Mesa K Remnant Mining Project - EPA WA€¦ · Mesa K is considered critical to ensure the sustainability of Robe business activities. LOCATION The proposal is located in the Robe

Mesa K Remnant Mining Project Environmental Protection Statement

Prepared for Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd by Strategen

March 2008

Mesa K Remnant Mining Project Environmental Protection Statement

Strategen is a trading name of Glenwood Nominees Pty Ltd Suite 7, 643 Newcastle Street Leederville WA ACN: 056 190 419 March 2008

Disclaimer and Limitation

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Client, in accordance with the agreement between the Client and Strategen (“Agreement”).

Strategen accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for it in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any person who is not a party to the Agreement.

In particular, it should be noted that this report is a qualitative assessment only, based on the scope of services defined by the Client, budgetary and time constraints imposed by the Client, the information supplied by the Client (and its agents), and the method consistent with the preceding.

Strategen has not attempted to verify the accuracy or completeness of the information supplied by the Client.

Copyright and any other Intellectual Property arising from the report and the provision of the services in accordance with the Agreement belongs exclusively to Strategen unless otherwise agreed and may not be reproduced or disclosed to any person other than the Client without the express written authority of Strategen.

Client: Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd

Report Version Prepared by Reviewed by Submitted to Client

Copies Date

Preliminary Draft Report V1 BS JN/WM/KO Electronic 29/08/07

Draft Report to EPASU V2 BS JN/WM/HV/KO 10 x hard copy, 10 x CD

07/09/07

Draft Report V3 BS JN Electronic 28/11/07

Draft Report V4 BS JN 6 x hard copy, 6 x CD

14/01/08

Final Final JN -- 4 x hard copy, 25 x CD

14/3/08

s t rategen Mesa K Remnant Mining Project

PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd (Robe) proposes to undertake mining of remnant iron ore in the previously mined Mesa K deposit. The title of the proposal is the “Mesa K Remnant Mining Project”.

Robe, as Manager for Robe River Iron Associates, is the proponent for the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project. The proposal will be managed by Pilbara Iron Company (Services) Pty Ltd (Pilbara Iron) on behalf of Robe. Pilbara Iron is a member of the Rio Tinto Group.

Robe currently manages the Mesa J iron ore mining operation in the Robe Valley, from which 32 Mtpa of ore is transported by the Central Pilbara Railway to ship loading facilities at Cape Lambert, approximately 200 km north of Mesa J on the Pilbara coast.

Based on current projections, the remaining source of dry ore at Mesa J will be mined out near the end of 2008, after which time ore produced from Mesa J will be primarily “wet ore”. Wet ore requires blending with dry ore to facilitate handling through rail and shipping facilities.

An additional dry ore source is required to be developed by 2008 to maintain current production rates from Mesa J. Ore remaining in the previously mined Mesa K deposit has been identified as the optimal source to meet the shortfall of dry ore from Mesa J.

Robe Valley pisolite iron ore is currently supplied to many steel producing companies in Japan, Korea, China and Europe. The unique technical properties of the Robe Valley ore establish it as an important component of the iron ore blend in customers’ blast furnace feedstock. The proposed production from Mesa K is considered critical to ensure the sustainability of Robe business activities.

LOCATION

The proposal is located in the Robe Valley area of the Pilbara region, Western Australia and involves remnant mining of an iron ore deposit (Mesa K deposit) approximately 4 km north of the existing Robe Mesa J operation and 11 km south-west of the town of Pannawonica (Figure S1).

TENURE

The Mesa K deposit is located on Mining Lease AML 70/00248 Sec 104. The Mesa J mine site and the access road from Mesa K to Mesa J are also located on this lease. The Mesa K deposit was previously mined from 1988 to 1995, producing approximately 48.2 Mt of pisolite ore. After this time, the mine site was partially rehabilitated, although access to the open cut pits and remnant ore was retained.

ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND EPA ADVICE

The proposal was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) under Section 38 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) on 19 April 2007. On 7 May 2007, the EPA advised of its intention to assess the proposal at the level of an Environmental Protection Statement (EPS). The


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL ii

EPA will report on its assessment of the proposal to the Minister for the Environment pursuant to Section 44 of the EP Act.

The EPS details the potential environmental impacts of the proposal, as well as the proposed management measures to mitigate these impacts. An extensive investigation and consultation program was undertaken to identify potential environmental impacts, evaluate their significance and develop mitigation measures. Robe has consulted extensively with government agencies and other key non-government organisations as part of the EPS process.

DESCRIPTION OF THE MESA K PROPOSAL

The principal activity of the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will be mining and transportation of iron ore. The proposal will involve:

• mining of remnant ore in five (5) existing open cut pits: Gravel Yard pit, Central pit, West-South pit, West-North pit and Gully pit

• mining by conventional drill and blast, load and haul occurring concurrently with Mesa J mainly through the dry months of May to December, utilising equipment fleet, personnel and other resources from Mesa J

• haulage of Run of Mine (ROM) ore by truck from Mesa K to Mesa J using the existing mine access road (any additional roads required for access at Mesa K will be constructed in previously disturbed areas)

• minor realignment and widening of the existing mine access road from Mesa K to Mesa J

• establishment of transportable office, portable crib room, toilets, septic tank, water tank and generators at Mesa K

• sourcing of water and fuel from existing Mesa J facilities.

The key characteristics of the proposal are presented in Table S1.

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

5000

00 m

E

4000

00 m

E40

0000

mE

5000

00 m

E

7600000 mN

7700000 mN 7700000 mN

7600000 mN

Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester National ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational Park

Pannawonica - Millstream Road

Cape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape Lambert

WickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampier

KarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourne

PannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonica

Mesa GMesa B-FDinnerCamp

Mesa A

Mesa K Middle Robe

Jimmawurrada

Mesa H-I Mesa J

LEGEND

Figure S1Regional Location Mesa K

Strategic Assets - Perth

Drawn: RLJDate: 8 May 2007

Plan No. PDE0028986Proj: MGA94-50

1:1 000 000 @ A4

SCALE

LOCATION MAP

0 20 40km

National Park

HighwayRoadMajor River

TownResource

Mine (operating)

Mesa K mine site

Perth

Indian Ocean

North

Wes

t Coa

stal

Hig

hway

Pannawonica Road

Fortescue River

Robe River

Jimmawirrada Creek

Robe River

WesternAustralia


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL iv

Table S1 Key characteristics of the Mesa K proposal

Component Proposal characteristic Detail

Proposal life Approximately 2 – 3 years General

Ore deposit Approximately 12 – 13 Mt high grade ore Approximately 6 Mt low grade ore

Clearing of native vegetation

Area of new disturbance Approximately 10 ha

Ore type Pisolite iron ore

Ore location Above watertable

Stripping ratio The ratio of waste and low grade ore to high grade ore will be approximately 1:1

Waste rock disposal Initially directed to surface waste dumps and, thereafter, used in progressive backfilling of mine pits as far as practicable

Mine and mining

Infrastructure Upgrade of existing mine access road Installation of transportable office, portable crib room, toilets, septic tank and water tank at Mesa K Portable generator (diesel powered) at Mesa K

Product transport Product transport The ore will be trucked 4 km to the nearby Mesa J mine site via the existing mine access road for blending with Mesa J ore and then transported via the existing railway to the port at Cape Lambert

Workforce Existing Mesa J workforce Workforce

Accommodation Existing accommodation in Pannawonica

STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

Robe initiated a stakeholder consultation program for the proposal towards the end of 2006, prior to referral of the proposal to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in April 2007. Key stakeholders identified for the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project and consulted during the preparation of the EPS were:

• Government agencies

• Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC)

• Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA)

• Department of Industry and Resources (DoIR)

• EPA and Environmental Protection Authority Service Unit (EPASU)

• Non-government organisations

• Conservation Council of Western Australia

• Kuruma Marthudunera Working Group

• Pilbara Native Title Service (PNTS)

• Wildflower Society of Western Australia

• Yalleen Station

• Local government

• Shire of Ashburton


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL v

• Community

• Senior representatives from Kuruma Marthudunera

KEY AREAS OF INTEREST

The main topics raised by stakeholders related to the flora and vegetation of the mesa, subterranean fauna (troglofauna) and habitat retention, retention of the southern escarpment facing the Robe River, Aboriginal heritage and rehabilitation. The topics raised by stakeholders have been addressed in this EPS. The following studies investigated key areas of interest:

• terrestrial vegetation and flora studies to assess potential impacts to the conservation status of those species known, or likely, to occur in and around the project area

• terrestrial and subterranean fauna (including short-range endemics and troglobites) studies to assess the potential impacts to the conservation status of those species known, or likely, to occur in and around the project area

• Aboriginal heritage surveys to identify archaeological sites and ethnographic values in and around the project area.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT

The following environmental factors were identified as relevant to this proposal:

• vegetation and flora

• terrestrial fauna

• subterranean fauna

• surface water and water quality

• Aboriginal heritage

• rehabilitation and closure.

Seven additional environmental factors were considered to be minor factors, given the remoteness of the location and existing management measures in place, and are consequently addressed in less detail. These minor factors are:

• air quality (dust)

• noise and vibration

• waste management (including mineral wastes)

• greenhouse gases

• public risk and safety

• groundwater

• landscape.

VEGETATION AND FLORA

The vegetation and flora of the project area have been surveyed consistent with EPA Position Statement No. 3 and EPA Guidance Statement No. 51. The Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL vi

result in the progressive removal and rehabilitation of approximately 10 ha of native vegetation over the life of the proposal.

The proposal is not expected to have any significant effect on regional flora and vegetation values due to the relatively small amount of clearing, the wide distribution of most vegetation types and flora species found in the project area and the control measures that will be implemented to minimise impacts to flora and vegetation values. There is a risk of spreading weeds; however, this will be managed through the implementation of weed control and hygiene procedures.

No Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) or Declared Rare Flora (DRF) were recorded at Mesa K. Three Priority 3 flora species and two other species of potential conservation significance are known to occur in the project area. The proposal will result in disturbance to one location where a single individual of the Priority 3 species Sida sp. Wittenoom was recorded, and four locations where scattered individuals of the undescribed spinifex species Triodia sp. nov. were recorded. In both cases, the loss of a small number of the individuals known from the Mesa K area is not expected to affect the conservation status of either species.

The proposal will not contravene EPA Position Statement No. 2, as all potential on-site and off-site impacts have been identified and management measures proposed. No species of flora or vegetation association will cease to exist as a result of the proposal. The only vegetation type restricted within the project area is that associated with the Robe River; however, there will be no disturbance to this vegetation type as a result of the proposal.

Consistent with EPA objectives, the abundance, species diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of flora at species and ecosystem levels will be maintained, thereby conserving regional biological diversity. The botanical studies undertaken by Robe identified populations of Priority flora. These will be protected from disturbance where possible to do so without compromising the implementation of the proposal. The implementation of vegetation protection measures will further ensure impacts are minimised.

TERRESTRIAL FAUNA

The terrestrial fauna of the project area have been surveyed consistent with EPA Position Statement No. 3 and EPA Guidance Statement No. 56. The Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will result in the progressive loss and subsequent revegetation of approximately 10 ha of potential terrestrial fauna habitat over the life of the proposal.

The southern escarpment of Mesa K will not be disturbed by the proposal (except for an area of approximately 0.2 ha in the immediate vicinity of the mine access road) and will be protected by a substantial buffer between the edge of the mesa and adjacent mining areas. The southern escarpment of Mesa K is considered to be the main terrestrial fauna habitat of importance in, or near, the project area, and is likely to be the only significant Northern Quoll habitat in the immediate vicinity of the project area. The scarp also contains at least two caves that provide habitat for bats, although they do not constitute significant maternity roosts for any bat species of conservation significance. Suitable habitat for short-range endemic (SRE) invertebrates also occurs on the southern escarpment. Protection of the escarpment will ensure that important habitat values for these groups are maintained.

The proposal will not conflict with the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 as no species of terrestrial vertebrate or invertebrate fauna will cease to exist as a result of the proposal. Minimal habitat of high conservation significance will be affected by the proposal, and there will be no significant impacts to terrestrial fauna that are of conservation significance at a local or regional level.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL vii

Consistent with EPA objectives, the abundance, species diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of terrestrial fauna at species and ecosystem levels will be maintained, thereby conserving regional biological diversity. The zoological studies undertaken by Robe and implementation of the proposed management actions will ensure that direct disturbance to important fauna habitat is minimised and that fauna and fauna habitat are protected from indirect disturbance as far as practicable.

SUBTERRANEAN FAUNA

Prior to 2003, troglofauna had not been documented as occurring in pisolitic mesa formations. Sampling undertaken in 2003 at Mesa A, some 40 km west of Mesa K, unexpectedly recorded four troglobitic taxa. Further sampling has since demonstrated that troglofauna are widely distributed within the Robe Valley (including at the previously mined and heavily disturbed Mesa K), inhabiting voids in the pisolite resource.

The troglofauna of the project area have been surveyed consistent with EPA Position Statement No. 3, EPA Guidance Statement No. 54 and EPA Guidance Statement No. 54a.

Robe has minimised potential impacts to troglofauna as far as practicable through the planning and design of the proposal, and will further protect troglofauna and their habitat through implementation of ongoing management actions.

Singleton (taxa represented by only one individual) troglofauna occurrences have been excluded from the mining area, with sufficient buffer, to ensure that these species are not affected by remnant mining activities at Mesa K.

The proposal will result in disturbance to some 22 Mt of the pisolite resource, which equates to less than 15 % (by volume) troglofauna habitat disruption. The majority of the pisolite resource will be retained as a contiguous system. Mining will result in the loss of troglobitic individuals located within the mining area.

The size of the retained portions of the mesa are considered to be sufficient to maintain suitable subterranean habitat for troglofauna. The existence of a diverse troglofauna community within the already disturbed areas of Mesa K lends support to this conclusion.

Consistent with EPA objectives, the habitat of the troglofauna community at Mesa K will be maintained, thereby conserving local and regional biological diversity. The troglofauna studies undertaken by Robe have ensured that disturbance to troglofauna and their associated habitat is minimised through planning and design. Implementation of the proposed management actions will further protect troglofauna and their habitat.

SURFACE WATER AND WATER QUALITY

Diversion structures will be designed in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Sediment and Drainage Control Design Criteria to maintain natural drainage flows, reduce erosion and minimise ponding of water. Sheet flows within the mining area will be locally concentrated by the proposed diversion structures, which will result in localised increases in flow velocity and soil erosion. Sediment traps and/or basins will be installed to reduce sediment load in surface water runoff. Disruption to sheet flows is not expected to adversely affect vegetation as there are no known vegetation types within the project area expected to be sustained by sheet flow. Ponding of surface water will be minimised and is not expected to affect vegetation or terrestrial fauna.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL viii

Uncontrolled surface water runoff generated from the mining areas during high rainfall events is unlikely to reach the Robe River. The capacity for internal storage of surface water runoff will increase with mine development, as the mining pits increase in depth and spatial extent. Captured surface water runoff will be returned to the Robe River at a designated discharge location when required, using a rock-lined spillway to minimise erosion.

Consistent with the EPA objective for surface water, the proposal is not expected to affect the quantity or quality of water entering the Robe River. The integrity, functions and environmental values of the Robe River system will be maintained through design and the implementation of the proposed surface water management measures.

ABORIGINAL HERITAGE

Robe has investigated the likelihood of the presence of matters of Aboriginal heritage significance in the project area and has analysed potential impacts to such sites as a result of the proposal in accordance with EPA Guidance Statement No. 41.

The only known remaining archaeological sites within the project area (MK04-05, MK04-06 and P02101 complex) will not be disturbed by the proposed remnant mining project. These sites will be protected by installing physical barriers as agreed with the Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant Group.

The proposal will have no impact to any of the known sites of Aboriginal heritage significance.

The Robe River will be protected from sediment-laden surface water runoff from the mining area by undertaking mining such that Gravel Yard pit drains internally for a minimum of a 20 year annual recurrence interval (ARI) rainfall event.

Robe will continue to consult and work with the Kuruma Marthudunera regarding management of Aboriginal heritage sites and values at Mesa K. Consistent with the EPA objective for this factor, Robe will ensure that changes to the biophysical environment do not adversely affect historical and cultural associations and will manage Aboriginal heritage sites in accordance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.

REHABILITATION AND CLOSURE

Robe has developed a Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan for Mesa K in accordance with EPA Guidance Statement No. 6. The Plan will be incorporated into the site rehabilitation plan upon commencement of operations at Mesa K and will be regularly reviewed during site operations to ensure it remains accurate and relevant.

Robe will incorporate Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Pilbara Iron Greater Pannawonica Operations Closure Study, which will address future closure, including developing suitable end land uses and objectives for closure, in consultation with relevant stakeholders and the community.

Robe has integrated key environmental aspects of the proposal into all stages of mine planning and design to maximise rehabilitation success. Implementation of Pilbara Iron management tools and the proposed management actions will ensure effective environmental and rehabilitation outcomes for Mesa K.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL ix

The Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will be incorporated into the regular monitoring schedule that applies to all Robe sites. Rehabilitation monitoring at Mesa K will commence upon completion of rehabilitation works at the site and will provide useful feedback for the improvement of rehabilitation techniques and help assess the long-term success of rehabilitation.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Robe acknowledges the environmental protection principles listed in Section 4(a) of the EP Act:

• precautionary principle

• principle of intergenerational equity

• principle of the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity

• principles relating to improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms

• principle of waste minimisation.

These principles are reflected in the Robe Environmental Policy, Iron Environmental Management System and the Rio Tinto corporate environmental standards that are applied across the Rio Tinto Group.

The environmental aspects of the proposal will be primarily managed through the site Iron Environmental Management System (IEMS), the Mesa K Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and the implementation of proposed Environmental Management Commitments for Mesa K. Robe will ensure acceptable rehabilitation of the site in accordance with the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Robe operates under an ISO14001 framework through the IEMS. ISO14001 is an internationally recognised continuous improvement model, the key elements of which include assessing environmental risk and legal requirements, developing objectives and targets for improvement, training, operational control, communication, emergency response, corrective actions, audits and review. Robe sites were certified to ISO14001 in July 2005.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) has been prepared to manage specific environmental issues arising from the proposal. The EMP outlines management actions and monitoring that will be undertaken, as well as contingency actions to be implemented if environmental management objectives will not be met. The EMP will be regularly reviewed and revised as required.

SUMMARY OF PROPONENT COMMITMENTS

The proponent (Robe) proposes the Environmental Management Commitments for the management of Mesa K that are detailed in Table S2.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL x

Table S2 Proponent’s Environmental Management Commitments for the management of Mesa K

No. Topic Objective Commitment Timing Advice from

1 Environmental Management Plan (EMP) (Operations)

To minimise environmental impacts during the operation of the proposal. To protect the environmental values of areas not required for mining operations.

Finalise the EMP for the proposal that addresses the following environmental aspects:

• protection of native flora and vegetation

• prevention of the introduction and spread of weeds

• protection of native terrestrial fauna

• protection of subterranean fauna

• control of feral animals

• management of surface water runoff and drainage

• protection of the Robe River (quantity and quality of water) and associated riparian vegetation

• minimisation and management of dust generated during activities related to mining and transport

• hydrocarbon management

• waste (mineral and non-mineral) management


• fire



• consultation, monitoring, auditing and reporting of environmental performance.

Prior to ground disturbance

DEC (Environmental Management Division & Nature Conservation Division)


As above. Implement the EMP prepared under Commitment 1. During operation

3 Rehabilitation Plan

To ensure rehabilitation achieves a stable and functioning landform that is consistent with the surrounding landscape and other environmental values.

Finalise the Rehabilitation Plan for Mesa K that addresses the following:

• a description of the rehabilitation process

• regular review and revision of the Plan

• use of local provenance seed and plant species

• monitoring, auditing and reporting of rehabilitation performance.

Prior to commencement of productive mining

1

1 “productive mining” means the mining of shippable ore


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL xi



To ensure rehabilitation is undertaken in accordance with the Rehabilitation Plan and consistent with the future requirements for final closure of the site.

Incorporate Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Greater Pannawonica Closure Study, which will address future closure, including:

• suitable end land uses and objectives for closure, in consultation with relevant stakeholders and the community

• identification and evaluation of closure options and determination of preferred options

• establishment of completion criteria for future closure

• closure monitoring

• review and update of the Greater Pannawonica Closure Study.

Prior to completion of mining at Mesa J

DEC (Nature Conservation Division)


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL xii

CONCLUSION

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION

The potential environmental impacts of the proposal and proposed management measures are:

1. Progressive removal of approximately 10 ha of previously undisturbed native vegetation over the life of the proposal, with rehabilitation of disturbed areas following the completion of operations.

2. Risk of the spread of weeds will be managed through implementation of weed control and hygiene measures in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Weed Management Plan.

3. Loss of generally low-value terrestrial fauna habitat is not expected to have a significant effect on the representation of fauna at a local or regional level.

4. Removal of a relatively small portion (less than 15% by volume) of potential troglofauna habitat within the mesa, with potential impacts to troglofauna diversity and species representation managed through alteration of the mine plan to avoid areas where singleton troglofauna (i.e. species that were not recorded at other sites on the mesa) were recorded and retention of the majority of the potential troglofauna habitat (the pisolite resource) as a contiguous system.

5. Change in the immediate landscape through removal of mined material and the resultant physical change in the re-established landform. Key landscape values will be maintained through retention of the southern escarpment.

6. Local alterations to surface drainage patterns within the mining area will not significantly affect the quality or quantity of water in the Robe River itself.

7. Generation of dust, waste, noise and vibration, as well as potential risks to public safety, will be minor and will be managed under the Mesa K EMP.

Table S3 provides more detail of potential impacts, proposed management and the environmental outcome for each of the environmental factors assessed.

ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS AND MANAGEABILITY

The approach taken in this environmental review has been based on a risk assessment approach to characterise environmental factors, determine potential impacts and develop mitigation measures.

The proponent has extensive experience in managing the development, operation and environmental compliance of similar operations (including the existing iron ore mine at Mesa J) and this experience is anticipated to lead to a greater certainty in achieving desirable environmental outcomes.

The key environmental aspects of the proposal have been considered during the planning and design of the proposal and have been managed largely through incorporation into the mine plan, thereby preventing many aspects from leading to significant environmental impacts.

The environmental aspects of the proposal will be further managed through the Mesa K EMP, the site EMS and the implementation of proposed Environmental Management Commitments for Mesa K. Robe will ensure acceptable rehabilitation of the site in accordance with the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan. Future closure of the site will be integrated with mine closure for the greater Pannawonica operations.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL xiii

The proponent has consulted with stakeholders (including government agencies) to scope the potential impacts of the proposal and to determine the significance of environmental issues and the acceptability of mitigation. This process substantially improves the likelihood that all significant environmental issues have been identified, investigated and mitigated as far as practicable.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL xiv

Table S3 Summary of key environmental issues, potential impacts and management

Factor EPA objective Existing environment Potential impacts Proposed management Predicted outcomes

Biophysical 1. Flora and vegetation

To maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of flora at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge.

Mesa K is a heavily disturbed site as a result of previous mining and exploration activities. The vegetation of the project area is open and dominated by spinifex, acacias and occasional open eucalypt woodlands in major waterways. No Declared Rare Flora (DRF) or Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) have been recorded from the area; however, several Priority flora species, as well as several other species of conservation significance, occur in the project area. None of the vegetation types recorded in the project area are expected to be restricted in the Pannawonica locality, although one is limited to the Robe River itself. One of the vegetation types associated with major creeklines and floodplains is considered to be of high conservation significance.

Loss of flora and vegetation due to clearing for mining areas and associated infrastructure. Disturbance to flora and vegetation due to alterations to surface hydrology through construction of diversion structures, mine pit and infrastructure. Introduction and/or spread of weeds from mining activities. Localised retardation of vegetation growth due to dust generated around roads and bare surfaces.

Implement measures outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) (included in Appendix 1), including:

• ensuring clearing is as approved and is kept within the project area

• minimising disturbance through planning and location of infrastructure within already disturbed areas

• backfilling waste and locating stockpiles in open pit voids wherever possible

• avoiding Priority flora locations wherever possible

• minimising the potential for fire to affect flora and vegetation values

• identifying and mapping the extent and distribution of target weed species occurring within the project area

• establishing and maintaining an inventory recording the location of weed species within the project area

• inspecting sites to record new observations of weed infestations

• controlling weed occurrences prior to disturbance at the site

• undertaking staff inductions to include information on identification and reporting of weeds and procedures to prevent the spread of weeds

• implementing weed hygiene measures as required for mining machinery entering and leaving the project area

• minimising site disturbance by preventing unnecessary clearing of vegetation

• implementing a weed control program for targeted weed species.

Progressive removal and rehabilitation of approximately 10 ha of native vegetation for mining areas and associated infrastructure. Disturbance to one location from which a single individual of the Priority 3 species Sida sp. Wittenoom was recorded, and four locations from which scattered individuals of the undescribed spinifex species Triodia sp. nov. were recorded. No significant impact to regional flora and vegetation values due to the relatively small amount of clearing, the wide distribution of most vegetation types and flora species found in the project area and the control measures that will be implemented to minimise impacts to flora and vegetation values. The only vegetation type restricted within the project area is that associated with the Robe River. This vegetation type will not be disturbed as a result of the proposal. Risk of the introduction and spread of weeds mitigated through implementation of weed control and hygiene procedures.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL xv


2. Terrestrial fauna

To maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of fauna at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge.

The Mesa K southern escarpment has the potential to support a range of terrestrial fauna species, including some that are endemic to the region and/or listed for protection under State and Federal conservation legislation.

Loss of fauna and fauna habitat from clearing for mining areas and associated infrastructure. Loss of fauna and fauna habitat from alterations to surface hydrology through construction of diversion structures, mine pit and infrastructure. Loss of fauna, particularly less-mobile species, due to vehicle movements in mining areas and on mine access roads.

Implement measures outlined in the EMP (included in Appendix 1), including:

• retaining the Mesa K southern escarpment, including cave habitats, by maintaining a substantial and geotechnically stable buffer between the edge of the mesa and adjacent mining areas

• implementing and sign-posting appropriate speed limits for both mining equipment and light vehicles on the Mesa K to Mesa J access road, including the Robe River crossing

• controlling feral animals

• ensuring clearing of potential fauna habitat is as approved and is kept within the project area

• designing diversion structures so as to ensure natural drainage flows are maintained wherever possible and to prevent ponding of water

• implementing standard dust suppression measures across the project area to mitigate effects on surrounding fauna habitat.

Progressive removal of approximately 10 ha of potential fauna habitat will not affect the local or regional abundance of fauna populations. Minimal disturbance to the southern escarpment of Mesa K, which is considered to be the main terrestrial fauna habitat of importance in the project area. Minimal disturbance to fauna habitat of high conservation significance. No significant impacts to fauna that are of conservation significance at a regional, state, national or international level.

3. Subterranean fauna

To maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of fauna at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge.

A number of troglobitic species are known to occur within the project area, including from within previously disturbed areas. All troglofauna that have been found at Mesa K are considered to be endemic to the mesa. Five of the collected taxa were singletons (taxa represented by only one individual) at the completion of four phases of sampling. Recent sampling has collected another Scolopendrida, reducing the number of singletons to four.

Loss of troglofauna habitat and troglobitic individuals due to mining. Reduction in habitat suitability and changes in habitat use due to changes to surface hydrology and the subterranean microclimate. Degradation of the subterranean environment due to surface or ground water contamination through spills of hydrocarbons or wastewater. Reduction in the availability of organic inputs to the foundation trophic levels due to clearing of vegetation beyond the mine footprint. Decreases (or increases) in the habitat available to troglofauna due to changes to strata and mesocaverns through blasting vibration.

Minimise disturbance to troglofauna and their habitat through planning and design, including:

• developing the mine plan to avoid singleton troglofauna occurrences (including a 50 m radius buffer)

• using existing infrastructure and locating new infrastructure in previously disturbed areas wherever possible

• retaining the majority of the pisolite resource as a contiguous system. Implement measures outlined in the EMP (included in Appendix 1), including:

• obvious demarcation of clearing boundaries, including buffers around singleton troglofauna occurrences

• implementing the Pilbara Iron Ground Disturbance Authorisation Procedure to control clearing of vegetation and ground disturbance

• managing blasting procedures near the final pit face limits to reduce blast vibration effects

• controlling surface drainage to minimise ponding, sedimentation and water starvation effects

• backfilling the Central pit and the southern section of Gravel Yard pit to protect retained habitat and biophysical processes

• continued sampling of troglofauna from a representative spread of sites across the mesa.

Disturbance to approximately 22 Mt of the pisolite resource at Mesa K (less than 15% by volume of the potential troglofauna habitat). Loss of troglobitic individuals located within the mining area. Maintenance of sufficient suitable troglofauna habitat through retention of the majority of the pisolite resource (approximately 85% by volume) as a contiguous system. Exclusion of singleton troglofauna occurrences (with sufficient buffer) from the mine plan will ensure that these species are not removed by mining activities at Mesa K.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL xvi


4. Surface water To maintain the quantity of water so that existing and potential environmental values, including ecosystem maintenance, are protected. To ensure that emissions do not adversely affect environment values or the health, welfare and amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards.

The Robe River is the dominant surface hydrological feature in the project area and typically flows at least once a year, generally following significant and intense rainfall events. The Robe River passes alongside the southern escarpment of Mesa K. Existing infrastructure traversing the river includes the Mesa J to Cape Lambert rail bridge and the mine site access road from Mesa K to Mesa J. There are no significant tributaries that originate in, or cross, the mining area. Prior to historical mining activities, Mesa K would have drained directly into the Robe River; providing approximately 0.03% of the total flow contribution to the river. As a result of previous mining at Mesa K, the mesa proper is now largely internally draining.

Alteration of surface water flow paths due to construction of mine pit and infrastructure. Contamination of surface water by sediments and hydrocarbons due to discharge of stormwater. Alteration of natural surface water flows due to changed landform.


• stabilising diversion structures to reduce erosion and associated water quality impacts

• locating waste dumps in-pit as far as practicable and designing waste dumps to incorporate water management features to reduce the potential for sediment-laden surface water runoff

• installing sediment traps/basins where appropriate to reduce sediment loads in runoff from the mine area

• installing settling ponds to reduce sediment loads in stormwater prior to re-use/discharge

• undertaking progressive backfill of pits where possible

• returning captured surface water runoff to the Robe River at a designated discharge location using a rock-lined spillway to reduce erosion as required

• designing final landforms to be self-draining.

Installation of sediment traps and/or basins will reduce sediment load in surface water runoff. Disruption to sheet flows is not expected to adversely affect vegetation. Ponding of surface water will be minimised and is not expected to affect vegetation or terrestrial fauna. Uncontrolled surface water runoff generated from the mining areas during high rainfall events is unlikely to reach the Robe River. Captured surface water runoff will be returned to the Robe River at a designated discharge location when required, using a rock-lined spillway to minimise erosion.

Social surrounds 5. Aboriginal

heritage To ensure that changes to the biophysical environment do not adversely affect historical and cultural associations and comply with relevant heritage legislation.

Nine archaeological sites, comprising mainly artefact scatters, have been recorded within the proposed remnant mining area. Six of these sites have been previously cleared under Section 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. Water courses are generally recognised as being of ethnographic significance to Aboriginal people. The Robe River passes by the southern

Disturbance to archaeological sites due to physical disturbance to the land surface during construction and operation of the mine and associated infrastructure. Increased sediment load in surface water entering the Robe River due to mining within the proposed Gravel Yard pit, which may affect the ethnographic values of the river.


• preventing unauthorised ground disturbance activities through implementation of the Pilbara Iron Ground Disturbance Authorisation Procedure for all areas to be disturbed

• protecting sites MK04-05, MK04-06 and the P02101 complex (MKE02-01, MKE02-01ex and P2101.1) through installation of physical barriers as agreed with the Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant Group

• protecting the Robe River from sediment-laden surface water runoff from the mining area by undertaking mining such that Gravel Yard pit drains internally for a minimum of a 20 year ARI rainfall event

• continuing consultation with the Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title

Protection of sites MK04-05, MK04-06 and the P02101 complex through installation of physical barriers as agreed with the Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant Group. Protection of the Robe River from sediment-laden surface water runoff from the mining area by undertaking mining such that Gravel Yard pit drains internally for a minimum of a 20 year ARI rainfall event. Continued consultation with the Kuruma Marthudunera


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL xvii

Factor EPA objective Existing environment Potential impacts Proposed management Predicted outcomes escarpment of Mesa K. Claimant Group regarding the proposed remnant mining activities. Native Title Claimant Group

regarding management of Aboriginal heritage sites and values at Mesa K. Management of Aboriginal heritage sites in accordance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.

Other 6. Rehabilitation

and closure To ensure, as far as practicable, that rehabilitation achieves a stable and functioning landform that is consistent with the surrounding landscape and other environmental values.

Mesa K is a heavily disturbed site as a result of previous mining and exploration activities. Mesa K was partially rehabilitated following historical mining activities, although access to the open cut pits and remnant ore was retained.

Clearing of vegetation and disturbance to soil profiles and landforms due to mining and the establishment of associated infrastructure.

Incorporate the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan for Mesa K (included in Appendix 1) into the site rehabilitation plan upon commencement of operations at Mesa K. Following the completion of (or during) mining activities:

• remove site infrastructure for re-use or disposal as appropriate

• empty, backfill and bury the septic system in-situ

• construct safety bunds around each pit void

• block access roads no longer required

• backfill pit voids where possible

• backfill minor excavations

• dispose rubbish and scrap at the Mesa J and townsite landfill as appropriate

• plug below ground-level drill holes not required for ongoing monitoring

• remove and separately stockpile vegetation, topsoil and subsoil for later re-use, where possible. Incorporate Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Pilbara Iron Greater Pannawonica Operations Closure Study, which will address future closure, including:


• identification and evaluation of future closure options and determination of preferred options



• provide cost estimates and allocate funds for future closure

• outline management actions that will be undertaken at Mesa K to facilitate future closure.

Incorporation of the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan into the site rehabilitation plan upon commencement of operations at Mesa K, as well as regular review of the plan, will maximise rehabilitation success at Mesa K. Incorporation of Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Pilbara Iron Greater Pannawonica Operations Closure Study will address future closure, including developing suitable end land uses and objectives for closure, in consultation with relevant stakeholders and the community. Rehabilitation monitoring at Mesa K will commence upon completion of rehabilitation works at the site and will provide useful feedback for the improvement of rehabilitation techniques and help assess the long-term success of rehabilitation at the site.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 THE MESA K REMNANT MINING PROJECT 1

1.1.1 Location 1 1.1.2 Description 1 1.1.3 Environmental approval history 4 1.1.4 Operations history 4

1.2 THE PROPONENT 4 1.3 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROPOSAL 4

1.3.1 Demand for iron ore 5 1.3.2 Alternatives considered 5 1.3.3 Benefits of the proposal 6

1.4 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT 6 1.5 STRUCTURE OF THIS DOCUMENT 7 1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS 7 1.7 RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION AND POLICY 8

2. OVERVIEW OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 12 2.1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 12

2.1.1 Climate 12 2.1.2 Landform and topography 13 2.1.3 Local geology 14 2.1.4 Surface hydrology 14 2.1.5 Hydrogeology 15

2.2 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT 17 2.2.1 Vegetation and flora 17 2.2.2 Fauna 18

2.3 SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT 19 2.3.1 Local government and towns 19 2.3.2 Tenure and surrounding land use 19 2.3.3 Aboriginal heritage and native title 19 2.3.4 European heritage 20

3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 22 3.1 KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSAL 22



3.2 DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE 24 3.3 IMPLICATIONS OF PREVIOUS MINING 25 3.4 DESCRIPTION OF MINING OPERATION 25

3.4.1 Site preparation 25 3.4.2 Mining operations 26 3.4.3 Ore handling and ore transport 29 3.4.4 Support infrastructure and consumables 29 3.4.5 Workforce and accommodation 30

4. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 31 4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS 31 4.2 FORM AND TIMING OF CONSULTATION 31 4.3 STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS AND RESPONSES OF PROPONENT 32

5. ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND SUSTAINABILITY 35 5.1 PRINCIPLES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 35 5.2 SUSTAINABILITY 37

6. ASSESSMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL 39 6.1 SCOPING OF RELEVANT FACTORS 39 6.2 KEY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ADDRESSED 39 6.3 MINOR ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS NOT FURTHER ASSESSED 39

6.3.1 Air quality (dust) 39 6.3.2 Noise and vibration 41 6.3.3 Waste 42 6.3.4 Greenhouse gases 43 6.3.5 Public risk and safety 44 6.3.6 Groundwater 44 6.3.7 Landscape 45

7. FLORA AND VEGETATION 47 7.1 DESCRIPTION OF FACTOR 47

7.1.1 Vegetation 47 7.1.2 Flora 49

7.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACT 52 7.3 KEY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE 53 7.4 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND MITIGATION 56



7.4.1 Vegetation clearing 56 7.4.2 Effects of surface drainage flow alterations 57 7.4.3 Weeds 57 7.4.4 Dust 58

7.5 PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 58 7.6 PREDICTED OUTCOME 59

8. TERRESTRIAL FAUNA 60 8.1 DESCRIPTION OF FACTOR 60

8.1.1 Fauna habitat 60 8.1.2 Significant fauna identified as potentially occurring at Mesa K 60 8.1.3 Results of fauna survey 62

8.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACT 64 8.3 KEY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE 64 8.4 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND MITIGATION 65

8.4.1 Vegetation clearing 65 8.4.2 Alteration to surface drainage flows 66 8.4.3 Vehicle and equipment movement 66 8.4.4 Impacts to fauna of conservation significance 66


9. SUBTERRANEAN FAUNA 69 9.1 DESCRIPTION OF FACTOR 69

9.1.1 Troglofauna 69 9.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACT 77 9.3 KEY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE 77 9.4 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND MITIGATION 77

9.4.1 Habitat removal 78 9.4.2 Changes to surface hydrology and the subterranean

microclimate 84 9.4.3 Surface water contamination 84 9.4.4 Reduction in organic inputs through clearing of vegetation 84 9.4.5 Vibration 85




10. SURFACE WATER 87 10.1 DESCRIPTION OF FACTOR 87 10.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACT 87 10.3 KEY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE 88 10.4 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND MITIGATION 89

10.4.1 Drainage management 89 10.4.2 Disposal of stormwater 89 10.4.3 Post-mining landform 89


11. ABORIGINAL HERITAGE 91 11.1 DESCRIPTION OF FACTOR 91

11.1.1 Site significance 92 11.1.2 Ethnographic heritage 93

11.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACT 93 11.3 KEY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE 93 11.4 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND MITIGATION 94 11.5 PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 95 11.6 PREDICTED OUTCOME 95

12. REHABILITATION AND CLOSURE 96 12.1 DESCRIPTION OF FACTOR 96 12.2 KEY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE 96 12.3 REHABILITATION 99

12.3.1 Rehabilitation objectives 99 12.3.2 The rehabilitation process 100 12.3.3 Rehabilitation procedures 100 12.3.4 Area-specific rehabilitation measures 102

12.4 CLOSURE 107 12.4.1 Closure objectives 107 12.4.2 Closure planning 107

12.5 PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 107 12.6 PREDICTED OUTCOMES 108

13. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 109 13.1 PROPONENT’S ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY 109



13.2 IRON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IEMS) 110 13.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP) 110 13.4 REHABILITATION PLAN 111 13.5 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MEASURES 111 13.6 SUMMARY OF PROPONENT’S COMMITMENTS 111

14. CONCLUSION 115 14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 115 14.2 ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS AND MANAGEABILITY 115

15. REFERENCES 117

16. SHORT TITLES AND ACRONYMS 122

LIST OF TABLES

1. Key characteristics of the Mesa K proposal 24 2. Amount of high grade ore scheduled to be mined from the five pits at Mesa K 28 3. Summary of consultation undertaken to date 31 4. Key topics raised during stakeholder consultation regarding the proposal 33 5. Principles of environmental protection 35 6. Key environmental factors addressed in the EPS 39 7. Description of vegetation groups recorded at Mesa K 48 8. Area of vegetation types to be cleared for the proposal 57 9. Terrestrial fauna species of elevated conservation status that may potentially occur

at Mesa K 61 10. Details of the troglofauna sampling program conducted at Mesa K 70 11. Troglofauna collected at Mesa K during phases (P) 1 – 4 72 12. Drill holes where troglofauna species were recorded at Mesa K 72 13. Archaeological heritage sites within the proposed mining area at Mesa K 92 14. Environmental compliance and management controls for Mesa K 112 15. Proponent’s Environmental Management Commitments for the management of

Mesa K 113 16. Short titles and acronyms 122



LIST OF FIGURES

1. Regional location of Mesa K 2 2. General location plan of Mesa K 3 3. Flowchart of the Environmental Protection Statement (EPS) process 11 4. Mean monthly maximum and minimum temperatures for Pannawonica 12 5. Monthly rainfall data showing rainfall and number of rain days for Pannawonica 13 6. Mesa K topography and landforms 16 7. Mesa K land use and tenure 21 8. Mesa K conceptual mine site layout 23 9. Mesa K surface water catchments 27 10. Mesa K vegetation mapping 50 11. Priority flora species recorded at Mesa K 51 12. Location of troglofauna sampling sites at Mesa K 73 13. Locations where troglofauna were recorded at Mesa K 74 14. Examples of troglofauna specimens collected during sampling program 75 15. Development of mine plan to avoid singleton troglofauna species 79 16. Mesa K cross-section no. 1 80 17. Mesa K cross-section no. 2 81 18. Mesa K cross-section no. 3 82 19. Mesa K cross-section no. 4 83 20. A typical ripped surface with alternating bank and trough landscape zones 102 21. Mesa K conceptual rehabilitation areas 103 22. Rehabilitation monitoring at Mesa J and Mesa K 106

LIST OF APPENDICES

1. Supporting documents (contained on CD inside back cover of EPS)


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL 1

1. INTRODUCTION

The Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd (Robe) proposes to undertake mining of remnant iron ore in the previously mined Mesa K deposit. The title of the proposal is the “Mesa K Remnant Mining Project”.

The Mesa K deposit was mined from 1988 to 1995, producing approximately 48.2 million tonnes (Mt) of pisolite ore. After this time, the mine site was partially rehabilitated, although access to the open cut pits and remnant ore was retained.

The following is an Environmental Protection Statement for the proposal, prepared in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment (Part IV Division 1) Administrative Procedures 2002 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act).

1.1 THE MESA K REMNANT MINING PROJECT

1.1.1 Location

The proposal is located in the Robe Valley area of the Pilbara region, Western Australia (Figure 1) and involves remnant mining of an iron ore deposit (Mesa K deposit) located approximately 4 km north of the existing Robe Mesa J operation and 11 km south-west of the town of Pannawonica (Figure 2).

The Mesa K deposit is located on Mining Lease AML 70/00248 Sec 104. The Mesa J mine site and the access road from Mesa K to Mesa J are also located on this lease (Figure 2). The ‘project area’ for the proposal includes the parts of Mesa K that will be disturbed by the proposal (or that contain existing infrastructure).

1.1.2 Description

The existing Robe Mesa J operation is approaching the end of its mine life. The remaining source of dry ore at Mesa J is expected to be mined out by the end of 2008, after which time ore produced from Mesa J will be primarily “wet ore” that will require blending with dry ore to facilitate handling at the Cape Lambert facilities.

The proposed Mesa K Remnant Mining Project is intended to meet the shortfall of dry ore produced from Mesa J and will be operated as a satellite project to the current Mesa J operation. The supply of dry ore is critical for Mesa J to continue to operate.

The proposal will utilise the existing Mesa J equipment fleet, personnel and infrastructure. Dry ore mined from part of the previously mined Mesa K pisolite ore deposit will be trucked to Mesa J via existing road infrastructure, where it will be blended with “wet ore” from Mesa J and subsequently transported via existing rail infrastructure to Cape Lambert.

The proposal will supplement production at Mesa J to maintain current total production from the Mesa J train loadout. The proposal will not increase total production from Mesa J or change throughput at the Cape Lambert port.

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

5000

00 m

E

4000

00 m

E40

0000

mE

5000

00 m

E

7600000 mN

7700000 mN 7700000 mN

7600000 mN

Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester Millstream-Chichester National ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational ParkNational Park

Pannawonica - Millstream Road

Cape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape LambertCape Lambert

WickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamWickhamDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampierDampier

KarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaKarrathaRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourneRoebourne

PannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonica

Mesa GMesa B-FDinnerCamp

Mesa A

Mesa K Middle Robe

Jimmawurrada

Mesa H-I Mesa J

LEGEND

Figure 1Regional Location Mesa K


Drawn: RLJDate: 8 May 2007

Plan No. PDE0028986Proj: MGA94-50

1:1 000 000 @ A4

SCALE

LOCATION MAP

0 20 40km

National Park

HighwayRoadMajor River

TownResource

Mine (operating)

Mesa K mine site

Perth

Indian Ocean

North

Wes

t Coa

stal

Hig

hway

Pannawonica Road

Fortescue River

Robe River

Jimmawirrada Creek

Robe River

WesternAustralia

7600000 mN

4300

00 m

E

7590000 mN

4200

00 m

E42

0000

mE

7590000 mN

7600000 mN

Figure 2General Location Plan

of Mesa K


Drawn: R JenawayDate: 9 May 2007

Plan No. PDE0028914Proj: GDA94-50

1:125 000 @ A4

SCALE

++

+

Mesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa K

MarandooMarandooMarandooMarandooMarandooMarandooMarandooMarandooMarandooMount Tom PriceMount Tom PriceMount Tom PriceMount Tom PriceMount Tom PriceMount Tom PriceMount Tom PriceMount Tom PriceMount Tom Price

ChannarChannarChannarChannarChannarChannarChannarChannarChannarEastern RangeEastern RangeEastern RangeEastern RangeEastern RangeEastern RangeEastern RangeEastern RangeEastern Range

Brockman No.2Brockman No.2Brockman No.2Brockman No.2Brockman No.2Brockman No.2Brockman No.2Brockman No.2Brockman No.2NammuldiNammuldiNammuldiNammuldiNammuldiNammuldiNammuldiNammuldiNammuldi

ParaburdooParaburdooParaburdooParaburdooParaburdooParaburdooParaburdooParaburdooParaburdoo

Dampier

West AngelasWest AngelasWest AngelasWest AngelasWest AngelasWest AngelasWest AngelasWest AngelasWest Angelas

YandicooginaYandicooginaYandicooginaYandicooginaYandicooginaYandicooginaYandicooginaYandicooginaYandicooginaHope DownsHope DownsHope DownsHope DownsHope DownsHope DownsHope DownsHope DownsHope Downs

Cape Lambert

Port Hedland

LOCATION MAP

0 2 4 6 km

PannawonicaTownsite

Mesa JMesa JMesa JMesa JMesa JMesa JMesa JMesa JMesa JMine SiteMine SiteMine SiteMine SiteMine SiteMine SiteMine SiteMine SiteMine Site

Pannawonica Road

Old Pannawonica Road

Robe

Rive

r

RailwayRoadMinor rivers/creeks

Mine (operating)

Mesa K resource

LEGEND

Mesa J resource

Jimmawurrada Creek

Bungaroo Creek

Mesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KResourceResourceResourceResourceResourceResourceResourceResourceResource

Private Road



1.1.3 Environmental approval history

A Notice of Intent (including operations at Mesa K) was previously submitted and approved in 1987 under the Iron Ore (Robe River) Agreement Act 1964. Notification of intent to expand operations at Mesa K was submitted and approved in 1991. Notification of continuation of the Mesa K operation was submitted to the Department of Industry and Resources (DoIR) in 2002 and both DoIR and Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) concurrence were received in 2002.

1.1.4 Operations history

The Mesa K deposit was mined from February 1988 to May 1995 under an approved Notice of Intent and approvals pursuant to the Iron Ore (Robe River) Agreement Act 1964, producing approximately 48.2 Mt of pisolite ore. After this time, the mine site was partially rehabilitated, although access to the open cut pits and remnant ore was retained.

The Mesa K mine site has since been utilised to some extent as a support area for the Mesa J operation. An ammonium nitrate (AN) storage and handling depot, explosives storage magazines and salvageable plant and equipment storage have been sited at, and operated from, Mesa K.

1.2 THE PROPONENT

The proponent is the Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd (Robe), as Manager for Robe River Iron Associates. The proposal will be managed by Pilbara Iron Company (Services) Pty Ltd (Pilbara Iron) on behalf of Robe. Pilbara Iron is a member of the Rio Tinto Group. The title of the proposal is the “Mesa K Remnant Mining Project”.

The key contact for the proposal is:

Fiona Bell Environmental Approvals Specialist Pilbara Iron 152 – 158 St Georges Tce, Perth WA GPO Box A42, Perth WA 6837 Telephone: (08) 9366 5405 Facsimile: (08) 9327 2696 Email: [email protected]

1.3 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROPOSAL

The proposed production from Mesa K is considered critical to ensure the sustainability of Robe business activities. Robe currently produces approximately 32 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) of pisolite ore from the Mesa J mine site. Based on current projections, the remaining source of dry ore at Mesa J will be mined out near the end of 2008, after which time ore produced from Mesa J will be primarily “wet ore”. Wet ore must be blended with dry ore to facilitate handling through rail and shipping facilities.

An additional dry ore source is critical to the continued operation of the Mesa J (Pannawonica) Operation. The dry ore source is required to be developed by 2008 to maintain current operations at Mesa J.



Several factors make Mesa K the optimal source of dry ore for blending with wet ore from Mesa J. The key factors are the proximity of Mesa K to the existing Mesa J operation, the capacity to use existing infrastructure and access into Mesa K and the degree of previous disturbance at Mesa K.

Mesa K is the closest remnant ore source to the Mesa J operation, being only 4 km from the Mesa J site. This means that the haulage distance is reduced and the need for additional haulage infrastructure is minimal. It also means that Mesa K can be operated as a satellite operation to Mesa J, thus utilising the existing infrastructure at Mesa J and minimising the need for additional site infrastructure at Mesa K. The fact that there is existing and ready access into Mesa K, as well as direct access to ore at Mesa K, further reduces the need to develop additional infrastructure to support the operation and, hence, reduces the overall disturbance.

Given that Mesa K is a heavily disturbed site due to previous mining and that access to existing pits and ore remains open, the need for new disturbance can be minimised and infrastructure can be located preferentially within areas already disturbed.

1.3.1 Demand for iron ore

Robe Valley pisolite iron ore is currently supplied to many steel producing companies in Japan, Korea, China and Europe. The unique technical properties of the Robe Valley ore have established it as an important component of the iron ore blend in customers’ blast furnace feedstock. With the loss of access to this material, these customers would not be in a position to source alternative iron ore from other major suppliers, as all are, like Robe, essentially in a “sold out” position.

Recent growth in world sea-borne trade in iron ore has been driven by China, whose iron ore imports have risen from 70 Mt in 2000 to 208 Mt in 2004. This rapid growth in Chinese iron ore imports has been driven by the compound effect of an acceleration in finished steel consumption, which grew at an average rate of 20% year-on-year between 2000 and 2003. Domestic steel production has moved in step with this growth in demand. As domestic ore production in China is constrained by resource and cost issues, and scrap availability is low, most of the consequential increase in demand for iron units has been realised by imports of iron ore.

Resource statistics released by DoIR showed that, in 2004, Western Australian iron ore sales reached record volumes for a fifth consecutive year and pushed sales values to a record of $6190 million (DoIR 2004).

Robe pisolites have a firm position in the market as a consistent and cost-competitive product. With growth in most Asian markets, market share for Robe pisolites is forecast to drop, although saleable tonnes are likely to continue at a stable level due to its value-in-use. The Mesa K deposit will supplement production at Mesa J to enable Robe to continue to meet this demand.

1.3.2 Alternatives considered

The remaining source of dry ore from Mesa J is predicted to be mined out by the end of 2008 and an alternative source of dry ore will be required to maintain production of ore that has suitable moisture levels for handling and processing. Robe has investigated the mining of suitable deposits (including Mesas H, K and L) to meet this shortfall of dry ore from Mesa J.



Mesa H is currently undeveloped and mining at this site will require disturbance during the establishment of an active mine and associated facilities. The ore body is also predominantly mixed with waste, which will require extensive processing.

In this case, Robe considers mining of remnant areas is preferable to the development of relatively undisturbed areas. Both Mesas K and L have been heavily disturbed during previous mining operations. Mesa K is the more suitable of the two deposits for meeting the shortfall of dry ore from Mesa J as it is closer to Mesa J and allows existing infrastructure and access to be used.

The proposed remnant mining at Mesa K is considered critical to maintain the viability of Mesa J and ensure the sustainability of Robe business activities. Maintaining production from Mesa J is also important to the maintenance of the Pannawonica town, including its employees and residents.

1.3.3 Benefits of the proposal

Environmental benefits associated with the remnant mining of Mesa K, rather than development of an alternative resource, are discussed above in Section 1.3.2.

The proposal will result in economic benefits both state-wide and nation-wide through:

• contribution to the value of mineral exports

• royalties and taxation payments

• capital investment

• maintaining direct and indirect employment opportunities in the region

• maintaining demand for goods and services supporting the regional economy.

The ongoing activities of Robe in the Pilbara region will continue to support a range of social and economic development projects, including:

• funding for a range of organisations in the region, including sporting and cultural groups

• increasing the education, training and employment options for local Aboriginal people.

The town of Pannawonica was constructed in 1972 by Robe to house employees for the adjacent mine. The town remains a Robe community with a population of approximately 700 residents. Robe provides all infrastructure in the town, including housing, electricity, sewerage and drainage. Pannawonica relies largely on the continuation of Robe activities in the area for its survival and, by maintaining production rates, the proposal will contribute to the continuation of the town.

1.4 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT

The purpose of this document is to present an environmental review of the principle components of the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project, in the form of an Environmental Protection Statement (EPS).



1.5 STRUCTURE OF THIS DOCUMENT

This document is structured as follows:

• Introduction and background

• background to the Mesa K operation

• approvals and operations history

• environmental impact assessment process

• Overview of the existing environment

• Description of the proposal

• Environmental review of the proposal

• stakeholder consultation

• factor-by-factor environmental impact assessment and mitigation

• Environmental management

• outline of the Mesa K environmental management program

• proponent commitments.

1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The EPS was prepared in accordance with the Administrative Procedures for environmental assessment prescribed under the EP Act. Figure 3 outlines the process for an EPS level of assessment.

Robe initiated the EPS2 process by referring the proposal to the EPA on 19 April 2007. Notification of intent by the EPA to assess the proposal at the level of EPS was made in The West Australian on 7 May 2007. Following this, the proponent prepared the EPS documentation in consultation with stakeholders and other interested parties. The proposal was submitted to the EPA once it had been finalised.

The remaining part of the process involves the EPA formally setting the level of assessment (which, at this stage, is expected to remain as an EPS) and releasing the EPA report under Section 44 of the EP Act. This includes the conditions and procedures that the EPA considers should be applied to the proposal. The EPA then advertises the formal decision on the level of assessment and the availability of the report. At this time, the completed EPS is also made available to the public as required by the EPA.

The intent of the EPS process is for considerable upfront investigation and community consultation to be undertaken to resolve key environmental issues prior to the release of the EPS. Robe has therefore

2 The EPS level of assessment is applied typically to proposals of local interest that raise a number of significant

environmental factors which can be readily managed. It is also applied when it is considered that Ministerial Conditions are required to ensure the proposal is implemented and managed in an environmentally acceptable manner and where the EPA considers a formal public review period may not be necessary because the proponent has adequately consulted with stakeholders.



consulted with government agencies and other relevant stakeholders prior to, and during, the preparation of the EPS (Section 4).

To ensure that an EPS level of assessment is appropriate, the EPS document must demonstrate to the EPA that:

• the community, key stakeholders and government agencies have been adequately consulted and that their views have been taken into account

• all necessary studies have been carried out in a competent manner

• results of the studies have been incorporated into the design and intended operation and management of the proposal

• the proposal conforms with applicable environmental guidelines, policies, standards and procedures

• all relevant environmental factors have been adequately addressed

• appropriate environmental commitments have been made.

1.7 RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION AND POLICY

State legislation, policy and strategies

Western Australian legislation relevant to the environmental aspects of the proposal includes the following:

• Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972

• Agricultural and Related Resources Protection Act 1976

• Bush Fires Act 1954

• Conservation and Land Management Act 1984

• Contaminated Sites Act 2003

• Country Areas Water Supply Act 1947

• Dangerous Goods and Safety Act 2004

• Environmental Protection Act 1986

• Explosives and Dangerous Goods Act 1961

• Dangerous Goods (Transport) Act 1998

• Health Act 1911

• Iron Ore (Robe River) Agreement Act 1964

• Land Administration Act 1997

• Local Government Act 1995

• Mining Act 1978

• Native Title (State Provisions) Act 1999

• Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984



• Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914

• Soil and Land Conservation Act 1945

• Waterways Conservation Act 1976

• Wildlife Conservation Act 1950.

In addition to existing legislation, Western Australian government agency strategies and policies relevant to the environmental assessment and management of this proposal includes the following:

• Western Australian State Sustainability Strategy 2003

• Draft Greenhouse Strategy for Western Australia 2003

• State Conservation Strategy 1987

• EPA Red Book recommendations for Conservation Reserves of Western Australia 1976–1984

• State Water Quality Management Strategy 2001

• EPA Position Statement No. 2 “Environmental Protection of Native Vegetation in Western Australia” 2000

• EPA Position Statement No. 3 “Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an Element of Biodiversity Protection” 2002

• EPA Position Statement No. 7 “Principles of Environmental Protection” 2004

• EPA Position Statement No. 9 “Environmental Offsets” 2006.

Commonwealth legislation, policy and strategies

Commonwealth legislation relevant to the environmental aspects of the proposal includes the following:

• Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (which operates concurrently with any existing State laws in so far as those laws would not be consistent with this Act)

• Native Title Act 1993.

The proposal was not referred to the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Water Resources (DEW) under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) as the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact to a Matter of National Environmental Significance3. Two nationally-listed threatened fauna species have been identified as potentially occurring near the project area (Section 8.1.2). These species include the Orange Leaf-nosed Bat Rhinonicteris aurantius and the Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus. Suitable habitat for these species does not occur within the project area and, hence, the proposal is not expected to affect either of these species.

A single itinerant individual of the Orange Leaf-nosed Bat was recorded from a cave adjacent to the project area. Further surveys have indicated that the cave is not a significant roost site for this species.

3 Matters of National Environmental Significance include World Heritage Properties, RAMSAR wetlands, nationally

threatened species and ecological communities, migratory species, Commonwealth marine areas and nuclear actions.



The Northern Quoll was not recorded in the project area during a recent survey, but is considered to potentially occur on the southern escarpment of Mesa K, where suitable habitat exists. The primary habitat of potential importance for the Northern Quoll in the vicinity of the mining area is the southern escarpment of the mesa.

As the proposal will not involve disturbance to the southern escarpment of Mesa K (except for an area of approximately 0.2 ha in the immediate vicinity of the mine access road), including the location of the cave, there is a very low likelihood that the proposal will significantly affect either species and it is, therefore, unlikely that the proposal would be considered a controlled action requiring assessment under the EPBC Act.

The following national environmental strategies are also relevant to the proposal:

• National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development 1992

• Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment 1992

• National Greenhouse Strategy 1998

• National Conservation Strategy for Australia 1983

• National Strategy for Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity 1996.



Procedure for Environmental Protection Statement (EPS)

EPA's PROCESS

MINISTER's PROCESS

Referral of proposal to EPA

EPA considers the proposal may beassessed through EPS. Proponent agrees

EPS documentation suitable and proposalsuitable for EPS level of assessment

EPA advertises EPS levelof assessment

EPA makes EPS document public along withEPA Report under s44 including proposedEnvironmental Conditions and Procedures

PER or ERMP procedureapplies or Public Enquiry

Appeals to the Minister:to raise the level of assessment; and oron EPA Report

Minister consults with DMAs to seek agreementon whether or not and in what manner the

proposal may be implemented

Minister issues statement

Minister refers proposal toEPA under s43 of the Act tobe assessed more fully or

more publicly

Minister upholds appeals onlevel of assessment

Minister determinesappeals on EPA Report

NO

YES

NO

YES

EPA decides to assess proposal at EPS levelof assessment

Proponent refers EPS documentation to EPA

Proponent prepares EPS documentation inconsultation with stakeholders

EPA advertises possibility of an EPS level ofassessment

No

No

No

PER procedure appliesNo

Figure 3 Flowchart of the Environmental Protection Statement (EPS) process



2. OVERVIEW OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

2.1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

2.1.1 Climate

The Pilbara region has an arid tropical climate with two distinct seasons (Gentilli 1972). The region experiences very low rainfall, high evaporation and high daytime temperatures.

The summer months extend from November to April, with average monthly temperatures ranging from 21 to 40 ºC. Winter months extend from May to October, with average monthly temperatures ranging from 12 to 36 ºC (Bureau of Meteorology 2007; Figure 4).

The average annual rainfall for Pannawonica is approximately 300 to 350 mm, but is very erratic, with average monthly rainfall ranging from almost zero in September and October to around 100 mm in February (Bureau of Meteorology 2007; Figure 5). Intense rainfall events occasionally occur as a result of cyclonic activity, usually during the months of January to March. Cyclones can result in more than 100 mm of rain falling within a 24-hour period. These intense rainfall events can cause sheet flooding and extensive mechanical erosion.

Average annual evaporation around Pannawonica is approximately 2400 mm, greatly exceeding the average annual rainfall and contributing to the arid environment of the region.

Winds are predominantly east-north-easterly between March and August, and west-north-westerly between September and February.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Tem

pera

ture

(o C)

Mean maximum temperature

Mean minimum temperature

Source: Bureau of Meteorology (2007)

Figure 4 Mean monthly maximum and minimum temperatures for Pannawonica



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Rain

fall

(mm

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Num

ber o

f rai

n da

ys

Rainfall (mm) Number of rain days

Source: Bureau of Meteorology (2007)

Figure 5 Monthly rainfall data showing rainfall and number of rain days for Pannawonica

2.1.2 Landform and topography

Major physiographic unit

The project area lies towards the western end of the Hamersley Plateau as defined by Beard (1975a, 1975b). The Hamersley Plateau is characterised by rounded hills and ranges, consisting mainly of jaspilite and dolomite with some shale, siltstone and volcanics.

Land system (rangelands)

The project area includes sections of the following land systems, as described by Department of Land Information geographic information system mapping:

• River: active floodplains and major rivers supporting grassy eucalypt woodlands, tussock grasslands and soft spinifex grasslands; occurring within the Robe River and on the adjacent floodplain

• Robe: low limonite mesas and buttes supporting soft spinifex (and occasionally hard spinifex) grasslands; the main land system in the area, occurring broadly over the stony hills of the Mesa K deposit

• McKay: hills, ridges, plateaux remnants and breakaways of metasedimentary and sedimentary rocks supporting hard spinifex grasslands; a small area occurring at the northern boundary of the Mesa K project area

• Newman: rugged jaspilite plateaux, ridges and mountains supporting hard spinifex grasslands; a small area occurring at the western boundary of the Mesa K project area.

The landscape in and around the project area is characterised by two mesas (Mesas J and K) on either side of a valley, through which the Robe River flows. As a landform, Mesa K is a partial mesa that abuts adjacent mesa landforms and hills. Mesa K has escarpments on the southern and eastern sides.



The eastern escarpment has been substantially disturbed by previous mining activity, whilst the southern escarpment is largely undisturbed and is visible from the adjacent Robe River. Minor drainage lines form gullies through the steep slopes of the mesas and flow towards the Robe River (Figure 6).

The physical landscape is further described in Section 6.3.7 and surface hydrology in Section 10.

2.1.3 Local geology

The dominant surface geological formation in the project area is the Robe Pisolite4, which is believed to have been deposited in the palaeochannels of the ancestral Robe River system. As a result of regional uplift and subsequent erosion, the Robe Pisolite is exposed along the Robe Valley as a series of mesas, including two characteristic mesas in the vicinity of the project area (Mesa K and Mesa J). These two mesas protrude above the colluvium and aeolian sands and are separated by the Robe River alluvium, which occurs along the southern boundary of Mesa K.

The Mesa K deposit overlies a number of rock types, including the Marra Mamba Iron Formation, the Jeerinah Formation, duricrust and reworked pisolite and clay. The duricrust, reworked pisolites and clay form the basal unit of the Robe Pisolite sequence, which, in turn, overlies basement rocks comprising the Marra Mamba Iron Formation, the Jeerinah Formation and the Wittenoom Dolomite.

2.1.4 Surface hydrology

The Robe River is one of several major river systems in the Pilbara region and covers a linear distance of approximately 190 km. The Robe River catchment drains generally from east to west through the high relief areas of the Hamersley Ranges onto the more gently sloping areas of the coastal plain before discharging into the ocean (Aquaterra 2005).

Surface flows in the Robe River are intermittent, but the river has significant underflow in its alluvial bed, which maintains semi-permanent pools in the river channel where the groundwater is exposed. The positions of these pools within the valley change following seasonal floods (BBG 1991). The river typically flows at least once a year, generally following significant and intense rainfall events.

The Robe River is the dominant surface hydrological feature in the vicinity of the project area and passes by the southern escarpment of Mesa K. The river is crossed by the existing Mesa J to Cape Lambert rail bridge and the mine site access road from Mesa K to Mesa J.

There are no significant tributaries that originate in, or cross, the mining area. The majority of the proposed mine infrastructure is located in the primary Robe River drainage catchment, directly north of Weedai Pool and the confluence of Jimmawurrada Creek and Robe River.

Section 10 describes surface hydrology of the Mesa K project area in more detail.

4 Pisolitic ore, as found at Mesa K, consists primarily of a mixture of the iron minerals goethite and hematite, with minor clay

and silica. The majority of the pisolite is made up of spherical accretions of iron minerals called pisoliths, which consist of a hematite nucleus coated by concentric growths of goethite.



2.1.5 Hydrogeology

The three prevalent aquifer units in the project area are:

1. Alluvial overburden: a substantial unconfined aquifer if saturated. The alluvial overburden occurs in the Robe River and on the floodplain at the eastern edge of the Mesa K area and is highly permeable due to the gravely nature of the material.

2. Robe Pisolite: forms the main unconfined aquifer of variable permeability due to solution cavities and pisolite ore (highly permeable) and horizontal lenses of clay and clay alteration near fractures (low permeability).

3. Basement: typically the Jeerinah Formation and the Marra Mamba Formation. Permeability varies from fractured basalts (highly permeable) to claystones, shale and chert (lower permeability).

Surficial groundwater in the Mesa K area flows south to south-east through the alluvium and pisolite towards the Robe River. Based on historical data collected during previous mining at Mesa K (1988 to 1995), groundwater salinity is low, ranging from 299 to 476 mg/L, and is comparable to that found nearby at Mesa J.

Groundwater elevation typically fluctuates seasonally in the Mesa K area and is responsive to rainfall recharge and the Robe River when it flows/floods.

Section 6.3.6 describes the hydrogeology of the Mesa K project area in more detail.

4300

00 m

E

7590000 mN

7600000 mN7600000 mN

4200

00 m

E42

0000

mE

7590000 mNFigure 6

Mesa K Topography and Landforms

Drawn: R JenawayDate: 27 July 2007


1:125 000 @ A4

SCALE

++

+






Dampier



Cape Lambert

Port Hedland

LOCATION MAP

0 2 4 6 km

PannawonicaTownsite


Pannawonica Road


Robe

Rive

r

RoadMajor River

Mine

Mesa K Project Area

LEGEND

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada CreekBungaroo Creek

Mesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject Area

50K contours

Minor River

Mesa LMesa LMesa LMesa LMesa LMesa LMesa LMesa LMesa L

Mesa MMesa MMesa MMesa MMesa MMesa MMesa MMesa MMesa M

Mesa NMesa NMesa NMesa NMesa NMesa NMesa NMesa NMesa N

Private Road

Railway



2.2 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

The Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation (IBRA) identifies 85 bioregions across Australia (Environment Australia 2000). The Mesa K project area is located within the Pilbara bioregion, at the north-western end of the Hamersley subregion. Due to the limited representation of areas in conservation reserves, the Pilbara Biogeographic Region is listed as a medium priority for land purchase funding under the National Reserves System Co-operative Program.

2.2.1 Vegetation and flora

Mesa K is located within the Fortescue Botanical District of the Eremaean Botanical Province as defined by Beard (1975a, 1975b). The vegetation of this province is typically open and dominated by spinifex, acacias and occasional eucalypts.

The vegetation of the project area can be categorised into seven major types, occurring over two broad topographic features (Biota 2007a):

• Stony hills

• Eucalyptus leucophloia scattered low trees over Acacia atkinsiana (A. arida) open shrubland to tall shrubland over Triodia wiseana hummock grassland

• Acacia inaequilatera scattered tall shrubs over A. arida open shrubland to open heath over Triodia wiseana hummock grassland

• Eucalyptus leucophloia scattered low trees over Acacia inaequilatera scattered tall shrubs over Acacia bivenosa scattered shrubs to open shrubland over Triodia wiseana hummock grassland

• Major creeklines and floodplains

• Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Melaleuca argentea open forest over Acacia trachycarpa, Petalostylis labicheoides tall open scrub over Stemodia grossa low shrubland

• Corymbia candida scattered low trees to low woodland over Triodia epactia hummock grassland

• Acacia synchronicia, A. bivenosa, A. ancistrocarpa open shrubland to shrubland over Triodia epactia open hummock grassland

• Acacia synchronicia, A. bivenosa open shrubland over Triodia longiceps hummock grassland.

Much of the ground surface over Mesa K has been disturbed by previous mining activities and these areas are considered to be in Poor condition5. Vegetation outside previously disturbed areas is in Excellent to Very Good condition in stony hills habitats and in Very Good to Good condition adjacent to the Robe River and associated floodplains (Biota 2007a).

5 This classification has been assigned to all areas that have been previously disturbed and is not applied as a measure of

rehabilitation success, but rather as an indication of the degree of disturbance in comparison to intact vegetation.



The riverine vegetation is considered to be of high conservation significance, as it supports habitat-restricted species (including Priority flora) and occurs in the major drainage feature for the locality (Biota 2007a).

One hundred and sixty-four (164) taxa of native vascular flora from 91 genera belonging to 42 families, as well as 14 species of introduced flora, have been recorded in a survey area centred on Mesa K (Biota 2007a).

No Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) or Declared Rare Flora (DRF) are known from the project area; however, three Priority 3 (P3) flora species do occur in, or adjacent to, the project area (Biota 2007a). These are:

• Abutilon trudgenii

• Sida sp. Wittenoom

• Rhynchosia bungarensis.

In addition, an undescribed spinifex species (Triodia sp. nov.) occurs in rocky habitats at Mesa K, as well as throughout the broader Pannawonica locality.

Section 7 contains more detailed descriptions of the vegetation and flora of the Mesa K mining area.

2.2.2 Fauna

The terrestrial vertebrate fauna of the Robe Valley area in the Pilbara region is generally dominated by avifauna (birds) and, to a lesser extent, herpetofauna (reptiles and amphibians). Avifauna currently recorded in the Robe Valley includes both passerine (“perching”) and non-passerine birds. Commonly recorded species include the Little Corella, the Painted Finch and the Budgerigar. Herpetofauna recorded from this area includes frogs, lizards and snakes, with skinks the most common group recorded. Mammals are common throughout many habitats in the Robe Valley, including both native and introduced (e.g. the common house mouse) species. Native mammal species occurring in the Robe Valley are generally dominated by carnivorous marsupials (e.g. Northern Quoll) and rodents (e.g. Sandy Island Mouse), but also include monotremes (e.g. Short-beaked Echidna), non-carnivorous marsupials (e.g. Euro) and a variety of bats (e.g. Common Sheath-tail Bat) (Biota 2005a, 2006a).

The terrestrial invertebrate fauna of the Robe Valley area includes some taxa with naturally small distributions that are, in part, characterised by poor dispersal capabilities, confinement to disjunct habitats and low fecundity (Harvey 2002, Ponder and Colgan 2002). These groups are collectively referred to as short-range endemic (SRE) invertebrates (sensu Harvey 2002). SRE invertebrates that have been recorded in the Robe Valley area include millipedes, land snails, mygalomorph (trapdoor) spiders and pseudoscorpions (Biota 2005a, 2006a, 2007b).

The terrestrial vertebrate and invertebrate taxa recorded in the Robe Valley area to date include several species that are endemic to the Pilbara region, such as the Pilbara Olive Python and the Fortescue Grunter (Biota 2005a, 2006a, 2007b).

Subterranean invertebrate fauna (stygofauna and troglofauna) are known to occur in the alluviums and mesa formations within the region, including Mesa K (Biota 2006b, 2006c, 2007c). These fauna are of high conservation significance as they exhibit high degrees of endemism, which is characteristic of subterranean fauna throughout Western Australia (EPA 2003).



Sections 8 and 9 contain a more detailed description of the terrestrial and subterranean fauna of the Mesa K area.

2.3 SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

2.3.1 Local government and towns

The proposal is located within the Shire of Ashburton (Pilbara Region), approximately 11 km south-west of the town of Pannawonica, which currently has a population of approximately 700 residents. The town’s economy is based directly or indirectly on Robe mining operations in the area.

The closest regional centre to Pannawonica is Karratha, which is approximately 200 km to the north-east. Other regional centres in the Pilbara are Tom Price, Paraburdoo, Roebourne and Port Hedland. These centres provide services to the pastoral, natural gas, salt, iron ore and other mining industries within the Pilbara.

The Robe Cape Lambert port operations are approximately 3.5 km north-west of the coastal township of Point Samson, in the Shire of Roebourne. The townships of Wickham and Roebourne lie approximately 10 and 20 km to the south of the Cape Lambert operations respectively; Karratha is approximately 40 km to the west.

2.3.2 Tenure and surrounding land use

The land use and tenure in and around the project area (Figure 7) comprises:

• mining on AML70/248 as part of the Iron Ore (Robe River) Agreement Act 1964

• stock grazing

• Yarraloola Pastoral Lease 3114/1127 (held by Robe)

• Yalleen Pastoral Lease 3114/1013 (held by Robe)

• infrastructure

• Mesa J to Cape Lambert mainline rail (operated by Pilbara Iron)

• access roads from Pannawonica to Mesa J

• explosives facility servicing Mesa J.

The closest National Park is the Millstream-Chichester National Park, approximately 75 km north-east of Pannawonica (Figure 1).

2.3.3 Aboriginal heritage and native title

Numerous Aboriginal heritage sites have been identified within the general project area and surrounds, the majority of which are artefact scatters.

The Mesa K site is heavily disturbed as a result of previous mining operations. Nine archaeological sites have been recorded within the proposed remnant mining area. Six of these sites have been previously cleared under Section 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. The remaining three sites will not be disturbed by the proposal.



A heritage survey of the project area (including ethnographic consultation) was conducted in April 2007, in consultation with the Kuruma Marthudunera people.

The Native Title Claim of the Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant Group (the Kuruma Marthudunera) covers approximately 15,759 km2 of land in the Pilbara region, incorporating the Mesa K project area. Robe, as part of Pilbara Iron, have negotiated a Binding Initial Agreement with Kuruma Marthudunera representatives regarding all Robe interests within the bounds of the Kuruma Marthudunera claim. Among other things, the proposed native title agreement will address all matters required pursuant to the Native Title Act 1993.

Section 11 contains more detailed information regarding Aboriginal heritage values within the project area.

2.3.4 European heritage

No places or buildings listed on the Australian Heritage Database (which includes the Register of the National Estate, the Commonwealth Heritage List, the National Heritage List or the World Heritage List) occur within 50 km of Mesa K.

A search of the Heritage Council of Western Australia State Register of Heritage Places indicated there are no registered heritage places in the vicinity of the proposal. A search of the Heritage Council of Western Australia Places Database for the Ashburton Shire provided four listings in the region:

• Yarraloola Homestead (place number 15398)

• Red Hill Homestead (place number 15375)

• Pannawonica Fire Station (place number 14628)

• Pannawonica Police Station (place number 17385).

The Pannawonica Fire Station and Police Station are the closest of these places, being located within the Pannawonica town itself, approximately 11 km north-east of the proposed project area.

4350

00 m

E

7590000 mN

7595000 mN

7600000 mN

4300

00 m

E

4350

00 m

E

7605000 mN

7610000 mN

4200

00 m

E

4250

00 m

E

4300

00 m

E

4200

00 m

E

4250

00 m

E

4150

00 m

E

7605000 mN

7610000 mN

4150

00 m

E

7590000 mN

7600000 mN

7595000 mN

L 3116 4627Pannawonica Townsite

ASHBUL 00162

ASHBUL 00169

ASHBUL 00054

ASHBUL 00113

ASHBUL 00123

ASHBUL 00124

ASHBUL 00107

ASHBUL 00120VCL

ASHBUL 00164VCL

ASHBUL 00112VCL

ASHBUL 00118VCL

ASHBUL 00108Railway

L 3114 1127Yarraloola Station

L 3114 1013Yalleen Station

ASHBUL 00124VCL

ML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SASec 77Sec 77Sec 77Sec 77Sec 77Sec 77Sec 77Sec 77Sec 77



AML70/00248AML70/00248AML70/00248AML70/00248AML70/00248AML70/00248AML70/00248AML70/00248AML70/00248




ML248ML248ML248ML24ML24ML24ML24ML24ML24SecSecSecSecSecSecSecSecSec

ASHBUL 00106ML24ML24ML24ML24ML24ML24ML24ML24ML24

SecSecSecSecSecSecSecSecSec

ML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAPt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103


ML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAML248SAPt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103Pt Sec 103




Figure 7Mesa K Landuse and Tenure

Drawn: R JenawayDate: 27 July 2007


1:125 000 @ A4

SCALE






Dampier



Cape Lambert

Port Hedland

LOCATION MAP

0 2 4 6 km

PannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaPannawonicaTownsiteTownsiteTownsiteTownsiteTownsiteTownsiteTownsiteTownsiteTownsite


Pannawonica Road


Robe

Rive

r

RoadRiver/Creek

Mine

Mesa K Project Area

LEGEND

Mesa J

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada Creek

Jimmawurrada CreekBungaroo Creek

Mesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KMesa KProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject AreaProject Area

Pastoral Stations

DOLA Tenure

Robe Mining Leases

Railway



3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

3.1 KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSAL

The proponent currently operates the Mesa J iron ore mine located approximately 15 km south-west of the town of Pannawonica. The mine currently produces pisolite ore at a rate of 32 Mtpa, which is railed approximately 200 km from the mine to the port at Cape Lambert. The remaining source of dry ore at Mesa J is expected to be mined out by the end of 2008, after which time ore produced from Mesa J will be “wet ore” that will require blending with dry ore from an alternative source to facilitate handling and maintain production. The proponent proposes to meet this significant shortfall in dry ore production at Mesa J with dry ore from Mesa K.

Mesa K is located approximately 4 km north of Mesa J and 11 km south-west of the town of Pannawonica. The Mesa K deposit was previously mined from 1988 to 1995, after which it was partially rehabilitated. Access to the Mesa K open cut pits and remnant ore was retained and minimal new infrastructure is required to recommence mining at this site. Mining at Mesa K is planned to recommence in July 2008 and conclude in December 2010, although mining may continue into 2011. The mining schedule will be regularly reviewed and revised as required.

The proposal will involve:

• mining of remnant ore in five (5) existing open cut pits: Gravel Yard pit, Central pit, West-South pit, West-North pit and Gully pit (Figure 8)

• mining by conventional drill and blast, load and haul occurring concurrently with Mesa J mainly through the dry months of May to December, utilising equipment fleet, personnel and other resources from Mesa J

• haulage of Run of Mine (ROM) ore by truck from Mesa K to Mesa J using the existing mine access road (any additional roads required for access at Mesa K will be constructed in previously disturbed areas)

• minor realignment and widening of the existing mine access road from Mesa K to Mesa J

• establishment of transportable office, portable crib room, toilets, septic tank, water tank and generators at Mesa K (Figure 8)

• sourcing of water and fuel from existing Mesa J facilities.

The key characteristics of the proposal are presented in Table 1.

4240

00 m

E

4245

00 m

E

7597500 mN

7598000 mN

7598500 mN

7599000 mN

4240

00 m

E

4245

00 m

E

7596500 mN

7597000 mN

4230

00 m

E

4235

00 m

E

4230

00 m

E

4225

00 m

E

4235

00 m

E

7599000 mN

7598500 mN

7597500 mN

7598000 mN

4225

00 m

E

7596500 mN

7597000 mN

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

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

Figure 8 Mesa K Conceptual Mine LayoutProjection: MGA94-50FDMS No.: PDE0035119a Scale: 1: 12 500 Date: 27 November 2007

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

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

Legend

Surface Water Runoff Discharge Point

Nominal Mesa Outline

AN Facility

Project Area

Waste Dump/Low Grade Ore Stockpile

Proposed Pit Outlines

Crib/Office

Robe RiverRobe RiverRobe RiverRobe RiverRobe RiverRobe RiverRobe RiverRobe RiverRobe River

Gully PitGully PitGully PitGully PitGully PitGully PitGully PitGully PitGully Pit

Gravel YardGravel YardGravel YardGravel YardGravel YardGravel YardGravel YardGravel YardGravel YardPitPitPitPitPitPitPitPitPit

CentralCentralCentralCentralCentralCentralCentralCentralCentralPitPitPitPitPitPitPitPitPit

West Pit SouthWest Pit SouthWest Pit SouthWest Pit SouthWest Pit SouthWest Pit SouthWest Pit SouthWest Pit SouthWest Pit South

West Pit NorthWest Pit NorthWest Pit NorthWest Pit NorthWest Pit NorthWest Pit NorthWest Pit NorthWest Pit NorthWest Pit North

Railway

Private Road



Table 1 Key characteristics of the Mesa K proposal

Component Proposal characteristic Detail

Proposal life Approximately 2 – 3 years General

Ore deposit Approximately 12 – 13 Mt high grade ore Approximately 6 Mt low grade ore

Clearing of native vegetation

Area of new disturbance Approximately 10 ha

Ore type Pisolite iron ore

Ore location Above watertable

Stripping ratio The ratio of waste and low grade ore to high grade ore will be approximately 1:1

Waste rock disposal Initially directed to surface waste dumps and, thereafter, used in progressive backfilling of mine pits as far as practicable

Mine and mining

Infrastructure Upgrade of existing mine access road Installation of transportable office, portable crib room, toilets, septic tank and water tank at Mesa K Portable generator (diesel powered) at Mesa K

Product transport Product transport The ore will be trucked 4 km to the nearby Mesa J mine site via the existing mine access road for blending with Mesa J ore and then transported via the existing railway to the port at Cape Lambert

Workforce Existing Mesa J workforce Workforce

Accommodation Existing accommodation in Pannawonica

Abbreviations Mt million tonnes Mtpa million tonnes per annum ha hectares km kilometres

3.2 DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE

The Mesa K deposit is one of several pisolite ore deposits that together form the Robe Pisolite. The majority of the pisolite is made up of spherical accretions of iron minerals called pisoliths, which consist of a hematite nucleus coated by concentric growths of goethite.

The Robe Pisolite is believed to have been deposited in the palaeochannels of the ancestral Robe River system. Iron precipitation from solution onto fine-grained ferruginous material and fragments over millions of years is believed to be the mechanism of the development of the iron-rich pisolite deposits. The pisolite is thought to have slowly filled the palaeodrainage valleys of the Robe River system to depths of up to 50 m or more, whereafter regional uplift and subsequent erosion of sections removed large segments of the deposits, leaving behind mesas, or partial mesas, such as Mesa K.

The basal unit of the deposit is dominated by clay and reworked channel deposits, which may include basal conglomerate and coarse pisolite. Above this, three sub-horizontal stratigraphic zones make up the remainder of the Robe Pisolite, although in some areas, only one or two of these zones are present. From the basal unit to the surface, these zones are the Transitional Pisolite, the Main Pisolite and the Weathered Pisolite. Clays are common throughout the Robe Pisolite in Mesa K, occurring mainly as pods or narrow bands of varying thickness, but also filling joint zones.

The Transitional Pisolite is characterised by relatively low iron content and poor pisolite development. The Main Pisolite varies in thickness from two (2) to 50 m and is considered to be the principal ore



zone, within which iron grades are generally high (Fe > 55%). The Weathered Pisolite forms the upper-most stratigraphic unit of the pisolite sequence across most of Mesa K, and largely comprises most of the overburden. This zone varies in thickness from zero (0) to 18 m (average four to six metres) and contains variable amounts of clay, often covered by clay-rich topsoil.

The nominal outline for the Mesa K landform comprises some 360 ha surface area. Within this, the pisolite resource footprint makes up approximately 255 ha, of which approximately 110 ha was previously disturbed during mining from 1988 to 1995. Previous mining produced approximately 48 Mt of pisolite ore.

Up to a further 12 – 13 Mt of pisolite ore is proposed to be mined from the five pits at Mesa K, over a total surface area of approximately 65 ha.

The stripping ratio of waste and low grade ore to high grade ore will be approximately one to one.

The proposed mining will take place above the local water table. Due to the nature of the pisolite, there may be minor localised pockets of water within the resource voids.

3.3 IMPLICATIONS OF PREVIOUS MINING

Substantial mining and exploration activities have already occurred at Mesa K over an extended period. As a result, the majority of the area in which mining and associated activities will take place on Mesa K has already been disturbed.

The spatial extent of new disturbance for the proposal at Mesa K is approximately 10 ha. The majority of the new disturbance required is for the cutback of existing open pits, with the remainder being for waste rock dumps, as well as minor realignment and widening of the mine access road.

3.4 DESCRIPTION OF MINING OPERATION

3.4.1 Site preparation

Clearing and earthworks

Vegetation and overburden has been removed from the majority of the project area during previous mining activities. Disturbance to approximately 10 ha of relatively undisturbed areas within the mining area will be required for the proposal, including the need to clear vegetation and strip overburden.

Any topsoil removed will be either directly placed onto areas undergoing rehabilitation, or stored in temporary stockpiles for later placement. All topsoil removed will be stored in accordance with the Robe Soil Resource Management Procedure, which includes measures to:

• prevent compaction of the topsoil • facilitate drainage • reduce the risk of erosion • maintain an active population of soil microbes.



Waste rock material (overburden) will initially be directed to surface waste dumps and, thereafter, will be used in progressive backfilling of mine pit voids as far as practicable.

Drainage

There are no significant tributaries that originate in, or cross, the mining area, and Mesa K is situated at the top of local subcatchments that have been created through previous mining activities (Figure 9). Local steep-sided gullies on the mesa escarpment to the south of the mining area are associated with geological structures and preferential weathering, rather than significant surface water runoff and erosion. Prior to historical mining activities, the mesa would have drained directly into the Robe River; however, the mesa proper has been heavily disturbed and is now largely internally draining, intercepting approximately 0.03% of the flow contribution to the Robe River.

Uncontrolled surface water runoff generated from the mining areas during high rainfall events is unlikely to reach the Robe River. The internally-draining subcatchments created by previous mining activity at Mesa K presently contain all surface water runoff from rainfall events of less than a 20 year annual recurrence interval (ARI), and all but one subcatchment are also capable of containing surface water runoff from rainfall events greater than a 50 year ARI (Figure 9). The capacity for internal storage of surface water runoff will increase with mine development, as the mining pits increase in depth and spatial extent.

During pit development and other mining activities, local drainage controls will be constructed to control surface water runoff within the mining area. Captured surface water runoff will be returned to the Robe River at a designated discharge location when required, using a rock-lined spillway to minimise erosion.

3.4.2 Mining operations

The mining of up to 12 – 13 Mt of high grade ore from Mesa K over approximately two to three years will supplement production at Mesa J to maintain the current pisolite delivery rate to Cape Lambert of 32 Mtpa. Mining will involve further excavation in five existing open cut pits at Mesa K using conventional drill and blast, load and haul technology.

Mining at Mesa K is scheduled to take place mainly during the months of May to December, as access across the Robe River is expected to be disrupted during the cyclone season. Mining at Mesa K is planned to commence in mid 2008 and conclude in late 2010, although mining may continue into 2011.

Mining will be centred on Gravel Yard pit (Figure 8) during 2008. The focus of mining will shift to Central, West-South and West-North pits during 2009. Mining in Gully pit is scheduled to commence in 2009 and continue into 2010 (Table 2). Scheduling and backfilling requires that several pits are mined at the same time.

The proposed pit outlines (Figure 8) represent revised pit outlines, whereby all singleton troglofauna species occurrences have been avoided (including a 50 m radius buffer) (Section 9.4.1). The proposed pit outlines may be subject to minor realignment as mining progresses, based on ore quality, access, safety and geotechnical requirements; however, a 50 m buffer will be maintained around each singleton troglofauna occurrence.

Internal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageCatchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Catchment area = 0.66 km2Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Internal volume = 162,011 m3Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event Storage = 50 yr - 100 yr ARI flood event

Internal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchmentsInternal drainage catchments

Internal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageCatchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Catchment area = 0.17 km2Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Internal volume = 19,647 m3Storage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood eventStorage = 20 yr - 50 yr ARI flood event

Robe River

Sub-catchment divide

Mesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine SiteMesa K Mine Site

Internal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageCatchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Catchment area = 1.31 km2Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Internal volume = 1,116,606 m3Storage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood event

Weedai Pool

Internal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageInternal drainageCatchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Catchment area = 0.11 km2Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Internal volume = 62,964 m3Storage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood eventStorage = +100 yr ARI flood event

Robe River

Mesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine SiteMesa J Mine Site

4240

00 m

E

4260

00 m

E

4240

00 m

E

4260

00 m

E 7596000 mN

7598000 mN42

2000

mE

4220

00 m

E7596000 mN

7598000 mN

Projection: MGA94-50FDMS No.: PDE0035011 Scale: 1:25 000 Date: 25 July 2007Figure 9 Mesa K Surface Water Catchments



Table 2 Amount of high grade ore scheduled to be mined from the five pits at Mesa K

Approximate amount of high grade ore scheduled to be mined during each year (Mt) Pit

2008 2009 2010

TOTAL (Mt)

Gravel Yard 3.74 1.23 0 4.97 Gully 0 0.41 3.51 3.92 Central 0 1.06 0 1.06 West-South 0 0.30 0 0.30 West-North 0 1.15 0 1.15 TOTAL (Mt) 3.74 4.15 3.51 11.4

Abbreviations Mt million tonnes

Mesa K will be operated as a satellite project to Mesa J. As such, schedules may vary to meet combined production requirements.

The southern escarpment of Mesa K is largely undisturbed and is visible from the adjacent Robe River. Despite previous disturbance to some sections of the escarpment, it is considered important to minimise further disturbance in order to retain the biodiversity, heritage and landscape value associated with the scarp. Retention of the southern escarpment is a priority for the proposal and only minor disturbance associated with the access road upgrade is proposed.

Robe commissioned an assessment of the long-term geotechnical stability of remnant mesa escarpments in the Robe Valley, including that at Mesa K. The geotechnical stability assessment by Snowden (2007) found that:

• mining operations adjacent to natural mesa escarpments have not caused large scale instability of the natural slopes and that blast damage to the natural escarpment is only observed where the width of the perimeter zone has been reduced to approximately 15 m

• a remnant natural bluff with a minimum width of 3 m directly adjacent to a section of mesa mined over 20 years ago showed no recent erosion effects

• a number of small isolated natural mesas with widths less than 50 m show no evidence of instability or accelerated erosion.

Robe will maintain a buffer between the relatively undisturbed sections of the southern escarpment and the adjacent proposed pit outlines of between 20 m and 220 m to maintain landscape and aesthetic values associated with the escarpment and to ensure the geotechnical stability of the remnant escarpment.

Mineral waste dumps

Mineral waste dumps will be preferentially located in previously cleared areas (Figure 8) to reduce clearing of previously undisturbed vegetation. Low grade ore and waste will initially be dumped outside pit designs until the pit is sufficiently developed to allow in-pit dumping.



All waste dumps at Mesa K will be constructed in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Landform Design Guidelines to minimise changes in landscape character resulting from the waste dumps. These guidelines include:

• minimisation of dump height

• shaping of dumps to blend in with the surrounding natural topography

• construction to meet the requirements of the final rehabilitation design

• inclusion of drainage and erosion management features.

3.4.3 Ore handling and ore transport

ROM ore will be hauled 4 km from Mesa K to Mesa J along the existing mine access road using up to six 185 t trucks. Ore will then be transported via the existing rail infrastructure from Mesa J to Cape Lambert. No additional rail infrastructure is required for transport of ore from Mesa K. The mine access road from Mesa K to Mesa J will require minor realignment in one section and will be widened in parts for safe traffic control. The Robe River crossing that forms part of the mine access road will be upgraded separately; the upgrade does not form part of the proposal. A Bed and Banks permit previously granted under the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 for the upgrade of the crossing will be renewed prior to the upgrade works commencing.

Low grade ore material will be either directly trucked to Mesa J for direct loadout or will be stockpiled within the Mesa K mining area to allow for possible future recovery. The proportion of material stockpiled at Mesa K, rather than trucked directly to Mesa J, will depend on material quality and blending requirements. The volume of low grade material recovered from stockpile at Mesa K will also depend on ore quality and blending requirements. The recovery of stockpiled low grade ore will be reviewed regularly and, if stockpiled low grade ore is not recovered by 2012, it will then be rehabilitated in the same manner as waste material (Section 12.3.3).

3.4.4 Support infrastructure and consumables

The proposal will require a number of minor support facilities and the provision of basic consumables for the duration of operations at the site. Wherever possible, existing facilities at Mesa J will be used for the Mesa K operation.

Water supply and use

Water requirements for the proposal are low and will be limited to the purposes of dust suppression, crib room and ablutions. Water for the proposal will be supplied from the existing Mesa J operation via trucks and will be stored in on-site water tanks. Potable water will be supplied separately.

No additional water extraction from the Mesa J operation is required to meet the needs of the current proposal and supply will be within the current licence limits for the Mesa J operation.

Power supply

Electrical power requirements will be minimal and will be provided by a transportable on-site diesel generator.



Fuel supply

Fuel will be supplied from Mesa J via a specialist service vehicle to the Mesa K equipment as required. No new fuel storage facilities will be required for the proposal.

Explosives transport and storage

The existing explosive storage facilities for Mesa J are located at Mesa K and consist of three separate locations for the magazine, emulsion storage tanks and ammonium nitrate (AN) prill storage shed. Planning is currently underway to consolidate these separate facilities within the vicinity of the existing AN prill storage shed. This combined explosives storage facility is being upgraded separately and will meet new Explosives and Dangerous Goods Regulations.

Non-mineral waste

Ablution facilities for the workforce at Mesa K will be temporary and transportable. Ablution effluent will be collected in a septic tank, which will be emptied regularly by a licensed contractor and disposed of at a licensed facility in accordance with the licence conditions.

Inert wastes from the mine site and work areas will be disposed of to the existing landfill facility located at Mesa J, which is managed in accordance with the licence registration and appropriate landfill guidelines. Putrescible waste from the mine site and work areas will be disposed of to the Pannawonica townsite landfill.

Communications

Transportable communications equipment will be used for the site mining fleet management system.

Other facilities

Transportable office, portable crib room, toilets and water tank will be located at the Mesa K mining area for use by employees. These will be located adjacent to the access road near Central Pit (Figure 8).

3.4.5 Workforce and accommodation

The main workforce for Mesa K will be supplied from the Mesa J workforce and will reside in the existing Pannawonica townsite accommodation.



4. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS

Key stakeholders were identified through the proponent’s previous experience (including review of public submissions) at Mesa K and their other mining projects in the region, as well as through discussion with the EPASU. Those consulted during the preparation of the EPS were:

• Government agencies

• Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC)

• Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA)

• Department of Industry and Resources (DoIR)

• Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and Environmental Protection Authority Service Unit (EPASU)

• Non-government organisations

• Conservation Council of Western Australia

• Kuruma Marthudunera Working Group

• Pilbara Native Title Service (PNTS)

• Wildflower Society of Western Australia

• Yalleen Station

• Local government

• Shire of Ashburton

• Community

• Senior representatives from Kuruma Marthudunera.

4.2 FORM AND TIMING OF CONSULTATION

Robe initiated a stakeholder consultation program for the proposal towards the end of 2006, prior to the submission of the environmental referral of the proposal to the EPA in April 2007. The timing of the consultation program has enabled the topics raised to be taken into account during the design of the proposal, determination of management measures and preparation of the EPS (Table 3).

Table 3 Summary of consultation undertaken to date

Date Stakeholder Purpose

September 2006 EPASU EPA

Brief introduction and overview (including flyover) of Mesa K during a field visit to Mesa A.

December 2006 Molhar Discuss findings of initial bat survey and proposed methods for follow-up bat survey.

December 2006 DEC Discuss findings of initial bat survey and proposed methods for follow-up bat survey.



Date Stakeholder Purpose

January 2007 Molhar Discuss findings of follow-up bat survey and whether any further investigation is required.

January 2007 DEC Discuss findings of follow-up bat survey and whether any further investigation is required.

8 February 2007 PNTS Heritage survey request for Mesa K.

23 February 2007 Kuruma Marthudunera Working Group

General overview of the proposal and discussion of heritage survey request.

27 March 2007 EPASU Detailed overview and discussion of the scope of the proposal, environmental factors and management of those factors.

2, 3 April 2007 Senior representatives from Kuruma Marthudunera

Detailed review of the proposal, known heritage sites and protection measures. View the site and development area and review protection measures.

17 April 2007 EPA EPASU

Detailed discussion of the proposal scope, environmental factors, management of those factors and the likely level of assessment.

1 May 2007 DIA General overview of the proposal and preliminary advice from the heritage survey.

4 May 2007 DEC Detailed overview and discussion of the environmental aspects of the proposal.

7 May 2007 DoIR Detailed overview and discussion of the environmental aspects of the proposal.

9 May 2007 DEC Detailed overview and discussion of the environmental aspects of the proposal. Discussion of the fauna aspects of the proposal.

16 May 2007 PNTS Kuruma Marthudunera Working Group

Detailed overview of the proposal.

17 May 2007 DEC (Karratha) Detailed overview and discussion of the environmental aspects of the proposal.

29 May 2007 Conservation Council of WA Detailed overview and discussion of the environmental aspects of the proposal.

29 May 2007 Wildflower Society of WA Detailed overview and discussion of the environmental aspects of the proposal.

31 May 2007 Shire of Ashburton Detailed overview of the proposal and discussion of status with the EPA.

7 June 2007 PNTS Kuruma Marthudunera Working Group

Update on the proposal and discussion of status with the EPA.

7 June 2007 Yalleen Station Detailed overview of the proposal and discussion of status with the EPA.

22 June 2007 EPASU Detailed overview and discussion of the environmental aspects of the proposal and the key aspects for assessment. Update on recent survey results and discussion of the scope of the proposal and assessment.

13, 14 November 2007

Kuruma Marthudunera Working Group

Detailed discussion of the proposal and the environmental aspects of the two areas of interest.

4.3 STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS AND RESPONSES OF PROPONENT

The main topics raised by stakeholders related to the flora and vegetation of Mesa K, subterranean fauna (troglofauna) and habitat retention, retention of the southern escarpment adjacent to the Robe River, Aboriginal heritage and rehabilitation (Table 4). The topics raised by stakeholders have been addressed in this EPS. The following studies investigated key areas of interest:

• terrestrial vegetation and flora studies to assess potential impacts to the conservation status of those species known, or likely, to occur in and around the project area (Biota 2007a)



• terrestrial and subterranean fauna (including short-range endemics and troglobites) studies to assess the potential impacts to the conservation status of those species known, or likely, to occur in and around the project area (Biota 2007b, 2007c)

• Aboriginal heritage surveys to identify archaeological sites and ethnographic values in and around the project area.

The key flora and fauna reports are contained in Appendix 1.

Table 4 Key topics raised during stakeholder consultation regarding the proposal

Stakeholder Topics raised Response

Government agencies Minimising new disturbance. Infrastructure has been preferentially located within

previously disturbed areas wherever possible (Section 7.4.1).

Fauna surveys to include short-range endemic (SRE) species, specifically troglobitic fauna.

Consideration of SRE species included in fauna surveys. Extensive troglobitic fauna surveys undertaken. Refer to Section 8.1.3.

Need for consideration of subterranean fauna in mine plan, including retention of troglofauna habitat and security of troglofauna populations.

Mine plan has been modified to avoid restricted troglofauna locations. Habitat retention has been maximised (Section 9.5).

A conceptual rehabilitation plan to be included. Timing and expected outcomes to be discussed.

Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan included in Appendix 1. Refer also to Section 12.

EPS to include discussion of performance in rehabilitation of previously mined areas.

Discussion of Robe rehabilitation performance is included in Section 12.

Weed management. Weed occurrences surveyed and weed controls to be included in operation (Section 7.4.3).

Proposed follow-up bat survey methods were agreed as appropriate.

Follow-up bat survey implemented (Section 8.1.3).

Escarpment retention. No new disturbance to the southern escarpment is proposed, except in the immediate vicinity of the mine access road. A substantial buffer will be maintained between the escarpment and active mining areas (Section 6.3.7).

EPASU EPA

Level of assessment. Level of assessment advised as EPS (Section 1.6).

Proposed follow-up bat survey methods were agreed as appropriate.

Follow-up bat survey implemented (Section 8.1.3).

Buffer zones around areas where “at risk” taxa have been recorded.

Mine plan modified to specifically avoid singleton troglofauna. Buffer zones around singleton occurrences have been established (Section 9.5).

Waste dump strategy. Waste rock initially directed to surface dumps within previously disturbed areas and thereafter used in backfilling of pits. Backfilling of pits with waste material will be maximised. Waste dumps to conform to the Pilbara Iron Landform Design Guidelines. Refer to Section 3.4.2.

Traffic impact to fauna near Robe River. Speed limit controls.

Speed limits will be implemented on haul route including Robe River crossing (Section 8.4.3).

DEC

Troglofauna survey to include nearby bores outside the mining area.

Bores outside mining areas included in all phases of the troglofauna survey (Section 9.1.1).



Stakeholder Topics raised Response

Heritage report to discuss historic survey coverage, areas surveyed, confidence in coverage and sites located.

Heritage report being prepared. Relevant heritage aspects included in Section 11.

DIA

Anthropologist to confirm survey findings. Anthropologist engaged by PNTS to complete survey.

Recovery of topsoil and consideration of the use of rock mulch where inadequate topsoil is available.

Topsoil recovery will be maximised where possible. Rock mulch to be used as supplementary (Section 12.3.3).

Management of temporary stockpiles. Temporary stockpiles to be located on previously disturbed ground. Low grade ore stockpiles to be located primarily within open pits and rehabilitated if not recovered for treatment. Refer to Sections 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3 and 12.3.3.

Rehabilitation. Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan included in Appendix 1. Rehabilitation will be undertaken as described in the Pilbara Iron Rehabilitation Guidelines. Refer to Section 12.

Discuss material types with respect to the potential to produce acid rock drainage at Mesa K.

The potential ARD risk of the proposal is low and is not considered to require special management (Section 10.2).

Water management. Drainage will be designed in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Sediment and Drainage Control Design Criteria to minimise runoff (Section 10.5).

DoIR

Hydrocarbon management to comply with AS1940.

Hydrocarbon management will comply with AS1940.

Non-government organisations Molhar Recommended follow-up bat survey

methods were identified. Follow-up bat survey implemented as recommended and findings were analysed by Dr Armstrong of Molhar (Section 8.1.3).

PNTS Type of heritage survey required. Timing of heritage survey and areas to be covered.

Consultation and on-ground assessment has been undertaken with Traditional Owner Group (Section 11).

Kuruma Marthudunera Working Group

Type of heritage survey required. Timing of heritage survey and areas to be covered.

Consultation and on-ground assessment has been undertaken with Traditional Owner Group (Section 11).

Conservation Council of WA

Troglofauna. Topsoil management and rehabilitation.

Avoidance of restricted occurrences of troglofauna. Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan included in Appendix 1. Refer to Section 9.5 and Section 12.

Wildflower Society of WA

Possible existence of significant flora. Depth of mining in relation to water table.

Flora surveys and vegetation mapping have been completed. No Declared Rare Flora were recorded and there will be minimal impact to Priority flora (Section 7.4.1) The proposed mining will be above the water table (Section 3.2).

Community Site protection measures. Site protection measures will be implemented as agreed

with Traditional Owners (Section 11). Senior representatives from Kuruma Marthudunera Retention of known site on the southern

escarpment. Southern escarpment and known site will be protected as agreed with Traditional Owners (Section 11).



5. ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND SUSTAINABILITY

Robe recognises that environmental responsibilities go beyond those required under statutory regulation and encompass strong commitments to environmental management, leadership in sustainable development and social obligations.

5.1 PRINCIPLES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

In 2003, the EP Act was amended to include a core set of Principles that are applied by the EPA in formal assessments (EPA 2004a). As listed in S4a of the EP Act, these are the:

• precautionary principle

• principle of intergenerational equity

• principle of the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity

• principles relating to improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms

• principle of waste minimisation.

Robe has considered these principles in its assessment of the environmental impacts associated with the proposal (Table 5).

Table 5 Principles of environmental protection

Principle Consideration given in proposal Section

addressed in EPS

1. Precautionary principle Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In the application of the precautionary principle, decisions should be guided by: a. careful evaluation to avoid, where

practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment

b. an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.

Robe includes a risk assessment process in the development of all new proposals with the intention of identifying issues early in the process to enable planning for avoidance and/or mitigations. Part of this process includes undertaking detailed and comprehensive site investigations of the biological and physical environs consistent with EPA Guidelines, where applicable. Where these investigations identify significant conservation issues, measures are incorporated into the design of the proposal and the management program to avoid, where practicable, and/or minimise any potential impacts. For example, Robe will maintain a buffer between the relatively undisturbed sections of the southern escarpment of Mesa K and the adjacent proposed pit outlines of between 20 m and 220 m to maintain biodiversity, landscape and aesthetic values associated with the escarpment and to ensure the geotechnical stability of the remnant escarpment.

Section 6.3 (minor factors) and Sections 7 to 11 (detailed assessment of major factors).

2. Intergenerational equity The present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations.

Robe integrates the principles of sustainable development (Section 5.2) into all aspects of their operations to contribute to sustainable development in Australia. These principles ensure that Robe operations deliver more value with less impact, where: Value = long-term financial outcomes + social outcomes + environmental outcomes Impact = financial cost + social impact + environmental impact Integration of these sustainable development principles ensures the environment in which Robe operates is maintained and, where possible, enhanced for future generations.

Section 12 (rehabilitation and closure) and Section 13.6 (commitments regarding conservation of biological diversity).




addressed in EPS

3. Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration.

Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity is fundamental to the environmental management approach of Robe and is a major environmental consideration for the proposal. This is reflected in the well-established approach by Robe to environmental management: ‘Protect – Restore – Do it Better’. Biological investigations consistent with EPA Guidelines are undertaken by Robe early in the planning process to identify environmental aspects of conservation significance that are required to be protected from disturbance. As well as designing proposals to ensure these aspects are not affected, management controls are put in place to ensure they are not unintentionally disturbed. For example, the need to protect threatened flora species has resulted in GPS plotters being fitted to all dozers working in the Robe exploration project areas. These plotters show exclusion and restricted zones in a graphic form and help the operators easily avoid them. Robe has well established rehabilitation guidelines for restoring disturbed environments upon decommissioning, the aim of which is to ‘establish sustainable endemic vegetation communities consistent with reconstructed landforms and surrounding vegetation’. Robe also actively undertakes and/or contributes to biological research (e.g. stygofauna and SRE research; plant-water relationship studies along riparian systems) to improve the understanding and management of these biological aspects.

References in No. 1 above, Precautionary Principle, as well as Section 12 (rehabilitation and closure) and Section 13.6 (commitments regarding conservation of biological diversity).

4. Improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms a. Environmental factors should be

included in the valuation of assets and services.

b. The polluter pays principle – those who generate pollution and waste should bear the cost of containment, avoidance or abatement.

c. The users of goods and services should pay prices based on the full life cycle costs of providing goods and services, including the use of natural resources and assets and the ultimate disposal of any wastes.

d. Environmental goals, having been established, should be pursued in the most cost-effective way, by establishing incentives structures, including market mechanisms, which enable those best placed to maximise benefits and/or minimise costs to develop their own solutions and responses to environmental problems.

Robe acknowledges the need for improved valuation, pricing and incentives mechanisms and endeavours to pursue these principles when and wherever possible. For example:

• environmental factors have played a major part in determining preferred operational options

• Robe has designed the proposal to ensure that pollution-type impacts are minimised as far as practicable and these are managed by Robe at its own cost

• environmental goals will be pursued in the most cost-effective way

• costs are provided for over the life of each operation on a unit of production basis. The inherent costs of environmental management are incorporated into product costs to customers, as are all overheads.

Section 3 (determination of preferred development options) and Section 6.3 (minor factors).




addressed in EPS

5. Waste minimisation All reasonable and practicable measures should be taken to minimise the generation of waste and its discharge into the environment.

The approach of Robe to waste management is to (in order of priority):

• avoid and reduce at source

• reuse and recycle

• treat and/or dispose. Robe operates appropriately licensed landfills for the disposal of general domestic solid wastes and recycles scrap metal, rubber, waste oil and batteries. Robe continues to investigate other waste management opportunities with the aim of minimising waste generation and disposal requirements.

Sections 3.4.2, 3.4.4 and 6.3.3 (waste management – mineral and non-mineral).

5.2 SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainable development is defined as:

development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

In the mining and metals sector, this means that investments should be financially profitable, technically appropriate, environmentally sound and socially responsible (Brundtland Commission 1997).

In September 2003, the Western Australian State Government released the State Sustainability Strategy (WA Government 2003). The strategy establishes a high-level approach to applying sustainability principles across government operations, including expectations for, and regulation of, the mining industry. The strategy recognises that ‘the international minerals sector has been one of the most pro-active industries in embracing sustainable development’.

The strategy also recognises that a number of key sustainability innovations have been developed in the Western Australian resources sector, including land and water rehabilitation, eco-efficiency in mineral processing and, more recently, a range of social innovations. The training and employment of Aboriginal people is a recent example.

Robe undertakes all operations with consideration of the Rio Tinto Sustainable Development Policy:

Rio Tinto businesses, projects, operations and products should contribute constructively to the global transition to sustainable development.

We contribute to sustainable development by helping to satisfy global and community needs and aspirations, whether economic, social or environmental. This means making sustainable development considerations an integral part of our business plans and decision making processes.

By focusing on people, the environment, resource stewardship and management systems, we can better manage risk, create business options, reduce costs, attract the best employees, gain access to new markets and resources and deliver a better product to our customers.

In practice, this depends on the active awareness of and support for Rio Tinto's principles and policies by each of us as individuals.



Robe also applies sustainable development principles in the development (planning and decision-making) of all major projects. These include:

• Environment

• reduce water use

• reduce net land disturbances and disruption of natural water bodies

• reduce net biodiversity loss

• reduce net emissions, particularly dust and greenhouse gases

• Social

• reduce injury and illness incidents

• improve equal employment opportunities

• improve contribution to community capacity building

• reduce impact to heritage

• Economic

• optimise long-term economic value.

Through the application of these principles, Robe intends for the proposal to be consistent with the WA State Sustainability Strategy and the Rio Tinto Sustainable Development Policy.



6. ASSESSMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL

6.1 SCOPING OF RELEVANT FACTORS

The scoping process utilised EPA guidelines, proponent experience and preliminary stakeholder consultation to identify key environmental factors potentially affected by the proposal. During this process, it was identified that the potential impacts to some factors warranted detailed assessment. The potential impacts to other factors did not warrant detailed assessment, as impacts were not significant and existing or proposed environmental management measures were more than adequate to manage any impact.

6.2 KEY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ADDRESSED

The environmental factors relevant to this proposal that were identified through the process described above as requiring detailed assessment are presented in Table 6.

Table 6 Key environmental factors addressed in the EPS

Category Environmental factor

Surface water and water quality

Vegetation and flora

Terrestrial fauna

Biophysical

Subterranean fauna

Social surrounds Aboriginal heritage

Other Rehabilitation and closure

These factors have been addressed in detail in Sections 7 to 12.

6.3 MINOR ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS NOT FURTHER ASSESSED

A number of environmental factors have not been addressed in detail as they are considered to be minor factors given the remoteness of the location and existing management measures that Robe has in place. These factors are air quality (dust), noise and vibration, waste (including mineral waste), greenhouse gases, public risk and safety, groundwater and landscape (Sections 6.3.1 to 6.3.7).

6.3.1 Air quality (dust)

Dust is generated during mining mainly by mechanical disturbances, such as blasting, earthmoving and road traffic on unsealed surfaces. In dry, windy conditions, particles can be lifted from open or disturbed areas, resulting in visible dust emissions. In the assessment of environmental impacts, dust is more conventionally referred to as ‘particulates’ or ‘airborne particulates’. Some commonly used definitions describing airborne particulates are:

• total suspended particulates (TSP): all particles that are suspended in the atmosphere. In practice, this will refer to particles typically up to 30 micrometres (µm) in aerodynamic diameter, but, under windy conditions, might include particles up to 50 µm in aerodynamic diameter

• PM10: particulate matter with an equivalent aerodynamic diameter 10 µm or less



• PM2.5: particulate matter with an equivalent aerodynamic diameter 2.5 µm or less

• fine particles: all particles less than 2.5 µm in diameter

• coarse matter: all particles in the size range from 2.5 to 10 µm.

Most airborne particles likely to originate from the proposed operations are larger than PM10 and are more associated with nuisance than public health problems. The larger particles tend to settle back to the ground within a short range (<300 m) from the source.

The generation of dust from mining and ore handling operations will depend on:

• the frequency at which a dust generating activity takes place

• meteorological conditions, such as wind speed

• composition of dust, including particle size distribution, particle density and moisture content

• the condition of the source.

Activities or aspects of the mining operations that may result in dust emissions include:

• physical disturbance to the land surface during construction of infrastructure and mining (removal of vegetation, blasting and excavations)

• haulage and light traffic on unsealed roads

• crushing and materials handling at existing fixed plant sites at Mesa J

• wind episodes over dry, open mine areas, stockpiles and unsealed roads.

Dust will be generated at Mesa K during mining and ore handling activities, and along the short haul route to Mesa J. Dust may also be generated during ore processing and handling activities at Mesa J, such as during crushing and loading. Crushing and handling facilities at Mesa J include appropriate dust suppression measures and are operated in accordance with licence requirements.

Dust may have physical effects on plants, although this is likely to be restricted to immediate peripheral vegetation and will be mitigated by periodic high rainfall events, which would remove built-up material on leaves.

Dust can also adversely affect health where there are nearby residences. Due to the remoteness of the mine from the town of Pannawonica and the closest residence, there will be no impact to town residents.

Dust management is an integral part of mine operations, and is managed to the highest standards for workforce health and safety.

The most effective way to control fugitive dust is to prevent dust generation through appropriate prevention measures.

During mining operations, appropriate dust management strategies will be implemented to minimise the generation of dust at the Mesa K mine site, along the haul route and at ore handling facilities. This will include dust suppression by the application of water to haul roads, working surfaces and stockpiles as required, to existing Pilbara Iron Health, Safety and Environment standards.

The potential for dust generation will also be limited by:



• the small amount of additional clearing required

• the coarse nature of the mined material

• backfilling of waste into voids, reducing exposure to wind

• stockpiling of low grade ore within voids, reducing exposure to wind

• progressive rehabilitation of disturbed areas.

The proposal will result in no change to the throughput at Cape Lambert, as ore from the Mesa K mine site will replace dry ore currently sourced from the Mesa J mine site. The moisture content of Mesa K ore will be approximately 6 – 8 %, which is consistent with Mesa J dry ore. Material handling dust tests (rotating drum tests) using Mesa J ore indicated that the moisture content required to suppress the majority of the dust ranged from 4 to 6%. Above this moisture content, negligible dust was generated (Robe 2005).

Proposed management actions

The generation of dust at Mesa K will be minimised and controlled through implementation of the following management actions outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1):

• application of water to haul roads, working surfaces and stockpiles as required

• minimising the amount of vegetation cleared

• clearing of work areas only as they are required

• progressive rehabilitation of disturbed areas to minimise total exposed area.

Through implementation of the above existing and proposed control measures, it is expected that dust emissions will not be a significant impact of the proposal.

6.3.2 Noise and vibration

Noise and vibration will be generated during mining and ore transport and handling operations. Vibration and ambient noise levels in the immediate vicinity of Mesa K will increase as a result of the proposal; however, as combined mining activity from Mesa J and Mesa K will not increase as a result of the proposal, there will be no net increase in noise and vibration from the combined operations.

Due to the remoteness of the operations, noise and vibration are not expected to affect any noise-sensitive premises. The nearest noise-sensitive premise to Mesa K is a house that is sometimes used by the Native Title Claimants and their families on UCL Loc 169, located approximately 5 km to the north-west of Mesa K (Figure 7). The house is equidistant to, and north of, the Mesa J operation. Operational noise and vibration have not been a nuisance at this location to date and are not expected to become problematic, as total noise and vibration will not be increased by the proposal.

Blasting activities will only be conducted during daylight hours.

Noise emissions from the proposed operations may cause localised disruption to fauna behaviour in areas adjacent to mining operations and transport corridors; however, it is unlikely that fauna would be disrupted by noise emissions in the long-term.



Noise emissions from the transportation of ore via rail will not differ from current noise, as the volume of rail traffic on the existing rail line is not expected to increase as a result of the proposal.

In accordance with current management practices at Mesa J, Robe will ensure that noise and vibration from Mesa K comply with the requirements of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, environmental licence conditions, and the DoIR requirements for mine safety and health.


The generation of noise and vibration at Mesa K will be controlled through implementation of the following management actions outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1):

• conducting blasting activities only during daylight hours

• implementation of noise suppression measures for vehicles and other equipment, including fitting mobile and stationary equipment with effective exhaust mufflers

• maintenance of noise suppression equipment so it is effective in reducing noise levels to accepted standards.

6.3.3 Waste

The proposal will be operated as a satellite project to Mesa J. Activities at Mesa K will be limited to those directly associated with mining. As such, wastes generated by the proposal will be limited in both volume and composition and will include:

• domestic solid and liquid wastes (including food scraps and ablution effluent)

• mineral waste.

Liquid effluent will not be discharged at the Mesa K mine site, as maintenance works will be conducted in existing workshops and maintenance facilities located at Mesa J.

Ablution facilities for the workforce at Mesa K will be temporary and transportable.

Inert wastes from the mine site and work areas will be disposed of to the existing landfill facility located at Mesa J, which is managed in accordance with the licence registration and appropriate landfill guidelines. Putrescible waste from the mine site and work areas will be disposed of to the Pannawonica townsite landfill.

Following clearing of vegetation and stripping of topsoil, waste rock material (overburden) will be removed from the surface to allow for the excavation of ore. This material will initially be directed to surface waste dumps and, thereafter, will be used in progressive backfilling of mine pits as far as practicable.


The storage and disposal of wastes generated at Mesa K will be controlled through implementation of the following management actions outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1):

• regular maintenance and servicing of equipment using existing facilities at Mesa J



• maintenance and operation of existing workshop and liquid effluent control systems at Mesa J in accordance with current practices

• collecting ablution effluent in a septic tank at Mesa K, which will be emptied regularly by a licensed contractor and disposed of in an approved manner at a licensed facility

• undertaking geochemical analysis work on mineral waste from Mesa K to improve understanding of the potential for leachates from mineral waste dumps

• constructing mineral waste dumps within existing pits and previously disturbed areas as far as practicable

• rehabilitation of backfill areas, waste dumps and low grade stockpiles as soon as practicable.

6.3.4 Greenhouse gases

The Greenhouse Effect is a natural phenomenon caused by atmospheric (primarily carbon-based) gases, where heat radiating off the Earth’s surface is trapped within the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere include carbon dioxide, water vapour, methane, nitrous oxide, non-methane volatile organic compounds, halocarbons, carbon monoxide and sulphur hexafluoride. The warmth experienced through this effect is essential to support life on Earth; however, there is a general consensus that warming over the last century has been exacerbated due to increased emissions of greenhouse gases from anthropogenic sources. This “Global Warming” is believed to be a major factor in altering the climate of the Earth (“climate change”), which is of major concern to the global community.

The main anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission is carbon dioxide (CO2), which has increased in concentration in the atmosphere by about 31% over the last 200 years (EPA 2002a).

The proposal is being developed to supplement the decreasing production of dry ore from the Mesa J operation. As such, the proposal will not result in an increase in total production from the combined operations. The proposal will utilise the existing Mesa J mining fleet, with no increase in the total number of operating hours.

The slightly longer ore haulage route from Mesa K (increase from 5 km to 6 km) will be counterbalanced by:

• low waste to ore stripping ratio (1:1)

• shorter haulage of waste material

• backfilling of existing pit voids with waste

• minimal clearing of vegetation.

The total greenhouse gas emissions for the proposal will be approximately 20 kt CO2-e/yr. There will be no net increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the combined operations of Mesa K and Mesa J.


Greenhouse gas emissions at Mesa K will be minimised through implementation of the following management actions outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1):

• minimising the amount of vegetation cleared

• utilising existing infrastructure at Mesa J and minimising the need for additional infrastructure



• maximising the efficiency of the operation through scheduling, direct trucking and avoidance of rehandling

• maximising the efficiency of waste and ore haulage

• maximising the backfilling of pit voids

• regular maintenance and servicing of equipment.

Robe will maintain an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and will continue to report greenhouse gas emissions and greenhouse intensity in its annual Social, Safety and Environment Report.

Robe will also maintain membership of the Australian Greenhouse Challenge Plus program and will evaluate and adopt appropriate technology to improve greenhouse efficiency wherever possible.

6.3.5 Public risk and safety

Due to the remote location of the Mesa K mine site, the proposed mining activities are not anticipated to create any significant risk to public safety.

The Mesa K mine site may have the potential to generate off-site risk due to the existing explosives storage facility; however, there will be no increase in risk from the proposed operations as no additional storage is required. The explosives storage facility is being upgraded to comply with the new requirements of the Dangerous Goods Safety Act 2004 and associated Regulations and, as such, will become a more secure facility and pose a lower risk to personnel and public safety.

The proposal has the potential to generate risk to the public from the transportation of fuel and explosives. The public roads that would be utilised for the movement of fuel and explosives for the proposal are designed to carry such heavy vehicles and already do so. Robe will ensure that transportation of fuel and explosives is undertaken in accordance with relevant legislation and Australian Standards to minimise risk to public safety.

There will be no increase in road traffic as a result of the proposal. There will also be no significant increase in rail car movements, as the proposal intends to maintain the current production from Mesa J.

A security gate will be installed on the main access road to Mesa K, to control access to the Mesa K site and the mine road to Mesa J.

There will be no additional risk to the public as a result of the implementation of the proposal.

6.3.6 Groundwater

Mining operations have the potential to affect groundwater resources through groundwater abstraction. This leads to drawdown of the groundwater levels in the area immediately around the bore fields, which may affect groundwater-dependent ecosystems.

Water supply for the proposed operations at Mesa K will be sourced from the existing Mesa J operation. No additional water abstraction is required from Mesa J to meet the needs of operation at Mesa K and, therefore, no impact to water sources is anticipated as a result of the proposal.



The proposed mining at Mesa K will be undertaken above the water table, as mining is specifically targeting dry ore to meet the shortfall of dry ore production from the Mesa J operation. Dewatering will not be required for the proposal.


Groundwater quality will be protected through implementation of the following actions outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1):

• environmentally acceptable methods of hydrocarbon transport, handling and disposal

• effective hydrocarbon clean-up procedures

• safe storage, handling and disposal of ablution effluent.

6.3.7 Landscape

As a result of substantial previous mining and exploration activities at Mesa K, the majority of the project area is disturbed, with the degree of disturbance ranging from surface disturbance only (i.e. clearing of vegetation) through to removal of the soil and underlying rock and mining to a substantial depth. Disturbance to previously undisturbed areas will be minimised and will comprise approximately 10 ha.

Mesa K has escarpments on the southern and eastern sides. The eastern escarpment has been substantially disturbed by previous mining activity, whilst the southern escarpment is largely undisturbed and is considered important for heritage and landscape value. The proposal will not involve mining or disturbance to the southern escarpment (except for a small area (0.2 ha) in the vicinity of the mine access road) and will retain a buffer of between approximately 20 m and 220 m between the relatively undisturbed sections of the southern escarpment and adjacent mining areas to maintain existing values.

Geotechnical assessment of the structural stability of mining slopes is a critical aspect of mine planning undertaken to ensure, amongst other things, the safety of employees. A geotechnical assessment has been recently undertaken for several mesas and mine areas in the Robe Valley, including Mesa K and Mesa J. The current pit design for the proposal provides for a substantial facade behind the southern escarpment around the majority of the southern walls of the Gully and Gravel Yard pits. This assessment has concluded that the mine slopes have a high degree of stability and that the probability of failure of the remnant facade is extremely low and not considered a probable outcome.

Independent geotechnical review indicates that mining operations adjacent to natural mesa facades in the Robe Valley have not caused large-scale instability of the natural slopes or escarpments at these sites. Visible damage from blasting has typically extended to less than 2 m behind the open pit face crest. The likelihood of any failure of the remnant facade affecting landscape values is very low.

The Robe River passes immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of Mesa K. The river is traversed by the existing access road from Mesa K to Mesa J and also by the rail line from Mesa J to Cape Lambert. Robe have committed to minimising general access to the foreshore through education of the workforce on the importance of preventing disturbance to the Robe River.




Landscape values at Mesa K will be protected through implementation of the following management actions:

• minimising clearing of previously undisturbed areas and intact vegetation

• maintaining a buffer of approximately 20 m to 220 m between the relatively undisturbed sections of the southern escarpment and adjacent mining areas

• preventing disturbance to areas along the banks of the Robe River adjacent to Mesa K

• educating mine personnel regarding the value and importance of the mesa escarpment and the Robe River foreshore, as well as directives to prevent incursion into these areas.



7. FLORA AND VEGETATION

7.1 DESCRIPTION OF FACTOR

Mesa K is located within the Fortescue Botanical District of the Eremaean Botanical Province as defined by Beard (1975a, 1975b), at the western end of the Hamersley subregion. The vegetation of this province is typically open and dominated by spinifex, acacias and occasional eucalypts.

Beard (1975a, 1975b) broadly mapped the project area as:

• Acacia pyrifolia and/or A. bivenosa sparse shrubs over Triodia basedowii and/or T. wiseana hummock grasslands

• riverine woodland dominated by eucalypts in the Robe River.

Given the broad nature of Beard’s mapping (mapped at a scale of 1:1,000,000), these units are only broadly applicable to the vegetation occurring in the project area.

Like much of the Pilbara region, Mesa K and surrounding areas were, until recently, relatively poorly known botanically. Various areas around Pannawonica have now been surveyed as part of baseline vegetation and flora surveys for Robe, including work at Mesa K (for example, Biota 2003, 2005a, 2006a, 2007a). The DEC (Nature Conservation Division) is currently undertaking the Pilbara Region Biological Survey6, which is expected to finish sometime during 2007.

Most recently, Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) conducted flora and vegetation surveys of Mesa K, consistent with the methodology and approaches of EPA Position Statement No. 3 (EPA 2002b) and EPA Guidance Statement No. 51 (EPA 2004b).

Unless otherwise stated, the descriptions of vegetation and flora in the project area are from the most recent Biota surveys. The full Biota (2007a) report is included in Appendix 1.

7.1.1 Vegetation

Vegetation types

Much of the Mesa K formation is already disturbed, being either entirely cleared or comprising rehabilitated vegetation following previous mining. Seven vegetation types were found to occur in the intact remnants within a survey area centred on Mesa K (Figure 10).

6 The Pilbara Region Biological Survey is a five year investigation (2002 – 2007) being undertaken by DEC (Nature

Conservation Division) and the WA Museum. The aim of the Survey is to provide an understanding of the Pilbara biodiversity and its conservation needs. Results from the Survey will provide for the: development of a framework to guide sustainable land use and conservation planning in the Pilbara; appraisal of the region’s conservation reserve system; improvement of the environmental impact assessment of developments; verification of the distributional information for threatened species and ecological communities; provision of detailed information on stygofauna; and, documentation of new information about flora and fauna.



It is important to understand the broad nature of these vegetation types, each of which incorporates a range of structural and floristic variants. The units described are considered to be at, or somewhat below, the association level, although they are not strictly defined as vegetation associations. There were no new vegetation types recorded in the surveys; all had been identified either within the area or within nearby areas during other recent studies. The vegetation types present within the survey area fall into two main vegetation groups relating to topography (Table 7).

Table 7 Description of vegetation groups recorded at Mesa K

Vegetation group Vegetation types Description

Stony hills H1: ElAatAarTw H2: AiAarTw H3: ElAiAbTw

Tall open shrublands of Acacia atkinsiana and A. arida, often with scattered A. inaequilatera and Eucalyptus leucophloia, over Triodia wiseana hummock grasslands on mesa crests and low stony hills.

Major creeklines and floodplains

C1: EcMaAtrPlSg C2: CcTe C3: AsyAbAaTe C4: AsyAbTlo

Riverine forest of Melaleuca argentea and Eucalyptus camaldulensis var. obtusa in the Robe River itself; and low open woodlands of Corymbia candida or tall open shrublands of Acacia synchronicia and A. bivenosa over hummock grasslands of Triodia epactia or T. longiceps on the floodplain of the Robe River.

Vegetation condition

Much of the Mesa K site has been previously disturbed and these areas were considered to be in Poor condition7.

With respect to the relatively intact vegetation in undisturbed areas:

• the vegetation types associated with the stony hills habitats supported no, or only few, weeds and were considered to be in Excellent to Very Good condition

• the vegetation types associated with the Robe River itself and the adjacent floodplain supported a variety of weed species, although generally only as scattered individuals, and were considered to be in Very Good to Good condition.

Regional representation of vegetation types

All of the vegetation types recorded from the Mesa K survey area have been mapped elsewhere in nearby survey areas (Biota 2005b, 2006d). None are expected to be particularly restricted within the Pannawonica locality, given the landforms and dominant species. Vegetation type C1 (Table 7) is restricted to the Robe River itself within the project area.

Conservation significance of vegetation types

Given their degraded condition, areas categorised as disturbed are considered to have no particular conservation value for flora and vegetation. Vegetation type C1 (Table 7) is considered to be of high conservation significance, as it supports Priority flora and other restricted taxa, and comprises the major drainage feature. The remaining vegetation types are considered to have moderate conservation significance as they comprise areas of native vegetation in relatively good condition.





7.1.2 Flora

One hundred and sixty-four (164) taxa of native vascular flora from 91 genera belonging to 42 families, as well as 14 species of introduced flora (weeds), were recorded in the survey area.

The dominant families recorded at Mesa K were Malvaceae (hibiscus family), Mimosaceae (wattle family), Poaceae (grass family), Asteraceae (daisy family), Amaranthaceae (mulla-mulla family), Euphorbiaceae (spurge family) and Papilionaceae (pea family). The most species-rich genera within the project area were Acacia (Mimosaceae), Sida (Malvaceae), Ptilotus (Amaranthaceae), Euphorbia (Euphorbiaceae), Abutilon (Malvaceae) and Cassia (Caesalpiniaceae). These are all typical dominant plant groups for the locality.

Declared rare flora

Neither of the two DRF known to occur in the Pilbara Region were recorded at Mesa K. These two DRF species are:

• Thryptomene wittweri (Mountain Thryptomene) is only known from high-altitude mountain tops further east in the Hamersley subregion, as well as areas within the Gascoyne and Great Victoria Desert bioregions. Given the absence of suitable habitat, this species would not be expected to occur within the project area. Surveys conducted in the Pannawonica locality to date have not recorded the presence of this species

• Lepidium catapycnon (Hamersley Lepidium) is known from a number of locations further east in the Hamersley Ranges. Although suitable habitat (low stony hills and plains) occurs within the Mesa K project area, surveys conducted in the Pannawonica locality to date have not recorded the presence of this species. The closest known population is near Tom Price, some 150 km south-east of Mesa K.

Priority flora

Three species of Priority 3 flora were recorded at Mesa K:

• Abutilon trudgenii ms. (Priority 3): low shrub that is poorly collected rather than rare. This species was recorded from numerous sites in the project area and is expected to be widespread in the project area (Figure 11). Given the broad distribution and the frequency with which Abutilon trudgenii is recorded, this species is considered to warrant removal from the Priority species listing (Biota 2007d)

• Rhynchosia bungarensis (Priority 3): perennial creeper, sometimes forming a dense shrub. This species was recorded from only three sites in the project area and is typically scattered through the Robe River (Figure 11)

• Sida sp. Wittenoom (WR Barker 1962) (Priority 3): medium height, spreading shrub. This species was recorded from numerous sites in the project area and is expected to be widespread in the project area (Figure 11). Given the broad distribution and the frequency with which Sida sp. Wittenoom is recorded, this species is considered to warrant removal from the Priority species listing (Biota 2007d).

7597500 mN

4245

00 m

E

4260

00 m

E

7599000 mN

4245

00 m

E

4260

00 m

E

4230

00 m

E

7599000 mN

4230

00 m

E

7597500 mN

PreviouslyDisturbed

AsyAbAaTe

AsyAbTlo

CcTe

EcMaAtrPlSg

AiAarTw

ElAatAarTw

ElAatAarTw

ElAiAbTwElAatAarTw

ElAatAarTw

ElAatAarTw

Robe River

Projection: MGA94-50FDMS No.: PDE0035119fig10 Scale: 1: 20 000 Date: 27 November 2007Figure 10 Mesa K Vegetation Mapping

Legend

Waste Dump/Low Grade Stockpile

Creek

CcTe - Corymbia candida scatteredlow trees to low woodland over Triodia epactia hummock grassland

AsyAbAaTe - Acacia synchronicia, A. bivenosa openshrubland over Triodia longiceps hummock grassland

ElAatAarTw - Eucalyptus leucophloia scattered lowtrees over Acacia atkinsiana (A. arida) open shrublandover Triodia wiseana hummock grassland

EcMaAtrPISg - Eucalyptus camaldulensis,Melaleuca argentea open forest over Acacia trachycarpa, Petalostylis labicheoides tall open scrub over Stemodia grossa low shrubland

ElAiAbTw - Eucalyptus leucophloia scattered lowtrees over Acacia inaequilatera scattered tall shrubsover Acacia bivenosa scattered shrubs to open shrubland over Triodia wiseana hummock grassland

AsyAbTlo - Acacia synchronicia, A.bivenosa open shrubland over triodia longiceps hummock grassland

AiAarTw - Acacia inaequilatera scattered tall shrubsover A.arida open shrubland to open heath overTriodia wiseana hummock grassland

Previously Disturbed


Mesa K Vegetation MappingArea

Railway



Young plant of Abutilon trudgenii Pendant fruit of Abutilon trudgenii

Growth form of Sida sp. Wittenoom Fruit of Sida sp. Wittenoom

Growth form of Rhynchosia bungarensis Flowering stem of Rhynchosia bungarensis

Photos: Biota (2007a)

Figure 11 Priority flora species recorded at Mesa K



Other flora of conservation significance

Additional flora recorded at Mesa K were identified as being of conservation interest. These are taxa that are not listed as DRF or Priority species by DEC (Nature Conservation Division), but are poorly known and/or could not be identified to species level for reasons other than poor condition of specimens. These taxa were:

• Triodia sp. nov.: undescribed spinifex species commonly occurring on mesas in the Robe Valley, but moderately geographically and habitat restricted

• Centaurium sp.: significant unresolved taxonomic issues within Centaurium mean that it is not certain whether collected specimens of the apparently distinct Centaurium sp. are C. spicatum

• The Malvaceae family contains a large number of taxa in the Pilbara, many of which are poorly collected. The genera Abutilon, Hibiscus and Sida exhibit a high degree of species diversity and new taxa are frequently recorded; however, the specimens collected from the Mesa K survey area all appear to represent taxa previously collected from other locations in the Pilbara.

Introduced flora

Fourteen species of introduced flora were recorded in the Mesa K project area, generally associated with the Robe River or the adjacent floodplain.

Argemone ochroleuca subsp. ochroleuca (Mexican Poppy) is a Declared Plant for the Pilbara under the Agriculture and Related Resources Protection Act 1976. Control of this plant is required for occurrences beyond the limits of creeklines.

Aerva javanica (Kapok), Acetosa vesicaria (Ruby Dock), Cenchrus ciliaris (Buffel Grass) and Cenchrus setiger (Birdwood Grass) are all considered to be serious environmental weeds by DEC.

Chloris barbata (Purpletop Chloris), Euphorbia hirta (Asthma Plant), Sonchus ?asper (Prickly Sowthistle) and Solanum nigrum (Black Berry Nightshade) are infrequently recorded in the Pilbara. All of the remaining introduced species recorded are common and widespread throughout the Pilbara and most have been previously recorded in the Pannawonica locality (Biota 2006d).

7.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACT

The following aspects of the proposal may affect vegetation and flora values:

• vegetation clearing for the mine pit area and associated infrastructure (primarily roads) will directly disturb vegetation communities and potentially Priority flora species

• vehicle and earth movements could potentially introduce and spread weed species

• dust generation could potentially smother vegetation, thereby retarding growth

• disruption of surface water flows through construction of diversion structures, mine pit and infrastructure.

Increased fire frequency/intensity may favour the establishment of weeds and could also prevent the regeneration of native vegetation; however, it is pastoral activities (as opposed to mining activities) that are expected to exacerbate fire occurrence in the Pilbara.



7.3 KEY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE

EPA objectives

In most circumstances, including this assessment, the EPA applies the following objective to the assessment of proposals that may affect vegetation and flora:

• maintain the abundance, species diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of flora and fauna at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge.

The following overriding EPA objective addressing biodiversity is also relevant to this factor:

• maintain biological diversity where that represents the different plants, animals and micro-organisms, the genes they contain and the ecosystems they form, at the levels of genetic diversity, species diversity and ecosystem diversity.

National Strategies

The State and Commonwealth Governments have endorsed the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity (1996) and the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (1992). The strategies address the conservation of Australia’s biological diversity by defining several guiding principles.

National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity

The principles of this Strategy are:

• biological diversity is best conserved in situ

• although all levels of government have clear responsibility, the cooperation of conservation groups, resource users, indigenous peoples, and the community in general is critical to the conservation of biological diversity

• it is vital to anticipate, prevent and attack at source the causes of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity

• processes for, and decisions about, the allocation and use of Australia's resources should be efficient, equitable and transparent

• lack of full knowledge should not be an excuse for postponing action to conserve biological diversity

• the conservation of Australia's biological diversity is affected by international activities and requires actions extending beyond Australia's national jurisdiction

• Australians operating beyond our national jurisdiction should respect the principles of conservation and ecologically sustainable use of biological diversity and act in accordance with any relevant national or international laws

• central to the conservation of Australia's biological diversity is the establishment of a comprehensive, representative and adequate system of ecologically viable protected areas integrated with the sympathetic management of all other areas, including agricultural and other resource production systems



• the close, traditional association of Australia's indigenous peoples with components of biological diversity should be recognised, as should the desirability of sharing equitably benefits arising from the innovative use of traditional knowledge of biological diversity.

National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development

The principles of this Strategy are:

• decision-making processes should effectively integrate both short-term and long-term economic, environmental, social and equity considerations

• where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation

• the global dimension of environmental impacts of actions and policies should be recognised and considered

• the need to develop a strong, growing and diversified economy which can enhance the capacity for environmental protection should be recognised

• the need to maintain and enhance international competitiveness in an environmentally-sound manner should be recognised

• cost-effective and flexible policy instruments should be adopted, such as improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms

• decisions and actions should provide for broad community involvement on issues which affect them.

EPA Position Statement No. 2

EPA Position Statement No. 2 (EPA 2000) provides an overview of the EPA position on the clearing of native vegetation in Western Australia. Principles and related objectives and actions have been adopted from the above-mentioned national strategies in the development of this Position Statement. In assessing a proposal, the EPA will include the following basic elements in consideration of biological diversity:

• comparison of development scenarios, or options, to evaluate protection of biodiversity at the species and ecosystems levels, and demonstration that all reasonable steps have been taken to avoid disturbing native vegetation

• no known species of plant or animal is caused to become extinct as a consequence of the development and the risks to threatened species are considered to be acceptable

• no association or community of indigenous plants or animals ceases to exist as a result of the proposal

• there is a comprehensive, adequate and secure representation of scarce or endangered habitats within the project area and/or in areas which are biologically comparable to the project area, protected in secure reserves

• if the proposal is large (in the order of 10 – 100 ha or more, depending on where in the State) the project area itself should include a comprehensive and adequate network of conservation areas and linking corridors whose integrity and biodiversity are secure and protected

• the on-site and off-site impacts of the proposal are identified and the proponent demonstrates that these impacts can be managed.




EPA Position Statement No. 3 (EPA 2002b) discusses the principles that the EPA would apply when assessing proposals that may have an effect on biodiversity values in Western Australia. The outcomes sought by this Position Statement are intended to:

• promote and encourage all proponents and their consultants to focus their attention on the significance of biodiversity and, therefore, the need to develop and implement best practice in terrestrial biological surveys

• enable greater certainty for proponents in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process by defining the principles the EPA will use when assessing proposals that may have an effect on biodiversity values.


EPA Position Statement No. 9 (EPA 2006a) recognises environmental offsets as one tool that can provide alternative beneficial environmental outcomes in situations where social and economic growth is sought at some detriment to the environment. The EPA stresses though, that offsets are not intended to make otherwise ‘unacceptable’ environmental impacts ‘acceptable’, but rather to achieve a ‘net environmental benefit’ to counterbalance ‘acceptable’ environmental impacts only. The EPA position is that environmental offsets represent a “last line of defence” for the environment and should only be used when all other options to avoid and mitigate environmental impacts have been considered and exhausted.

The EPA does not consider it appropriate to validate or endorse the use of environmental offsets where proposals are predicted to have significant adverse impacts to critical assets8. The Position Statement recognises native vegetation (with some further clarification) as a critical asset and usually considers adverse impacts to this asset to be “significant” where:

• they are seriously at variance to the principles to protect native vegetation listed under Schedule 5 of the EP Act or associated Regulations

• they would result in a 30% or less representation of the pre-clearing extent of that vegetation complex in a bioregion, or 10% or less where the vegetation complex occurs in constrained areas on the Swan Coastal Plain

• the affected vegetation is part of a Bush Forever reserve.

The EPA also recognises biodiversity as a critical asset and, in relation to this, will have regard to the significance of any potential impacts to Priority flora.

EPA Guidance Statement No. 51

EPA Guidance Statement No. 51 (EPA 2004b) provides guidance on standards and protocols for terrestrial flora and vegetation surveys, particularly those undertaken for the environmental impact assessment of proposals.

8 Critical assets represent the most important environmental assets in the State that must be fully protected and conserved.



7.4 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND MITIGATION

7.4.1 Vegetation clearing

The majority of the Mesa K site has been disturbed as a result of previous mining and exploration activities. Robe has designed the proposal to keep vegetation clearing to the minimum required to meet infrastructure and mining requirements for safe and efficient mining operations. During mine planning, infrastructure has been preferentially located within highly disturbed areas. As most mining is over historical open pit areas, the majority of development will be located within previously disturbed areas. New disturbance will comprise approximately 10 ha, including clearing for mine pits and waste dumps, as well as minor realignment and widening of the mine access road (Table 8).

Taking into consideration the likely regional distribution of most vegetation types occurring in the project area and the relatively small area of disturbance required, the proposal is expected to have only a local impact to the vegetation types present and is unlikely to have regional implications.

Vegetation type C1 is limited within the project area to the Robe River channel and is considered to be of high conservation significance (Table 7). This vegetation type will not be disturbed as a result of the proposal.

New clearing required for the proposal is comprised of spinifex-dominated vegetation occurring on stony hills (H1 and H2; Table 7). These vegetation types are relatively widespread within the Pannawonica locality (Biota 2006d) and are considered to be of moderate conservation significance. The loss of small areas of these vegetation types (Table 8) is not considered to be significant.

With respect to significant flora species occurring within the project area, there are four locations where scattered individuals of the undescribed spinifex species Triodia sp. nov. were recorded, as well as a single individual of the Priority 3 species Sida sp. Wittenoom. Appendix 3 of Biota (2007a), provided in Appendix 1, contains figures showing the locations of the Priority flora species. Sida sp. Wittenoom is widespread in the Pilbara and considered to warrant removal from the Priority species listing (Biota 2007d). Triodia sp. nov. is quite common in rocky hills habitats throughout the Pannawonica area, but is possibly restricted to this locality. In both cases, the loss of a small number of the individuals known from the Mesa K area is not expected to impact the conservation status of either species (Michi Maier, Biota, pers. comm. 2007).

The Priority 3 species Rhynchosia bungarensis was recorded from three sites in the vicinity of Mesa K and is typically scattered through the Robe River. This species is unlikely to suffer any significant loss as a result of mining operations at Mesa K, due to its occurrence close to the Robe River and away from nominated pit boundaries, as well as its wider occurrence within the upper Robe Valley.



Table 8 Area of vegetation types to be cleared for the proposal

Vegetation types Approximate area to be cleared (ha) Stony hills

H1: ElAatAarTw 7.0 – 9.0

H2: AiAarTw < 0.1

H3: ElAiAbTw 0

Major creeklines and floodplains

C1: EcMaAtrPlSg 0

C2: CcTe 0

C3: AsyAbAaTe 0

C4: AsyAbTlo 0

Total 10

7.4.2 Effects of surface drainage flow alterations

Disruption to minor sheet flows within the small catchments of Mesa K will occur due to the construction of diversion structures, which will direct water around the mine (Section 10). There are no known vegetation types within the project area expected to be sustained by sheet flow (Michi Maier, Biota, pers. comm. 2007). Robe will design diversion structures to ensure natural drainage flows are maintained wherever possible and to prevent ponding of water.

Mining at Mesa K is not expected to affect river flow or groundwater-dependent vegetation along the Robe River, as the project area intercepts only 0.03% of the regional flow to the Robe River. Thus, there will be no significant reduction in runoff to the river as a result of mining. Prior to historical mining activities, the small mesa catchment would have drained directly into the Robe River; however, the mesa proper has been heavily disturbed and is now largely internally draining. With mine development, the capacity for internal storage of surface water runoff is expected to increase.

The existing river crossing does not appear to have caused any erosion in the vicinity (Biota 2007a); however, there may be some potential for erosion of vegetated areas near the river crossing. Surface runoff from the river crossing and adjacent stretches of the access road into the Robe River is expected during periods of high rainfall; however, velocity and sediment load are expected to be low, given the relatively short stretch of road concerned. The amount of runoff from this stretch of road will be very low in comparison with the substantial flows that occur in the Robe River during most cyclone seasons.

It is planned to excavate where required through the crossing, to facilitate flow during major cyclone and flood events.

7.4.3 Weeds

Weed occurrences have been identified and mapped as part of the Mesa K vegetation survey. The vast majority of weed records were associated with the Robe River, or the adjacent floodplain. Few occurrences of weeds are located within the areas proposed to be disturbed, and these occurrences are located primarily within the Robe River.



Weed occurrences will be controlled by undertaking weed spraying programs prior to any disturbance occurring at the site. These control measures will specifically target, as a priority, those areas that are to be disturbed by the proposal. The broader occurrences of weeds in and around Mesa K will be controlled as part of the annual weed control program.

Weed control measures will be implemented in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Weed Management Plan and mobile equipment hygiene controls will be implemented as required.

7.4.4 Dust

Dust may potentially have physical effects on plants, such as blockage and damage to stomata, shading, abrasion of leaf surface/cuticle, as well as cumulative effects (e.g. drought stress on already stressed species). Vegetation located close to roads and other sources of dust is more likely to be subject to such impacts. Areas of clay substrate have the potential to generate large amounts of dust from even light vehicle movement. As a result of the proposal, areas adjacent to roads will be temporarily affected. Robe will implement appropriate dust management strategies to minimise dust generation at the Mesa K mine site and along the haul route.

7.5 PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS

Vegetation and flora within the project area will be protected through the implementation of measures outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1). These measures include:

• flora and vegetation management actions to: • ensure that clearing is as approved and is kept within the project area • minimise disturbance through planning and location of infrastructure within already

disturbed areas • backfill waste and locate stockpiles in open pit voids wherever possible • undertake progressive rehabilitation of disturbed areas • avoidance of Priority flora locations wherever possible

• fire management actions in all operational and adjacent areas • weed management actions in all operational and adjacent areas, including to:

• identify and map the extent and distribution of target weed species occurring within the project area

• establish and maintain an inventory recording the location of weed species within the project area

• inspect sites to record new observations of weed infestations • control weed occurrences prior to disturbance at the site • undertake staff inductions to include information on identification and reporting of weeds

and procedures to prevent the spread of weeds • implement weed hygiene measures as required for mining machinery entering and leaving

the project area • minimise site disturbance by preventing unnecessary clearing of vegetation • implement a weed control program for targeted weed species.



7.6 PREDICTED OUTCOME

The vegetation and flora of the project area have been surveyed consistent with EPA Position Statement No. 3 (EPA 2002b) and EPA Guidance Statement No. 51 (EPA 2004b). The Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will result in the progressive removal and rehabilitation of approximately 10 ha of native vegetation over the life of the proposal.

The proposal is not expected to have any significant effect on regional flora and vegetation values due to the relatively small amount of clearing, the wide distribution of most vegetation types and flora species found in the project area and the control measures that will be implemented to minimise impacts to flora and vegetation values. There is a risk of spreading weeds; however, this will be managed through the implementation of weed control and hygiene procedures.

No TECs or DRF were recorded at Mesa K. Three Priority 3 flora species and two other species of potential conservation significance are known to occur in the project area. The proposal will result in disturbance to one location where a single individual of the Priority 3 species Sida sp. Wittenoom was recorded, and four locations where scattered individuals of the undescribed spinifex species Triodia sp. nov. were recorded. In both cases, the loss of a small number of the individuals known from the Mesa K area is not expected to affect the conservation status of either species.

The proposal will not contravene EPA Position Statement No. 2 (EPA 2000), as all potential on-site and off-site impacts have been identified and management measures proposed. No species of flora or vegetation association will cease to exist as a result of the proposal. The only vegetation type restricted within the project area is that associated with the Robe River (vegetation type C1; Table 7); however, there will be no disturbance to this vegetation type as a result of the proposal.

Consistent with EPA objectives, the abundance, species diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of flora at species and ecosystem levels will be maintained, thereby conserving regional biological diversity. The botanical studies undertaken by Robe identified populations of Priority flora. These will be protected from disturbance where possible to do so without compromising the implementation of the proposal. The implementation of vegetation protection measures will further ensure impacts are minimised.



8. TERRESTRIAL FAUNA


The habitats found over the project area have the potential to support a range of terrestrial fauna species, including some that are endemic to the region and/or listed for protection under State and Federal conservation legislation.

Targeted fauna surveys were recently undertaken at Mesa K by Biota (2007b), consistent with EPA Position Statement No. 3 (EPA 2002b) and EPA Guidance Statement No. 56 (EPA 2004c).

The following description of the terrestrial fauna of Mesa K is adapted from Biota (2007b), unless otherwise stated. The full Biota (2007b) report is included in Appendix 1.

8.1.1 Fauna habitat

The two primary habitat types at Mesa K are (Biota 2007a):

• stony hills

• major creeklines and floodplains.

Much of the Mesa K site has been previously disturbed and is rated as being in Poor condition9. The relatively intact vegetation remaining in undisturbed areas is rated as being in Good to Very Good condition within stony hills habitats and Very Good to Excellent condition in habitats associated with major creeklines and floodplains (Biota 2007a).

The majority of the vegetation types at Mesa K do not appear to be restricted in distribution, suggesting that the general fauna habitat types are likewise probably more broadly distributed. Vegetation type C1 (Table 7) is considered to be of high conservation significance and, within the project area, is restricted to the Robe River itself (Biota 2007a), though it is more widely distributed in the region. The Robe River represents a riparian habitat corridor through the project area and extends throughout the wider Robe Valley.

A habitat of some importance near the project area is the southern escarpment of Mesa K. The edges of the mesas in the area are characterised by the presence of caves and overhangs, which can often be important habitats for bats. Biota (2007b) investigated two caves along the southern escarpment of Mesa K that were considered potential bat roosts.

8.1.2 Significant fauna identified as potentially occurring at Mesa K

Searches of DEC and WA Museum fauna databases were completed to identify species, including those of elevated conservation status (Table 9), that may potentially occur in the project area. The results of recent extensive fauna survey work in the locality were reviewed to identify which species from the database listings are likely to occur at Mesa K. The survey work reviewed included the





findings of fauna surveys totalling 92 systematic fauna survey sites completed elsewhere in the Robe Valley, including:

• Mesa J (12 systematic survey sites; Ecologia 1991)

• Mesa A and G (10 sites; Biota 2005a)

• Mesa A Northern Rail Corridor and Warramboo (33 sites; Biota 2006a)

• Mesa A Southern Rail Corridor (20 sites; Biota unpublished data)

• Bungaroo Creek (17 sites; Biota 2007e).

Table 9 Terrestrial fauna species of elevated conservation status that may potentially occur at Mesa K

Species State level Federal level Distribution Likely presence in project area

Rhinonicteris aurantius (Orange Leaf-nosed Bat)

Schedule 1 Vulnerable Endemic to Australia, where it occurs in the Pilbara and Kimberley regions and in north-west Queensland.

Single itinerant individual recorded from one cave on the mesa escarpment. This cave is not thought to constitute a significant roost site for this species.

Dasyurus hallucatus (Northern Quoll)

Schedule 1 Endangered Endemic to Australia, where it occurs in the Pilbara and Kimberley regions and in the Northern Territory and Queensland.

Not recorded, but likely to be present on the southern escarpment of the mesa.

Liasis olivaceus barroni (Pilbara Olive Python)

Schedule 1 Vulnerable Endemic to the Pilbara region. Unlikely to occur due to unsuitable habitat and existing disturbance.

Falco peregrinus (Peregrine Falcon)

Schedule 4 NL Cosmopolitan distribution. The only sub-species in Australia (macropus) is widespread throughout Australia.

Unlikely to occur due to unsuitable habitat and existing disturbance.

Ramphotyphlops ganei

Priority 1 NL Poorly collected species known to occur in the Pilbara region.


Antipodogomphus hodgkini (Pilbara Dragonfly)

Priority 2 NL Holotype collected from Millstream Spring, Millstream Station (Watson 1969). Limited published information available for this species.


Nososticta Pilbara (Pilbara Damselfly)

Priority 2 NL Holotype collected from Millstream Spring, Millstream Station (Watson 1969). Limited published information available for this species.


Sminthopsis longicaudata (Long-tailed Dunnart)

Priority 4 NL Inhabits rocky, rugged habitat in the Pilbara and adjacent upper Gascoyne region to the central Northern Territory and South Australia.


Macroderma gigas (Ghost Bat)

Priority 4 NL Fragmented distribution. Not recorded, but may be an occasional visitor to caves on the southern escarpment of the mesa.

Pseudomys chapmani (Western Pebble-mound Mouse)

Priority 4 NL Common to very common in suitable habitat within the Hamersley and Chichester subregions of the Pilbara bioregion.




Species State level Federal level Distribution Likely presence in project area

Neochmia ruficauda subclarescens (Star Finch - western)

Priority 4 NL This sub-species occurs in the Pilbara region and has a southern distribution limit of Shark Bay.


Leiopotherapon aheneus (Fortescue Grunter)

Priority 4 NL Endemic to the Pilbara region. Unlikely to occur due to unsuitable habitat and existing disturbance.

Notoscincus butleri Priority 4 NL Endemic to Western Australia and restricted to the arid north-west of the Pilbara bioregion.


Abbreviations NL Not listed under the Commonwealth EPBC Act

Based on the particular range of habitats present at Mesa K and surrounding areas, it was considered unlikely that many of these species would occur in the project area, or be reliant (at the local population level) on the habitats to be affected by the proposal. There was potential for other species of significance to occur that are not listed under State or Federal legislation, in particular SRE invertebrates. Field fauna surveys were targeted at significant fauna that were considered most likely to occur in and around the project area. This included the following threatened mammal species and SRE invertebrate groups:

• Rhinonicteris aurantius (Orange Leaf-nosed Bat): considered ‘rare and likely to become extinct’ under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. The Pilbara population is recognised as a separate form to other populations across northern Australia and is listed as ‘Vulnerable (VU A1c, B1, B2c)’ status by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) (1996) and is listed as ‘Vulnerable’ under the EPBC Act

• Macroderma gigas (Ghost Bat): listed as ‘Priority 4’ in the DEC Priority Fauna Listing and ‘Vulnerable A2c’ by the IUCN (1996)

• Dasyurus hallucatus (Northern Quoll): considered ‘Endangered’ under the EPBC Act and ‘rare and likely to become extinct’ under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950

• Araneae (specifically trapdoor spiders)

• Pseudoscorpionida (pseudoscorpions)

• Diplopoda (millipedes)

• Pulmonata (land snails).

8.1.3 Results of fauna survey

Ground mammals

Two native species and one introduced species of ground mammal were captured in Elliott traps during targeted surveys at Mesa K: Zyzomys argurus (Common Rock-rat), Psuedantechinus woolleyae (Woolley’s False Antechinus) and Mus musculus (introduced house mouse).

Species of conservation significance

Dasyurus hallucatus (Northern Quoll) is listed as ‘Endangered’ under the EPBC Act due to a recent considerable contraction of its range across Queensland and the Northern Territory (due to the effects of grazing, fires and Cane Toads), although a similar contraction does not appear to have occurred in



the Kimberley region of Western Australia. The status of this species in the Pilbara is less clear and is poorly understood. The Northern Quoll is also listed as ‘rare and likely to become extinct’ under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950.

The Northern Quoll was not recorded in the project area during the recent survey, but is considered to potentially occur on the southern escarpment of Mesa K due to the abundance of suitable prey and habitat, the occurrence of Northern Quoll on other mesa scarps adjacent to the Robe River and the inherent variability of Northern Quoll populations.

Bats

Call sequence analyses from two caves and harp trapping at the larger of the two caves (Cave 2) identified five bat species occurring at Mesa K. These species were:

• Cave 1 and Cave 2

• Vespadelus finlaysoni (Inland Cave Bat)

• Taphozous georgianus (Common Sheathtail Bat)

• Chalinolobus gouldii (Gould’s Wattled Bat)

• Cave 2 only

• Rhinonicteris aurantius (Orange Leaf-nosed Bat)

• Saccolaimus flaviventris (Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat).

Species of conservation significance

Rhinonicteris aurantius (Orange Leaf-nosed Bat) is listed as ‘rare and likely to become extinct’ under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. The Pilbara population is recognised as a separate form to other populations across northern Australia and is listed as ‘Vulnerable (VU A1c, B1, B2c)’ by the IUCN (1996) and ‘Vulnerable’ under the EPBC Act.

A single Orange Leaf-nosed Bat was captured in a harp net during the initial phase of bat surveys at Mesa K, conducted from the 10th – 15th November 2006. Consultation with Dr Kyle Armstrong (Molhar) and DEC personnel was undertaken to assess the initial results and design a suitable follow-up survey targeting the Orange Leaf-nosed Bat. No individuals of this species were recorded during the second phase follow-up survey, conducted from the 11th – 12th January 2007. Following the intensive trapping phase and advice from Dr Armstrong, it was concluded that the single specimen captured during surveys at Mesa K was an itinerant individual and that the caves examined do not constitute significant roost sites for Orange Leaf-nosed Bats due to their relative shallowness (Biota 2007b).

Macroderma gigas (Ghost Bat) is listed as ‘Priority 4’ in the DEC Priority Fauna Listing and ‘Vulnerable A2c’ by the IUCN (1996); however, this species was not recorded during surveys at Mesa K. The caves surveyed at Mesa K were not considered to constitute significant roost sites for Ghost Bats due to their relative shallowness.

Short-range endemic invertebrates

A single undescribed species of mygalomorph spider belonging to the genus Teyl (family Nemesiidae) was recorded at Mesa K. Burrows for this species were typically located in patches of clay soil on the



escarpment and were not found on the mesa plateau itself. A single species of pseudoscorpion, Synsphyronus sp. (family Garypidae), was recorded at Mesa K under the bark of a eucalypt. Both species belong to taxa that are currently undescribed (and therefore have no wider taxonomic or distributional context), but are unlikely to be limited in distribution to Mesa K (Biota 2007b).

No land snails or millipedes were recorded during surveys at Mesa K. In general, millipedes are poorly studied taxonomically (Harvey 2002) and poorly collected (Harvey 2002, Hoffman 2003). Both millipedes and land snails have been recorded in similar areas within the Robe Valley (Biota 2005a, 2006a) and could potentially occur on the southern escarpment of Mesa K.


Activities or aspects of the proposal that may affect terrestrial fauna values include:

• vegetation clearing will directly disturb terrestrial fauna habitat and may result in the loss of individual terrestrial fauna

• alterations to surface hydrology may affect habitats and may result in the loss of individual terrestrial fauna through ponding

• vehicle movements in mining areas and on mine access roads could potentially result in the loss of individual terrestrial fauna, especially less-mobile species.

Minor potential sources of impact include noise emissions from the mining operations, which may cause habitats close to the mining operations to become unsuitable for foraging and general habitation; however, this is not anticipated to be a significant impact. Dust and the introduction and/or spread of weed species are also not anticipated to significantly affect terrestrial fauna as a result of the proposed operations.


EPA objective

In most circumstances, including this assessment, the EPA applies the following objective in its assessment of proposals that may affect fauna:

• to maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of fauna at species and ecosystems levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement of knowledge.


EPA Position Statement No. 3 (EPA 2002b) discusses the principles that the EPA would apply when assessing proposals that may have an effect on biodiversity values in Western Australia. The Position Statement intends to provide the following outcomes:

• promote and encourage all proponents and their consultants to focus their attention on the significance of biodiversity and, therefore, the need to develop and implement best practice in terrestrial biological surveys

• enable greater certainty for proponents in the EIA process by defining the principles the EPA will use when assessing proposals that may have an effect on biodiversity values.




As described in the EPA Position Statement No. 3, the EPA determined that a series of guidance statements were warranted to provide an easy-to-use decision-making guide to the level of biological survey required. EPA Guidance Statement No. 56 (EPA 2004c), provides guidance on standards and protocols for terrestrial fauna surveys, particularly those undertaken for the environmental impact assessment of proposals.

State protection

In a legislative context, the preservation and conservation of fauna is covered primarily by the following Western Australian legislation:

• Wildlife Conservation Act 1950

• Conservation and Land Management Act 1984.

In Western Australia, rare or endangered species are protected by the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2005, under the Wildlife Protection Act 1950. Schedules 1 and 4 in this notice are relevant to this assessment, providing a listing of those species protected by this Notice.

The DEC (Nature Conservation Division) Priority Fauna List also nominates conservation species from Priority One to Five. It is expected that the potential impacts of a proposal to these Priority listed species should be managed such that the species do not meet the IUCN criteria for threatened species.

Commonwealth protection

The Commonwealth EPBC Act protects species listed under Schedule 1 of the Act. In 1974, Australia signed the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). As a result, an official list of endangered species was prepared and is regularly updated. This listing is administered through the EPBC Act. The current list differs from the various State lists; however, some species are common to both.

International agreements

Australia is party to the Japan-Australia (JAMBA) and China-Australia (CAMBA) Migratory Bird Agreements. Most of the birds listed in these agreements are associated with saline wetlands or coastal shorelines and have little relevance to the proposed area; however, some migratory birds not associated with water are also listed on these international treaties.


8.4.1 Vegetation clearing

Terrestrial fauna rely on native vegetation and physical aspects of the landscape to provide food, shelter and breeding sites. The loss or degradation of native vegetation and physical disturbance to the landscape may reduce the capacity of the habitat to support the range of species it would in an undisturbed state.

Approximately 10 ha of relatively intact fauna habitat will be disturbed for the development of the Mesa K remnant mining area. The majority of the vegetation types at Mesa K do not appear to be



restricted in distribution within the Pannawonica locality, suggesting that the fauna habitats are likewise probably more widely distributed. The exception being vegetation type C1 (Table 7), which, within the project area, is restricted to the Robe River itself. This vegetation type will not be disturbed as a result of the proposal.

The edges of Mesa K and similar mesas are characterised by the presence of caves and overhangs, which are potentially important habitats for cave-dwelling bat species. The southern escarpment of Mesa K contains at least two caves that support a number of bat species. Due to their shallow nature, neither of these caves are thought to constitute a significant maternity roost for any bat species of conservation significance. It is considered likely that the southern escarpment also supports the endangered Northern Quoll and provides important habitat for short-range endemic invertebrates.

With the exception of a small area (0.2 ha) in the vicinity of the existing mine access road, the southern escarpment of Mesa K (including the two caves surveyed) will not be disturbed by the proposal. A substantial buffer between the southern escarpment and adjacent mining areas will be maintained throughout the proposed operations.

8.4.2 Alteration to surface drainage flows

Disruption to minor sheet flows will occur due to the construction of diversion structures, which will direct water around the mine (Section 10). This will not affect fauna habitat as there are no known habitats within the project area expected to be sustained by sheet flow (Michi Maier, Biota, pers. comm. 2007).

Ponding of sheet flow could potentially lead to loss of vegetation and potential fauna habitat, as well as drowning of less-mobile terrestrial fauna. Robe will design diversion structures to ensure natural drainage flows are maintained wherever possible and to prevent ponding of water.

8.4.3 Vehicle and equipment movement

The site preparation process and vehicle movements around the mine site have the potential to cause the loss of some individuals of terrestrial fauna. Appropriate speed limits for both mining equipment and light vehicles will be implemented and sign-posted on the Mesa K to Mesa J access road, including the Robe River crossing. The appropriate speeds for various sections of the route will be determined through a risk assessment process.

The conservation status and distribution of any species is unlikely to be affected by the degree of impact associated with vehicle movement at the Mesa K site.

8.4.4 Impacts to fauna of conservation significance

The likelihood of impacts to selected species of conservation significance is discussed below:

• Dasyurus hallucatus (Northern Quoll): the southern escarpment is likely to be the only significant potential Northern Quoll habitat in the immediate vicinity of the project area. The escarpment will not be disturbed by the proposal and will be protected by a substantial buffer between the edge of the mesa and adjacent mining areas.

• Rhinonicteris aurantius (Orange Leaf-nosed Bat): the southern escarpment of Mesa K and the location of the two caves surveyed (including where an itinerant individual of the vulnerable Orange Leaf-nosed Bat was recorded) will not be disturbed by the proposal. There are no caves



in the vicinity of Mesa K that are thought to constitute a significant maternity roost for the Orange Leaf-nosed Bat, or any other bat species of conservation significance. The proposal will not affect the conservation status of this species.

• Teyl sp. mygalomorph spiders and Synsphyronus sp. pseudoscorpions (SRE invertebrates): these belong to currently undescribed taxa, but are unlikely to be limited in distribution to Mesa K. The proposed operations are not expected to affect these invertebrates, as important habitat for these groups occurs on the southern escarpment of Mesa K, which will not be disturbed by the proposal.


Terrestrial fauna within, and adjacent to, the project area will be protected through the implementation of measures outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1). These measures include:

• retaining the Mesa K southern escarpment (including cave habitats) by maintaining a substantial and geotechnically stable buffer of approximately 20 m and 220 m between the relatively undisturbed sections of the southern escarpment and the adjacent mining areas

• implementing and sign-posting appropriate speed limits for both mining equipment and light vehicles on the Mesa K to Mesa J access road, including the Robe River crossing

• controlling feral animals

• ensuring that clearing of potential fauna habitat is as approved and is kept within the mining area

• designing diversion structures so as to ensure natural drainage flows are maintained wherever possible and to prevent ponding of water

• implementing standard dust suppression measures across the project area to mitigate effects on surrounding fauna habitat

• undertaking progressive rehabilitation to re-establish fauna habitat.


The terrestrial fauna of the project area have been surveyed consistent with EPA Position Statement No. 3 (EPA 2002b) and EPA Guidance Statement No. 56 (EPA 2004c). The Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will result in the progressive loss and subsequent revegetation of approximately 10 ha of potential terrestrial fauna habitat over the life of the proposal.

The southern escarpment of Mesa K will not be disturbed by the proposal (except for an area of approximately 0.2 ha in the immediate vicinity of the mine access road) and will be protected by a substantial buffer between the edge of the mesa and adjacent mining areas. The southern escarpment of Mesa K is considered to be the main terrestrial fauna habitat of importance in, or near, the project area, and is likely to be the only significant Northern Quoll habitat in the immediate vicinity of the project area. The scarp also contains at least two caves that provide habitat for bats, although they do not constitute significant maternity roosts for any bat species of conservation significance. Suitable habitat for SRE invertebrates also occurs on the southern escarpment. Protection of the escarpment will ensure that important habitat values for these groups are maintained.

The proposal will not conflict with the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 as no species of terrestrial vertebrate or invertebrate fauna will cease to exist as a result of the proposal. Minimal habitat of high



conservation significance will be affected by the proposal, and there will be no significant impacts to terrestrial fauna that are of conservation significance at a local or regional level.

Consistent with EPA objectives, the abundance, species diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of terrestrial fauna at species and ecosystem levels will be maintained, thereby conserving regional biological diversity. The zoological studies undertaken by Robe and implementation of the proposed management actions will ensure that direct disturbance to important fauna habitat is minimised and that fauna and fauna habitat are protected from indirect disturbance as far as practicable.



9. SUBTERRANEAN FAUNA


Subterranean fauna are predominantly invertebrate animals that inhabit underground habitats. These fauna include stygofauna (obligate groundwater-dwelling aquatic fauna) and troglofauna (obligate terrestrial fauna that inhabit air chambers in underground caves or small, humid, air-filled voids).

Subterranean fauna in Western Australia are generally invertebrates, the most common stygofauna being crustaceans. Common examples of troglofauna include spiders, scorpions and millipedes (EPA 2003). Western Australian stygofauna and troglofauna exhibit high levels of endemism (EPA 2003).

The proposed remnant mining of Mesa K does not involve mining below the water table, or groundwater abstraction. Hence, operations at Mesa K will not adversely affect stygofauna and, therefore, only troglofauna are considered further in relation to this proposal.

Sampling undertaken in 2003 at Mesa A, some 40 km west of Mesa K, unexpectedly recorded four troglobitic taxa within voids in the pisolite resource. Troglofauna had not previously been documented from mesa formations in the mainland Pilbara region (Biota 2004).

Further sampling for troglofauna at Mesa A, and similar sites within the Robe Valley (Biota 2005a, 2006a) recorded 159 troglobitic specimens, 12 of which were collected from the previously mined and heavily disturbed Mesa K.

9.1.1 Troglofauna

Sampling program

Troglofauna from the 2003 sampling program at Mesa A (Biota 2004) were the first documented records of such a fauna occurring in a pisolitic mesa formation. Biota (2004) suggested that the humid, dark, fractured and vuggy environment indicated by drill logs from Mesa A were analogous to the habitats occupied by troglobites in karstic limestone formations (at Cape Range, Barrow Island and in the Kimberley [Harvey 1988, Biota 2002, Humphreys 2001]). Prior to 2003, very little work in terms of comprehensive surveys and sampling programs for troglofauna had been documented. Troglofauna communities have since been found to be widely distributed within the Robe Valley (Biota 2005a, 2006a).

Sampling for troglofauna at Mesa K was carried out by Biota (2007c) using the same approach as the 2003 sampling program at Mesa A. The approach and methods used were in accordance with EPA Guidance Statement No. 54 (EPA 2003) and the draft EPA Guidance Statement No. 54a (EPA 2007).

Sampling at Mesa K was undertaken across four separate phases from 2004 – 2007, and is ongoing. Initial sampling locations were determined by the availability of existing drill holes, with additional holes purpose-drilled in later phases to ensure the adequacy of sampling spread and representation across the mesa. Phases 1 and 2 utilised existing drill holes at Mesa K, many of which are located within, and adjacent to, disturbed areas. Twenty-one additional holes were purpose-drilled across Mesa K to ensure the adequacy of sampling spread and representation. These drill holes were included in sampling phases 3 and 4. In previously mined areas at Mesa K, such as West-South and



West-North pits, most of the original drill holes were mined out during previous mining and many areas are now difficult to access with a drill rig, restricting opportunities to add additional drill holes.

Operating within the constraint of available drill holes, Robe has conducted a comprehensive sampling program across Mesa K, with a balance between drill holes located inside and outside the proposed mining area.

A total of 56 drill holes were sampled at Mesa K over four phases of the study, including 23 located within the preliminary nominal pit outlines and 33 in reference areas that were not planned to be disturbed by the proposal. Of the 56 drill holes, 23 were sampled over at least three phases (seven over four phases) and a further 22 were sampled over two phases. All phases included sampling of troglofauna from drill holes located both within and outside the preliminary pit outlines. Details of each of the four sampling phases are shown in Table 10 and the locations of the troglofauna sampling sites are shown in Figure 12.

Table 10 Details of the troglofauna sampling program conducted at Mesa K

Phase No. drill holes sampled No. traps installed No. days traps in place

1 10 36 87

2 34 98 60

3 43 126 42

4 44 129 58

Source: Biota (2007c)

Sampling results

A total of 178 troglobitic (or potentially troglobitic) individuals, representing seven orders, were recorded over four phases of the troglofauna sampling program at Mesa K (Table 11). These specimens were recorded from 33 of the 56 drill holes sampled (Table 12; Figure 13).

The troglofauna recorded at Mesa K were identified as 10 individual taxa. All of the 10 taxa recorded are treated as being endemic to Mesa K, as it can not currently be demonstrated that any occur in the other mesas sampled during earlier work by Biota (2006a). Photographs of troglofauna collected during the sampling program are shown in Figure 14.

Of the troglobitic fauna recorded in the study, the schizomids were the most abundant, accounting for 60% of the total troglobitic specimens collected. Schizomids were recorded from 28 different drill holes (Table 11) located both inside and outside the preliminary nominal pit boundaries10. These drill holes spanned the extent of the mesa, indicating that schizomids are widespread throughout Mesa K. All mature schizomids collected were identified as belonging to the same species (Draculoides sp. ‘Mesa K’), which is currently considered to be endemic to Mesa K (Biota 2006c, Harvey et al. 2007).

10

Preliminary nominal pit boundaries have been revised by Robe to avoid any occurrences of singleton (taxa that are represented by only one individual) troglofauna specimens or taxa that were recorded only in the preliminary nominal pit outlines; refer preliminary nominal pit outlines (prior to troglofauna sampling) and proposed pit outlines (current) in Figure 15.



The genetic homogeneity of the Mesa K schizomids suggests there is no effective barrier to gene flow for the schizomids across the mesa (Biota 2007c).

Fifty-four troglobitic beetles (order Coleoptera) were collected from nine bores at Mesa K, both inside and outside the preliminary nominal pit boundaries. The coleopterans accounted for a further 30% of the total troglobitic specimens collected at Mesa K. All specimens from Mesa K were identified as the same species.

Five troglobitic pseudoscorpion specimens, representing at least four different species from four different families, were recorded at Mesa K. Pseudoscorpions were recorded from bores both inside and outside the preliminary nominal pit boundaries; two pseudoscorpion species were recorded from bores outside the preliminary nominal pit boundaries and two (possibly three) species were recorded from bores within the preliminary nominal pit boundaries.

A single troglobitic specimen belonging to the order Scolopendrida (centipedes) was recorded from a drill hole located within the preliminary nominal Gully pit boundary. A single dipluran belonging to the genus Heterojapyx was also recorded at Mesa K, within the preliminary nominal Gravel Yard pit boundary, and currently represents the only recording within the Robe Valley.

Six juvenile millipedes presumed to belong to the order Polydesmida, as well as three ‘potentially troglobitic’ juvenile polyxenid millipedes, were recorded at Mesa K. All millipedes were recorded from drill holes outside preliminary nominal pit boundaries.

Five of the collected taxa were either singletons11 or were collected within only the preliminary nominal pit boundaries at the completion of four phases of sampling:

1. Lagynochthonius sp. nov. (Pseudoscorpionida): drill hole MEK1689.

2. Indohya sp. nov. (Pseudoscorpionida): drill hole MEK1696.

3. Cryptops sp. 1 (Scolopendrida): drill hole MEK157012.

4. Heterojapyx sp. nov. (Diplura): drill hole MEK1478.

5. Polyxenida sp. indet. (Polyxenida): drill holes MEK1551 and MEK1556.

Following troglofauna sampling and identification, Robe revised the preliminary nominal pit boundaries to ensure each of the species listed above is now outside the actual proposed pit boundaries (Figure 15). The proposed pit outlines (Figure 8) represent revised preliminary pit outlines, whereby all singleton troglofauna species occurrences have been avoided.

A fifth phase of troglofauna sampling has recently been undertaken at Mesa K, focusing on areas outside the proposed mining area. The fifth phase of sampling did not record any new singleton troglofauna species. Importantly, the fifth phase did record another Cryptops sp. 1 individual, reducing the number of singletons to four. As the results of the fifth phase of sampling were not available in full during preparation of the EPS, Robe has applied the precautionary principle and

11

Singletons are taxa that are represented by only one individual.

12 Recent sampling has collected another Cryptops sp. 1 individual, reducing the number of singletons and species collected within only the preliminary nominal pit boundaries to four.



treated the initial recording of Cryptops sp. 1 as a singleton species. Therefore, the proposed pit outlines avoid drill hole MEK1570.

Table 11 Troglofauna collected at Mesa K during phases (P) 1 – 4

No. of bores with troglofauna Total no. individuals Class Order

P1 P2 P3 P4 Total P1 P2 P3 P4 Total

Schizomida 5 21 18 1 28 12 60 35 1 108 Arachnida

Pseudoscorpionida 0 2 1 1 4 0 3 1 1 5 Chilopoda Scolopendrida 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1

Polydesmida 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 5 1 6 Diplopoda

Polyxenida 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 1 2 3 Insecta Coleoptera 0 1 7 1 9 0 1 42 11 54 Diplura Diplura 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 TOTAL 5 22 21 9 33 12 65 85 16 178 Source: Biota (2007c)

Table 12 Drill holes where troglofauna species were recorded at Mesa K

Taxa Drill holes inside proposed pit outlines Drill holes outside proposed pit outlines

Schizomida Draculoides sp. ‘Mesa K’ MEK1456, MEK1458, MEK1474, MEK1482,

MEK1524, MEK1529, MEK1551, MEK1553, MEK1685A, MEK1694, MEK1757

K0607, K0672, K0740, K1328, MEK1556, MEK1570, MEK1685, MEK1689, MEK1696, MEK1712, MEK1718, MEK1721, MEK1724, MEK1728, MEK1731, MEK1732, MEK1735

Pseudoscorpionida Lagynochthonius sp. nov. - MEK1689

Indohya sp. nov. - MEK1696

Ideoblothrus sp. nov. - MEK1721

Olpiidae sp. nov. - K0502

Scolopendrida Cryptops sp. 1 - MEK1570

Polydesmida Polydesmidae sp. indet. - K0740, K1315, K0948

Polyxenida Polyxenida sp. indet. MEK1551 MEK1556

Coleoptera Coleoptera sp. 1 MEK1694 K0607, K1302, MEK1478, MEK1701,

MEK1718, MEK1728, MEK1731, MEK1735

Diplura Heterojapyx sp. nov. - MEK1478

Source: Modified from Biota (2007c)

4240

00 m

E

7599000 mN

4240

00 m

E

7596000 mN

7598000 mN

7597000 mN

4230

00 m

E

7599000 mN

4230

00 m

E

7596000 mN

7598000 mN

7597000 mN

Robe R

iver

MEK1728MEK1718

MEK1667

MEK1721

MEK1732k0948

MEK1735

MEK1724A

MEK1724k1074

MEK1556MEK1553

MEK1552MEK1551

MEK1529

MEK1696

k0740

MEK1482

MEK1458

k0607

k0739

k0502

k0557

k0672

k0873

k0968

k0989

k0996

k1000

k1066k1068

k1302

k1315k1317

k1328

k1337

MEK1439

MEK1449

MEK1456

MEK1464

MEK1474

MEK1478

MEK1524MEK1526

MEK1570

MEK1628

MEK1685

MEK1685A

MEK1689MEK1694

MEK1701

MEK1712

MEK1731

MEK1749

MEK1757

MEK1770

Figure 12 Location of troglofauna sampling sites at Mesa KProjection: MGA94-50FDMS No.: PDE00350119fig12 Scale: 1:15 000 Date: 21 August 2007

LegendBores sampled for Troglofauna

RailwayLine

Road

Creek

Pisolite Boundary


Gravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard Pit

Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully PitPitPitPitPitPitPitPitPit

Central PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral Pit



4240

00 m

E

7599000 mN

4240

00 m

E

7596000 mN

7598000 mN

7597000 mN

4230

00 m

E

7599000 mN

4230

00 m

E

7596000 mN

7598000 mN

7597000 mN

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Robe R

iver

k0672

MEK1721

k1315

MEK1456

MEK1724

k0502k0607

k0948

MEK1701MEK1696

MEK1735MEK1732

MEK1731MEK1728

MEK1458MEK1474

MEK1478

MEK1553

MEK1551MEK1529

k0740

k1302

k1328

MEK1482

MEK1524

MEK1556MEK1570

MEK1685

MEK1685A

MEK1689MEK1694

MEK1712

MEK1718

MEK1757

Figure 13 Locations where Troglofauna recorded at Mesa KProjection: MGA94-50FDMS No.: PDE0035119fig14 Scale: 1:15 000 Date: 28 November 2007

��

��

Legend

Singletons recorded inpreliminary normal pit outlines

Polyxenida sp. Indet. recordedin preliminary normasl pit outlines


Railway

Road

Creek

Pisolite Boundary


Gravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard PitGravel Yard Pit

Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully Gully PitPitPitPitPitPitPitPitPit

Central PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral PitCentral Pit



�� Locations where Troglofauna recorded



(a) troglobitic schizomid Draculoides sp, ‘Mesa K’ (male) (b) troglobitic coleopteran Coleoptera sp. 1

(c) troglobitic pseudoscorpion Olpiidae sp. nov. (d) troglobitic centipede Cryptops sp. 1

(Source: Biota 2007c)

Figure 14 Examples of troglofauna specimens collected during sampling program

Interpretation of sampling results

Biota (2007c) assessed the relationship between troglofauna distribution and habitat variables, including the effect of rainfall and the level of historic disturbance. This assessment included DNA sequencing and phylogenetic analysis of the schizomid specimens collected at Mesa K. The full Biota (2007c) report is included in Appendix 1.

Key findings are:

1. Although data were limited, standardised yields from troglofauna sampling at Mesa K showed a positive relationship with rainfall events experienced up to six months prior to sampling.

2. There are at least 10 troglobitic taxa documented that are believed to be endemic to Mesa K.

3. The troglofauna community of the disturbed Mesa K site is very similar to the troglofauna community of the undisturbed Mesa A in terms of abundance, diversity and representation at the order level. Mesa A is the only other extensively sampled mesa formation in the Robe Valley.

4. Considerably more troglofauna were collected from historically disturbed areas than from relatively undisturbed areas. Taxonomic richness was also slightly greater in areas subject to



greater disturbance. Biota (2007c) state that this is not statistically significant and may be due to the greater number of specimens collected from these areas and/or the longer time between drilling holes and subsequently sampling them.

5. The available data do not show any evidence of a substantial decline in troglofauna abundance or diversity in historically mined areas compared to intact areas within Mesa K.

6. DNA analysis of schizomid individuals recorded at Mesa K suggests the presence of a single, widespread species at the site.

7. Five of the collected taxa were singletons at the completion of four phases of sampling. Recent sampling has collected another Scolopendrida, reducing the number of singletons to four.

8. A designated singleton species can become abundant in the next phase of sampling. The beetle Coleoptera sp. 1 is a striking example of this: a singleton after two sampling phases, it then returned 41 individuals from six other sites in the third sampling phase. These, and similar, observations suggest that apparent singletons are likely to be more widely distributed within the mesa.

Conservation significance

The troglofauna documented at Mesa K represent a newly-recorded component of the subterranean fauna of Western Australia. Similar subterranean fauna communities occur in other mesas within the Robe Valley (Biota 2006c), and also represent a newly-recorded component of the subterranean fauna of Western Australia.

The precautionary approach has been adopted with respect to the Mesa K troglobitic fauna, given that little is known about troglofauna communities. The distribution and phylogeography13 of the schizomids can, however, be used as a guide to the likely distribution of taxa in the other core troglobitic groups (Pseudoscorpionida, Scolopendrida, Polydesmida, Coleoptera, and Diplura), whose distributions are reasonably expected to be broader than indicated by sampling results to date.

The troglofauna recorded at Mesa K have the following relevant attributes when assessing the conservation significance of the species and fauna assemblages:

• species with very short-range distributions based on available data; each species currently appears to be restricted to Mesa K

• relictual fauna representative of very old lineages; the lineages from which the contemporary troglofauna arose were present in subterranean habitats since the late Miocene (at least the last 10 million years)

• higher tiers of biodiversity involved; the species present are sometimes the only known representatives of orders and families in the Pilbara bioregion and, in some cases, the only known troglobitic representatives of families

• it is probable that other, currently uncollected, species occur in Mesa K (Biota 2007c).

13

Phylogeography is the study of patterns of genetic differentiation across landscapes.




The following aspects of the proposal have the potential to affect subterranean fauna values in the project area (including mining pits, stockpiles and infrastructure):

• direct habitat removal through mining will result in habitat loss and the loss of some individual subterranean fauna

• changes to surface hydrology, particularly in regards to increased surface water runoff, potential for creation of zones of enhanced recharge and clogging of voids through mobilisation of fine material, leading to a reduction in habitat suitability

• changes to the subterranean microclimate, particularly a reduction in humidity levels, could lead to changes in use of retained habitat by troglofauna

• surface and ground water contamination through spills of hydrocarbons or wastewater has the potential to degrade the subterranean environment

• reduction in organic inputs through clearing of vegetation beyond the mine footprint may lead to a reduction in the availability of inputs to the foundation trophic levels

• vibration from blasting activities has the potential to cause changes to strata and mesocaverns within the remnant mesa formation, and may decrease (or increase) the habitat available to troglofauna.



EPA Guidance Statement No. 54 (EPA 2003) provides guidance on the information that the EPA will consider when assessing proposals where troglofauna are a relevant environmental factor.

The objective of the EPA in relation to subterranean fauna species is to ensure adequate protection of important habitats for these species (EPA 2003). In addition, the EPA will ensure that proposals do not potentially threaten the viability of any subterranean fauna species.

The draft EPA Guidance Statement No. 54a (EPA 2007) has been developed as a technical appendix to EPA Guidance Statement No. 54 and provides guidance on sampling for subterranean fauna, including sampling effort, sampling design and ongoing monitoring.


Parts of Mesa K have been previously disturbed through earlier mining operations. Troglofauna representation across Mesa K is comparable between disturbed and relatively undisturbed areas.

Although there are no baseline data to accurately determine whether previous mining has historically affected troglofauna at Mesa K, the abundance, diversity and representation at the order level is very similar to the troglofauna community of Mesa A, which has not been disturbed.



9.4.1 Habitat removal

The troglofauna community at Mesa K will be protected through the retention of the majority of the existing troglofauna habitat (Figure 16, Figure 17, Figure 18 and Figure 19) and the avoidance of singleton troglofauna occurrences (Figure 15).

Removal of a relatively small portion of the available habitat will be the most direct impact to the troglofauna community at Mesa K.

Troglofauna population viability at Mesa K is likely to be a function of the extent, configuration and intactness of the portions of the mesa formation that will be left undisturbed by the proposed mining activities. The ongoing suitability of habitat to support troglofauna in areas adjacent to the mining operations is also linked to the maintenance of core biophysical conditions and processes (Biota 2006c).

The Mesa K Remnant Mining project has been designed to:

• avoid singleton troglofauna occurrences; preliminary pit outlines were revised subsequent to sampling conducted by Biota (2007c) to avoid singleton troglofauna occurrences (Figure 15)

• minimise new disturbance to the surface of Mesa K and underlying troglofauna habitat wherever possible

• retain substantial habitat to protect the troglofauna community (Figure 16, Figure 17, Figure 18 and Figure 19).

The Mesa K pisolite surface outline is approximately 254 ha. Of this, approximately 90 ha will be disturbed by the proposal, of which only 7 ha is new disturbance within the pisolite outline.

The above water table pisolite resource at Mesa K (which represents the potential troglofauna habitat) is approximately 180 Mt. The proposal requires disturbance to approximately 22 Mt of this resource, which equates to disturbance to less than 15% (by volume) of the potential troglofauna habitat (i.e. approximately 85% of the troglofauna habitat will be retained).

The required removal of habitat for the proposal is not expected to significantly affect the troglofauna community at Mesa K, as there will be minimal new surface disturbance, the majority of the pisolite resource will be retained and singleton troglofauna occurrences will be avoided.

4240

00 m

E

4245

00 m

E

7597500 mN

7598000 mN

7598500 mN

7599000 mN

4240

00 m

E

4245

00 m

E

7596500 mN

7597000 mN

4230

00 m

E

4235

00 m

E

4230

00 m

E

4225

00 m

E

4235

00 m

E

7599000 mN

7598500 mN

7597500 mN

7598000 mN

4225

00 m

E

7596500 mN

7597000 mN

Figure 15 Development of Mine Plan to avoid singleton Troglofauna speciesProjection: MGA94-50FDMS No.: PDE0035119b Scale: 1: 12 500 Date: 27 November 2007

Legend

Preliminary nominal pit outlines(prior to troglofauna sampling)


Project Area









RailwayPrivate Road

FDMS No.: PDE0046937v1 Date: January 2008

RL 182mRL 182mRL 182mRL 182mRL 182mRL 182mRL 182mRL 182mRL 182m

Water table RL144mWater table RL144mWater table RL144mWater table RL144mWater table RL144mWater table RL144mWater table RL144mWater table RL144mWater table RL144m

Figure 16 Mesa K Cross-section No. 1

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

SECTION 3SECTION 3SECTION 3SECTION 3SECTION 3SECTION 3SECTION 3SECTION 3SECTION 3

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

SECTION 1Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

e

RobeRobeRobeRobeRobeRobeRobeRobeRobe

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s



423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E7599088.45 N7599088.45 N7599088.45 N7599088.45 N7599088.45 N7599088.45 N7599088.45 N7599088.45 N7599088.45 N








Pit OutlinePit OutlinePit OutlinePit OutlinePit OutlinePit OutlinePit OutlinePit OutlinePit Outline

LOCATIONLOCATIONLOCATIONLOCATIONLOCATIONLOCATIONLOCATIONLOCATIONLOCATION

Hardcap/Weathered pisolite

Pisolite (including high grade)

Basal Pisolite/Basement

Pit outline

RL (Reduced level)

Water table RL





SECTION 1

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River


Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s


SECTION 2

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

e


P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica














Pit outline

RL (Reduced level)

Water table RL



Water table 150RLWater table 150RLWater table 150RLWater table 150RLWater table 150RLWater table 150RLWater table 150RLWater table 150RLWater table 150RL


P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

SECTION 1

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

SECTION 3


Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

e

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s


SECTION 2














Pit outline

RL (Reduced level)

Water table RL





SECTION 1

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

River

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

SECTION 3

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Acces

s

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

eM

ine

Min

e

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

P an n

awo n

ica

SECTION 2


SECTION 4423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E423968.93 E7599088.46 N7599088.46 N7599088.46 N7599088.46 N7599088.46 N7599088.46 N7599088.46 N7599088.46 N7599088.46 N













Pit outline

RL (Reduced level)

Water table RL



9.4.2 Changes to surface hydrology and the subterranean microclimate

The surface hydrological regime of Mesa K has been altered by previous mining operations, such that the site is now largely internally-draining (Section 10.1). Some correlation between rainfall and troglofauna abundance in sampling was noted by Biota (2007c). Alterations in surface hydrology could potentially affect underlying subterranean habitats either through creation of zones of enhanced recharge or through clogging of voids through mobilisation of fine material.

Sampling results within disturbed areas suggest that disturbance to date may not have greatly affected troglofauna communities. This is supported by the similarities in troglofauna communities between Mesa A (undisturbed) and Mesa K.

The proposal has been designed to minimise new disturbance wherever possible and locate infrastructure within existing disturbed areas, thereby minimising disruption to surface water flows and infiltration. The relatively minor area of new surface disturbance required for the proposal and the retention of the majority of the mesa will protect troglofauna at Mesa K from the potential effects of changes to surface hydrology and the subterranean microclimate.

In addition, the proposal will leave much of the lower pisolite in place. As the permeability of the lower pisolite is relatively high, water will infiltrate through this layer as it currently does, thereby minimising the possibility of increased water retention in cavities.

Backfilling of pits will be used as a measure to reduce the potential for changes to habitat microclimate which may result from exposing openings in the mine pit wall (refer to Figure 3 in the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan included in Appendix 1). Backfilling of the Central Pit and the southern leg of the Gravel Yard Pit will assist in the protection of habitat and minimise the potential disruption to core biophysical factors, including humidity. Ponding of surface water will be minimised during operations and rehabilitation.

9.4.3 Surface water contamination

There is minimal risk for surface water contamination and subsequent degradation of the underlying troglofauna habitat at Mesa K. Hydrocarbon storage facilities required for the proposal will be situated at the Mesa J site and will pose no risk to the troglofauna at Mesa K. Servicing will be carried out at dedicated facilities at Mesa J, which contain appropriate hydrocarbon and surface water management features.

Diesel and other hydrocarbons will be used at Mesa K on a routine basis during mining, which presents minor operational risks such as during re-fuelling of trucks and other machinery. The subterranean environment could potentially be degraded by spills of hydrocarbons; however, these risks are relatively straight-forward to manage through established design, infrastructure and operational procedures.

Appropriate operational controls and clean-up procedures will ensure any minor spills have minimal impact to troglofauna habitat.

9.4.4 Reduction in organic inputs through clearing of vegetation

Troglofauna appear to be dependent on organic carbon from surface sources as an input to the foundation trophic levels (Humphreys 1991, 1993). The clearing of vegetation beyond the mine



footprint has the potential to reduce nutrient influx to the underlying mesa remnants, leading to a potential reduction in inputs to the subterranean ecosystem.

Robe has minimised the clearing of vegetation and new disturbance required for the proposal through the preferential location of infrastructure in previously disturbed areas at Mesa K. Implementation of the Pilbara Iron Ground Disturbance Authorisation Procedure will control clearing of vegetation and ground disturbance to further reduce the loss of organic carbon source material.

Progressive rehabilitation will help to re-establish carbon and nutrient cycling in those areas that have been cleared.

9.4.5 Vibration

Blasting activities during mining have the potential to cause changes to existing strata and other features such as mesocaverns in the remnant mesa formation. This is a difficult impact to quantify; however, Robe will manage blasting procedures to reduce blast impacts at final pit face limits and the surrounding habitat, and ensure structural integrity of final pit face slopes.


Robe has sought to meet its troglofauna management objective at Mesa K firstly through planning and design and, secondly, through the implementation of ongoing management actions and sampling.

Aspects of the planning and design of the proposal that will minimise disturbance to troglofauna and their habitat include:

• development of the mine plan to avoid singleton troglofauna occurrences (including a 50 m radius buffer around each drill hole where singleton troglofauna have been recorded)

• efficient use of existing infrastructure and location of new infrastructure in previously disturbed areas wherever possible

• retention of the majority of the pisolite resource as a contiguous system.

Troglofauna at Mesa K will be further protected through the implementation of measures outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1). These measures include:

• obvious demarcation of clearing boundaries, including buffers around drill holes where singleton troglofauna have been recorded

• implementing the Pilbara Iron Ground Disturbance Authorisation Procedure to control clearing of vegetation and ground disturbance

• managing blasting procedures near final pit face limits to control blast vibration effects

• controlling surface drainage to minimise ponding, sedimentation and water starvation effects

• backfilling the Central pit and the southern section of Gravel Yard pit to protect retained habitat and biophysical processes

• continued sampling of troglofauna from a representative spread of sites across the mesa.

Robe (as part of Pilbara Iron) is in the process of preparing a Robe Valley regional troglofauna research program, which will be implemented in 2008. This will address the measurement of biophysical parameters required for persistence of troglofauna, down-hole camera work and further



trapping and molecular studies to better understand taxon level distributions and phylogeographic patterns in this fauna. Mesa K will be included as a study site in this program.

Robe will progressively rehabilitate disturbed areas to protect habitat and contribute to biophysical processes, including carbon and nutrient cycling. The Mesa K Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan is included in Appendix 1.


The troglofauna of the project area have been surveyed consistent with EPA Position Statement No. 3 (EPA 2002b), EPA Guidance Statement No. 54 (EPA 2003) and EPA Guidance Statement No. 54a (EPA 2007).

Robe has minimised potential impacts to troglofauna as far as practicable through the planning and design of the proposal, and will further protect troglofauna and their habitat through implementation of ongoing management actions (Section 9.5).

Singleton troglofauna occurrences have been avoided through revision of the mine plan and 50 m radius buffers have been established to ensure that these species are not affected by remnant mining activities at Mesa K.

The proposal will result in disturbance to some 22 Mt of the pisolite resource, which equates to less than 15 % (by volume) troglofauna habitat disruption. The majority of the pisolite resource will be retained as a contiguous system. Mining will result in the loss of troglobitic individuals located within the mining area.

The size of the retained portions of the mesa are considered to be sufficient to maintain suitable subterranean habitat for troglofauna. The existence of a diverse troglofauna community within the already disturbed areas of Mesa K lends support to this conclusion.

Consistent with EPA objectives, the habitat of the troglofauna community at Mesa K will be maintained, thereby conserving local and regional biological diversity. The troglofauna studies undertaken by Robe have ensured that disturbance to troglofauna and their associated habitat is minimised through planning and design. Implementation of the proposed management actions will further protect troglofauna and their habitat.



10. SURFACE WATER


The Robe River is one of several major river systems in the Pilbara region and covers a linear distance of approximately 190 km. The Robe River catchment drains generally from east to west through the high relief areas of the Hamersley Ranges onto the more gently sloping areas of the coastal plain before discharging into the ocean (Aquaterra 2005).

Surface flows in the Robe River are intermittent, but the river has significant underflow in its alluvial bed, which maintains semi-permanent pools in the river channel where the groundwater is exposed. The positions of these pools within the valley change following seasonal floods (BBG 1991). The pools play an important role in the river ecosystem, supporting a diverse range of aquatic fauna and acting as refuges during periods of drought. The river typically flows at least once a year, generally following significant and intense rainfall events.

The Robe River is the dominant surface hydrological feature in the vicinity of the project area and passes alongside the southern escarpment of Mesa K (Figure 9). Existing infrastructure traversing the river includes the Mesa J to Cape Lambert rail bridge and the mine site access road from Mesa K to Mesa J.

Major tributaries to the Robe River include Jimmawurrada Creek/Bungaroo Creek, Kumina Creek and Red Hill Creek/Mungarathoona Creek; however, there are no significant tributaries that originate in, or cross, the mining area. Local, steep-sided gullies on the mesa escarpment to the south of the mining area are associated with geological structures and preferential weathering, rather than significant surface water runoff and erosion.

Prior to historical mining activities, the mesa would have drained directly into the Robe River; providing approximately 0.03% of the total flow contribution to the river. As a result of previous mining at Mesa K, the mesa proper has been heavily disturbed and is now largely internally-draining (Figure 9). The subcatchments created by previous mining activity at Mesa K presently contain all surface water runoff from rainfall events of less than a 20 year ARI, and all but one subcatchment are also capable of containing surface water runoff from rainfall events greater than a 50 year ARI (Figure 9).


Activities or aspects of the proposal that may affect surface water values include:

• drainage management associated with construction of mine pits and infrastructure will alter surface water flow paths

• discharge of stormwater has the potential to affect water quality through contamination by sediments and hydrocarbons

• changed landforms will alter natural surface water flows.

A risk assessment of the potential for Acid Rock Drainage (ARD) has been undertaken for a number of pisolite deposits in the Robe Valley, including Mesa K. This involves analysing the total sulphur content of the pisolite, which is used as a conservative indicator of the potential for ARD generation.



The proposal is for mining of pisolite ore from above the water table. The total material to be mined with sulphur concentrations above 0.1% is extremely low; approximately 0.0025 Mt (0.04%) of the 6 Mt of waste material is expected to have a total sulphur content above 0.1%. As a result, the potential ARD risk of the proposal is low and is not considered to require special management.


Stormwater management, surface water discharge and activities producing emissions to the environment are managed under a license issued under the EP Act.

EPA objectives

In most circumstances, including this assessment, the EPA applies the following objectives in its assessment of proposals that may affect surface water and water quality:

• the EPA objective for the management of watercourses is to maintain the quantity of water so that existing and potential environmental values, including ecosystem maintenance, are protected

• the EPA objective for surface water quality is to ensure that emissions do not adversely affect environmental values or the health, welfare or amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards.

Water resource strategies and guidelines

In 2000, the Water and Rivers Commission (WRC) and Department of Minerals and Energy (DME; now DoIR) developed a series of Water Quality Protection Guidelines for mining and mineral processing. These guidelines address a range of issues including installation of minesite groundwater monitoring wells, minesite water quality monitoring and minesite stormwater.

ANZECC/ARMCANZ Guidelines

In 1996, the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) together with the Agricultural and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ) developed the National Principles for the Provision of Water for Ecosystems (ANZECC/ARMCANZ 1996). These national principles aim to improve the approach to water resource allocation and management, and to incorporate the needs of the environment in the water allocation process. The overriding goal of the principles is to provide water for the environment to sustain and, where necessary, restore ecological processes and biodiversity of water-dependent ecosystems.

ANZECC and ARMCANZ have also released a set of water quality guidelines for the protection of marine and freshwater ecosystems (ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2000). The guidelines provide a comprehensive list of recommended low-risk trigger values for physical and chemical stressors in water bodies, broken down into five geographical regions across Australia and New Zealand. The guidelines and their application to mining are discussed in Batley et al. (2003).




10.4.1 Drainage management

During pit development and other mining activities, local diversion structures will be used to control surface water runoff within the project area. Drainage will be designed in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Sediment and Drainage Control Design Criteria to maintain natural drainage flows and prevent erosion. Waste dumps will be designed to incorporate water management features to minimise the potential for sediment-laden surface water runoff (Section 12.3.2).

The natural mesa catchment is small and sheet flow is a minor feature of the natural system. Flow across the proposed pit and mine infrastructure areas will be concentrated by the proposed diversion structures, which will result in localised increases in flow velocities with the potential to increase soil erosion. Sediment traps and/or basins will be installed where required to reduce this potential. The disruption to sheet flows through the construction of diversion structures will not affect vegetation and flora values in the project area, as there are no known vegetation types within the project area expected to be sustained by sheet flow (Michi Maier, Biota, pers. comm. 2007).

Robe will design diversion structures to minimise ponding of water, which can cause vegetation stress and affect less-mobile terrestrial fauna.

10.4.2 Disposal of stormwater

The proponent’s experience at Mesa J and other mining areas is that water collected within mining pits during rainfall events dissipates quickly through the pit floor. The multiple bench system used for mining will enable mining to continue at higher bench levels while lower levels drain naturally.

Uncontrolled surface water runoff generated from the mining areas during high rainfall events is unlikely to reach the Robe River. The internally-draining subcatchments created by previous mining activity at Mesa K presently contain all surface water runoff from rainfall events of less than a 20 year ARI, and all but one subcatchment are also capable of containing surface water runoff from rainfall events greater than a 50 year ARI (Figure 9). The capacity for internal storage of surface water runoff will increase with mine development, as the mining pits increase in depth and spatial extent.

During pit development and other mining activities, local diversion structures will be constructed to control surface water runoff within the mining area. Captured surface water runoff will be returned to the Robe River at a designated discharge location (Figure 8) when required, using a rock-lined spillway to minimise erosion.

Waste dumps will be designed in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Landform Design Guidelines to reduce the potential for sediment-laden surface water runoff.

10.4.3 Post-mining landform

The post-mining landforms at Mesa K will be designed to be self-draining.

The proposal has been developed to maximise the backfilling of pit voids and minimise the development of surface waste dumps. Backfilling of the Central pit void, two previously mined voids and the southern leg of the Gravel Yard pit void will reduce potential effects of the post-mining landform on surface water.



The backfilled pits and waste dumps will be landscaped to blend in with the surrounding topography. Drainage controls will be constructed as part of the final landform to prevent scouring and heavy sediment loads in runoff.

Rehabilitation is discussed further in Section 12.


Surface water values at Mesa K will be maintained through the implementation of measures outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1). These measures include:

• stabilising diversion structures and drains to reduce erosion and associated water quality impacts

• locating waste dumps in-pit as far as practicable and designing waste dumps to incorporate water management features to reduce the potential for sediment-laden surface water runoff

• installing sediment traps/basins where appropriate to reduce sediment loads in runoff from the mine area

• installing settling ponds to reduce sediment loads in stormwater prior to re-use/discharge

• undertaking progressive backfill of pits where possible

• returning captured surface water runoff to the Robe River at a designated discharge location using a rock-lined spillway to reduce erosion as required

• designing final landforms to be self-draining.


Diversion structures will be designed in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Sediment and Drainage Control Design Criteria to maintain natural drainage flows, reduce erosion and minimise ponding of water. Sheet flows within the mining area will be locally concentrated by the proposed diversion structures, which will result in localised increases in flow velocity and soil erosion. Sediment traps and/or basins will be installed to reduce sediment load in surface water runoff. Disruption to sheet flows is not expected to adversely affect vegetation as there are no known vegetation types within the project area expected to be sustained by sheet flow (Michi Maier, Biota, pers. comm. 2007). Ponding of surface water will be minimised and is not expected to affect vegetation or terrestrial fauna.

Uncontrolled surface water runoff generated from the mining areas during high rainfall events is unlikely to reach the Robe River. The capacity for internal storage of surface water runoff will increase with mine development, as the mining pits increase in depth and spatial extent. Captured surface water runoff will be returned to the Robe River at a designated discharge location when required, using a rock-lined spillway to minimise erosion.

Consistent with the EPA objective for surface water, the proposal is not expected to affect the quantity or quality of water entering the Robe River. The integrity, functions and environmental values of the Robe River system will be maintained through design and the implementation of the proposed surface water management measures.



11. ABORIGINAL HERITAGE

Numerous Aboriginal heritage sites have been identified within the general project area and surrounds. These sites consist of artefact scatters and rock shelters situated outside the area of impact, and are mainly located on the mesa escarpment and the banks of the adjacent Robe River, with exploitable water sources also present nearby.

The proposal will not require disturbance to any Aboriginal heritage sites.


Numerous archaeological and ethnographic surveys have been carried out in and around the project area over the last two decades, the earliest of which was conducted during the 1980s, prior to the commencement of mining activities at Mesa K. The recent surveys of most relevance to the proposal are:

• Thomson, J. and Hammond, C. 2001, Preliminary Advice of an Aboriginal Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Remnant Mining Areas Drilling Program, Mesas L, L Minor and K, Pannawonica, Western Australia.

• Stevens, R. 2004, Results of a Kuruma Marthudunera Ethnographic Heritage Survey: Mesas J & K, West Pilbara.

• Di Lello, A., Hook, F., Dias, A. and Hammond, C. 2002, The report of an Aboriginal Heritage Assessment of Mesas J and K, near Pannawonica.

• Hammond, C., Jimenez-Lozano, M. and Mullen, D. 2006, The First Addendum Report to Di Lello, A., F. Hook, A. Dias & C. Hammond 2002. The report of an Aboriginal Heritage Assessment of Mesas J and K, near Pannawonica.

• Corsini, S. 2007, Results of an Indigenous Heritage Survey: Robe River Iron Associates Deepdale – Mesa “K”, draft report.

All surveys were conducted in consultation with the Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant group (Kuruma Marthudunera). The Native Title Claim of the Kuruma Marthudunera covers approximately 15,759 km2 of land in the Pilbara region, including the project area. Robe, as part of Pilbara Iron, is currently negotiating a native title agreement with the Kuruma Marthudunera regarding all Robe/Pilbara Iron interests within the bounds of their claim. Amongst other things, the proposed native title agreement will address all matters required pursuant to the Native Title Act 1993.

As part of the most recent survey program, the proposed Mesa K Remnant Mining Project was presented and discussed in detail with representatives of the Kuruma Marthudunera prior to the field surveys being undertaken. The proposal was summarised and recent heritage survey findings were presented and discussed with the group.

Aboriginal archaeological surveys have been carried out in all areas within the proposed remnant mining area that have not been disturbed by previous mining activities. The southern escarpment of Mesa K was not assessed in these recent surveys, as it will not be further disturbed by the proposed remnant mining. The DIA and the Kuruma Marthudunera have been consulted regarding the heritage values in the area. Information about recorded sites will be reported to the DIA as required.



Over 30 archaeological sites have been recorded in, or near, the project area. Nine archaeological sites, comprising mainly artefact scatters, have been recorded within the proposed remnant mining area. Six of these sites have been previously cleared under Section 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. The remaining three sites will not be disturbed by the proposal (Table 13).

Table 13 Archaeological heritage sites within the proposed mining area at Mesa K

Site number Site type Status

MK04-05 Artefact scatter14

, reduction area15

Protected

MK04-06 Artefact scatter Protected

P02101 complex (including MKE02-01, MKE02-01ex, P2101.1)

Artefact scatter, rock shelter16

Protected

P02097 Artefact scatter Cleared

P02098 Artefact scatter, quarry17

Cleared

P02103 Artefact scatter, quarry, water source18

Cleared

P02104 Artefact scatter, water source Cleared



11.1.1 Site significance

In general, artefact scatters are relatively common in the Pilbara region and are typically assessed as having a low degree of archaeological significance. Rock shelters can have a higher degree of archaeological significance due to the possibility of stratified archaeological deposits being present within them. Rock shelters are, therefore, important as they have the potential to reveal information about Aboriginal occupation of the area.

Hammond et al. (2006) provide a preliminary assessment of archaeological significance of five artefact scatters/reduction areas, including two of the three protected sites within the proposed remnant mining area, MK04-05 and MK04-06. These two sites were assessed as being of low archaeological significance, as sites with similar characteristics are very common in the Pannawonica area and the wider Pilbara Uplands area. Stevens (2004) has also previously assessed these sites as being of little ethnographic significance.

14

Artefact scatter refers to locations where a range of activities have occurred, such as the manufacture and maintenance of tools and the processing of foods. These sites will often contain a wider range of lithic materials than quarries and reduction scatters.

15 Reduction area refers to locations where stone tools were made.

16 Rock shelter refers to an overhang, cave or cliff face that contains evidence of human occupation in the form of stone artefacts, charcoal, faunal material or rock art.

17 Quarry refers to locations where there is evidence of the extraction of stone or ochre, for use in the manufacture of tools and painting respectively.

18 Water source refers to a source of water, for example gnamma holes, soaks, springs or rock-holes, with ethnographic evidence of historical use and/or modification.



The P02101 complex was assessed as being of moderate to high potential significance due to the presence of a rock shelter with the potential occurrence of archaeological deposits (Di Lello et al. 2002).

None of these sites will be disturbed by the proposal.

11.1.2 Ethnographic heritage

Aboriginal people throughout the Pilbara attribute some level of significance to all their sites and would prefer that no sites be disturbed. Water courses are generally recognised as being of ethnographic significance to Aboriginal people. The Robe River lies immediately to the south of the proposed Gravel Yard pit.

The survey conducted by Corsini (2007) was specifically commissioned to obtain ethnographic comment on the proposal and the remaining protected heritage sites on the mesa. Corsini (2007) states that the majority of the area is cleared for the intended purpose.

Consultation with representatives of the Kuruma Marthudunera identified an area at the north-west end of the proposed West-North pit and an area at the south-east end of the proposed Gravel Yard pit as requiring further discussion with the group. Corsini (2007) does not attribute any particular ethnographic significance to these areas, but does state that the Kuruma Marthudunera have requested further details regarding drainage in the area of the southern end of Gravel Yard pit. A meeting with the Kuruma Marthudunera was held in mid-November 2007 at Pannawonica. The mining proposal was further explained by Robe personnel and the Kuruma Marthudundera were assured that the southern gully area would not be disturbed and that the proposal would not adversely affect the nearby Robe River. The importance of the area at the north-west end of the proposed West-North pit to the Remnant Mining Project was also explained. No objections were raised by the group at this meeting. Robe will continue to discuss the proposed work with the Kuruma Marthudunera and provide requested information regarding these two areas to the Group as it becomes available.


The proposal has the potential to disturb heritage sites and affect ethnographic values through:

• physical disturbance to the land surface during construction and operation of the mine and associated infrastructure

• increased sediment load in surface water entering the Robe River due to mining within the proposed Gravel Yard pit.


EPA Objective

In most circumstances, including this assessment, the EPA applies the following objective in its assessment of proposals that may affect heritage and culture values:

• to ensure that changes to the biophysical environment do not adversely affect historical and cultural associations and comply with relevant heritage legislation.



State legislation

The Minister for Indigenous Affairs is responsible for the administration of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. Under Section 17 of the Act, it is an offence to disturb any Aboriginal site without consent under Section 18 of that Act.

The Minister considers recommendations from the Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee and the general interests of the community when making a decision on disturbance to a site and may also impose conditions on the approval.

The Registrar of Aboriginal Sites is responsible for maintaining the Register of Places and Objects. The DIA has a database of all recorded sites.

EPA Guidance Statement No 41

EPA Guidance Statement No. 41 (EPA 2004d) provides guidance on the process for the assessment of Aboriginal heritage as an environmental factor.

In its assessment of proposals, the EPA will expect proponents to:

• report on the likelihood of the presence of matters of heritage significance to Aboriginal people

• determine whether the proposed changes to the biophysical environment will result in an impact to these matters of heritage significance to Aboriginal people.

The EPA will, based on this information, make a determination of whether Aboriginal heritage is a relevant environmental factor to the proposal. Where Aboriginal heritage is determined to be a relevant factor, the EPA will expect the proponent to properly consider how to minimise any impact of the proposal to heritage values.

EPA Guidance Statement No. 41 (EPA 2004d) details actions that may be pertinent to the factor of Aboriginal heritage, including:

• consultation with DIA staff and desktop review of sites

• undertaking an Aboriginal heritage and/or archaeological survey in consultation with relevant Aboriginal representatives

• inform relevant Aboriginal people of the proposal and conduct appropriate consultation

• demonstrate that any concerns raised by the Aboriginal people have been considered in the environmental management of the factor and that this is made known to the relevant Aboriginal people.


The proposal will not require disturbance to the three protected sites remaining within the project area (MK04-05, MK04-06 and P02101). These sites are located outside the area of direct impact and will be protected by installing physical barriers as agreed with the Kuruma Marthudunera.

Consultation with the Kuruma Marthudunera included discussions of heritage management measures to be implemented. The consultation process identified an area at the north-west end of West-North pit and an area at the south-east end of Gravel Yard pit as requiring further discussion. The two areas



of interest were further discussed with the Kuruma Marthudunera at a meeting held in November 2007. The Kuruma Marthudunera were assured that the southern gully area would not be disturbed and that the proposal would not adversely affect the nearby Robe River. The importance of the area at the north-west end of the proposed West-North pit to the Remnant Mining Project was also explained. No objections were raised by the group at this meeting. Robe will continue to discuss the proposal with the Kuruma Marthudunera and will provide requested information regarding these two areas to the Kuruma Marthudunera as it becomes available.

Robe will protect the Robe River from sediment-laden surface water runoff from the mining area by undertaking mining such that Gravel Yard pit drains internally for a minimum of a 20 year ARI rainfall event.


Aboriginal heritage values at Mesa K will be protected through the implementation of measures outlined in the Environmental Management Plan (included in Appendix 1). These measures include:

• preventing unauthorised ground disturbance activities through implementation of the Pilbara Iron Ground Disturbance Authorisation Procedure for all areas to be disturbed

• protecting sites MK04-05, MK04-06 and the P02101 complex (MKE02-01, MKE02-01ex and P2101.1) through installation of physical barriers as agreed with the Kuruma Marthudunera

• protecting the Robe River from sediment-laden surface water runoff from the mining area by undertaking mining such that Gravel Yard pit drains internally for a minimum of a 20 year ARI rainfall event

• continuing consultation with the Kuruma Marthudunera regarding the proposed remnant mining activities and, specifically, regarding the two areas noted by Corsini (2007).


Robe has investigated the likelihood of the presence of matters of Aboriginal heritage significance in the project area and has analysed potential impacts to such sites as a result of the proposal in accordance with EPA Guidance Statement No. 41 (EPA 2004d).

The only known remaining archaeological sites within the project area (MK04-05, MK04-06 and P02101 complex) will not be disturbed by the proposed remnant mining project. These sites will be protected by installing physical barriers as agreed with the Kuruma Marthudunera.

The proposal will have no impact to any of the known sites of Aboriginal heritage significance.

The Robe River will be protected from sediment-laden surface water runoff from the mining area by undertaking mining such that Gravel Yard pit drains internally for a minimum of a 20 year ARI rainfall event.

Robe will continue to consult and work with the Kuruma Marthudunera regarding management of Aboriginal heritage sites and values at Mesa K. Consistent with the EPA objective for this factor, Robe will ensure that changes to the biophysical environment do not adversely affect historical and cultural associations and will manage Aboriginal heritage sites in accordance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.



12. REHABILITATION AND CLOSURE


Mining and the establishment of associated infrastructure will require clearing of vegetation and disturbance to soil profiles and landforms. Rehabilitation aims to re-establish disturbed landforms so that they are sympathetic to surrounding areas and resemble the local environment as much as possible.

Robe aims to rehabilitate all areas of land that it disturbs whilst carrying out its operations. Robe environmental performance in rehabilitation has been recognised through the award of a certificate of merit in the 1997 Golden Gecko Awards for mine site rehabilitation work conducted at Mesa K.

Robe, in conjunction with universities and research organisations, has participated in a number of studies in order to improve rehabilitation techniques in the Pilbara region. Projects have included trials to maximise spinifex regrowth, establishment of a native seed farm, and the use of remote sensing data to monitor the performance of rehabilitation areas.

General objectives for mine closure are to prevent adverse environmental impacts and to create self-sustaining natural ecosystems or an alternative land use based on an agreed set of end land use objectives (ANZMEC & MCA 2000). Closure planning is a dynamic process that requires regular review and development throughout the life of an operation, to take into account changes in legal obligations, corporate requirements, community expectations and changes in technical knowledge.


EPA objective To ensure, as far as practicable, that rehabilitation achieves a stable and functioning landform that is consistent with the surrounding landscape and other environmental values.


EPA Guidance Statement No. 6 (EPA 2006b) provides guidance on the rehabilitation of terrestrial ecosystems following disturbance. The Guidance Statement states that the key aims of rehabilitation are:

• to ensure the long-term stability of soils, landforms and hydrology required for the sustainability of sites

• to partially or fully repair the capacity of ecosystems to provide habitats for biota and services for people.



Actions relevant to rehabilitation planning and design include the identification of relevant rehabilitation objectives (in consultation with key stakeholders), as well as the development of clear targets for rehabilitation that can be effectively monitored and audited to confirm objectives are achieved. The EPA (2006b) proposed standard objectives for rehabilitation are for rehabilitated sites to:

• include safe, stable and resilient landforms and soils

• include appropriate hydrology

• provide visual amenity

• retain heritage values

• be suitable for agreed land uses

• include resilient and self-sustaining vegetation comprised of local provenance species

• reach agreed numeric targets for vegetation recovery

• comprise habitats capable of supporting all types of biodiversity.

Relevant legislation

Key environmental legislation relevant to mine closure and rehabilitation in Western Australia includes general provisions under the following:

• Environmental Protection Act 1986

• Mining Act 1978

• Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994.

Other legislation relevant to mine closure and rehabilitation includes:

• Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972

• Agriculture and Related Resources Protection Act 1976

• Bushfires Act 1984

• Conservation and Land Management Act 1984

• Contaminated Sites Act 2003

• Dangerous Goods (Transport) Act 1998

• Explosives and Dangerous Goods Act 1961

• Land Administration Act 1997

• Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984

• Rights in Water Irrigation Act 1914

• Soil and Land Conservation Act 1945

• Waterways Conservation Act 1976

• Wildlife Conservation Act 1950.



Government and industry guidelines

Regulatory agencies and industry bodies have established guidelines (industry best practice) to assist mining companies to achieve acceptable standards of mine closure and rehabilitation. While there are no legislative requirements to adhere to these guidelines, both Rio Tinto and Pilbara Iron subscribe to the intent and advice of such guidelines.

The Department of Industry and Resources (DoIR), formerly known as the Department of Minerals and Energy (DME), is the regulatory agency of mining in Western Australia. It has developed a number of guidelines and environmental notes in relation to mining and rehabilitation, which include:

• Guidelines for Mining in Arid Environments (DME 1996)

• Environmental Notes on Mining, Waste Rock Dumps (DME 2001).

Other key government and industry guidelines relevant to mine closure and rehabilitation includes:

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

• Mine Closure Guidelines for Mineral Operations in Western Australia (Chamber of Minerals and Energy 2000).

• Enduring Value – The Australian Minerals Industry Framework for Sustainable Development (Minerals Council of Australia 2004).

• Best Practice Environmental Management in Mining Series (EPA 1995, Environment Australia 1998).

Corporate requirements

Rio Tinto, Expansion Projects and Pilbara Iron have established policies and standards to which all operations must adhere. Robe Operations are managed by Pilbara Iron and subscribe to the same standards.

Rio Tinto Environment Standards

Rio Tinto has developed and implemented a set of management standards relating to mine closure and rehabilitation. These standards outline the minimum level of compliance for all operations. Standards relevant to rehabilitation include:

• Mineral Waste Management Standard

• Land Use Stewardship Standard

• Closure Standard.

Pilbara Iron Environmental Policy

The Pilbara Iron Environmental Policy outlines specific directions and management commitments for environmental management. The Policy incorporates the aim to leave areas in as close as practicable to their original condition and to prevent pollution. To fulfil these aims it is required to minimise land disturbance and waste generation, continually update disturbance and closure plans and undertake progressive rehabilitation.



Pilbara Iron Management Plans and Guidelines

Key Pilbara Iron standards relevant to the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan include:

• Soil Resource Management Procedure

• Pilbara Iron Landform Design Guidelines

• Rehabilitation Handbook.

12.3 REHABILITATION

The Mesa K Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan (included in Appendix 1) outlines the procedures for rehabilitation activities at Mesa K. The Plan will be incorporated into the site rehabilitation plan, once the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project becomes operational, and will be regularly reviewed during site operations to ensure it remains accurate and relevant.

12.3.1 Rehabilitation objectives

The management objective for rehabilitation of all Robe operations is to rehabilitate all disturbed areas to a standard that achieves a safe and stable landform containing endemic plant communities that approximate those that existed prior to disturbance. The objective of rehabilitation is to produce final landforms that are:

• safe

• stable

• able to support self-sustaining native vegetation communities

• free-draining and non-polluting

• visually compatible with surrounding landscape.

Specific objectives for rehabilitation at Mesa K include:

• implementing safety measures in accordance with the Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994

• no intervention required for management of erosion following the establishment of sustainable vegetation communities

• ensuring open pit voids retain a minimum of a 20 year ARI rainfall event

• maintaining existing visual amenity from the adjacent Robe River.

To facilitate impartial assessment of the progress of rehabilitation, a preliminary set of rehabilitation performance criteria will be established. Regular monitoring of rehabilitation will identify any need to alter management techniques and determine whether the performance criteria are applicable or require revision. Revision of criteria is based on their capacity to reflect practical goals of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation performance criteria will include post-closure land use objectives, closure objectives, landform stability targets, revegetation targets and groundwater protection targets.



12.3.2 The rehabilitation process

Minimising environmental impacts and maximising rehabilitation success of all Robe operations is achieved by integrating the environmental aspects of each operation into all stages of mine planning and through the implementation of Pilbara Iron environmental management tools.

The Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan and operational factors for the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will be integrated into the mine planning system. A life-of-mine plan for the Pannawonica Operations will be developed in late 2007. Operational mine plans (5 year, 2 year, quarterly) are developed and continually updated as operations progress. The mine plans address key environmental criteria such as vegetation clearing, topsoil recovery and volumes, pit and waste dump development strategies and rehabilitation areas. Monitoring and regular review of the plans provide a feedback loop to ensure key structures are developed to design criteria.

The following Pilbara Iron management tools will be implemented to ensure effective environmental and rehabilitation outcomes for the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project:

• Ground Disturbance System (requires review by relevant professionals of all areas to be disturbed, prior to disturbance)

• Biological Survey Protocol (specifies required level of survey detail for each project area)

• Mine Planning System (integrates and schedules key environmental aspects into mine plan)

• Closure Planning System (details closure requirements for each site)

• Landform Design Guidelines (specifies appropriate design criteria for landforms)

• Soil Resource Management Plan (identifies key soil resources for recovery and rehabilitation)

• Rehabilitation Monitoring Schedule (captures required rehabilitation monitoring)

• Rehabilitation Handbook (outlines measures and methods for rehabilitation).

12.3.3 Rehabilitation procedures

Rehabilitation of the project area will be undertaken in accordance with the procedures and timeline outlined in the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan (included in Appendix 1).

The rehabilitation process undertaken by Robe involves five general phases:

1. Recovery and stockpiling of cleared vegetation and topsoil in advance of mining for use on rehabilitation areas.

2. Battering slopes to an angle ≤20º (angle depends on the nature of the material being shaped). 3. Re-spreading of topsoil and deep ripping of soil surfaces. 4. Seeding using local provenance seed where possible. 5. Monitoring establishment of plants and development of ecosystem processes.



Vegetation (where present) and soil material will be recovered from all accessible areas to be disturbed and re-used on rehabilitation areas. Where re-vegetated areas are to be disturbed, the vegetation will be removed and stockpiled together with suitable soil material for later re-use, wherever possible.

Topsoil is a very limited resource within the project area due to the nature of the mesa surface and the location of the proposed operation primarily within previously disturbed areas. Topsoil management will be undertaken in accordance with the Rio Tinto Soil Resource Management Procedure, which includes measures to:

• prevent compaction of the topsoil

• facilitate drainage

• reduce the risk of erosion

• maintain an active population of soil microbes.

Management of topsoil is an important factor in successful rehabilitation, particularly in arid environments such as the Pilbara. Topsoil is valuable as it has a high nutrient content relative to other sections of the soil profile; has a higher water holding capacity; has suitable structural properties; contains most of the viable seed and vegetative material; and, contains mycorrhizal fungi that facilitate plant growth.

Wherever possible, topsoil stockpiles will be located within already disturbed areas. Any topsoil removed will be either directly placed onto areas undergoing rehabilitation, or stored in temporary stockpiles for later placement.

Battering slopes reduces the risk of erosion and creates a more stable landform. Deep ripping of soil surfaces reduces the risk of erosion and enhances water harvesting capabilities of the rehabilitated landform. Surface ripping creates a typical bank and trough system (Figure 20) and is undertaken prior to seeding to control runoff and create favourable microsites for seeds.

Current seeding rates at Robe rehabilitation sites in the Robe Valley are approximately 6.5 – 7.0 kg/ha, which includes 2.0 kg of Triodia (spinifex) seed. Seeds consist of a range of local provenance species, including acacias (Acacia ancistrocarpa, A. atkinsiana, A. bivenosa, A. colei, A. inaequilatera , A. orthorcarpa , A. pyrifolia , A. tenuissima , A. trachycarpa , A. tumida , A. victoriae), Triodia (T. pungens, T. wiseana), Cassia (C. luerssenii, C. notabilis, C. oligophylla), Cymbopogon ambiguus, Eucalyptus aspera, Grevillea wickhamii, Hakea suberea, Ipomoea muelleri and Petalostylis labicheoides.

Following the completion of mining (expected in 2010 – 2011), disturbed areas across the site will be made safe and rehabilitated. General measures to be implemented across the site prior to rehabilitation include:

• removing site infrastructure for re-use or disposal as appropriate

• emptying, backfilling and burying the septic system in-situ

• constructing safety bunds around each pit void

• blocking access roads no longer required

• backfilling minor excavations

• disposing rubbish and scrap at the Mesa J and townsite landfill, or burying on-site as appropriate



• plugging below ground-level drill holes not required for ongoing monitoring. TROUGH BANK BANK TROUGH

LitterAccumulation

Decomposition and Incorporation of organic matter

BANK-TROUGH MICRO-CATCHMENT the basic repeating landscape unit

(Source: Tongway 1994)

Figure 20 A typical ripped surface with alternating bank and trough landscape zones

12.3.4 Area-specific rehabilitation measures

Pit void backfilling strategy

Mineral waste generated as a result of the proposal will be limited and will not be sufficient to backfill all pit voids. A selective void backfilling strategy has been developed to maximise the environmental benefits of backfilling, within the constraints of safe, practicable mining (Figure 21). The key outcomes from the backfilling strategy are:

• backfilling of the Central Pit void, to marry into the surrounding mesa surfaces and the adjacent Echo and Foxtrot waste dumps

• backfilling of previously mined voids with the Hotel (and possibly India) waste dumps, to marry into the surrounding mesa landscape

• backfilling of the southern leg of the Gravel Yard Pit void, to blend this leg into the surrounding mesa surface

• development of the Bravo and Delta waste dumps, to blend into sections of the surrounding mesa surface and remain below the visual profile of the mesa crest

• partial backfilling of sections of the Gully Pit void

• expansion of the existing Alpha waste dump (if practical), to allow the external un-rehabilitated waste slope to be re-profiled to 20 degrees and then rehabilitated

• depths of the remaining open pit voids will vary in the approximate range of 20 – 35 m below the surrounding surface.

4240

00 m

E

4245

00 m

E

7597500 mN

7598000 mN

7598500 mN

7599000 mN

4240

00 m

E

4245

00 m

E

7596500 mN

7597000 mN

4230

00 m

E

4235

00 m

E

4230

00 m

E

4225

00 m

E

4235

00 m

E

7599000 mN

7598500 mN

7597500 mN

7598000 mN

4225

00 m

E

7596500 mN

7597000 mN

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

Figure 21 Mesa K Conceptual Rehabilitation areasProjection: MGA94-50FDMS No.: PDE0036249_fig3 Scale: 1: 12 500 Date: 24 August 2007

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

Legend


AN Facility

Project AreaWaste Dump/Low Grade Ore StockpileBackfill


Crib/Office







Railway

Private Road

Alpha WDAlpha WDAlpha WDAlpha WDAlpha WDAlpha WDAlpha WDAlpha WDAlpha WD

Echo WDEcho WDEcho WDEcho WDEcho WDEcho WDEcho WDEcho WDEcho WD

Charlie LGCharlie LGCharlie LGCharlie LGCharlie LGCharlie LGCharlie LGCharlie LGCharlie LG

Bravo WDBravo WDBravo WDBravo WDBravo WDBravo WDBravo WDBravo WDBravo WD

Delta WDDelta WDDelta WDDelta WDDelta WDDelta WDDelta WDDelta WDDelta WD

BackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfill

Foxtrot WDFoxtrot WDFoxtrot WDFoxtrot WDFoxtrot WDFoxtrot WDFoxtrot WDFoxtrot WDFoxtrot WD

BackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfillBackfill

Hotel WDHotel WDHotel WDHotel WDHotel WDHotel WDHotel WDHotel WDHotel WDIndia WDIndia WDIndia WDIndia WDIndia WDIndia WDIndia WDIndia WDIndia WD

LG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/Backfill

LG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/BackfillLG/Backfill



Rehabilitation of waste dumps

The deposition of waste rock material has been designed to maximise backfilling and prevent new disturbance, as outlined above.

Where waste dumps are not a complete void backfill (and thus have an external slope), they will be designed in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Landform Design Guidelines. The Design incorporates features to minimise waste re-handling and optimise the configuration and stability of waste dumps to facilitate successful rehabilitation. Waste dump slopes will be profiled to a batter slope of 20 degrees.

Waste dumps will be located wholly within areas previously disturbed by mining, with the exception of the Alpha waste dump (Figure 21), which will encroach on a small area that has previously been only superficially disturbed. The Alpha dump is situated on top of a previously developed waste dump, which, due to safety concerns, was not previously rehabilitated. Dumping additional waste rock in this location, if practical, will enable an improved landform to be constructed with a reduced slope, which will allow for the landform to be rehabilitated.

The waste dumps have been designed to address legacy issues from historical mining wherever possible, as in the case of Echo, Hotel and India (contingency) waste dumps, which provide for backfilling of previous voids.

Dump heights are designed to be no higher than the adjacent natural topography. Where waste dumps abut natural landscapes, they are designed to blend in with the adjacent topography and to prevent surface runoff from the adjacent landform flowing onto the top of the waste dump. The tops of the waste dumps will be sloped towards natural topography and/or towards the centre of the dump. A bund wall will be constructed around the dump crest to prevent surface water flowing over the edge.

Low grade ore stockpiling strategy

Approximately 5.4 Mt of low grade ore material is expected to be produced during the operation of the Mesa K Remnant Mining Project. It is the preferred strategy to cart as much of this ore directly to Mesa J for blending; however, the volume of low grade ore that can be directly hauled to Mesa J will depend on several factors, including quality, blending and scheduling requirements. As such, it is necessary to provide for stockpiling of low grade ore within the Mesa K project area.

Low grade ore stockpiling will be primarily located within the Gravel Yard pit void and Gully pit void to prevent additional disturbance.

Low grade ore will be recovered from the stockpiles and hauled to Mesa J as required throughout the operation period. It is expected that required low grade ore will be recovered into 2011. Any low grade ore material not recovered will be treated as waste material and re-profiled and rehabilitated accordingly.



Rehabilitation monitoring

The Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will be incorporated into the regular monitoring schedule that applies to all Robe sites. Rehabilitation monitoring will be part of scheduled monitoring for Mesa K, commencing at the completion of rehabilitation works, and will include:

• landform stability and erosion monitoring of reconstructed landforms in relation to surface hydrology, erosion gullying, rilling, loss of surface material and factors affecting surface stability and revegetation

• revegetation monitoring of specific factors to gauge success and identify required remedial actions to establish sustainable native vegetation communities.

Monitoring of rehabilitation at Mesa K will be undertaken to measure the progress of rehabilitation and ensure that objectives and targets are being met. Monitoring programs provide useful feedback for the improvement of rehabilitation techniques and help assess the long-term success of rehabilitation. Monitoring also provides valuable information to establish realistic and achievable completion criteria.

Robe has monitored the success of its rehabilitated mine sites in the Robe River area since 1993, including at Mesa K (Figure 22). Robe rehabilitation monitoring to date has focused on ecosystem functions, measuring parameters such as vegetation density, vegetation cover and indicators of landscape function including surface stability, infiltration capacity and nutrient cycling capacity.

Revegetation monitoring will be undertaken to ensure that vegetation communities are approaching the planned land use values for the area. In general, vegetation is monitored to assess and compare composition, structure and function of the revegetated area to an adjacent control area. Control areas are reference sites selected on the basis of representative landform and vegetation applicable to each of the land systems to be re-established. These sites help to account for changes in seasonal or inter-annual changes in ecosystem state and represent a potential end-point for rehabilitated landscapes.

Monitoring of operational aspects during mining will allow defects and variations in design to be quickly identified and rectified. This is important for key activities such as waste dump development and open pit void backfilling, and will help ensure final landforms are appropriate and require minimum reworking.

Monitoring rehabilitated areas following the completion of operations will ensure that any areas requiring remedial work are identified. Rectification and maintenance works will be undertaken as necessary and may include:

• minor earthworks

• erosion control works

• re-seeding

• weed control.

A recent Landscape Function Analysis (LFA) was conducted at several established Robe rehabilitation monitoring sites, including at Mesas J, K, L, M and N (Outback Ecology 2007). The LFA compared the biochemical functioning of rehabilitated sites to that of undisturbed (control) sites using several indicators, such as soil texture, cryptogam cover, surface roughness and the coherence of soil when wet. Rehabilitated sites generally recorded high values for stability, infiltration and nutrient cycling indices when compared with control sites (Outback Ecology 2007).



Rehabilitation monitoring area K32 at Mesa K, 1996




Rehabilitated pit void at Mesa K, 2007

Rehabilitated area west of Central pit at Mesa K, 2007

Figure 22 Rehabilitation monitoring at Mesa J and Mesa K



12.4 CLOSURE

12.4.1 Closure objectives

Robe is committed to constructively contributing to society’s transition to sustainable development. Effective closure planning is required to ensure that the areas in which the company operates are left in a condition that reduces adverse impacts to the human and natural environment, and that a legacy remains that makes a positive contribution to sustainable development.

General Robe objectives for mine closure are:

• to relinquish to the community a tidy, safe and uncontaminated site

• to construct landforms that are stable, free-draining, non-polluting and aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape

• to establish sustainable endemic vegetation communities that are consistent with reconstructed landforms and surrounding vegetation and are suitable for the support of pastoralism.

12.4.2 Closure planning

Robe will incorporate Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Pilbara Iron Greater Pannawonica Operations Closure Study. This study is currently undergoing internal review and is being developed in accordance with relevant legislation and best practice guidelines.

One of the keys to achieving acceptable closure outcomes, as well as reducing the cost of closure without compromising outcomes, is the successful integration of closure concepts into ongoing short and long-term mine planning activities. In this regard, Pilbara Iron has already considered potential closure impacts in the preliminary planning of the proposed operations. The following considerations have been included in the current planning for the proposal to mitigate potential effects of closure:

• progressive backfilling of the mine pit voids where possible

• retention of the southern escarpment of Mesa K

• early establishment and rapid rehabilitation of outer edges of out-of-pit waste dumps.


Robe has developed a Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan for Mesa K (included in Appendix 1), which will be regularly reviewed and updated as required. The Plan will be incorporated into the site rehabilitation plan upon commencement of operations at Mesa K.

Following the completion of mining, management actions to ensure rehabilitation at Mesa K is undertaken in accordance with Robe rehabilitation objectives include:

• removing site infrastructure for re-use or disposal as appropriate

• emptying, backfilling and burying the septic system in-situ

• constructing safety bunds around each pit void

• blocking access roads no longer required

• backfilling pit voids where possible (Section 12.3.4)



• backfilling minor excavations

• disposing rubbish and scrap at the Mesa J and townsite landfill, or burying on-site as appropriate

• plugging below ground-level drill holes not required for ongoing monitoring

• removal and separate stockpiling of vegetation, topsoil and subsoil for later re-use, where possible.

Robe will incorporate Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Pilbara Iron Greater Pannawonica Operations Closure Study, which will address future closure, including:





• cost estimates and fund allocation for future closure

• management actions to facilitate future closure.

12.6 PREDICTED OUTCOMES

Robe has developed a Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan for Mesa K (included in Appendix 1) in accordance with EPA Guidance Statement No. 6 (EPA 2006b). The Plan will be incorporated into the site rehabilitation plan upon commencement of operations at Mesa K and will be regularly reviewed during site operations to ensure it remains accurate and relevant.

Robe will incorporate Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Pilbara Iron Greater Pannawonica Operations Closure Study, which will address future closure, including developing suitable end land uses and objectives for closure, in consultation with relevant stakeholders and the community.

Robe has integrated key environmental aspects of the proposal into all stages of mine planning and design to maximise rehabilitation success. Implementation of Pilbara Iron management tools and the proposed management actions will ensure effective environmental and rehabilitation outcomes for Mesa K.

The Mesa K Remnant Mining Project will be incorporated into the regular monitoring schedule that applies to all Robe sites. Rehabilitation monitoring at Mesa K will commence upon completion of rehabilitation works at the site and will provide useful feedback for the improvement of rehabilitation techniques and help assess the long-term success of rehabilitation.



13. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Robe will minimise environmental impacts through the implementation of ongoing management actions, which include:

• maintaining an Environmental Management System (EMS) and business systems

• preparing and implementing an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the proposal (included in Appendix 1)

• preparing and implementing a Rehabilitation Plan for Mesa K (Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan included in Appendix 1), which includes regular review and revision of the Plan

• developing environmental improvement plans each year for priorities identified in reviews of systems and performance

• improving mechanisms to measure both water and energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

• controlling waste and spills of hydrocarbons

• improving the efficiency of natural resource use

• updating plans for disturbance and closure, progressively rehabilitating and measuring success

• training staff and contractors in environmental requirements of their work

• ensuring that community views are sought, respected and considered

• reporting regularly to stakeholders on performance

• aligning with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore Health, Safety and Environmental Policy and the Pilbara Iron and Robe River Joint Venture Environmental Policy.

Robe acknowledges the environmental protection principles listed in S4a of the EP Act through its strong commitment to sustainable development and environmental management at its operations (Section 5). These principles are clearly reflected in the Robe Environmental Policy (Section 13.1), Iron Environmental Management System (Section 13.2) and the Rio Tinto corporate environmental standards that are being implemented across the Rio Tinto Group.

Robe maintains membership of the Australian Greenhouse Challenge Plus program and continues to evaluate and adopt appropriate technology to improve greenhouse efficiency wherever possible (Section 6.3.4).

13.1 PROPONENT’S ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

Robe aims to conduct business in an efficient and environmentally responsible manner that is compatible with the expectations of shareholders, the government and the community. Robe also recognises that environmental responsibilities go beyond those required under statutory regulations to encompass social obligations, leadership in sustainable development and minimising environmental impacts.

The Pilbara Iron and Robe River Joint Venture Environmental Policy was signed in August 2004 by the company’s executive management. The Environmental Policy is the guiding document for environmental management and provides context and specific direction for continuous improvement.



Pilbara Iron and Robe River Joint Venture Environmental policy

Our goal is to create long-term value as a responsible iron ore mining company. In doing this we need to care for the environment with our aims including:

• efficient use of natural resources

• to meet our legal and other obligations along with the targets we set

• to minimise pollution and clean up any accidents quickly

• leaving areas as close as practical to how we found them

• to continually improve performance

• ensuring employees know their environmental accountabilities and act on them

• being proactive to better understand the impact of our operations now and for the future

• providing opportunities for communities and others to tell us what they think.

To achieve this, our actions will be:

• managing our environmental issues through our EMS and business systems

• developing environmental improvement plans each year for priorities identified in review of systems and performance

• improving our ability to measure water, energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

• minimising waste and spills of hydrocarbons

• improving the efficiency of our use of natural resources

• updating plans for disturbance and closure, progressively rehabilitate and measure success

• recognising good environmental performance

• training staff and contractors in environmental requirements of their work

• that community views are sought, respected and considered

• reporting regularly to stakeholders on our performance

• aligning with the Rio Tinto Iron Ore Health, Safety and Environmental Policy.

13.2 IRON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IEMS)

Robe operates under an ISO14001 framework through the IEMS. ISO14001 is an internationally recognised continuous improvement model, the key elements of which include assessing environmental risk and legal requirements, developing objectives and targets for improvement, training, operational control, communication, emergency response, corrective actions, audits and review. Robe sites were certified to ISO14001 in July 2005 and, to maintain this, Robe sites are required to successfully complete regular external independent surveillance audits.

13.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP)

An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for Mesa K has been prepared and will be implemented to manage specific environmental issues arising from the proposal.



The EMP (included in Appendix 1) addresses the following aspects:

• protection of native flora and vegetation • prevention of the introduction and spread of weeds • protection of native terrestrial fauna • protection of subterranean fauna • control of feral animals • management of surface water runoff and drainage • protection of the Robe River (quantity and quality of water) and associated riparian vegetation • minimisation and management of dust generated during activities related to mining and transport • hydrocarbon management • waste (mineral and non-mineral) management • noise and vibration • fire • Aboriginal heritage • greenhouse gases • consultation, monitoring, auditing and reporting of environmental performance.

13.4 REHABILITATION PLAN

A Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan has been developed for Mesa K (included in Appendix 1). The Plan will be regularly reviewed and updated in response to site factors, operational changes, environmental factors, monitoring results and visual observations.

13.5 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MEASURES

A number of measures currently exist, and further measures will be put in place, to ensure environmental compliance and appropriate management of the proposal in regard to each environmental factor (Table 14). Key measures are drawn from:

• Ministerial Conditions, Key Characteristics and Proponent Commitments in the Ministerial Statement

• the EMP (included in Appendix 1) • relevant Rio Tinto Environmental standards.

13.6 SUMMARY OF PROPONENT’S COMMITMENTS

The proponent (Robe) proposes the Environmental Management Commitments for the proposal as detailed in Table 15.


PIR07021_MesaK_EPS_FINAL - 14/03/2008 112

Table 14 Environmental compliance and management controls for Mesa K

Factor Topic / aspect Ministerial Statement 1

Proponent Commitment in

EPS

Environmental Management

Plan Corporate Standard

Extent of ground disturbance

Protection of areas not approved to be cleared

Protection of riverine habitat

Weed management

Flora and vegetation

Fire management

Extent of ground disturbance Terrestrial and Subterranean fauna Protection of areas not approved to be cleared

Drainage management Surface water

Prevention of surface water contamination

Protection of sites / heritage values Aboriginal heritage

Consultation with Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant Group

Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan Rehabilitation and closure

Closure

Dust Dust management

Noise and vibration Noise and vibration management

Mineral waste

Domestic solid and liquid waste

Waste management

Ablution effluent

Emission reductions Greenhouse gases

Reporting

Extent of ground disturbance Landscape

Protection of areas not to be disturbed

Auditing

Performance monitoring

General

Reporting

1 Ministerial Conditions are to be assigned at a later date. Those listed in the table are based on proponent expectations.



Table 15 Proponent’s Environmental Management Commitments for the management of Mesa K



To minimise environmental impacts during the operation of the proposal. To protect the environmental values of areas not required for mining operations.

Finalise the EMP for the proposal that addresses the following environmental aspects:

• protection of native flora and vegetation

• prevention of the introduction and spread of weeds

• protection of native terrestrial fauna

• protection of subterranean fauna

• control of feral animals

• management of surface water runoff and drainage

• protection of the Robe River (quantity and quality of water) and associated riparian vegetation

• minimisation and management of dust generated during activities related to mining and transport

• hydrocarbon management

• waste (mineral and non-mineral) management


• fire



• consultation, monitoring, auditing and reporting of environmental performance.

Prior to ground disturbance

DEC (Environmental Management Division & Nature Conservation Division)


As above. Implement the EMP prepared under Commitment 1. During operation


To ensure rehabilitation achieves a stable and functioning landform that is consistent with the surrounding landscape and other environmental values.

Finalise the Rehabilitation Plan for Mesa K that addresses the following:

• a description of the rehabilitation process

• regular review and revision of the Plan

• use of local provenance seed and plant species

• monitoring, auditing and reporting of rehabilitation performance.

Prior to commencement of productive mining

19

19

“productive mining” means the mining of shippable ore





To ensure rehabilitation is undertaken in accordance with the Rehabilitation Plan and consistent with the future requirements for final closure of the site.

Incorporate Mesa K and the Mesa K Rehabilitation Plan into the Greater Pannawonica Closure Study, which will address future closure, including:





• review and update of the Greater Pannawonica Closure Study.

Prior to completion of mining at Mesa J

DoIR, DEC (Nature Conservation Division)



14. CONCLUSION

The key environmental factors identified by the proponent, government agencies and other stakeholders in regard to the development and operation of the proposal were:

• flora and fauna (terrestrial and subterranean): conservation of regional biodiversity

• landscape: retention of important features of the landscape

• Aboriginal heritage: protection of significant Aboriginal sites and consultation with the Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant Group.

14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION

The potential environmental impacts of the proposal and proposed management measures are as follows:

• progressive removal of approximately 10 ha of previously undisturbed native vegetation over the life of the proposal, with rehabilitation of disturbed areas following the completion of operations

• risk of the spread of weeds will be managed through implementation of weed control and hygiene measures in accordance with the Pilbara Iron Weed Management Plan

• loss of generally low-value terrestrial fauna habitat is not expected to have a significant effect on the representation of fauna at a local or regional level

• removal of a relatively small portion (less than 15% by volume) of potential troglofauna habitat within the mesa, with potential impacts to troglofauna diversity and species representation managed through alteration of the mine plan to avoid areas where singleton troglofauna (i.e. species that were not recorded at other sites on the mesa) were recorded and retention of the majority of the potential troglofauna habitat (the pisolite resource) as a contiguous system

• change in the immediate landscape through removal of mined material and the resultant physical change in the re-established landform. Key landscape values will be maintained through retention of the southern escarpment

• local alterations to surface drainage patterns within the mining area will not significantly affect the quality or quantity of water in the Robe River itself

• the generation of dust, waste, noise and vibration, as well as potential risks to public safety, will be minor and will be managed under the Mesa K EMP (included in Appendix 1).

14.2 ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS AND MANAGEABILITY

The approach taken in this environmental review has been based on a risk assessment approach to characterise environmental factors, determine potential impacts and develop mitigation measures.

The proponent has extensive experience in managing the development, operation and environmental compliance of similar operations (including the existing iron ore mine at Mesa J) and this experience is anticipated to lead to a greater certainty in achieving desirable environmental outcomes.



The key environmental aspects of the proposal have been considered during the planning and design of the proposal and have been managed largely through incorporation into the mine plan, thereby preventing many aspects from leading to significant environmental impacts.

The environmental aspects of the proposal will be further managed through the Mesa K EMP (included in Appendix 1), the site EMS and the implementation of proposed Environmental Management Commitments for Mesa K. Robe will ensure acceptable rehabilitation of the site in accordance with the Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan (included in Appendix 1). Future closure of the site will be integrated with mine closure for the greater Pannawonica operations.

The proponent has consulted with stakeholders (including government agencies) to scope the potential impacts of the proposal and to determine the significance of environmental issues and the acceptability of mitigation. This process substantially improves the likelihood that all significant environmental issues have been identified, investigated and mitigated as far as practicable.



15. REFERENCES

Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ANZECC/ARMCANZ) 1996, National Principles for the Provision of Water for Ecosystems, Sustainable Land and Water Resources Management Committee Subcommittee on Water Resources Occasional Paper SWR No. 3.

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

Australian and New Zealand Minerals and Energy Council (ANZMEC) and Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) 2000, Strategic Framework for Mine Closure, National Library of Australia Catalogue.

Aquaterra 2005, Mesa A/Warramboo Development, Memorandum Doc 039a, March 2005.

Batley, G. E., Humphrey, C. L., Apte, S. C. and Stauber, J. L. 2003, A Guide to the Application of ANZECC/ARMCANZ Water Quality Guidelines in the Mineral Industry, Australian Centre for Mining Environmental Research, September 2003.

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

Beard, J. S. 1975b, Vegetation Survey of Western Australia, 1:100,000 Vegetation Series Mapsheet 5 – Pilbara.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2002, Exmouth Limestone Troglobitic Fauna Sampling Stage III, unpublished report prepared for Exmouth Limestone Pty Ltd, Perth.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2003, Mesa J Extension Vegetation, Flora and Fauna Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, December 2003.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2004, Mesa A and Bungaroo Creek Subterranean Fauna Survey, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2005a, Fauna Habitats and Fauna Assemblage of Mesa A and G, near Pannawonica, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, July 2005.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2005b, Vegetation and Flora Survey of Mesa A and Mesa G, near Pannawonica, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, July 2005.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2006a, Fauna Habitats and Fauna Assemblage of the Mesa A Transport Corridor and Warramboo, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, January 2006.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2006b, Mesa A/Warramboo and Yarraloola Borefield Development – Baseline Stygofauna Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, January 2006.



Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2006c, Mesa A and Robe Valley Mesas Troglobitic Fauna Survey – Subterranean Fauna Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, March 2006.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2006d, A Vegetation and Flora Survey of the Proposed Mesa A Transport Corridor, Warramboo Deposit and Yarraloola Borefield, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, January 2006.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007a, A Vegetation and Flora Survey of the Mesa K Mine Site, near Pannawonica, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, March 2007.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007b, Mesa K Targeted Fauna Survey, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron, April 2007.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007c, Mesa K Remnant Mining Project Troglobitic Fauna Survey, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron, June 2007.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007d, Recommendation for removal of Abutilon trudgenii ms. and Sida sp. Wittenoom (WR Barker 1962) from the WA Priority flora listing, Correspondence Ms. Michi Maier (Biota) to Mr. John Reilly (Department of Environment and Conservation), 26 March 2007.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007e, Seasonal fauna habitats and fauna assemblage survey of the Bungaroo Trial Pit Project, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates.

Bowman Bishaw Gorham (BBG) 1991, Proposed Iron Ore Mining at Mesa J, Deepdale – Consultative Environmental Review, June 1991.

Brundtland Commission 1997, The Brundtland Commission: The World Commission on Environment and Development, Chaired by Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland.

Bureau of Meteorology 2007, Climate Statistics for Australian Locations, [Online], Available from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_005069.shtml [15 May 2007].

Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia 2000, Mine Closure Guidelines for Mineral Operations in Western Australia, October 2000.

Corsini, S. 2007, Results of an Indigenous Heritage Survey: Robe River Iron Associates Deepdale – Mesa “K”, draft unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron.

Department of Industry and Resources (DoIR) 2004, Western Australian Minerals and Petroleum Statistics Digest.

Department of Minerals and Energy Western Australia (DME) 1996, Guidelines for Mining in Arid Environments, June 1996.

Department of Minerals and Energy Western Australia (DME) 2001, Environmental Notes on Mining, Waste Rock Dumps, January 2001.

Di Lello, A., Hook, F., Dias, A. and Hammond, C. 2002, The report of an Aboriginal Heritage Assessment of Mesas J and K, near Pannawonica, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron.



Ecologia Environmental Consultants (Ecologia) 1991, Mesa J Project. Consultative Environmental Review: Fauna Assessment Survey, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates.

Environment Australia 1998, Landform Design for Rehabilitation. One Booklet in a Series on Best Practice Environmental Management in Mining, May 1998.

Environment Australia 2000, Revision of the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) and Development of Version 5.1, Summary Report, Environment Australia, November 2000.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 1995, Rehabilitation and Revegetation. One Module in a Series on Best Practice Environmental Management in Mining, June 1995.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2000, Environmental Protection of Native Vegetation in Western Australia, Position Statement No. 2, December 2000.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2002a, Guidance Statement for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Guidance Statement No. 12, October 2002.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2002b, Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an Element of Biodiversity Protection, Position Statement No. 3, March 2002.

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

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2004a, Principles of Environmental Protection, Position Statement No. 7, August 2004.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2004b, Terrestrial Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, Guidance Statement No. 51, June 2004.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2004c, Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, Guidance Statement No. 56, June 2004.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2004d, Assessment of Aboriginal Heritage, Guidance Statement No. 41, April 2004.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2006a, Environmental Offsets, Position Statement No. 9, January 2006.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2006b, Rehabilitation of Terrestrial Ecosystems, Guidance Statement No. 6, June 2006.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2007, Sampling Methods and Survey Considerations for Subterranean Fauna in Western Australia, Guidance Statement No. 54a (Technical Appendix to Guidance Statement No. 54), Draft, August 2007.

Gentilli, J. 1972, Australian Climate Patterns, Nelson.



Government of Western Australia (WA Government) 2003, Hope for the Future: The Western Australian State Sustainability Strategy, Department of the Premier and Cabinet, Perth.

Hammond, C., Jimenez-Lozano, M. and Mullen, D. 2006, The First Addendum Report to Heritage Assessment of Mesas J and K, near Pannawonica, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron.

Harvey, M. S. 1988, ‘A new troglobitic schizomid from Cape Range, Western Australia (Chelicerata: Schizomida)’, Records of the Western Australian Museum, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 15 – 20.

Harvey, M. S. 2002, ‘Short-range endemism among the Australian fauna: some examples from non-marine environments’, Invertebrate Systematics, vol. 16, pp. 555 – 570.

Harvey, M. S. , Berry, O., Edward, K. L. and Humphreys, G. 2007, Molecular and morphological systematics of hypogean schizomids (Schizomida: Hubbardiidae) in semi-arid Australia, unpublished manuscript.

Hoffman, R.L. 2003, ‘A new genus and species of trigoniuline millipede from Western Australia (Spirobolida: Pachybolidae: Trigoniulinar)’, Records of the Western Australian Museum, vol. 22, pp. 17 – 22.

Humphreys, W. F. 1991, ‘Experimental reactivation of pulse driven populations in a terrestrial troglobite community’, Journal of Animal Ecology, vol. 60, pp. 609 – 623.

Humphreys, W. F. 1993, ‘Cave Fauna in Semi-Arid Tropical Western Australia: A diverse relict wet-forest litter fauna’, Memoires de Biospeologie, Tome XX, pp. 105 – 110.

Humphreys, W. F. 2001, ‘The subterranean fauna of Barrow Island (Northwestern Australia)’, Memoires de Biospeologie (International Journal of Subterranean Biology), vol. 28.

Minerals Council of Australia 2004, Enduring Value: The Australian Minerals Industry Framework for Sustainable Development, October 2004.

Outback Ecology 2007, Pilbara Iron Pannawonica Operations Landscape Function Analysis, draft unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron, January 2007.

Ponder, W. F. and Colgan, D. J. 2002, ‘What makes a narrow-range taxon? Insights from Australian fresh-water snails’, Invertebrate Systematics vol. 16, pp. 571 – 582.

Robe River Mining Co Pty Ltd. (Robe) 2005, Mesa A/Warramboo Pre-Feasibility Study V1.1, unpublished report.

Snowden 2007, Rio Tinto: Mesa A Geotechnical Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Rio Tinto.

Stevens, R. 2004, Results of a Kuruma Marthudunera Ethnographic Heritage Survey: Mesas J & K, West Pilbara, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron.

Thomson, J. and Hammond, C. 2001, Preliminary Advice of an Aboriginal Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Remnant Mining Areas Drilling Program, Mesas L, L Minor and K, Pannawonica, Western Australia, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron.



Tongway, D. 1994, Rangeland Soil Condition Assessment Manual, CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology, Canberra.

Watson, J. A. L. 1969, ‘Taxonomy, ecology, and zoogeography of dragonflies (Odonata) from the north-west of Western Australia’, Australian Journal of Zoology, vol. 17, pp. 65 – 112.



16. SHORT TITLES AND ACRONYMS

Table 16 details the short titles and acronyms used in this report.

Table 16 Short titles and acronyms

Short title or acronym Long title

µm Micrometre

AN Ammonium nitrate

ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council

ANZMEC Australian and New Zealand Minerals and Energy Council

ARI Annual recurrence interval

ARMCANZ Agricultural and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand

BBG Bowman Bishaw Gorham

Biota Biota Environmental Sciences

CAMBA China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement

CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna

CO2 Carbon dioxide

CO2-e Carbon dioxide equivalents

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation

DEW Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Water Resources

DIA Department of Indigenous Affairs (WA)

DoIR Department of Industry and Resources (WA)

DME Department of Minerals and Energy (now DoIR)

DRF Declared Rare Flora

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EPA Environmental Protection Authority (WA)

EPASU Environmental Protection Authority Service Unit

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth)

EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA)

EPS Environmental Protection Statement

ha Hectare

IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation Area

IEMS Iron Environmental Management System

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

JAMBA Japan-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement

kg Kilogram

km Kilometre

kt Thousand tonnes

Kuruma Marthudunera Kuruma Marthudunera Native Title Claimant Group

m Metre

MCA Minerals Council of Australia

mm Millimetre

Mt Million tonnes



Short title or acronym Long title

Mtpa Million tonnes per annum

Pilbara Iron Pilbara Iron Company (Services) Pty Ltd

PM10 Particulate matter with an equivalent aerodynamic diameter 10 µm or less

PM2.5 Particulate matter with an equivalent aerodynamic diameter 2.5 µm or less

PNTS Pilbara Native Title Service

Robe Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd

ROM Run of mine

SRE Short-range endemic

t Tonne

TEC Threatened Ecological Community

TSP Total suspended particulates

yr Year

Appendix 1 Supporting documents

APPENDIX 1 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

The following supporting documents are contained on CD inside the back cover of the EPS:

Environmental management

Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd 2007, Mesa K Remnant Mining Project Preliminary Rehabilitation Plan, unpublished.

Strategen 2007, Mesa K Remnant Mining Project Environmental Management Plan, unpublished document prepared for Robe River Mining Company Pty Ltd, September 2007.

Vegetation and flora

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007a, A Vegetation and Flora Survey of the Mesa K Mine Site, near Pannawonica, unpublished report prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, March 2007.

Terrestrial and subterranean fauna

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007b, Mesa K Targeted Fauna Survey, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron, April 2007.

Biota Environmental Sciences (Biota) 2007c, Mesa K Remnant Mining Project Troglobitic Fauna Survey, unpublished report prepared for Pilbara Iron, June 2007.

Mesa K Remnant Mining Project - EPA WA€¦ · Mesa K is considered critical to ensure the sustainability of Robe business activities. LOCATION The proposal is located in the Robe

Documents