 68

69 69

70 70

71 71

0 1 20.5Kilometres

Buckland Project

Legend

!( Premise Boundary Points

Exploration Camp

Accommodation Camp

Buckland_Mine_Design

Mine Tenement Boundary

C&S Plant Locations

Mine Disturbance Area

Premise Boundary

Level 1, 15 Rheola StreetWest Perth WA 6005www.bciron.com.au

Point Easting Northing1 444934.779 7570964.3532 453714.55 7565499.1963 455271.918 7566675.4564 455275.909 7565264.8435 453555.702 7565259.8646 451835.487 7565254.7067 450115.347 7565249.3678 450109.517 7567094.2219 448389.096 7567088.68210 446668.674 7567082.96311 446666.392 7567759.18312 446240.36 7567651.59913 445996.181 7567702.25214 445722.458 7567862.10215 445721.024 7568289.35916 446083.479 7568361.27617 446328.697 7568606.49418 446663.765 7568537.87119 446662.449 7568927.81820 444941.896 7568921.90921 444935.472 7570766.664



| Page 6 of 37

4 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

For a full description of the existing environment please refer to Section 2.3 to 2.10 of the original

WA5699/2014/1 works approval application, Iron Ore Holdings Ltd - Bungaroo South Pty Ltd Works

Approval Application – Bungaroo South Mine (Ennovate, 2014) (Appendix A). This document provided

valuable information used in the environmental impact assessment of the Project; ratified as works

approval instrument W5699/2014/1.

5 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

For a description of the full Buckland Project stakeholder consultation please refer to Section 3 Stakeholder Consultation of the original WA5699/2014/1 works approval application, Iron Ore

Holdings Ltd - Bungaroo South Pty Ltd Works Approval Application – Bungaroo South Mine (Ennovate,

2014) (Appendix A).

BCP has undertaken the following stakeholder consultation in regards to the addition of the mobile

C&SP to the Project with the following stakeholders:

Stakeholder Discussion Outcome / Actions

Kuruma Marthudunera People Completed discussion with KM People CEO (Amanda Wheeler) regarding bulk sample rationale, outlining the slight change in process (namely the addition of mobile C&SP and timing of said works). No objections were raised.

None

Shire of Ashburton General discussion outlining the bulk sample rationale and implementation activities. A discussion was had with the Shire’s Nathan Benson regarding the proposed bulk sample activities. No objections were raised.

None

Department of Environment Regulation

Discussion held regarding approvals required for additional C&SP to be bought to site. Discussion regarding amending current works approval and applying for Licence to Operate (LTO)

BCP to apply to amend works approval W5699/2014/1 and apply for LTO

Department of Mines and Petroleum;

Discussion outlining the intent to utilise a mobile C&SP within the approved mining proposal footprint. Minor amendment to be submitted. No requirement to change footprint purpose or report each time the C&SP is relocated. Discussion held regarding other stakeholder engagement; main concern was DER.BCP stated that amendments to works approvals

BCP to submit a minor amendment to mining proposal REG ID: 47739 outlining proposed change and management measures to be implemented.



| Page 7 of 37

and LTO would be sought

Department of Water Discussion held outlining addition of C&SP and requirement to haul bulk sample to market. DoW Kevin Hopkinson advised that an amendment to the water extraction licences (i.e. 5C licences) will be required. No further issues were raised

BCP are in the process of submitting a 5C licence amendment.

Department of State Development Discussion held outlining addition of C&SP and requirement to haul bulk sample to market. No issues were raised.

None

Main Roads WA Discussion held outlining addition of C&SP and requirement to haul bulk sample to market along public roads (i.e. Pannawonica, North West Coastal Hwy) and Onslow Road. MRWA advised that road haulage vehicles will require the appropriate authorisations, accreditations and permits.

BCI will ensure contractor has appropriate authorisations, accreditations and permits.

Rio Tinto Iron Ore Pty Ltd (RTIO). Discussion held outlining addition of C&SP and requirement to haul bulk sample to market.

BCI met with Rio Tinto on 13 June 2017 to discuss at length access agreement required to transport ore through the Bungaroo Valley (area of land where Rio Tinto hold State Agreement tenure).

No objections or concerns were raised by any of the above stakeholders, providing the appropriate

approvals are granted. Please refer to Section 6.3 Other Relevant Licences/Permits for more

information on additional approvals.



| Page 8 of 37

6 PRESCRIBED PREMISES CATEGORY

The proposed works of this WAA / LTO application are Prescribed activities pursuant to Part V of the

EP Act and described within Schedule 1 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987, as per

Table 3.

Table 3: Proposed Prescribed Activities

Activity Category Number

Description of Category Production or Design Capacity

Ore Processing Facility

5 Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore: premises on which — metallic or non-metallic ore is crushed, ground, milled or otherwise processed; tailings from metallic or non-metallic ore are reprocessed; or tailings or residue from metallic or non-metallic ore are discharged into a containment cell or dam.


The EP Act requires that, given the nature and size of the activities described above, they hold:

A Works Approval for the construction of the facilities; and

A Licence for their operation.

A Works Approval provides information for the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) to assess

the environmental acceptability of a proposal against standards and policies. WAs and LTOs contain

conditions to ensure that premises operate in an environmentally acceptable manner and that the works

themselves and ongoing operation activities do not cause unacceptable environmental impacts. The

types of conditions that can be applied to a works approval are detailed under Section 62A of the EP

Act.

6.1 Current DER Licences/Registrations/Works Approvals

Current DER instruments approved for the Project are:

The Buckland Project Bungaroo South iron ore mine (including the processing operations,

wastewater treatment plant and dewatering activities; W5699/2014/1); and

The Buckland Project haul road (crushing and screening W5689/2014/1).

6.2 Documents associated with this proposal As described in Section 2, The Buckland Project has been assessed and approved under Part IV of

the EP Act. The following documents arising from that process are outlined in Table 4 and are available

on request.



| Page 9 of 37

Table 4: Supporting information

Factor Study area Study effort

Vegetation Mine area Two-season, Level 2 survey


Desktop GDE assessment

Haul Road – All Level 1 review


Two -season, Level 2 survey

Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna





Terrestrial Short-Range Endemic Invertebrate Fauna

Mine area Habitat assessments; targeted surveys



Subterranean Fauna

Mine area Desktop reviews; targeted surveys; habitat assessment

Soils and Landforms

Mine area Desktop review; site inspection

AMD Risk Mine area Static testing of drill samples, Leachate, waste fines and process liquor

Water Resources Mine area Desktop review; field tests; groundwater model; catchment model; particle transport model

Environmental Assessments

Mine area and Haul Road

Assessment on Proponent Information

6.3 Other Relevant Licences/Permits

6.3.1 Office of the EPA The Buckland Project was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). The project level

of assessment was set at Assess on Proponent Information (API). The EPA released their report on 4

December 2013 and the subsequent Ministerial Statement 960 was published on 12 February 2014.

Ministerial Statement 960 contains a range of legally-binding conditions covering the mining operations.

6.3.2 Department of the Environment and Energy

The proposal was also referred to the Australian Government Department of Sustainability,

Environment, Water, Population and Communities (now Department of the Environment and Energy)

in May 2013 pursuant to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC

Act). On 19 July 2013, the delegate of the Commonwealth Minister for Environment determined that

the proposed action was not a controlled action provided specific measures, as identified in the decision,

were taken to avoid significant impacts on the Northern Quoll.



| Page 10 of 37

6.3.3 Department of Water Four groundwater abstraction licences have been granted for the project area as outlined in Table 5. These licences allow the taking of water for dust suppression, earthworks, construction, exploratory

drilling operations, general campsite use, geotechnical investigation, mineral exploration and potable

water supply.

Table 5: Current Groundwater Licences

Licence Aquifer Annual Allocation Kilolitres (kL)

Licence Expiry

GWL158473(5) Hamersley – Fortescue 45,000 13 November 2022

GWL164672(4) Hamersley – Fractured Rock

45,000 30 October 2017

GWL171847(2) Wittenoom – Wittenoom 45,000 13 November 2022

GWL177962(1) Hamersley – Fractured Rock

212,000 4 September 2018

6.3.4 Department of Mines and Petroleum

As noted earlier in this documentation, the proposed Buckland mining operations and associated

infrastructure require a Mining Proposal (MP) and Mine Closure Plan (MCP) to be granted by the

Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP). A full Mining Act 1978 assessment of the project was

undertaken and the Project was approved on 9 September 2016; ratified as MP and MCP REG ID:

47739. Refer to Appendix B for a copy of the MP and MCP approval.

The DMP will require an amendment to MP REG ID 47739 (Letter of Intent) to allow for the addition of

the mobile C&SP. This is currently under development and approval will be gained, prior to mobilisation

to site.

A Storage of Dangerous Goods Licence (DGL) for fuel storage onsite will also be required. Applications

for an applicable DGL will be applied for prior to mobilisation to site.


All applicable Local Government approvals required will be obtained from the Shire of Ashburton prior

to commencement of construction.

The Project and the proposed operations outlined in this application will be constructed and operated

in accordance with approvals issued under the Mining Act 1978. As such, this infrastructure will not be

subject to the Planning and Development Act 2005 or any other local government planning by-laws.

BCP has continued to liaise with Shire if Ashburton with regards to construction and operation of the

haul road and mine.



| Page 11 of 37

6.3.6 Department of Health Working endorsements will be required from the Department of Health for Potable water and a small

sewage facility (15kL/d capacity). These will be progressed prior to mobilisation to site.

The workforce required for construction and operations of the mobile C&SP will be accommodated at

an existing Bungaroo South Exploration Camp, which is an existing fly camp and is of insufficient size

to require any DER Part V approvals.



| Page 12 of 37

7 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION

7.1 Approved Buckland Project Description

The three Buckland iron ore deposits are:

Bungaroo South West – mining above and below water table in a single pit.

Bungaroo South East – mining above and below water table in two separate pits.

Dragon – mining above water table only in a single pit.

The approved mine will consist of:

The four pits and associated flood-protection bunding (apart from Dragon)

Ore processing facilities

Groundwater dewatering and disposal systems

Waste rock dumps

Waste fines storage facilities

Internal roads, accommodation village and supporting infrastructure.

It is expected to have an operational life of approximately 15 years.

The Project is located within the Bungaroo Creek Water Reserve, which is a Priority 1 public drinking

water supply area (PDWSA). The disposal of surplus mine dewater and possible seepage or spillage

of contaminants from waste storage and operational areas has the potential to impact the quality of

surface and groundwater downstream, specifically the Bungaroo Creek Water Supply Borefield

(BCWSB, located 19 km downstream of the Project area (EPA 2013). The Bungaroo Creek Water

Reserve downstream of the Buckland Project, including the BCWSB, falls within areas covered by the

Iron Ore (Robe River) Agreement Act 1964, namely Mineral Lease 248 SA, which is held by Robe River

Limited, a subsidiary of RTIO.

By the end of operations, waste fines storage facilities and most the waste rock associated with the two

Bungaroo South deposits will have been removed and used to backfill the below water table mining

voids, to prevent the formation of permanent pit lakes. This measure, as well as the development of

management plans on the advice of the Department of Water (DoW) and in consultation with RTIO, is

part of an integrated approach to ensuring the BCWSB and the water quality in the PDWSA is not

unduly impacted by the Project.

All disturbed areas will be rehabilitated in accordance with standard practices, statutory requirements

issued by DMP and the Minister for the Environment. These requirements are reflected in the approved

MCP. The approved MCP is largely indicative at this early stage of the project’s life so will be routinely

revised as the project progresses.



| Page 13 of 37

7.2 Project Description – Mobile Crushing and Screening Plant

Whilst the actual C&SP to be utilised is yet to be selected, the general principles of crushing and

screening utilising mobile equipment will be consistent. The process will generally be as follows:

Topsoil will be removed and stockpiled for rehabilitation activities;

Raw materials are excavated and fed into the hopper of a vibrating feeder. This moves the

materials to the jaw crusher;

The resulting materials are then sent via a conveyor to a secondary crushing process

before being conveyed to a vibrating screen for separating; and

After separating to appropriate sizes for final product (12mm) and stockpiling, materials not

meeting final specifications will be returned for re-crushing.

A typical mobile crushing and screening plant is shown in Figure 3 below and a typical C&SP process

schematic is presented in Figure 4.

Figure 3 Typical C&SP Layout



| Page 14 of 37

Figure 4 Process flow chart for a typical C&S circuit, as per the proposed Buckland works

7.2.1.1 Product stockpiling

The product from the mobile C&SP will either be loaded straight onto long haul road trains via the use

of a Front-End Loader (FEL) for stockpiling at the main stockpile area adjacent to the OPF (approved

under W5699/2014/1) or sent direct to market as Direct Shipped Ore (DSO). Applicable management

measures for stockpiles during operations will be as follows:

Material will be stockpiled in a designated stockpiling area;

Drainage from the site will be managed to prevent movement of sediment from erosion into the

surrounding environment;

Stockpiles, if required, will be stabilised to prevent erosion from wind or water;

Site surfaces will be shaped to allow for natural drainage and to avoid pooling or ponding;

Water diversion bunds or levees will be established around minor storage areas to prevent the

cross-contamination of clean water; and

Existing natural drainage paths and channels will not be unnecessarily blocked or restricted.

7.2.2 Competency of the Operator

Extraction, crushing and screening of materials will be contracted out to competent contractor through

a public tender process. Under the contract, the contractor is required to have experience in similar

sized and larger operations, and must hold similar works approvals and licences. All plant and

machinery will be supplied by the potential contractor.



| Page 15 of 37

7.3 Water supply

Bungaroo South Pty Ltd (a subsidiary of BCP) holds GWL179197(1) issued under the Rights in Water

and Irrigation Act 1914 (RIWI Act). This licence permits abstraction of 4000 kL per annum from the

fractured rock aquifer on M47/1464 for the purposes of exploration drilling operations, geotechnical

investigation purposes, mineral exploration activities and mining camp purposes. The time of this

document submission, BCP will apply to increase the water entitlement to 10,000 kl per annum and add

in mining operation to its purpose.

An additional water supply, either from the existing source or a new source, will be required when the

full OPF (currently approved under W5699/2014/) is bought on line. Hydrogeological investigations will

be undertaken and an amended licence or a new licence under the RIWI Act will be applied for, when

required.

7.4 Power supply

Power for the existing crushing and screening operations will be produced by diesel-powered

generators with an overall capacity of approximately 1.3 MW.

7.5 Sensitive Receptors / Separation Distances

No Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) or Priority Ecological Communities (PECs) occur

within, or adjacent to the Buckland survey area. The only potential sensitive receptor within the vicinity

of the Project is the accommodation facilities for the Project construction and operational employees

and contractors.

During construction and initial operations of the C&SP, employees and contractors will be

accommodated in the exploration fly camp (See Figure 2 and Section 6.3.6). There will always be a

minimum 700m separation distance from the C&SP and any sensitive receptor. This separation

distance was assessed and approved with the granting of W5699/2014/1.

The EPA Guidance Statement 3. Separation Distances between Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses

(EPA 2005) doesn’t delineate a separation distance for mine site C&S activities, it does however state

that ‘Heavy Industrial Sites proposals for ‘greenfield” sites would be determined on a case by case

basis. As the Project already has full EPA, DMP and DER approval it is deemed that standard

management practices for the C&SP (along with the 700m minimum separation distance) will ensure

that the mobile C&SP proposed locations will not impact sensitive receptors within the Project locality,

i.e. any accommodation facilities.

For future operations (i.e. when the full Project comes on line), all employees and contractors for the

Project will be accommodated; approximately 1.5km from the nearest C&S activity (See Figure 2).



| Page 16 of 37

7.6 Commissioning

It is requested that commissioning of the plant be undertaken under the Works Approval and prior to

submission of the required Compliance Document and granting of a Licence to enable various

components to be trialled and tested. This will enable testing of equipment whilst the licence is being

assessed.

Commissioning will consist of two stages, pre-commissioning and load commissioning and is expected

to take a maximum of three month. Pre-commissioning will consist of the electrical and mechanical

testing of the equipment. This will involve running or live testing all items of equipment to confirm that

they operate as per their intended function.

The system will then go through the load commissioning stage; namely the plant will be operated in

automatic mode (with ore) to test and confirm all control functions including dust suppressant systems

(sprayers etc.) are working correctly.



| Page 17 of 37

8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

All works associated with the construction and operations of the proposed prescribed premises outlined

within this document will be undertaken to comply with all internal plans and procedures and WA and

LTO conditions and commitments. Therefore, all management measures outlined in this section will

relate directly to the WAA and the ongoing LTO.

The key issues for consideration for the proposed mobile C&S plant as they relate to construction and

ongoing operations are outlined in the following sections.

8.1 Clearing of Native Vegetation

Native vegetation clearing required will be undertaken in accordance with the approval granted by the

Minister for the Environment under Part IV of the EP Act through Ministerial Statement 960. The only

clearing that is required for the Prescribed activity will be in relation to the set-up of each location as the

C&SP is moved to a new location within the prescribed premise. Such clearing activities will be

minimised as far as practicable and will be limited to those areas covered by MS960 and the approved

mining proposal footprint.

8.1.1 Ground Disturbance / Topsoil Management

The work consists of clearing, demolition, and the management of site vegetation in areas where the

mobile C&SP will be installed. Site clearing work will be conducted in accordance with internal Ground

Disturbance Permits procedures for clearing activities. Areas to be disturbed shall be surveyed,

pegged, and inspected and approved by BCP prior to clearing.

All topsoil removal shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant approvals. Topsoil shall be

removed and stripped to a minimum depth of 100mm. Topsoil excavated will be stored in a designated,

permanent stockpile location as per Mining Proposal approvals.

8.2 Emissions

8.2.1 Air and Gaseous emissions

Apart from dust, there will be no air emissions from the mobile C&S plant. BCP will report emissions

(as required) under the NPI and NGERS programs.

8.2.2 Dust Emissions

Minor earthwork activities have the potential to generate dust during the construction of the mobile C&S

plant. Dust generation will be managed by minimisation of ground clearing and dust suppression



| Page 18 of 37

through the application of water during earthworks. Water will be sourced from existing licensed

sources.

Crushing and screening operations have the potential to produce significant dust levels. The C&SP will

be fitted with fogging and surface wetting sprays at material transfer points on conveyors, bins, crushers

and screens.

The C&SP will also be situated a minimum of 700m away from the accommodation camp to further

minimise potential dust impacts. Based on the configuration of the operations, there are no significant

environmental receptors that are likely to be affected by any dust that is generated through the C&SP

activities.

Water trucks will also be used on open areas and roads to suppress dust, if required.

A full dust monitoring program is expected to be implemented when the full OPF is licenced. Until then

visual dust monitoring will be used to confirm that existing controls are effective or as a basis for

implementing corrective action.

8.2.3 Odour Emissions

The mobile C&S plant will not emit any odour.

8.2.4 Noise Emissions

Additional crushing and screening activities, and power generation, will produce additional noise levels.

The C&SP has the potential to generate noise emissions through mechanical movement of material on

the conveyors, and the crushing and screening of the material. Conveyors will be regularly maintained

to ensure rollers are well lubricated to minimise friction. Crushing and screening will be undertaken in

housings which will attenuate noise. Given that there are no sensitive receptors in proximity to the

C&SP (<700m), noise is not expected to be an issue.

BCP understands that the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 apply. BCP will:

Use equipment, machines and vehicles that would be the quietest, reasonably available,

consistent with operational requirements that would be routinely maintained to ensure the

effectiveness of noise suppression systems and equipment.

Inform all personnel (including contractors) through site inductions of their responsibilities

and the importance of managing noise levels during the construction phase and ongoing

operations.

All construction and operations will be expected to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise)

Regulations 1997 (noting that Clause 13 of the Regulations covers construction noise and how it is

managed through the Regulations).



| Page 19 of 37

8.2.5 Light Emissions

Additional lighting will be required to service the mobile C&SP. Given the distance to the nearest

sensitive receptor, nuisance light is not expected to be an issue. There is potentially some impact to

local fauna from additional light emissions.

Managing impacts of light overspill on fauna during construction and operations will be conducted

through the implementation of the following management strategies:

All external lighting will be targeted where possible, using shields and directional lighting to

minimise light spill beyond the required work area; and

External lighting will use, where possible, red or low pressure sodium lights. Bright white

lights such as mercury vapour, metal halide or florescent will be avoided where possible.

The design of these systems will be such that light spill to the surrounding environment will be minimised

as far as practicable.

8.3 Discharges to Water

There will be no discharges to water from the C&SP. The only output from the C&SP is dry crushed

ore suitable for direct shipping which will be stockpiled for transport to the customer.

8.3.1 Surface and Groundwater Management

The main rationale for managing surface water and groundwater is to prevent impacts on surface and

groundwater quality and minimise erosion. The only discharge occurring from the proposal is sediment

in surface water. There are no anticipated significant changes to these discharges because of the

proposal. No discharges with the potential to impact groundwater are anticipated.

Management measures will include:

Any evidence of erosion, disturbance to natural drainage flow or impact on vegetation must be

reported to the Site Supervisor and be remediated as required;

Drainage from the site will be managed to prevent movement of sediment from erosion into the

surrounding environment;

Site surfaces will be shaped to allow for natural drainage and to avoid pooling or ponding on

site;

All runoff water from disturbed areas will be collected in retention bunds, sufficient to

accommodate the maximum recorded rainfall intensity over a 24-hour period (12 mm/hr;

exceeds DoW recommendation in WQPN15).

Bunds should allow adequate retention time to reduce suspended sediment load prior to

discharge and capacity will be maintained through routine cleaning;



| Page 20 of 37

Spill response procedures will be prepared and implemented to ensure spill containment

measures are in place and available for clean-up, if required. See Section 9 Incident Response;

Minimise exposed soil working surfaces or protect them from stormwater erosion; and

Crushed material is stockpiled away from drainage paths and covered to prevent erosion

8.4 Discharges to Land

There will be no discharges to land from the C&SP. The only output from the C&SP is dry crushed ore

suitable for direct shipping which will be stockpiled for transport to the customer.

8.5 Solid and Liquid Waste Management Solid and liquid wastes generated from construction and ongoing operations may include:

Inert wastes such as glass, paper, cardboard, wood, bricks, concrete, plastics, scrap metal,

obsolete or expired equipment (e.g. transformers, pumps and pipes);

Domestic waste including the generation of putrescibles (e.g. kitchen scraps), non-

recyclable packaging and non-hazardous liquids;

Sewage and wastewater from toilets and onsite ablutions; and

Hydrocarbon waste generated from fuel spills.

BCP has an obligation to manage waste disposal in accordance with the Environmental Protection

Regulations 1987 and the Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004. These

regulations govern the general control of pollution and outline obligations regarding the transportation

and disposal of ‘controlled’ wastes.

BCP will implement the following management measures in regards to waste storage and disposal:

Disposing of putrescible and inert waste to an appropriately licensed facility (off site),

Collecting and treating ablution effluent prior to removal from site by approved controlled

waste carrier; and

Maintaining and servicing equipment regularly.

8.6 Hydrocarbon/Chemical Storage

The design and construction of tanks, pipes and bunding will comply with all relevant regulations under

the Dangerous Goods Act 2004 (WA) to prevent and/or manage spills. Hydrocarbons and chemicals

will be stored in bunded areas. The bund will be constructed in an impervious material to comply with

Australian Standard (AS) 1940 – 2004 ‘The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible

Liquids’ with a minimum retention capacity of 110%. Bunded areas will be regularly maintained by



| Page 21 of 37

inspecting the integrity of the bund, regularly cleaning out of the bund and checking that any valves are

sealed and kept in the closed position;

The following measures are proposed to be implemented to manage and mitigate potential issues

associated with hydrocarbon and chemicals handling during construction and operations at the C&SP:

Separation of hydrocarbon materials from other facilities and people, segregation from

stored dangerous goods, placarding, providing firefighting equipment at hydrocarbon and

chemicals storage and handling areas.

Vehicles will be refuelled by a mobile fuel truck utilising drip trays;

The diesel fuel will be pumped and not gravity fed into vehicles/generators and the pump

will be installed with a shut off device, so that the pump can be shut off in case of an

emergency. The shut off device will be easily accessible and clearly identified;

The C&SP area will be equipped with spill kits and equipment that will be regularly

monitored and maintained. The kit will include sufficient quantities absorbent materials,

equipment for recovering spilled materials, containers for recovered materials and personal

protective equipment;

In the case that a spill occurs, it will be reported immediately to the Site Manager and the

area around the spill will be isolated and mopped up using the spill response kit and

equipment;

The waste from the spill will be stored separately and isolated, until the spill waste is

collected and disposed by a licensed contractor; and

All site personnel will be made aware of the hydrocarbon management strategies through

training at inductions and ‘tool-box’ meetings.

8.7 Contaminated Sites

No known contaminated sites exist within the proposed premise boundary. The works proposed are

also unlikely to give rise to any contamination given the safeguards proposed in this document.

8.8 Other Emissions and Discharges

There are no further anticipated impacts to groundwater, soil hygiene, visual impact, flora and fauna as

the result of the implementation of this amendment to works approval W5699/2014/1 and ongoing

operations. No increase in the risk of incidents which may cause harm to the environment (or personnel)

is anticipated to occur because of the installation and operation of the mobile C&SP that have not been

considered across the proposed larger crushing operations to be undertaken at the Project as outlined

and assessed in W5699/2014/1.



| Page 22 of 37

All management of emissions and discharges will be considered in line with the surrounding receiving

environment and implemented in line with approval guidelines and associated industry best practice.

9 INCIDENT RESPONSE

9.1 Spill Response

The Buckland Project will be equipped with spill kits and spill response equipment that will be regularly

maintained. The kits include absorbent materials, equipment for recovering spilled materials, containers

for recovered materials and personal protective equipment. In the event of a fuel or chemical spill, the

spill will be contained and the source will be isolated and recovered immediately using absorbent

materials, which will then be placed in disposable drums or containers onsite.

Any contaminated soil or absorbent material resulting from a fuel or chemical spill will be removed by a

licensed contractor to an authorised waste disposal site. Where necessary, validation sampling will be

undertaken to verify that all contaminated soil has been removed. All significant spills (i.e. greater than

500 L) will be reported to the DER as soon as practicable.

All site personnel will be trained in the site’s procedure to follow in the event of a hydrocarbon spill

9.2 Incident Response

If a potential pollution incident occurs (e.g. hydrocarbons spill), the Site Manager will be notified, the

activity causing the problem will cease and an investigation will be initiated immediately. The following

corrective action will be taken as soon as practicable:

Recording of the date, time and reason for the incident;

Estimation of the period over which the incident occurred;

Determination of the extent of the emissions or discharges over that period and potential

or known environmental consequences;

Establishment and implementation of corrective action taken or planned to mitigate adverse

environmental consequences; and

Establishment of a corrective action to prevent a recurrence of the incident.

The Site Manager will advise DER within 24 hours of becoming aware of an incident which may have

resulted in emissions which exceeded licence limits. Once the incident has been investigated, the Site

Manager will advise DER in writing of the status of corrective actions implemented to address the

problem.



| Page 23 of 37

9.3 Complaints

The Buckland Project will record any complaints in the Registered Manager’s Mine Record Book. The

Mine Record Book is a requirement under the Mining Act 1978. If a complaint is received, it is most

likely to be from an adjoining landholder, either the pastoralist from Yallen Station or another lease

holder or mine operator. Records of any correspondence and dealing with the complainant will be

maintained.

Should a complaint be received, the Site Manager will contact any complainants that have concerns

related to the environmental issues and determine the nature of the issue. The Site Manager will take

steps to ensure that any identified impacts are addressed. If the issue relates to matters covered by the

licence issued under Part V of the EP Act, the Site Manager will advise the DER within 24 hours of

becoming aware of a valid complaint, and advise the DER in writing of the corrective actions

implemented to address the problem.



| Page 24 of 37

10 REHABILITATION AND CLOSURE

All site infrastructure will be decommissioned and disposed or otherwise removed from site, and areas

recontoured and treated to address compaction. A site contamination audit will be conducted, as per

the Contaminated Sites Act 2003 and appropriate remediation undertaken if required.

A Mine Closure Plan (MCP) has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of the ANZMEC/MCA

Strategic Framework for Mine Closure (ANZMEC/MCA 2000). The approved MCP was based on the

methodology and approaches outlined in the DMP/EPA Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans

(DMP and EPA 2011) and Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) Leading Practice

Sustainable Development in Mining (DITR 2008) handbooks and the Planning for Integrated Mine

Closure: Toolkit (ICMM 2008).

Once the project is complete and/or the mobile C&SP is no longer required, it will be decommissioned

and removed from site, and the land rehabilitated as per the approved MCP, at an appropriate time.



| Page 25 of 37

11 COST OF PROJECT

The estimated capital cost of the mobile C&S plant is highlighted in Table 6.

Table 6: Cost of Facilities

Prescribed Premise Capital Cost

Mobilisation costs $60,000 Construction costs $50,000 C&SP cost* $0.00 Total costs $110,000

*Contractor to pay cost of C&SP



| Page 26 of 37

12 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS

The assessment completed by BCP in relation to the proposed Prescribed Activities, both construction

and operations suggests that there will be no unacceptable risk to the environment.

Despite this assessment, BCP has proposed a range of management measures to minimise potential

impacts associated with the activities covered by this amendment to Works Approval W5699/2014/1

and LTO application. These have been described in this document and are summarised in Table 7.



27

Table 7 Summary of management commitments

Environmental Factor Potential Impacts Proposed Management Works Approval Amendment Application Section Number

Commitment

MOBILE CRUSHING AND SCREENING PLANT

Discharge to air Dust generated from

construction and operation of

the OPF

Dust mitigation to reduce and

eliminate dust.

8.2.1-8.2.2 Use of water sprays to keep material wet to limit dust generation.

Crush and screen in enclosed facilities to capture dust generated.

Noise Emissions Excessive noise from

movement of material and

crushing and screening

activities

Reduce noise emissions

through maintenance and

attenuation.

8.2.4 Ensure conveyors are maintained regularly to ensure friction is minimised.

Crush and screen in enclosed facilities to attenuate noise emissions.

Light Emissions Light spill on surrounding

habitat

Ensure light spill is minimised 8.2.5 Ensure lighting is positioned to limit light spill outside of required area.

Hydrocarbon/Chemical

Storage

Contamination of surrounding

land

Manage potential

contamination

8.6 Hydrocarbon contaminated waste from maintenance of the C&SP will be disposed to a licensed controlled waste facility.

Native Vegetation Excessive clearing of native

vegetation

Clearing will be undertaken to

comply with Part IV approval.

8.1.1 Clearing will be undertaken in accordance with all conditions of pending Part IV approval.

Rehabilitation Failure to rehabilitate upon

closure of the plant

Plant and associated

equipment will be removed

and disturbance rehabilitated

upon project completion.

10 Plant and associated equipment will be removed and disturbance rehabilitated as per closure planning.



28

1 REFERENCES

Australian and New Zealand Minerals Energy Council/Mineral Council of Australia (ANZMEC/MCA)

2000, Strategic Framework for Mine Closure, Canberra.

Australian Standard 2436-1981 “Guide to Noise control on Construction, Maintenance and Demolition

Sites

Australian Standard 1940:2004 “The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids

Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) (Now Department of Resources Energy and

Tourism) 2008, Leading Practice Sustainable Development in Mining handbooks, [Online],

Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) and Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2011,

Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans, Government of Western Australia, Perth.

Environmental Protection Authority (2013), Report and recommendations of the Environmental

Protection Authority Report 1496 Buckland Project Iron Ore Holdings Ltd, December 2013

Environmental Protection Authority (2005), Guidance Statement 3. Separation Distances between

Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses, Western Australia

International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM) 2008, Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit,

ICMM, London.

Minister for the Environment 2014, Statement that a Proposal may be Implemented (Pursuant to the

Provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986), Statement No. 960, February 2014

National Health and Medical Research Council & Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council

((NHMRC & NRMMC) 2011, Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 6 National Water Quality

Management Strategy, Australian Government, Canberra.

Strategen Consultants Pty Ltd (Strategen) 2013, Buckland Project Assessment on Proponent

Information - Environmental Review prepared for Iron Ore Holdings Ltd, November 2013

002514.Matt.BOARDMAN Mineral House 100 Plain Street East Perth Western Australia 6004 Telephone +61 8 9222 3333 Facsimile +61 8 9222 3862

www.dmp.wa.gov.au www. wa.gov.au ABN 69 410 335 356

Our ref: Registration ID: 47739 Enquiries: Matt Boardman (08) 9222 3589 Email: [email protected]

The Registered Manager Iron Ore Holdings LIMITED PO Box 1761 WEST PERTH WA 6872 Attention: Mr Michael Klvac Dear Sir/Madam APPROVAL FOR MINING PROPOSAL WITH A MINE CLOSURE PLAN - MINING PROPOSAL FOR THE BUCKLAND PROJECT MINE AND HAUL ROAD VERSION 2G - AUGUST 2016 ON L08/101, L08/120, L08/139, L08/140, L08/141, L08/142, L47/679, L47/680, L47/681 and M47/1464. REGISTRATION ID: 47739

I refer to your Mining Proposal dated 16 August 2016, for mining activities on Mining Lease (M) 47/1464 and Miscellaneous Licences (L) 08/101, L08/120, L08/139, L08/140, L08/141, L08/142, L47/679, L47/680 and L47/681, which included a Mine Closure Plan (MCP) for the Buckland Project. Both documents have been assessed by this Department and satisfy the Schedule of Conditions attached to M47/1464, L08/101, L08/120, L08/139, L08/140, L08/141, L08/142, L47/679, L47/680 and L47/681.

Approval is hereby given to commence development and operation of the project in accordance with the Mining Proposal and to implement the MCP in accordance with tenement conditions. However, this does not remove the need for any necessary approvals from other authorities.

Please note the following points which need to be addressed when revising the Mine Closure Plan for submission in 2019:

Section of the Mine Closure Plan Comments

4.4.4 Acid and Metalliferous Drainage

Outcomes from further geochemical characterisation investigations need to be included in future revisions of the MCP. Further geotechnical investigations are also required with regard to assessing suitability of potential backfill material.

5 Stakeholder Consultation Very little consultation has been conducted regarding closure of the site. Stakeholders will need to be engaged regarding mine closure prior to the next Mine Closure Plan submission. Dates of consultation should also be included within the consultation register.

7.5.3 Rehabilitation Issues Rehabilitation issues such as topsoil shortages are anticipated to occur towards the end of mine life. A commitment has been made to examine the options available ‘at the time’, as is also the case with determining the dispersive/sodic characteristics of the material. These

002514.Matt.BOARDMAN 2 of 13

Section of the Mine Closure Plan Comments

investigations should be commenced as soon as possible as this will allow for greater potential to identify potentially suitable alternative material during operations. It’s expected that further thought to investigations is provided as a minimum in the next iteration of the MCP.

I advise that I intend to recommend to the Minister responsible for the Mining Act 1978 that he impose further conditions on M47/1464, L08/101, L08/120, L08/139, L08/140, L08/141, L08/142, L47/679, L47/680 and L47/681 under the provisions of Sections 46A and 84 of the Mining Act 1978. A schedule of further conditions is attached.

Please be reminded that you are required to report disturbance data on an annual basis and pay any corresponding levy in accordance with the Mining Rehabilitation Fund Act 2012 and associated Regulations.

It should be noted that the approvals hereby given under the Mining Act does not remove the need for approvals from other authorities. With respect to safety, you are reminded of your obligation to carry out the mining operation in accordance with the provision of the Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994 and Regulations 1995. Further to this, if your proposal is clearing native vegetation a clearing permit under Part V Division 2 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 for clearing of native vegetation will be required.

Should you have any queries regarding this letter, please contact Environment Officer, Matt Boardman on (08) 9222 3589.

Yours faithfully

_________________________ Phil Gorey | Executive Director Environment 09 September 2016

Attach: Recommended Further Conditions


RECOMMENDED FURTHER CONDITIONS FOR MINING LEASE 47/1464

Please include the following on existing condition 7:

(MP Reg ID:47739) “Mining Proposal for the Buckland Project Mine and Haul Road – Version 2G – August 2016” dated 16 August 2016 signed by Michael Klvac, and retained on Department of Mines and Petroleum file no. EARS-MPMCP-47739 as Doc ID 4488938.

(MCP Reg ID: 47739) “Mining Closure Plan for the Buckland Project Mine and Haul Road – Version 2C - June 2016” dated 15 June 2016 signed by Michael Klvac, and retained on Department of Mines and Petroleum file no. EARS-MPMCP-47739 as Doc ID 4488950.

Please impose the following new conditions:

9. All topsoil and vegetation being removed ahead of all mining operations and being stockpiled appropriately for later respreading or immediately respread as rehabilitation progresses. [MTSD: Standard Condition 385]

10. All rubbish and scrap is to be progressively disposed of in a suitable manner. [MTSD: Standard Condition 387]

11. The Lessee taking all reasonable measures to prevent or minimise the generation of dust from all materials handling operations, stockpiles, open areas and transport activities. [MTSD: Standard Condition 659]

12. Where saline water is used for dust suppression, all reasonable measures being taken to avoid any detrimental effects to surrounding vegetation and topsoil stockpiles. [MTSD: Standard Condition 401]

13. Placement of waste material must be such that the final footprint after rehabilitation will not be impacted upon by pit wall subsidence or be within the zone of pit instability to the satisfaction of the Executive Directoer, Environment Division, DMP. [MTSD: Standard Condition 573]

14. On the completion of operations or progressively when possible, all waste dumps, tailings storage facilities, stockpiles or other mining related landforms must be rehabilitated to form safe, stable, non-polluting structures which are integrated with the surrounding landscape and support self-sustaining, functional ecosystems comprising suitable, local provenance species or an alternative agreed outcome to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Environment Division, DMP. [MTSD: Standard Condition 388]

15. The Lessee submitting to the Executive Director, Environment Division, DMP, a brief annual report outlining the project operations, minesite environmental management and rehabilitation work undertaken in the previous 12 months and the proposed operations, environmental management plans and rehabilitation programs for the next 12 months. This report to be submitted each year in: [MTSD: Standard Condition 392]

September

16. The construction of any tailings storage embankment shall be supervised by an engineering or

geotechnical specialist. [MTSD: Standard Condition 393]

17. The construction details of any tailings storage embankment shall be documented by an

engineering or geotechnical specialist and confirm that the construction satisfies the design

intent. The construction document shall include the records of all construction quality control

testing, the basis of any method specification adopted, and any significant modifications to the

original design together with the reasons why the modifications were necessary. The

construction document shall also present as-built drawings for the embankment earthworks and

pipework. A copy of the construction document shall be submitted to DMP for its records.

[MTSD: Standard Condition 394]

18. The tailings storage facility shall be checked on a routine daily basis by site personnel during

periods of deposition to ensure that the facility is functioning as per the design intent.

[MTSD: Standard Condition 395]


19. An engineering or geotechnical specialist shall audit and review the active tailings storage facility

on an annual basis. The specialist shall review past performance, validate the design, examine

tailings management, and review the results of monitoring. Any deficiencies noted in the audit

and review report shall be suitably addressed and improved. The audit and review report shall

be submitted to DMP and should be accompanied by a recent survey pick-up of the facility and

an updated tailings storage data sheet. [MTSD: Non-Standard Condition]

20. At the time of decommissioning of the tailings storage facility and prior to rehabilitation, a further

review report by a geotechnical or engineering specialist shall be submitted to DMP. This report

should review the status of the structure and its contained tailings, examine and address the

implications of the physical and chemical characteristics of the materials, and present and review

the results of all monitoring. The rehabilitation stabilisation works proposed and any on-going

remedial requirements should also be addressed. [MTSD: Standard Condition 398]

21. Final design and operating manual for in-pit waste fines and waste rock disposal shall be submitted to the Executive Director Environment, DMP for his assessment and written approval prior to commencement of in-pit disposal of waste rock and waste fines. [MTSD: Non-Standard Condition]

22. A construction report (as-constructed) shall be prepared for each flood protection earth bund and concrete wall. The construction reports shall document construction details and verify that the construction meets design specifications and tolerances. The construction document shall include the records of all construction quality control testing, the basis of any method specification adopted, and any significant modifications to the original design together with the reasons why the modifications were necessary. The construction document shall also present as-built drawings. A copy of the construction document shall be submitted to DMP within 6 weeks of the completion of construction. [MTSD: Non-Standard Condition]

23. All activities being carried out in such a manner so as to not have a detrimental effect on the natural water flow through the lease and surrounding areas to the satisfaction of the Environmental Officer, DMP [MTSD: Standard Condition 657]

24. A Mine Closure Plan is to be submitted in the Annual Environmental Reporting month specified in tenement conditions in the year specified below, unless otherwise directed by an Environmental Officer, DMP. The Mine Closure Plan is to be prepared in accordance with the “Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans” available on DMP’s website: [MTSD: Standard Condition 587]

2019


RECOMMENDED FURTHER CONDITIONS FOR MISCELLANEOUS LICENCE 08/101


43. The construction and operation of the project and measures to protect the environment to be carried out in accordance with the document titled:



Where a difference exists between the above document(s) and the following conditions, then the following conditions shall prevail: [MTSD: Standard Condition 383]

44. The development and operation of the project being carried out in such a manner so as to create the minimum practicable disturbance to the existing vegetation and natural landform. [MTSD: Standard Condition 384]



47. The Licensee taking all reasonable measures to prevent or minimise the generation of dust from all materials handling operations, stockpiles, open areas and transport activities. [MTSD: Standard Condition 659]



50. The Licensee submitting to the Executive Director, Environment Division, DMP, a brief annual report outlining the project operations, minesite environmental management and rehabilitation work undertaken in the previous 12 months and the proposed operations, environmental management plans and rehabilitation programs for the next 12 months. This report to be submitted each year in: [MTSD: Standard Condition 392]

September 51. A Mine Closure Plan is to be submitted in the Annual Environmental Reporting month specified

in tenement conditions in the year specified below, unless otherwise directed by an Environmental Officer, DMP. The Mine Closure Plan is to be prepared in accordance with the “Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans” available on DMP’s website: [MTSD: Standard Condition 587]

2019






(MCP Reg ID: 47739) “Mining Closure Plan for the Buckland Project Mine and Haul Road – Version 2C June 2016” dated 15 June 2016 signed by Michael Klvac, and retained on Department of Mines and Petroleum file no. EARS-MPMCP-47739 as Doc ID 4488950.









September A Mine Closure Plan is to be submitted in the Annual Environmental Reporting month specified in tenement conditions in the year specified below, unless otherwise directed by an Environmental Officer, DMP. The Mine Closure Plan is to be prepared in accordance with the “Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans” available on DMP’s website: [MTSD: Standard Condition 587]

2019

















2019

















2019

















2019

















2019

















2019

















2019

















2019

Environmental Protection Authority

GOVERNMENT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr Les Purves Environmental Advisor BC Pilbara Iron Ore Limited Level 1, 1 Altona Street

Our Ref: 2015-0001096468: AC06-2015-0006 Enquiries: Tania.Liaghati, 6145 0843 Email: tania. Iiaghati@epa. wa. gov. au

WEST PERTH WA 6005

Dear Mr Purves

BUCKLAND IRON ORE PROJECT - MINISTERIAL STATEMENT 960 -CHANGES TO PROPOSAL APPROVED UNDER SECTION 45C OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT 1986 I refer to your letters of 24 March and 9 July 2015, requesting approval of changes to the Buckland Iron Ore Project (Ministerial Statement 960).

I consider the changes, as described in Attachment 1 to Ministerial Statement 960, are unlikely to result in a significant detrimental effect on the environment in addition to, or different from, the effect of the original proposal. Approval of the changes is therefore granted under section 45C of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. This approval does not replace any responsibilities you may have for seeking approvals from other government agencies to implement the changes.

Please note, implementation of the Buckland Iron Ore Project, including the approved changes described in Attachment 1, is subject to the conditions of Ministerial Statement 960. The Chief Executive Officer of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority may monitor the implementation of the proposal for the purpose of determining whether the implementation conditions are being complied with.

Yours sincerely

CHAIRMAN for the Minister for Environment under Notice of Delegation dated 24 November 2004

September 2015

Encl. - Attachment 1 to Ministerial Statement 960

Level 8, The Atrium, 168 St Georges Terrace, Perth, Western Australia 6000 Telephone 08 6145 0800 Facsimile 08 6145 0895 Email [email protected]

Locked Bag 10, East Perth WA 6892

\ www.epa.wa.gov.au

Attachment 1 to Ministerial Statement 960

Change to proposal approved under section 45C of the Environmental Protection Act 1986

This Attachment replaces Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of Ministerial Statement 960

Proposal: Buckland Project

Proponent: BC Pilbara Iron Ore Pty Ltd

Changes: • Removal of the original mine village location and replace it with an alternative location; • Addition of a Central Services Facility (CSF) and associated infrastructure; and • Increase to the Disturbance Area for the Stage 1 Haul Road.

Table 1: Summary of the Proposal Proposal Title Buckland Project Short Description The proposal is to develop and operate an iron ore mine,

processing facilities and supporting infrastructure, 45 km south-southeast of Pannawonica in the Shire of Ashburton, and a 176 km haul road from the mine site to the customer delivery point near Cape Preston.

Table 2: Location and authorised extent of physical and operational elements Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Element Location Authorised Extent Previously Authorised

Extent Mine puts and infrastructure area

Figure 1 Clearing of no more than 698 ha of vegetation within the 1,446 ha mine development envelope.

Clearing of not more than 650 ha of vegetation within the 1,600 ha mine development envelope.

Haul Road Figure 2 Stage 1: mine area to North West Coastal Highway

Stage 2: North West Coastal Highway to Customer Delivery Point

Clearing of not more than 1,434 ha vegetation within a 5,800 ha haul road development envelope.

Clearing of not more than 1,400 ha vegetation within a 5,800 ha haul road development envelope.

Central Services Facility (CSF)

Figure 2 Clearing of not more than 71 ha vegetation within a 358 ha development envelope.

Previously not authorised.

Disposal of surplus dewater

Figure 1 Dewater disposal through the water use hierarchy: 1. Use on site;

Dewater disposal through the water use hierarchy: 1. Use on site;

1

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Element Location Authorised Extent Previously Authorised

Extent 2. Subsurface reinjection;

and 3. Controlled discharge to

surface drainage at multiple discharge locations as a contingency measure only. Duration of surface discharge is not to exceed three months at any one time.

2. Subsurface reinjection; and

3. Controlled discharge to surface drainage at multiple discharge locations as a contingency measure only. Duration of surface discharge is not to exceed three months at any one time.

Backfilling of mine pits

Figure 1 Progressive backfilling of mine voids so that the final surface levels are at a higher elevation than the pre-mining groundwater levels.

Progressive backfilling of mine voids so that the final surface levels are at a higher elevation than the pre-mining groundwater levels.

Note: Text in bold in Table 2 indicates a change to the proposal.

Table 3: Abbreviations - as used in Ministerial Statement 960 Term or Phrase Definition

CEO The Chief Executive Officer of the Department of the Public Service of the State responsible for the administration of section 48 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986, or his delegate.

EPA Environmental Protection Authority EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986

ANZECC Guidelines

Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand 2000, Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters

Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2011

National Water Quality Management Strategy, Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2011 (and its updates). Prepared by the National Health and Medical Research Council, January 2011.

IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia ha hectare km kilometre GST Goods and Services Tax

2

Figures and Tables (attached)

Figure 1 Development envelope for mine area and supporting infrastructure;

Figure 2 Development envelope for haul road corridor and Central Systems

Facility (CSF); and

Tables 4-7 Coordinates that define the Buckland Project Mine, CSF and Haul Road Development Envelopes

CHAIRMAN Environmental Protection Authority under delegated authority

Approval date: ''x"'/ " < '' ^

3

Borefield

Access\i Road West Pit

JInfra- > structure IVesr Dump

j^^Haui Road 'Dragon Dump

East Pit and Dump

Dragon Pit

Kilometres

LOCALITY MAP

LEGEND

I—| Mine Disturbance — Area

Mine t~l Development

Envelope Haul Road Development Envelope

SOURCE DATA Proponent. Mine Planning and Biological Survey Data (2015) Aerial: Virtual Mosaic Ministerial Statement: 980 Location Path: l:\Prpjecta\epasu\mmor_projects\ Post Assessments 50429 Buckland Iron Ore Mine s45C_MSB60

Map Version: 1.10 Date: 14.-08/2015

Prq'ection: Map Grid of Australia Zone 50 Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia, 1994

Scale: 1:45.000 atA4

Figure 1: Development envelope for mine area and supporting infrastructure

4

/

//

/ / /

/

//

/ / /

/

///

//

/ / /

//

// /

/ /

/ /

//

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

!

!

!

!

!

!

4480

0045

2000

4560

007564000

7564000

7568000

7568000

00.

51

kilo

met

ers

´Fi

gure

7: P

oten

tial N

orth

ern

Quo

ll ha

bita

t and

obs

erva

tion

reco

rds w

ithin

the

area

of t

he p

ropo

sed

min

esite

Lege

nd Prop

osed

hau

l roa

d ro

ute

(SKM

, Feb

201

3)!

Nort

hern

Quo

ll ca

mer

a an

d ca

ge tr

ap re

cord

ings

(Pho

enix

, Oct

201

2)

/No

rthe

rn Q

uoll

targ

et su

rvey

cage

trap

loca

tions

(Pho

enix

, Oct

201

2)

/No

rthe

rn Q

uoll

Min

esite

targ

et su

rvey

cam

era

trap

loca

tions

(Pho

enix

, Oct

201

2)

Nort

hern

Quo

ll de

nnin

g / s

helte

r hab

itat (

Phoe

nix,

Oct

201

2)No

rthe

rn Q

uoll

fora

ging

/ di

sper

sal h

abita

t (Ph

oeni

x, O

ct 2

012)

Targ

et su

rvey

bou

ndar

yCo

ncep

tual

min

e an

d in

frast

ruct

ure

layo

ut (S

now

dens

, Oct

201

2)

Leve

l 1, 1

Alto

na S

tree

tW

est P

erth

, WA

600

5P.

O. B

ox 1

761,

Wes

t Per

th 6

872

Ph: +

61 8

948

3 20

00Fa

x: +

61 8

932

1 03

22w

ww

.iron

oreh

oldi

ngs.

com

info

@iro

nore

hold

ings

.com

Indian Oce

an

North W

est Coasta

l Highway

We

ste

rnW

es

tern

Au

str

ali

aA

us

tra

lia

Datu

m:

Proj

ectio

n:

Sour

ces:

File

:

Geoc

entr

ic D

atum

of A

ustr

alia

199

4M

ap G

rid A

ustr

alia

, Zon

e 50

Topo

grap

hy: G

eosc

ienc

e Au

stra

lia, G

EOD

ATA

Topo

250

KV3,

© C

omm

onw

ealth

of A

ustr

alia

, 200

6Im

ager

y: IO

H A

AM S

urve

y, 2

007

001\

093_

RevA

(HR

01/0

5/20

13)

1:26

,000

Scal

e (A

3):

!

! (!

RED HILL CREEK

ROBE RIVER

FORTE

SCUE RIV

ER

! (!±

Figu

re 1

: