TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Galt Environmental Pty Ltd www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017 T: +61 (8) 6272‐0200 ABN: 96 520 810 622 J1601242 002 TM Rev1 20 December 2016 To: Lisa Chandler e‐mail: [email protected]From: Brad Palmer Sender’s email: [email protected]PRELIMINARY ACID SULFATE SOIL STUDY PROPOSED POTASH PROJECT LAKE WELLS Dear Lisa, 1. INTRODUCTION This technical memorandum presents the results Galt Environmental Pty Ltd’s (Galt’s) preliminary acid sulfate soil (ASS) study undertaken at the location for a proposed potash mining project at Lake Wells (the site). The location of the site relative to the surrounding location is shown on Figure 1, Site and Location Plan. The work was authorised by Matthew Shackleton from Australian Potash Limited (APL) via a signed client authorisation form dated 18 November 2016. This document supersedes J1601242 001 TM Rev0 dated 14 December 2016 and addresses comment received from you via an email dated 16 December 2016. 2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Based on the supplied information, we understand that a potash mining project is proposed for a portion of Lake Wells located approximately 180 km of Laverton. We further understand that submissions for the initial environmental approvals for a small‐ scale brine evaporation trial are currently being prepared and this preliminary ASS study is required to support these submissions. We understand APL proposes to implement a small‐scale evaporation trial in 2017. The trial will involve pumping up to 650 m 3 of brine from an existing production bore into a nominal 52 m x 85 m lined pond complex to allow production of a 20 tonne bulk sample of potash salts. 3. PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objectives of the study were to: broadly assess the nature and extent of ASS conditions across the site; and make recommendations for further studies (if required). Note: In additional to characterising the nature and extent as ASS, additional laboratory testing was conducted to establish baseline concentrations of heavy metals and total organic carbon (TOC) at the site.
77
Embed
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM€¦ · To: Lisa Chandler e‐mail: [email protected] From: Brad Palmer Sender’s email: [email protected] PRELIMINARY ACID SULFATE SOIL STUDY
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Galt Environmental Pty Ltd
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017 T: +61 (8) 6272‐0200
22/11/2016 PL‐01/0.2‐0.4 0.2‐0.4 SAND: fine to coarse grained, white/pale orange, trace fine gravel 5.6 5.7 ‐0.1 M 8.8 6.9 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.35 0.22 <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 2.1 2.1 <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 PL‐09/0.2‐0.5 0.2‐0.5 Clayey SAND / Sandy CLAY: fine to medium grained, brown, low plasticity 7.0 5.9 1.1 M 8.9 7.5 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.36 0.72 <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 3.6 5.9 <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 PL‐10/0.1‐0.3 0.1‐0.3 Silty / Clayey SAND, fine to medium grained, brown, low plasticity, very soft to soft, wet 7.6 5.5 2.1 M 8.4 6.4 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.07 0.09 <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 0.66 0.61 <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 PL‐04/0.2‐0.8 0.2‐0.8 SAND: fine to medium grained, pale brown/yellow, trace fines,trace fine gravel 8.1 5.8 2.3 M 8.8 6.6 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.26 0.12 <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 1.3 1.4 <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 PL‐07/0.2 0.2 SAND: fine grained, brown, with some plastic fines, trace gravel 5.6 5.0 0.6 M 8.9 7.3 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.86 0.31 <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 1.5 1.2 <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 PL‐03/0.2‐1.0 0.2‐1.0 SAND / Silty SAND: fine grained, pale brown, non‐plastic fines,locally brown 8.0 5.9 2.1 M 9 7 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.45 0.3 <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 2.3 2.3 <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 PL‐06/1.5 1.5 Silty Clayey SAND, fine to medium grained, brown, low plasticity, moist, typically firm 6.6 5.5 1.1 M 8.2 6.6 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.1 NA <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 0.28 0.35 <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 S10/0.0‐0.2 0.0‐0.2 Clayey SAND / SAND: fine to medium grained, red, plastic fines 8.1 5.8 2.3 M 5.1 4.5 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 NA NA <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 NA NA <0.02 NASS
22/11/2016 CREEK/0.0‐0.2 0.0‐0.2 SAND; fine to coarse grained, red/brown, trace gravel and fines 8.0 5.8 2.2 M 5.1 4.5 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 NA NA <0.02 <0.02 <0.005 NA NA <0.02 NASS
Acid Sulftae Soil Classification
Assessment Criteria
Chromium Reducible Sulfur SuiteSuspended Peroxide Oxidation and Combined Acidity Sulfur Suite
Soil Description
Sample ID
Field Observations Lab pH
Table A2: Metals and Organic Carbon Testing Results
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017
ABN: 96 520 810 622
ATTACHMENT A
Site Photographs
J1601242 002 TM Rev1 20 December 2016
Galt Environmental Pty Ltd
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017
Page | A1 ABN: 96 520 810 622
Photograph 1: Hand auger location on the playa
Photograph 2: View across the playa
J1601242 002 TM Rev1 20 December 2016
Galt Environmental Pty Ltd
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017
Page | A2 ABN: 96 520 810 622
Photograph 3: Creek sampling location
Photograph 4: Hand auger location on the playa
Galt Environmental Pty Ltd
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017
ABN: 96 520 810 622
ATTACHMENT B
Soil Borehole Reports
EXPLANATORY NOTES TO BE READ WITH BOREHOLE AND TEST PIT REPORTSMETHOD OF DRILLING OR EXCAVATION
AC Air Core E Excavator PQ3 PQ3 Core Barrel
AD/T Auger Drilling with TC‐Bit EH Excavator with Hammer PT Push Tube
AD/V Auger Drilling with V‐Bit HA Hand Auger R Ripper
AT Air Track HMLC HMLC Core Barrel RR Rock Roller
B Bulldozer Blade HQ3 HQ3 Core Barrel SON Sonic Rig
BH Backhoe Bucket N Natural Exposure SPT Driven SPT
CT Cable Tool NMLC NMLC Core Barrel WB Washbore
DT Diatube PP Push Probe X Existing Excavation
SUPPORTT Timbering
PENETRATION EFFORT (RELATIVE TO THE EQUIPMENT USED)
VE Very Easy E Easy F Firm
H Hard VH Very Hard
WATER
Water Inflow Water Level
Water Loss (complete)
Water Loss (partial)
SAMPLING AND TESTINGB Bulk Disturbed Sample P Piston Sample
BLK Block Sample PBT Plate Bearing Test
C Core Sample U Undisturbed Push‐in Sample
CBR CBR Mould Sample U50: 50 mm diameter
D Small Disturbed Sample SPT Standard Penetration Test
ES Environmental Soil Sample Example: 3, 4, 5 N=9
EW Environmental Water Sample 3,4,5: Blows per 150 mm
G Gas Sample N=9: Blows per 300 mm after
HP Hand Penetrometer 150 mm seating interval
LB Large Bulk Disturbed Sample VS Vane Shear; P = Peak
M Mazier Type Sample R = Remoulded (kPa)
MC Moisture Content Sample W Water Sample
ACID SULFATE SOILS
NASS Non acid sulfate soils
PASS Potential acid sulfate soils
AASS Actual acid sulfate soils pHF pH of soil:water
pHFOX pH of soil:water following reaction with hydrogen sulfide
Net Acidity Chromium Reduciable Sulfur + Titratable actual acidity
O:\Administration\Standard Forms and Documents\PMP19 Explanatory Notes Rev0 EnviroGalt Form PMP19
RL1 February 2010
METHOD OF SOIL DESCRIPTIONBOREHOLE AND TEST PIT REPORTSGRAPHIC LOG & UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS) SYMBOLSGraphic USCS Soil Name Graphic USCS Soil Name
FILL (various types) SM
COBBLES ML
BOULDERS MH
GP GRAVEL (poorly graded) CL
GW GRAVEL (well graded) CI
GC Clayey GRAVEL CH
SP SAND (poorly graded) OL
SW SAND (well graded) OH
SC Clayey SAND Pt
RESISTANCE TO EXCAVATIONSymbol Term
VE Very easy
E Easy
F Firm
H Hard
VH Very hard
SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND INFERRED STRATIGRAPHYSoil descriptions are based on AS1726‐1993, Appendix A. Material properties are assessed in the field by visual/tactile methods
in combination with field testing techniques (where used).
NATA AccreditedAccreditation Number 1261Site Number 20794
Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 – TestingThe results of the tests, calibrations and/ormeasurements included in this document are traceableto Australian/national standards.
Client Sample ID PS-01_0.2-0.4 PS-09_0.2-0.5 PS-10_0.1-0.3 PS-04_0.2-0.8
Sample HistoryWhere samples are submitted/analysed over several days, the last date of extraction and analysis is reported.A recent review of our LIMS has resulted in the correction or clarification of some method identifications. Due to this, some of the method reference information on reports has changed. However,no substantive change has been made to our laboratory methods, and as such there is no change in the validity of current or previous results (regarding both quality and NATA accreditation).
If the date and time of sampling are not provided, the Laboratory will not be responsible for compromised results should testing be performed outside the recommended holding time.
1. Laboratory QC results for Method Blanks, Duplicates, Matrix Spikes, and Laboratory Control Samples are included in this QC report where applicable. Additional QC data may be available on
request.
2. All soil results are reported on a dry basis, unless otherwise stated.
3. Actual LORs are matrix dependant. Quoted LORs may be raised where sample extracts are diluted due to interferences.
4. Results are uncorrected for matrix spikes or surrogate recoveries.
5. SVOC analysis on waters are performed on homogenised, unfiltered samples, unless noted otherwise.
6. Samples were analysed on an 'as received' basis. 7. This report replaces any interim results previously issued.
Please refer to 'Sample Preservation and Container Guide' for holding times (QS3001).
For samples received on the last day of holding time, notification of testing requirements should have been received at least 6 hours prior to sample receipt deadlines as stated on the Sample
Receipt Advice.
If the Laboratory did not receive the information in the required timeframe, and regardless of any other integrity issues, suitably qualified results may still be reported.
Holding times apply from the date of sampling, therefore compliance to these may be outside the laboratory's control.
**NOTE: pH duplicates are reported as a range NOT as RPD
mg/kg: milligrams per Kilogram mg/l: milligrams per litre
ug/l: micrograms per litre ppm: Parts per million
ppb: Parts per billion %: Percentage
org/100ml: Organisms per 100 millilitres NTU: Nephelometric Turbidity Units
MPN/100mL: Most Probable Number of organisms per 100 millilitres
Dry Where a moisture has been determined on a solid sample the result is expressed on a dry basis.
LOR Limit of Reporting.
SPIKE Addition of the analyte to the sample and reported as percentage recovery.
RPD Relative Percent Difference between two Duplicate pieces of analysis.
LCS Laboratory Control Sample - reported as percent recovery
CRM Certified Reference Material - reported as percent recovery
Method Blank In the case of solid samples these are performed on laboratory certified clean sands.
In the case of water samples these are performed on de-ionised water.
Surr - Surrogate The addition of a like compound to the analyte target and reported as percentage recovery.
Duplicate A second piece of analysis from the same sample and reported in the same units as the result to show comparison.
Batch Duplicate A second piece of analysis from a sample outside of the clients batch of samples but run within the laboratory batch of analysis.
Batch SPIKE Spike recovery reported on a sample from outside of the clients batch of samples but run within the laboratory batch of analysis.
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
APHA American Public Health Association
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
COC Chain of Custody
SRA Sample Receipt Advice
CP Client Parent - QC was performed on samples pertaining to this report
NCP Non-Client Parent - QC performed on samples not pertaining to this report, QC is representative of the sequence or batch that client samples were analysed within
TEQ Toxic Equivalency Quotient
RPD Duplicates: Global RPD Duplicates Acceptance Criteria is 30% however the following acceptance guidelines are equally applicable:
Results <10 times the LOR : No Limit
Results between 10-20 times the LOR : RPD must lie between 0-50%
Results >20 times the LOR : RPD must lie between 0-30%
Surrogate Recoveries: Recoveries must lie between 50-150%-Phenols & PFASs 20-130%
1. Where a result is reported as a less than (<), higher than the nominated LOR, this is due to either matrix interference, extract dilution required due to interferences or contaminant levels within
the sample, high moisture content or insufficient sample provided.
2. Duplicate data shown within this report that states the word "BATCH" is a Batch Duplicate from outside of your sample batch, but within the laboratory sample batch at a 1:10 ratio. The Parent
and Duplicate data shown is not data from your samples.
3. Organochlorine Pesticide analysis - where reporting LCS data, Toxaphene & Chlordane are not added to the LCS.
4. Organochlorine Pesticide analysis - where reporting Spike data, Toxaphene is not added to the Spike.
5. Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons - where reporting Spike & LCS data, a single spike of commercial Hydrocarbon products in the range of C12-C30 is added and it's Total Recovery is reported
in the C10-C14 cell of the Report.
6. pH and Free Chlorine analysed in the laboratory - Analysis on this test must begin within 30 minutes of sampling.Therefore laboratory analysis is unlikely to be completed within holding time.
Analysis will begin as soon as possible after sample receipt.
7. Recovery Data (Spikes & Surrogates) - where chromatographic interference does not allow the determination of Recovery the term "INT" appears against that analyte.
8. Polychlorinated Biphenyls are spiked only using Aroclor 1260 in Matrix Spikes and LCS.
9. For Matrix Spikes and LCS results a dash " -" in the report means that the specific analyte was not added to the QC sample.
10. Duplicate RPDs are calculated from raw analytical data thus it is possible to have two sets of data.
Testing for the acid sulphates and CRS has been completed on pulverized samples in this report
V2 - Report updated after discussion with client in regards to solubility issues with samples. The samples have been reweighed using a lowerweight and due to this results have changed.
Sample containers for volatile analysis received with minimal headspace Yes
Samples received within HoldingTime Yes
Some samples have been subcontracted No
Qualifier Codes/Comments
Code Description
S01Liming rate is calculated and reported on a dry weight basis assuming use of fine agricultural lime (CaCO3) and using a safety factor of 1.5 to allow for non-homogeneous mixingand poor reactivity of lime. For conversion of Liming Rate from 'kg/t dry weight' to 'kg/m3 in-situ soil' multiply 'reported results' x 'wet bulk density of soil in t/m3'
S02 Retained Acidity is Reported when the pHKCl is less than pH 4.5
S03 Acid Neutralising Capacity is only required if the pHKCl if greater than or equal to pH 6.5
S04 Acid Sulfate Soil Samples have a 24 hour holding time unless frozen or dried within that period
Authorised By
Natalie Krasselt Analytical Services Manager
Bryan Wilson Senior Analyst-Metal (QLD)
Jonathon Angell Senior Analyst-Inorganic (QLD)
Glenn Jackson
National Operations Manager
- Indicates Not Requested
* Indicates NATA accreditation does not cover the performance of this service
Measurement uncertainty of test data is available on request or please click here.Eurofins | mgt shall not be liable for loss, cost, damages or expenses incurred by the client, or any other person or company, resulting from the use of any information or interpretation given in this report. In no case shall Eurofins | mgt be liable for consequential damages including, but notlimited to, lost profits, damages for failure to meet deadlines and lost production arising from this report. This document shall not be reproduced except in full and relates only to the items tested. Unless indicated otherwise, the tests were performed on the samples as received.
Sample HistoryWhere samples are submitted/analysed over several days, the last date of extraction and analysis is reported.A recent review of our LIMS has resulted in the correction or clarification of some method identifications. Due to this, some of the method reference information on reports has changed. However,no substantive change has been made to our laboratory methods, and as such there is no change in the validity of current or previous results (regarding both quality and NATA accreditation).
If the date and time of sampling are not provided, the Laboratory will not be responsible for compromised results should testing be performed outside the recommended holding time.
1. Laboratory QC results for Method Blanks, Duplicates, Matrix Spikes, and Laboratory Control Samples are included in this QC report where applicable. Additional QC data may be available on
request.
2. All soil results are reported on a dry basis, unless otherwise stated.
3. Actual LORs are matrix dependant. Quoted LORs may be raised where sample extracts are diluted due to interferences.
4. Results are uncorrected for matrix spikes or surrogate recoveries.
5. SVOC analysis on waters are performed on homogenised, unfiltered samples, unless noted otherwise.
6. Samples were analysed on an 'as received' basis. 7. This report replaces any interim results previously issued.
Please refer to 'Sample Preservation and Container Guide' for holding times (QS3001).
For samples received on the last day of holding time, notification of testing requirements should have been received at least 6 hours prior to sample receipt deadlines as stated on the Sample
Receipt Advice.
If the Laboratory did not receive the information in the required timeframe, and regardless of any other integrity issues, suitably qualified results may still be reported.
Holding times apply from the date of sampling, therefore compliance to these may be outside the laboratory's control.
**NOTE: pH duplicates are reported as a range NOT as RPD
mg/kg: milligrams per Kilogram mg/l: milligrams per litre
ug/l: micrograms per litre ppm: Parts per million
ppb: Parts per billion %: Percentage
org/100ml: Organisms per 100 millilitres NTU: Nephelometric Turbidity Units
MPN/100mL: Most Probable Number of organisms per 100 millilitres
Dry Where a moisture has been determined on a solid sample the result is expressed on a dry basis.
LOR Limit of Reporting.
SPIKE Addition of the analyte to the sample and reported as percentage recovery.
RPD Relative Percent Difference between two Duplicate pieces of analysis.
LCS Laboratory Control Sample - reported as percent recovery
CRM Certified Reference Material - reported as percent recovery
Method Blank In the case of solid samples these are performed on laboratory certified clean sands.
In the case of water samples these are performed on de-ionised water.
Surr - Surrogate The addition of a like compound to the analyte target and reported as percentage recovery.
Duplicate A second piece of analysis from the same sample and reported in the same units as the result to show comparison.
Batch Duplicate A second piece of analysis from a sample outside of the clients batch of samples but run within the laboratory batch of analysis.
Batch SPIKE Spike recovery reported on a sample from outside of the clients batch of samples but run within the laboratory batch of analysis.
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
APHA American Public Health Association
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
COC Chain of Custody
SRA Sample Receipt Advice
CP Client Parent - QC was performed on samples pertaining to this report
NCP Non-Client Parent - QC performed on samples not pertaining to this report, QC is representative of the sequence or batch that client samples were analysed within
TEQ Toxic Equivalency Quotient
RPD Duplicates: Global RPD Duplicates Acceptance Criteria is 30% however the following acceptance guidelines are equally applicable:
Results <10 times the LOR : No Limit
Results between 10-20 times the LOR : RPD must lie between 0-50%
Results >20 times the LOR : RPD must lie between 0-30%
Surrogate Recoveries: Recoveries must lie between 50-150%-Phenols & PFASs 20-130%
1. Where a result is reported as a less than (<), higher than the nominated LOR, this is due to either matrix interference, extract dilution required due to interferences or contaminant levels within
the sample, high moisture content or insufficient sample provided.
2. Duplicate data shown within this report that states the word "BATCH" is a Batch Duplicate from outside of your sample batch, but within the laboratory sample batch at a 1:10 ratio. The Parent
and Duplicate data shown is not data from your samples.
3. Organochlorine Pesticide analysis - where reporting LCS data, Toxaphene & Chlordane are not added to the LCS.
4. Organochlorine Pesticide analysis - where reporting Spike data, Toxaphene is not added to the Spike.
5. Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons - where reporting Spike & LCS data, a single spike of commercial Hydrocarbon products in the range of C12-C30 is added and it's Total Recovery is reported
in the C10-C14 cell of the Report.
6. pH and Free Chlorine analysed in the laboratory - Analysis on this test must begin within 30 minutes of sampling.Therefore laboratory analysis is unlikely to be completed within holding time.
Analysis will begin as soon as possible after sample receipt.
7. Recovery Data (Spikes & Surrogates) - where chromatographic interference does not allow the determination of Recovery the term "INT" appears against that analyte.
8. Polychlorinated Biphenyls are spiked only using Aroclor 1260 in Matrix Spikes and LCS.
9. For Matrix Spikes and LCS results a dash " -" in the report means that the specific analyte was not added to the QC sample.
10. Duplicate RPDs are calculated from raw analytical data thus it is possible to have two sets of data.
Sample containers for volatile analysis received with minimal headspace Yes
Samples received within HoldingTime Yes
Some samples have been subcontracted No
Qualifier Codes/Comments
Code Description
S01Liming rate is calculated and reported on a dry weight basis assuming use of fine agricultural lime (CaCO3) and using a safety factor of 1.5 to allow for non-homogeneous mixingand poor reactivity of lime. For conversion of Liming Rate from 'kg/t dry weight' to 'kg/m3 in-situ soil' multiply 'reported results' x 'wet bulk density of soil in t/m3'
S02 Retained Acidity is Reported when the pHKCl is less than pH 4.5
S03 Acid Neutralising Capacity is only required if the pHKCl if greater than or equal to pH 6.5
S04 Acid Sulfate Soil Samples have a 24 hour holding time unless frozen or dried within that period
Authorised By
Natalie Krasselt Analytical Services Manager
Bryan Wilson Senior Analyst-Metal (QLD)
Jonathon Angell Senior Analyst-Inorganic (QLD)
Glenn Jackson
National Operations Manager
- Indicates Not Requested
* Indicates NATA accreditation does not cover the performance of this service
Measurement uncertainty of test data is available on request or please click here.Eurofins | mgt shall not be liable for loss, cost, damages or expenses incurred by the client, or any other person or company, resulting from the use of any information or interpretation given in this report. In no case shall Eurofins | mgt be liable for consequential damages including, but notlimited to, lost profits, damages for failure to meet deadlines and lost production arising from this report. This document shall not be reproduced except in full and relates only to the items tested. Unless indicated otherwise, the tests were performed on the samples as received.
NATA AccreditedAccreditation Number 1261Site Number 20794
Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 – TestingThe results of the tests, calibrations and/ormeasurements included in this document are traceableto Australian/national standards.
Sample HistoryWhere samples are submitted/analysed over several days, the last date of extraction and analysis is reported.A recent review of our LIMS has resulted in the correction or clarification of some method identifications. Due to this, some of the method reference information on reports has changed. However,no substantive change has been made to our laboratory methods, and as such there is no change in the validity of current or previous results (regarding both quality and NATA accreditation).
If the date and time of sampling are not provided, the Laboratory will not be responsible for compromised results should testing be performed outside the recommended holding time.
Description Testing Site Extracted Holding Time
Total Organic Carbon Melbourne Dec 08, 2016 28 Day
- Method: APHA 5310B Total Organic Carbon
Extended Metals Suite Melbourne Dec 07, 2016 28 Day
- Method: LTM-MET-3030 by ICP-OES (hydride ICP-OES for Mercury) & USEPA 6010 Alkali Metals
Melbourne Laboratory - NATA Site # 1254 & 14271 X X X
Sydney Laboratory - NATA Site # 18217
Brisbane Laboratory - NATA Site # 20794
Perth Laboratory - NATA Site # 18217
(No24406)
7 PS-06_1.5(No24407)
Nov 22, 2016 Soil B16-De05219 X X X
8 CREEK_0.0-0.2M(No24414)
Nov 22, 2016 Soil B16-De05220X X X
9 S-10_0.0-0.2(No24408)
Nov 22, 2016 Soil B16-De05236 X X X
Test Counts 9 9 9
AB
N–
50 0
05 0
85 5
21e.
mai
l : E
nviro
Sal
es@
euro
fins.
com
web
: w
ww
.eur
ofin
s.co
m.a
u
Mel
bour
neM
elbo
urne
Mel
bour
neM
elbo
urne
2-5
Kin
gsto
n T
own
Clo
seO
akle
igh
VIC
316
6P
hone
: +
61 3
856
4 50
00N
AT
A #
126
1S
ite #
125
4 &
142
71
Syd
ney
Syd
ney
Syd
ney
Syd
ney
Uni
t F3,
Bui
ldin
g F
16 M
ars
Roa
dLa
ne C
ove
Wes
t NS
W 2
066
Pho
ne :
+61
2 9
900
8400
NA
TA
# 1
261
Site
# 1
8217
Bris
bane
Bris
bane
Bris
bane
Bris
bane
1/21
Sm
allw
ood
Pla
ceM
urar
rie Q
LD 4
172
Pho
ne :
+61
7 3
902
4600
NA
TA
# 1
261
Site
# 2
0794
Per
thP
erth
Per
thP
erth
2/91
Lea
ch H
ighw
ayK
ewda
le W
A 6
105
Pho
ne :
+61
8 9
251
9600
NA
TA
# 1
261
Site
# 1
8217
Dat
e R
epor
ted:
Dec
09,
201
6
Eur
ofin
s | m
gt 1
/21
Sm
allw
ood
Pla
ce, M
urar
rie, Q
LD, A
ustr
alia
, 417
2
AB
N :
50 0
05 0
85 5
21 T
elep
hone
: +61
7 3
902
4600
Pag
e 6
of 1
1
Rep
ort N
umbe
r: 5
2646
2-S
Internal Quality Control Review and Glossary
General
Holding Times
Units
Terms
QC - Acceptance Criteria
QC Data General Comments
1. Laboratory QC results for Method Blanks, Duplicates, Matrix Spikes, and Laboratory Control Samples are included in this QC report where applicable. Additional QC data may be available on
request.
2. All soil results are reported on a dry basis, unless otherwise stated.
3. Actual LORs are matrix dependant. Quoted LORs may be raised where sample extracts are diluted due to interferences.
4. Results are uncorrected for matrix spikes or surrogate recoveries.
5. SVOC analysis on waters are performed on homogenised, unfiltered samples, unless noted otherwise.
6. Samples were analysed on an 'as received' basis. 7. This report replaces any interim results previously issued.
Please refer to 'Sample Preservation and Container Guide' for holding times (QS3001).
For samples received on the last day of holding time, notification of testing requirements should have been received at least 6 hours prior to sample receipt deadlines as stated on the Sample
Receipt Advice.
If the Laboratory did not receive the information in the required timeframe, and regardless of any other integrity issues, suitably qualified results may still be reported.
Holding times apply from the date of sampling, therefore compliance to these may be outside the laboratory's control.
**NOTE: pH duplicates are reported as a range NOT as RPD
mg/kg: milligrams per Kilogram mg/l: milligrams per litre
ug/l: micrograms per litre ppm: Parts per million
ppb: Parts per billion %: Percentage
org/100ml: Organisms per 100 millilitres NTU: Nephelometric Turbidity Units
MPN/100mL: Most Probable Number of organisms per 100 millilitres
Dry Where a moisture has been determined on a solid sample the result is expressed on a dry basis.
LOR Limit of Reporting.
SPIKE Addition of the analyte to the sample and reported as percentage recovery.
RPD Relative Percent Difference between two Duplicate pieces of analysis.
LCS Laboratory Control Sample - reported as percent recovery
CRM Certified Reference Material - reported as percent recovery
Method Blank In the case of solid samples these are performed on laboratory certified clean sands.
In the case of water samples these are performed on de-ionised water.
Surr - Surrogate The addition of a like compound to the analyte target and reported as percentage recovery.
Duplicate A second piece of analysis from the same sample and reported in the same units as the result to show comparison.
Batch Duplicate A second piece of analysis from a sample outside of the clients batch of samples but run within the laboratory batch of analysis.
Batch SPIKE Spike recovery reported on a sample from outside of the clients batch of samples but run within the laboratory batch of analysis.
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
APHA American Public Health Association
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
COC Chain of Custody
SRA Sample Receipt Advice
CP Client Parent - QC was performed on samples pertaining to this report
NCP Non-Client Parent - QC performed on samples not pertaining to this report, QC is representative of the sequence or batch that client samples were analysed within
TEQ Toxic Equivalency Quotient
RPD Duplicates: Global RPD Duplicates Acceptance Criteria is 30% however the following acceptance guidelines are equally applicable:
Results <10 times the LOR : No Limit
Results between 10-20 times the LOR : RPD must lie between 0-50%
Results >20 times the LOR : RPD must lie between 0-30%
Surrogate Recoveries: Recoveries must lie between 50-150%-Phenols & PFASs 20-130%
1. Where a result is reported as a less than (<), higher than the nominated LOR, this is due to either matrix interference, extract dilution required due to interferences or contaminant levels within
the sample, high moisture content or insufficient sample provided.
2. Duplicate data shown within this report that states the word "BATCH" is a Batch Duplicate from outside of your sample batch, but within the laboratory sample batch at a 1:10 ratio. The Parent
and Duplicate data shown is not data from your samples.
3. Organochlorine Pesticide analysis - where reporting LCS data, Toxaphene & Chlordane are not added to the LCS.
4. Organochlorine Pesticide analysis - where reporting Spike data, Toxaphene is not added to the Spike.
5. Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons - where reporting Spike & LCS data, a single spike of commercial Hydrocarbon products in the range of C12-C30 is added and it's Total Recovery is reported
in the C10-C14 cell of the Report.
6. pH and Free Chlorine analysed in the laboratory - Analysis on this test must begin within 30 minutes of sampling.Therefore laboratory analysis is unlikely to be completed within holding time.
Analysis will begin as soon as possible after sample receipt.
7. Recovery Data (Spikes & Surrogates) - where chromatographic interference does not allow the determination of Recovery the term "INT" appears against that analyte.
8. Polychlorinated Biphenyls are spiked only using Aroclor 1260 in Matrix Spikes and LCS.
9. For Matrix Spikes and LCS results a dash " -" in the report means that the specific analyte was not added to the QC sample.
10. Duplicate RPDs are calculated from raw analytical data thus it is possible to have two sets of data.
Sample containers for volatile analysis received with minimal headspace Yes
Samples received within HoldingTime Yes
Some samples have been subcontracted No
Authorised By
Natalie Krasselt Analytical Services Manager
Alex Petridis Senior Analyst-Metal (VIC)
Huong Le Senior Analyst-Inorganic (VIC)
Glenn Jackson
National Operations Manager
- Indicates Not Requested
* Indicates NATA accreditation does not cover the performance of this service
Measurement uncertainty of test data is available on request or please click here.Eurofins | mgt shall not be liable for loss, cost, damages or expenses incurred by the client, or any other person or company, resulting from the use of any information or interpretation given in this report. In no case shall Eurofins | mgt be liable for consequential damages including, but notlimited to, lost profits, damages for failure to meet deadlines and lost production arising from this report. This document shall not be reproduced except in full and relates only to the items tested. Unless indicated otherwise, the tests were performed on the samples as received.
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017
ABN: 96 520 810 622
ATTACHMENT D
Understanding Your Report
Galt Environmental Pty Ltd
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017
Page | 1 ABN: 96 520 810 622
UNDERSTANDING YOUR REPORT
GALT FORM PMP29 Rev1
1. EXPECTATIONS OF THE REPORT
This document has been prepared to clarify what is and is not provided in your report. It is intended to inform you of what your
realistic expectations of this report should be and how to manage your risks associated with the conditions on site.
Geotechnical engineering and environmental science are less exact than other engineering and scientific disciplines. We include
this information to help you understand where our responsibilities begin and end. You should read and understand this
information. Please contact us if you do not understand the report or this explanation. We have extensive experience in a wide
variety of projects and we can help you to manage your risk.
2. THIS REPORT RELATES TO PROJECT-SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
This report was developed for a unique set of project-specific conditions to meet the needs of the nominated client. It took into
account the following:
the project objectives as we understood them and as described in this report;
the specific site mentioned in this report; and
the current and proposed development at the site.
It should not be used for any purpose other than that indicated in the report. You should not rely on this report if any of the
following conditions apply:
the report was not written for you;
the report was not written for the site specific to your development;
the report was not written for your project (including a development at the correct site but other than that listed in the
report); or
the report was written before significant changes occurred at the site (such as a development or a change in ground
conditions).
You should always inform us of changes in the proposed project (including minor changes) and request an assessment of their
impact.
Where we are not informed of developments relevant to your report, we cannot be held responsible or liable for problems that
may arise as a consequence.
Where design is to be carried out by others using information provided by us, we recommend that we be involved in the design
process by being engaged for consultation with other members of the project team. Furthermore, we recommend that we be
able to review work produced by other members of the project team that relies on information provided in our report.
Form PMP29 Rev1 20 October 2015
Galt Environmental Pty Ltd
www.galtenv.com.au 4/15 Walters Drive OSBORNE PARK WA 6017
Page | 2 ABN: 96 520 810 622
3. SOIL LOGS
Our reports often include logs of intrusive and non-intrusive investigation techniques. These logs are based on our
interpretation of field data and laboratory results. The logs should only be read in conjunction with the report they were issued
with and should not be re-drawn for inclusion in other documents not prepared by us.
4. THIRD PARTY RELIANCE
We have prepared this report for use by the client. This report must be regarded as confidential to the client and the client’s
professional advisors. We do not accept any responsibility for contents of this document from any party other than the
nominated client. We take no responsibility for any damages suffered by a third party because of any decisions or actions they
may make based on this report. Any reliance or decisions made by a third party based on this report are the responsibility of the
third party and not of us.
5. CHANGE IN SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The recommendations in this report are based on the ground conditions that existed at the time when the study was
undertaken. Changes in ground conditions can occur in numerous ways including anthropogenic events (such as construction or
contaminating activities on or adjacent to the site) or natural events (such as floods, groundwater fluctuations or earthquakes).
We should be consulted prior to use of this report so that we can comment on its reliability. It is important to note that where
ground conditions have changed, additional sampling, testing or analysis may be required to fully assess the changed conditions.
6. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS DURING CONSTRUCTION
Practical constraints mean that we cannot know every minute detail about the subsurface conditions at a particular site. We use
professional judgement to form an opinion about the subsurface conditions at the site. Some variation to our evaluated
conditions is likely and significant variation is possible. Accordingly, our report should not be considered as final as it is
developed from professional judgement and opinion.
The most effective means of dealing with unanticipated ground conditions is to engage us for construction support. We can only
finalise our recommendations by observing actual subsurface conditions encountered during construction. We cannot accept
liability for a report’s recommendations if we cannot observe construction.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES
Unless specifically mentioned otherwise in our report, environmental considerations are not addressed in geotechnical reports.
Similarly, geotechnical issues are not addressed in environmental reports. The investigation techniques used for geotechnical
investigations can differ from those used for environmental investigations. It is the client’s responsibility to satisfy themselves
that geotechnical and environmental considerations have been taken into account for the site.
O:\Administration\Standard Forms and Documents\GEPL Forms\PMP29-Rev1 Understanding your Report Env Logo.docx
To the Chief Executive Officer
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 1
Application form:
works approval / licence Division 3, Part V, Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 (EP Regulations)
This is an application for [select only one option]
Works approval
Works approval including clearing of native vegetation (Clearing Permit)
P Concurrent works approval and licence or registration
Licence Registration number:[ ] Works approval number: [ ]
Renewal Licence number: [ ]
Amendment Licence or works approval number: [ ]
Registration (works approval already obtained) Works approval number:[ ]
Application for a clearing permit already submitted Clearing permit application number: [ ]
This application is for the category/categories of prescribed premises
[Refer to DER’s Guidance Statement: Licensing and works approval process for further information on activities which will be subject to works approval/licensing.
P Single category of prescribed premises (specify category number): [Category 14]
Multiple categories of prescribed premises (specify category numbers): [ ]
P All activities on the premises within category of prescribed premises of Schedule 1 to the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 have been specified above (tick if Yes)
INSTRUCTIONS
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 2
• The application form must be completed with all information attached. This form is a statutory requirement under section 54(1)(a) for works approval applications, section 57(1)(a) for licence applications, and regulation 5B of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 for registration.
• If an application form has been submitted which is incomplete or materially incorrect, the CEO will decline to deal with the application under the EP Act and advise the Applicant accordingly.
• The instructions set out in this guideline to complete the application form are general in nature.
• A reference to ‘you’ in these instructions is a reference to the Applicant.
• Works approval only applies for new works approvals. For works approvals for existing premises, please select ‘Amendment’.
• Concurrent applications for works approval and licence (or registrations) are encouraged. This means a single application is submitted.
• Applicants seeking further information relating to requirements under the EP Act are recommended to review the Act through the State Law Publisher (www.slp.wa.gov.au)
• For premises where activities fall within more than one category of prescribed premises, ALL categories must be licensed and identified. This applies for existing licensed premises seeking renewal or amendment, as well as new licensed premises.
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 3
COMPLETION MATRIX The matrix below explains what sections are required to be completed for different types of applications.
Application Form Section New Application/ Registration
Renewal Amendment
Part 1 Applicant details – section 1.1 ● ● ●
Part 1 section 1.2 onwards ● N/A Δ
Part 2 Premises ● N/A Δ
Part 3 Proposed Activities ● N/A Δ
Part 4 Other Approvals ● N/A Δ
Part 5 Fit and competent operator ● N/A N/A
Part 6 Public health and environmental risks ● N/A Δ
Part 7 Siting and location ● N/A N/A
Part 8 – not in use
Part 9 Submission of any other relevant information
● If required. If required.
Part 10 Proposed fee calculation ● ● ●
Part 11 Submission of application ● ● ●
Acknowledgement and signature ● ● ●
Attachment 1A: Proof of Applicant status ● N/A N/A
Attachment 1B: ASIC Company Extract ● N/A N/A
Attachment 2: Map for proposed premises ● N/A Δ
Attachment 3A: Proposed activities ● N/A Δ
Attachment 3B: Map for proposed area to be cleared (only applicable if clearing is proposed)
● N/A N/A
Attachment 4: Other approvals ● N/A Δ
Attachment 5: Fit and competent operator ● N/A N/A
Attachment 6: Public health and environment risks
● N/A Δ
Attachment 7: Siting and location ● N/A Δ
Attachment 9: Other relevant information If required. N/A If required.
Attachment 10: Proposed fee calculation ● N/A N/A
Attachment 11: Request for exemption from publication
If required. N/A If required.
Key: ● Must be submitted Δ To the extent changed/required in relation to the amendment N/A Not required with application, but may be requested subsequently depending on DER records “If required” are sections for applicants to determine.
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 4
Part 1. Applicant details
1.1 Applicant name (full legal name)
Australian Potash (formerly Goldphyre Resources Limited)
ACN (if applicable) 149 390 394
1.2 Directors details (if applicant is a small proprietary company)
Refer Attachment 5
1.3 Registered business address (Registered with ASIC)
31 Ord St, West Perth Western Australia 6005
1.4 Address for correspondence
1.5 Contact person details Name
Position
Telephone
Email
1.6 Authorised representative (if any)
Name
Telephone
Email
1.7 Applicant’s representative (if any)
Name
Telephone
Email
1.8 Occupier status [One of the options must be selected and if you have been asked to specify, please provide details]
Registered proprietor on certificate of title
Lease holder (please specify)
Public authority that has care, control or management of the land
Other (please specify – for example, joint venture operating entity or contractor. Note contractual arrangements will need to be provided to evidence land owner’s consent to occupancy arrangements. If contractual arrangements are not finalised, reason why occupancy consent will be granted will need to be provided.) Signatory to sale and split commodity agreement with tenement holder of exploration lease E38/2742 – refer confidential information provided in Attachment 11A.
P
1.9 Proof of occupier status [Instructions set out in Attachment 1A]
Attachment 1A completed P
1.10 ASIC Company Extract [Instructions set out in Attachment 1B]
Attachment 1B completed P
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 5
INSTRUCTIONS
• Your full legal name must be inserted. Business names are not accepted. If a small proprietary company, the Directors’ full names must also be provided.
• A proprietary is defined by ASIC as small for a financial year if it satisfies at least two of the following paragraphs:
- the consolidated revenue for the financial year of the company and any entities it controls is less than $25 million
- the value of the consolidated gross assets at the end of the financial year of the company and any entities it controls is less than $12.5 million, and
- the company and any entities it controls have fewer than 50 employees at the end of the financial year.
• The address for correspondence can be the same as the registered business address.
• Details for a contact person must be provided (where you are an individual, you would be the contact person).
• Details for any authorised representatives must be provided (e.g. consultant) but only if you authorise that person to represent you and that person can be contacted by the Department in relation to your application.
• Details of the occupation of the premises must be provided. One of the options must be selected and if you have been asked to specify, please provide details. For example, if ‘Lease holder’ has been selected, please specify the type of lease—e.g. pastoral lease, mining lease, general lease.
• You must provide proof of ownership in Attachment 1. Instructions are set out in Attachment 1.
Part 2. Premises
2.1 Premises legal description (whole or part to be specified) [Land description: volume and folio number, lot or location number(s), Crown lease or reserve number, pastoral lease number or mining tenement number of all properties, as shown on title details registered with Landgate]
Refer Attachment 1A for description of tenement E38/2742.
2.2 Local government authority area [City, Town or Shire]
Laverton Shire
2.3 GIS coordinates [GIS coordinates must be provided where cadastre are not used as the premises boundary] Coordinates are listed clockwise, starting from northwest corner – refer plan in Attachment 2.
2.4 An aerial photograph and map of premises [Instructions set out in Attachment 2]
Attachment 2 completed P
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 6
Part 3. Proposed activities (including clearing)
3.1 Description/overview [Instructions set out below and in Attachment 3A]
Attachment 3A completed ü
3.2 Estimated operating period (based on estimated infrastructure life) 1 March 2017 to 28 February 2018
3.3 Proposed date for commencement of works 1 March 2017
3.4 Expected production 20 tonnes of potassium salts
3.5 Design capacity 20 tonnes of potassium salts
3.6 Throughput (in addition to 3.4 or 3.5) Up to 650m3 of brine
3.7 Proposed clearing area (hectares and/or number of trees) - only required if application includes clearing 0.8 ha
3.8 Proposed method of clearing (if applicable) Dozer
3.9 Period within which clearing is proposed to be undertaken (e.g. May 2015 – June 2015) (if applicable)
March 2017
3.10 Map of area proposed to be cleared (if applicable) [Instructions set out in Attachment 3B]
Attachment 3B completed P
INSTRUCTIONS
• You must provide the scope, size and scale of all prescribed activities of Schedule 1 to the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 including the maximum design capacity and the expected production capacity.
• You must identify emission discharge points. • You must also provide information on any other activity undertaken on the Premises if the activity poses
a risk to public health or the environment. • You only need to provide information on the processes or operations of prescribed activities if they are
unique or non-industry standard processes or operations. Instructions are set out in Attachment 3A. • If you are applying for a clearing permit you must provide the period within which clearing is proposed to
be undertaken (e.g. May 2017 – June 2017) and a description of the method by which it will be undertaken.
Part 4. Other approvals and consultation
N/A No Yes
4.1 Is the proposal a Major Resource Project (formerly known as a State Development Project)? P
Major Resource Projects include mining and petroleum activities or infrastructure projects which support mining and petroleum activities.
4.2 Has the proposal been referred to the Environmental Protection Authority? P
4.3 Is the proposal subject to any Ministerial conditions under the Environmental Protection Act 1986? P
4.4 Has the proposal been referred or assessed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth)? P
4.5 Has the proposal obtained all relevant planning approvals? P
4.6 Has the proposal obtained all other necessary statutory approvals? A Programme of Works will be submitted to the DMP in early January 2017. P
4.7 Has consultation been undertaken with parties considered to have a direct interest in the proposal? P
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 7
4.8 Other Approvals [Instructions set out in Attachment 4]
Attachment 4 completed P
Part 5. Fit and competent operator
Note: Under this section, DER will undertake an internal due diligence of the applicant’s fitness and competency based on DER’s compliance records. If you wish to provide additional information for DER to consider in making this assessment, you may provide that information in Attachment 11 (where it will not be published except where an application has been made, and only in accordance with, the Freedom of Information Act 1992).
No Yes
5.1 Has the applicant held or been part of a small proprietary company that has held a previous licence or works approvals? If yes, specify name of company and/or licence or works approval instrument number in Attachment 5.
P
5.2 If Yes to 5.1 or where the applicant wishes to provide additional information for DER’s consideration, Attachment 5 completed. Note: For an applicant that is a small proprietary company, each director must complete this section as an individual, and include their previous history as directors of other small propriety companies.
P
Part 6. Public health and environmental risks
No Yes
6.1 Is there an emission to air from the activities that poses a risk to public health or the environment? P
(includes emissions from stacks, chimneys, baghouses, blow offs, dust, noise and odour emissions)
6.2 Is there an emission to surface water from the activities that poses a risk to public health or the environment? P
(includes end of pipe or outfall emissions to river, lakes, estuary or seas and pollution from containment overflow)
6.3 Is there an emission to land from the activities that pose a risk to public health or the environment? P
(includes point source emissions to groundwater including direct aquifer reinjection or deep well injection, as well as emissions to land through irrigation and infiltration and seepage pits.
6.4 Is there a risk of other incidents arising from the activities that pose a risk to public health or the environment? P
(includes risk of a pollution incident or unplanned event related to hazardous materials or dangerous goods stored, used or handled)
6.5 Is there waste accepted, stored or recycled on the premises? P
Waste type must be described with reference to Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996 (as amended December 2009) or the Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004. Detail must be provided on storage type (e.g. hardstand, containment infrastructure), capacity and containment features (lining, bunding).
6.6 Public health and environmental risks [Instructions set out in Attachment 6]
Attachment 6 completed ü
INSTRUCTIONS
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 8
• You must provide detail on source (e.g. kiln stack), contaminants (e.g. particulates) and quantity (mg/m3) of the emission. Instructions are set out in Attachment 6.
• All material sources of emissions where there is a risk to public health or the environment, and for which there is a receptor must be identified. This includes where you may consider this to be a low risk.
• The risk to public health or the environment and proposed controls are to be specified.
Part 7. Siting and location
No Yes
7.1 Are there sensitive receptors located within specified separation distances from the premises? P
In considering sensitive receptors and separation distances refer to DER’s Guidance Statement: Separation Distances.
7.2 Are the premises located within or adjacent to any Specified Ecosystems such as wetlands, surface water, groundwater or terrestrial areas? The proposed ponds are located on the Lake Wells playa, which is not a specified ecosystem – refer discussion in Attachment 3A
P
In considering Specified Ecosystems refer to DER’s Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting.
7.3 Siting and Location [Instructions set out in Attachment 7]
Attachment 7 completed P
INSTRUCTIONS
Specified Ecosystems are defined in DER’s Guidance Statement: Separation Distances.
Part 8. Assessment Framework – DO NOT COMPLETE: THIS SECTION NOT ACTIVE
No Yes
8.1 Is there an emission that requires screening as per the Guidance Statement: Assessment Framework and underpinning emission guidelines?
8.2 All screening assessments required under Guidance Statement: Assessment Framework and underpinning emission guidelines completed.
8.3 All detailed assessments which may include survey/baseline monitoring, predictive modelling and any other studies required through the Guidance Statement: Assessment Framework completed.
8.4 Compliance with relevant environmental standard or supporting information for variation from environmental standard.
8.5 Assessment Framework [Instructions set out in Attachment 8]
Attachment 8 completed
Part 9. Submission of any other relevant information
No Yes
9 Additional information submitted Attachment 9 completed P
Supplementary documentation submitted List title of supplementary document/s in Attachment 9 Attachment 9A -Botanica Consulting (2016). Flora and Fauna Assessment of the Pilot Pond and Turkeys Nest Development - Lake Wells Project, unpublished report prepared for Australian Potash Limited, Tenement: E38/2742, 20 December 2016. Attachment 9B -Golder Associates Pty Ltd (2016). Draft report: Lake Wells Potash Project Hydraulic Study, unpublished report prepared for Goldphyre Resources Limited, 19 December 2016 Attachment 9C -Galt Environmental Pty Ltd (2016). Technical memorandum: preliminary acid sulfate soil study - Proposed potash project, Lake Wells, document number J1601242 002 TM Rev1, 20 December 2016.
P
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 9
Part 10. Proposed fee calculation
10.1 All information and data used for the calculation of proposed fees provided. ü
Detail of costs of works must include site works (e.g. levelling and drainage), construction works, plant and equipment hire and labour.
10.2 Fee details [Instructions set out in Attachment 10]
Attachment 10 completed ü
INSTRUCTIONS
Fee calculators are available online to assist in completing this section. • Licence fee calculator: www.der.wa.gov.au/LicenceFeeCalculator. • Works approval fee calculator: www.der.wa.gov.au/WorksapprovalFeeCalculator.
Licence and works approval amendments fee calculation (from 1 August 2016). The fee prescribed for an application for an amendment to a works approval or licence is based on a unit value for 2016-2017 of $3.40 per unit, calculated (in accordance with regulation 5BB of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987):
• for a single category of prescribed premises to which the works approval or licence relates, by using the fee unit number corresponding to the prescribed premises category and relevant production or design capacity threshold in Schedule 4 Part 1 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987.
• for multiple categories of prescribed premises to which the works approval or licence relates, by using the highest fee unit number corresponding to the prescribed premises categories and production design or capacity threshold in Schedule 4 Part 1 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987.
The relevant fee unit under Schedule 4 Part 1 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 for calculating the application form amendment fee is to be determined by reference to the actual production or design capacity reported for the preceding year’s annual licence fee. If an annual licence fee has not previously been paid or is not applicable as is the case for works approvals, the fee unit for an application for amendment is to be determined by reference to the production or design capacity currently prescribed in the licence or works approval.
Part 11. Submission of application
All information considered exempt from public disclosure has been separately placed in Attachment 11. Grounds for claiming exemption in accordance with Schedule 1 to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 must be specified.
A full hard copy has been sent to: APPLICATION SUBMISSIONS Department of Environment Regulation Locked Bag 33 Cloisters Square PERTH WA 6850
ü
Acknowledgement and signature
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 10
I, Matthew William Shackleton Executive Chairman, Australian Potash Limited (name) (position) I confirm I am authorised on behalf of the applicant to submit this application. I confirm that I have not altered the requirements and instructions set out in this application form. I confirm that the information contained in this application is true and correct and I acknowledge that knowingly providing information which is false or misleading in a material particular commits an offence under section 112 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and may incur a penalty of up to $50,000. I acknowledge that this application (excluding Attachment 11) is a public document and may be published. I confirm that information considered exempt from public disclosure has been placed in Attachment 11 with reasons as to why the information should be exempt in accordance with the grounds specified in Schedule 1 to the Freedom of Information Act 1992. I acknowledge that subsequent information provided in relation to this application will be a public document and may be published unless written notice has been given to the Department of Environment Regulation by the applicant, at the time the information is provided, claiming that the information is considered exempt from public disclosure. I acknowledge that the decision to not publish information will be at the discretion of the Department of Environment Regulation and will be made consistently with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 1992.
________________________________ Date 23/12/2016 (Signature)
ATTACHMENT CHECKLIST You must ensure that you have provided all of the attachments specified below.
Attachment 1A: Proof of Applicant status
You must provide copies of certificate of title, lease or other instruments evincing proof of occupier status.
No Yes P
Attachment 1B: ASIC Company Extract
You must provide a company extract (showing current company information only) from ASIC.
No Yes P
Attachment 2: Map for proposed premises
You must provide an aerial photograph of sufficient scale showing the proposed premises. You must also provide a map of the proposed premises, identifying: (a) layout of key infrastructure and buildings, clearly labelled; and (b) lot boundaries, with a north arrow, clearly marking the area in which the activities are carried out and of reasonable clarity and visible scale.
No Yes P
Attachment 3A: Proposed activities
You must provide details of proposed activities, identifying: (a) scope, size and scale, including details as to frequency, production and design capacity; (b) key infrastructure and equipment; (c) unique or non-industry standard processes or operations; and (d) emissions discharge points.
No Yes ü
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 11
Attachment 3B: Map for proposed area to be cleared (only applicable if clearing is proposed)
You must provide an aerial photograph or map of sufficient scale showing the proposed clearing area and premises boundary or if you have facilities a digital map on CDROM of the area to clear as an ESRI shapefile with the following properties:
Datum: GDA 1994 (Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994)
No Yes P
Attachment 4: Other approvals
You must provide details of other approvals specified in section 4 of this application, including copies of relevant decisions and any consultation undertaken with interested parties.
No Yes
ü
Attachment 5: Fit and competent operator
You must specify the name of the small proprietary company/companies that you have been involved in that have previously held a licence or works approval instrument, or provide the licence or works approval instrument number.
No Yes P
Attachment 6: Public health and environment risks
You must provide details of public health and environment risk (including risks you have assessed as low), identifying: (a) Source of emissions, Specific emissions, Receptors and proximity and Proposed controls. Providing details
of specific emission quantities may not be relevant for some emissions such as odour, noise and dust or emissions arising from incidents or unplanned events.
(b) Waste type (including waste generated onsite), quantity, storage and location of waste which relate to activities that fall within the category of prescribed premises in Schedule 1 to the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987.
Refer Attachment 6
Set out below is a suggested format for specifying waste types.
Waste Type Quantity Storage Location
Waste salt (<5% bitterns) ~500 tonnes in total HDPE lined pond 492,478mE;6,983,768mS
Attachment 7: Siting and location
You must provide a map showing siting and location of the premises to a 5km radius including identification of distances to sensitive receptors. Calculation of distance should be made in accordance with the Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting and the Guidance Statement: Separation Distances. Should the premises be in locations identified through Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting, further information including depth to groundwater, water quality and beneficial uses must be provided.
Refer Attachment 7 No Yes P
Attachment 8: Assessment Framework – NOT IN USE
N/A
Attachment 9: Other relevant information
Applicants seeking to submit further information may include information in Attachment 9.
Where supplementary documentation is submitted, please specify name of documents below. Attachment 9A -Botanica Consulting (2016). Flora and Fauna Assessment of the Pilot Pond and Turkeys Nest Development - Lake Wells Project, unpublished report prepared for Australian Potash Limited, Tenement: E38/2742, 20 December 2016. Attachment 9B -Golder Associates Pty Ltd (2016). Draft report: Lake Wells Potash Project Hydraulic Study, unpublished report prepared for Goldphyre Resources Limited, 19 December 2016
No Yes ü
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 12
Attachment 9C -Galt Environmental Pty Ltd (2016). Technical memorandum: preliminary acid sulfate soil study - Proposed potash project, Lake Wells, document number J1601242 002 TM Rev1, 20 December 2016.
Attachment 10: Proposed fee calculation
In the form provided: see following Attachment.
Refer Attachment 10 No Yes ü
Attachment 11: Request for exemption from publication
In the form provided: see following Attachment
Refer Attachment 11 No Yes P
Attachment 10: Proposed fee calculation
Summary of proposed fees
Proposed works approval fee (see Schedule 3 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987)
Proposed licence fee (see Schedule 4 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987)
Part 1 Component $1751.42
Part 2 Component $1468.55
Part 3 Component 0
Total proposed licence fees: $ 3219.97
Proposed works approval and licence amendment fee (see Schedule 4 Part 1 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 and Part 10 of this application form)
Fee units Proposed fee $ 3219.97 Note: (1) DER has fee calculators available on its website:
- Licence: www.der.wa.gov.au/LicenceFeeCalculator; and - Works approval: www.der.wa.gov.au/WorksApprovalFeeCalculator. (2) Different Fee Units apply for different fee components. Fee Units may also have different amounts depending on
the period in which the calculation is made. (3) Refer to Part 10 of this application form for instructions on fee calculations for applications to amend works
approvals and licences Detailed breakdown of proposed licence fees
Premises component
Proposed licence fee: Part 1 Premises (see Part 1 of Schedule 4 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987) Premises: Solar salt manufacturing
Sub total $ 1751.42
Discharges to air, onto land, into waters
Proposed licence fee: Part 3 Discharges to air No discharges to air (see Part 3 of Schedule 4 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987)
Discharges to air Discharge quantity Discharges to air Discharge
quantity
Carbon monoxide 0 Nickel 0
Oxides of nitrogen 0 Vanadium 0
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 13
Sulphur oxides 0 Zinc 0
Particulates (PM10 and PM2.5) 0 Vinyl chloride 0
Volatile organic compounds 0 Hydrogen sulphide 0
Inorganic fluoride 0 Benzene carbon oxysulphide 0
Aluminium 0 Carbon disulphide 0
Arsenic 0 Acrylates 0
Chromium 0 Beryllium 0
Cobalt 0 Cadmium 0
Copper 0 Mercury 0
Lead TDI (toluene-2, 4-di-iso-cyanate)
Manganese 0 MDI (diphenyl-methane di-iso-cyanate)
0
Molybdenum 0 Other waste 0
Subtotal $ 0
Proposed licence fee: Part 3 Discharges onto land or into waters No discharges to land or water (see Part 3 of Schedule 4 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987)
Discharges onto land or into waters Discharge quantity
1. Liquid waste that can potentially deprive receiving waters of oxygen (for each kilogram discharged per day) —
(a) biochemical oxygen demand (in the absence of chemical oxygen demand limit)
0
(b) chemical oxygen demand (in the absence of total organic carbon limit)
0
(c) total organic carbon 0
2. Biostimulants (for each kilogram discharged per day) —
(a) phosphorus 0
(b) total nitrogen 0
3. Liquid waste that physically alters the characteristics of naturally occurring waters —
(a) total suspended solids (for each kilogram discharged per day)
0
(b) surfactants (for each kilogram discharged per day)
0
(c) colour alteration (for each platinum cobalt unit of colour above the ambient colour of the waters in each megalitre discharged per day)
0
(d) temperature alteration (for each 1°C above the ambient temperature of the waters in each megalitre discharged per day) — (i) in the sea south of the Tropic of
Capricorn (ii) in other waters
0
4. Waste that can potentially accumulate in the environment or living tissue (for each kilogram discharged per day) —
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 14
5. E coli bacteria as indicator species (in each megalitre discharged per day) —
(b) 5 000 to 20 000 organisms per 100 ml 0
(c) more than 20 000 organisms per 100 ml
0
6. Other waste (per kilogram discharged per day) —
(a) oil and grease 00
(b) total dissolved solids 0
(c) fluoride
(d) iron 0
(e) total residual chlorine 0
(f) other 0
Subtotal $ 0
Information and data used to calculate proposed fees
The detailed calculations of fee components, including all Information and data used for the calculations are provided in the specified annexures to this application.
Proposed fee for works approval Annexure No
Details for cost of works Attachment 10
Proposed fee for licence Annexure No
Part 1: Premises Attachment 3A
Part 2: Waste types Attachment 3A
Part 3: Discharges to air, onto land, into waters Nil – Attachment 3A
Prescribed fee for clearing permit (only required if clearing deviates or extends from that proposed in works approval or licence application)
Please indicate the clearing permit application fee Not applicable: Clearing will be exempt from clearing permit if conducted under approved PoW. Area Permit:
$50 for an area of less than one hectare $100 for an area between one hectare and 10 hectares $200 for an area of more than 10 hectares
Purpose Permit: A $200 fee is required for all purpose permit applications
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 15
Attachment 11: Request for exemption from publication
Information which you consider should not be published on the grounds for claiming exemption in accordance with Schedule 1 to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 must be specified in this Attachment.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IF GROUNDS FOR EXEMPTION ARE DETERMINED
Section [1.8]:
Section [6.6]:
Department of Environment Regulation
Guideline and application form for applications (July 2016 V4) 16