Anglo American Australia - Water Management Plan/media/Files/A/Anglo...Anglo American (Drayton Management) Pty Ltd Policies and Procedures Water Management Plan MP_8-118 PRINT DATE

Anglo American (Drayton Management) Pty Ltd

Policies and Procedures

Water Management Plan

MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003

VERSION / DATE OF ISSUE

7 / June 2017

Page 1 of 62

DOC # DRA_8-118_MP_Water Management Plan

Printed copies created from this document are deemed to be uncontrolled

Drayton Management System Standard


Author: Name Brooke York

Title Environmental Officer

Signature Date 29/11/2017

Reviewer: Name Matt Lord

Title Environmental Superintendent


Authoriser: Name Darren Pisters

Title Mining Engineering Manager


This document is controlled whilst it remains in the Drayton Intranet





MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 2 of 62



Revisions

Issue Issue Date Author Reviewer Authoriser

1 February 2003 P SIMPSON P FORBES T HULME

2 November 2005 P SIMPSON P FORBES H HAYES

3 June 2008 P SIMPSON P FORBES M HEATON

4 November 2009 P SIMPSON P FORBES M HEATON

5 August 2011 P SIMPSON P FORBES C ROBERTSON

6 June 2016 K BLAIKIE P FORBES D O’ROURKE

7 June 2017 B YORK / N DOBBINS

(HANSEN BAILEY)

M LORD D PISTERS




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 3 of 62



Distribution List

Distributed to:

General Manager’s Office (current originals)

Administration Central File (originals of previous versions)

Department of Planning and Environment

Anglo American Website




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 4 of 62



Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 5

2 PURPOSE .................................................................................................................... 5

3 SCOPE ......................................................................................................................... 6

4 LEGAL AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS ....................................................................... 6

5 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................. 11

6 PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT ................................................................................ 12

6.1 Responsibilities ................................................................................................ 12

6.2 Audit/Review Schedule..................................................................................... 12

6.3 Records Management ...................................................................................... 12

6.4 Revision Status ................................................................................................ 12

6.5 References ....................................................................................................... 14

7 Water Management ..................................................................................................... 15

7.1 Site Overview ................................................................................................... 15

7.2 Site Water Balance ........................................................................................... 20

7.3 Erosion and Sediment Control .......................................................................... 25

7.4 Surface Water Monitoring ................................................................................. 28

7.5 Groundwater Monitoring ................................................................................... 36

7.6 Surface and Ground Water Response Plan ...................................................... 49

8 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 51




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 5 of 62



Document Information

1 INTRODUCTION

The Drayton Mine (Drayton) is an open cut coal mining operation located 13 km south of

Muswellbrook in the Upper Hunter of NSW approximately 100 km north west of the port of

Newcastle. Operated by Anglo American and its subsidiaries (Anglo American), Drayton is

owned by a joint venture consisting of six separate parties, of which Anglo American has the

operational control.

In May 2015, Anglo American submitted a Development Application to the Department of

Planning and Environment (DP&E) for a continuation to the Drayton operation via an extension

referred to as the Drayton South Coal Project (Drayton South) – State Significant Development

(SSD) 6875. In November 2015, Drayton South was referred to a Planning and Assessment

Commission (PAC) for assessment and determination. The Drayton South Project was

subsequently refused consent by the determination PAC on 22 February 2017.

The refusal of consent for the Drayton South Project and depletion of remaining ore reserves

within the existing mining areas resulted in the cessation of active mining operations at Drayton

in October 2016, resulting in the loss of approximately 400 jobs. Anglo American is proceeding

with site rehabilitation and closure works. As a result of the cessation of active mining

operations only a small project team remain to oversee the mine closure of Drayton.

In May 2017, Anglo American agreed to sell their interest in Drayton Mine to Malabar Coal

Limited. The sale is subject to several conditions which will be finalised in the preceding

months.

Despite the sale, the rehabilitation of the Drayton mining footprint is planned to be completed

in line with the Drayton Mining Operations Plan (MOP).

2 PURPOSE

Drayton operates in accordance with its primary approvals including Project Approval (PA)

06_0202 and Development Consent 106-04-00 (for the Antiene Rail Spur) which enabled the

extraction of up to eight million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) of Run of Mine (ROM) coal through

to 31 December 2017.

This Water Management Plan (WMP) provides the framework for water management at

Drayton Mine (Drayton) and has been developed in accordance with PA 06_0202 (as

modified), conditions 28 through 33. It also addresses the requirements of the Drayton Rail

Loop and Antiene Rail Spur approval (DA 106-04-00).




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 6 of 62



3 SCOPE

This procedure applies to the Drayton site, including mining areas, voids, dams and industrial

areas, and covers:

• The Legal and Other requirements pertaining to water management at Drayton.

• An overview of background information and the Drayton Site Water Balance.

• Reasonable and feasible measures to manage:

o Erosion and sediment control

o Surface water

o Groundwater

• The Surface and Groundwater Response Plan

4 LEGAL AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS

The conditions required to be covered by this Water Management Plan (WMP) are listed in

Table 1.

Table 1: Legal and other conditions

Condition Details Reference

Drayton Consent (06_0202)

S3.27 The Proponent shall only discharge water from the site in accordance

with the provisions of an EPL or the ‘Protection of the Environment

Operations (Hunter River Salinity Trading Scheme) Regulation 2002.’

7.2.3

S3.28 The Proponent shall prepare and implement a Site Water Management

Plan for the project to the satisfaction of the Director General. This plan

must:

a) be prepared in consultation with the OEH and NOW by suitably

qualified expert/s whose appointment/s have been approved by the

Director-General:

b) be submitted to the Director-General for approval within 6 months

of this approval; and

c) include:

• a Site Water Balance;

• an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan;

• a Surface Water Monitoring Program;

• a Ground Water Monitoring Program; and

• a Surface and Ground Water Response Plan.

This

document




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 7 of 62




S3.29 The Site Water Balance must:

a) include details of;

• sources and security of water supply;

• water use on site;

• water management on site;

• off-site water transfers; and

b) investigate and describe measures to minimise water use by the

project.

7.2

S3.30 The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must:

a) be consistent with the requirements of the ‘Managing Urban Storm

water: Soils and Construction Manual’ (Landcom 2004, or its latest

version);

b) identify activities that could cause soil erosion and generate

sediment;

c) describe measures to minimise soil erosion and the potential for the

transport of sediment to downstream waters;

d) describe the location, function, and capacity of erosion and

sediment control structures over time.

7.3

S3.31 The Surface Water Management and Monitoring Plan must include:

a) detailed baseline data on surface water flows and quality in creeks

and other water bodies that could be affected by the project;

b) surface water impact assessment criteria;

c) a program to monitor the impact of the project on surface water

flows and quality and downstream water users; and

d) reporting procedures for the results of this monitoring.

7.4




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 8 of 62




S3.32 The Groundwater Monitoring Plan must include:

a) detailed baseline data of groundwater levels, yield and quality in the

region (including privately owned groundwater bores within the

predicted drawdown impact zone identified in the EA);

b) a program to augment the baseline data over the life of the project

c) groundwater assessment criteria, including trigger levels for

investigating any potentially adverse groundwater impacts;

d) a program to monitor:

• regional groundwater levels and quality in the surrounding

aquifers;

• impacts on the groundwater supply of potentially affected

landowners;

• the volume of ground water seeping into the open cut mine

workings;

• the groundwater pressure response on the surrounding coal

measures;

• the seepage/leachate from the tailings dams, water storages or

backfilled voids on site;

e) procedures for the verification of the groundwater model; and

f) reporting procedures of the results of the monitoring program and

model verification.

7.5

S3.33 The Surface and Ground Water Response Plan must include:

a) a protocol of the investigation, notification and mitigation of any

exceedances of the surface water and groundwater impact

assessment criteria;

b) measures to mitigate and/or compensate potentially affected

landowners with privately owned groundwater bores within the

predicted drawdown impact zone identified in the EA, including

provision of alternative supply of water to the affected landowner

that is equivalent to the loss attributed to the project;

c) the procedures that would be followed if any unforeseen impacts

are detected during the project.

7.6




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 9 of 62




Rail Loop Consent (DA 106-04-00)

3.1 The Applicant shall:

(a) Prepare a site water management plan and monitoring system for

the Drayton rail loading facility to include the revised coal transport

operations in consultation with DLWC prior to commencement of

operations, and to the satisfaction of the Director-General. The plan

shall include but not be limited to the following matters:

(i) Details of the integration of the revised coal transport

operations with the existing Drayton mine water management

plan and monitoring system.

(ii) Management of the quality and quantity of surface and

groundwater within the areas covered by the Site Water

Management Plan, which shall include preparation of

monitoring programs.

(iii) Management of stormwater and general surface runoff

diversion to ensure separate effective management of clean

and dirty water.

(iv) Measures to prevent the quality of any surface waters being

degraded due to the revised coal transport operations, below

that identified in Table 2.5 of the EIS.

(v) Contingency plans for managing adverse impacts of the

development on surface or ground water quality and quantity

below that identified in Table 2.5 of the EIS.

(vi) Identification of any possible adverse effects on water supply

sources of surrounding land holders as a result of the revised

coal transport operations, and implementation of mitigation

measures as necessary.

(vii) A program for reporting on the effectiveness of the water

management systems and performance against objectives

contained in this water management plan.

7.1,7.4Error! R

eference

source not

found. and

7.5

7.2

7.3

7.7

7.6

7.6

EPL 1323

L1.1 Except as may be expressly provided in any other condition of this

licence, the licensee must comply with section 120 of the Protection of

the Environment Operations Act 1997.

Noted

O1.1 Licenced activities must be carried out in a competent manner. Noted




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 10 of 62




O2.1 All plant and equipment installed at the premises or used in connection

with the licenced activity:

a) must be maintained in a proper and efficient condition; and

b) must be operated in a proper and efficient manner.

Noted

Anglo American Water Management Standard

A Water Management Standard is required to ensure adherence of

the following key principles that apply to water management in our

business:

c) The application of the water use hierarchy;

d) To be responsible stewards of water, so as not to cause harm or

adverse social and environmental conditions through our use of

this resource;

e) To endeavor to optimally use water to generate value, both in the

long and short term (within the concept of sustainable

development);

f) To manage both the quantity and quality aspects of water;

g) To consider water access as a human right for society and the

environment in all that we do.

-

In addition to the above conditions, Drayton is required to comply with the requirements of the

Dams Safety Committee in relation to prescribed dams on site, the Hunter River Salinity

Trading Scheme and the DPI-Water licences listed below:

• 20BL111869 – Production Bore


• 20BL171953 – Test Bore









MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 11 of 62



5 DEFINITIONS

AEMR Annual Environment Management Report

CHP Coal Handling Plant

Clean water Any flow of water that has not originated from or passed over a

disturbed area.

Contaminated

Water/ Mine Water

Any flow of water that has originated from or passed over a disturbed

area.

DP&E Department of Planning and Environment

DRE Department of Planning and Environment – Division of Resources

and Energy

DPI - Water Department of Primary Industries - Water

DSC NSW Dams Safety Committee

MSC Muswellbrook Shire Council

NOW NSW Office of Water

OEH Office of Environment and Heritage

Prescribed Dam A dam is prescribed on the recommendation of the DSC, and is

usually based on the size and hazard rating of the dam.

SHE Safety, Health and Environment

PA Project Approval

POEO Act Protection of the Environment Operations Act, 1997

EPL Environmental Protection Licence




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 12 of 62



6 PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT

6.1 Responsibilities

Environmental Superintendent or delegated role

Organise monitoring and reporting as required by the project approval. The Environmental

Superintendent or delegate analyses all data, in conjunction with relevant authorities where

appropriate, and reports all data as required to do so. Ensure regular site inspections are

undertaken of the site water management system and infrastructure and corrective actions are

identified.

Mine Manager or delegated role

Integrate the requirements of this procedure into water management across the Drayton

mining area. The Mine Manager also supervises any investigations related to water

management that are undertaken and implements any actions arising from these

investigations to completion.

Manager Mechanical Engineering

Coordinate maintenance of water management infrastructure in consultation with the

Environmental Superintendent.

6.2 Audit/Review Schedule

This procedure will be subject to a review every five years. The Environmental Superintendent

will be responsible for such reviews.

Drayton’s original Water Management Plan was prepared in 2002, and has been subject to a

number of reviews as listed in Section 6.4.

6.3 Records Management

All records of monitoring details must be kept on file at the mine site for the life of the mine. All

data must be entered into the Environmental Database. This is the responsibility of the

Environmental Superintendent or delegate. All correspondence received from the authorities

will be maintained and stored as required.

6.4 Revision Status

February 2003

Changes in this revision include:

• Changes to wording to update the procedure with current operating conditions per new

DA conditions.

Comments were requested from Manager Coal and Parting, Senior Mining Engineer – Long-

Term Planning and S&SD Manager. Consultation was also sought from the DLWC and

Muswellbrook Shire Council.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 13 of 62



November 2005

Changes in this revision include:

• Updating into Anglo procedure format;

• Reorganisation of procedure; and

• Updating responsibilities of key personnel.

This management plan was forwarded to MSC, Department of Lands and the Department of

Primary Industries – Minerals (now DPI) on 19th September 2005 for review. The Department

of Primary Industries - (Minerals) advised the modifications made to this procedure were

acceptable and that they had no additional comments (letter dated 29 September 2005). No

comments were received from the other parties consulted.

June 2008

The plan was updated as a requirement of PA 06_0202 issued by the DP&E which required

this Plan to be prepared in consultation with the OEH and NOW (now DPI – Water)by suitably

qualified expert/s whose appointment/s had been approved by the Director-General.

The Plan was reviewed by Gilbert and Associates, and changes in this review include:

• Integration of separate Management Plans:

o Site Water Balance.

o Erosion and Sediment Control.

o Surface Water Monitoring.

o Groundwater Monitoring.

o Surface and Groundwater Response Plan.

This version was not formally approved and during the review period, Drayton applied for a

modification.

November 2009

As a result of the approval of a modification to the existing consent, this procedure was updated

and submitted in accordance with the conditions within PA 06_0202 and MOD 1 issued in

October 2009.

August 2011

Scheduled review. Updates include reviewing Anglo requirements, inclusion of water saving

actions and updating organisational changes within Drayton structure.

June 2016

Full update and review of plan information including Water Balance, Erosion and Sediment

control, monitoring programmes, response plans and operational responsibilities,

incorporating recommendations of 2015 Independent Environmental Audit.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 14 of 62



June 2017

The mine water system schematic updated to reflect cessation of active mining operations and

Water Monitoring Figure revised with additional monitoring locations.

6.5 References

• Protection of the Environment Operations Act, 1997 (Section 120)

• Dams Safety Committee

• Protection of the Environment Operations (Hunter River Salinity Trading Scheme)

Regulation 2002

• Water Act 1912

• Water Management Act 2000 and associated regulations

• Project Approval PA 06_0202, Department of Planning, 2007 and modifications.

• Project Approval DA 106-04-00

• EPL 1323




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 15 of 62



7 Water Management

7.1 Site Overview

Drayton operates a closed water system and does not draw water from surface water sources

(such as the Hunter River), or discharge water to the environment.

All mine water is stored in established dams and voids. Water used historically in the process,

e.g. for coal washing or vehicle wash downs, is recycled through the system. Water is

generally lost through evaporation or entrainment in tailings, rejects or coal sent from site, and

is recharged from rainfall run off and minimal groundwater interception. There are no clean

water catchments located on site and therefore no clean water storages are required. Water

evaporation sprays have been used to evaporate excess mine water.

Figure 1 shows the dams used for the Drayton Water Management system, and a summary of

the main water storage dams and their capacities, supply sources and uses is provided in

Table 2.

Figure 2 shows a schematic of Drayton’s mine water management system and the various

connection and flow paths between the water storages. This figure has been revised to reflect

the cessation of active mining operations in 2016. The rail loop consent (DA 106-04-00)

required that the revised coal train operations were integrated into the existing water

management plan and monitoring program. The change to coal train operations had no impact

on the existing rail loop, which was already incorporated into the site water management

system.

The mine water dams do not capture significant quantities of rainfall runoff as they have small

catchment areas. The majority of the surface water runoff around the site is captured within

the existing open cut pit which is then pumped back into the mine water management system

for reuse or storage for later use. In pit sumps are used to move water to the main water

storage dams from within pit areas.

Table 2: Main Mine Water Storages

Ref.

No.

Dam

Names

Approx.

Storage

Capacity (ML)

Supply Source Water Use

ES Void ES Void 5500ML Tailings, run-off from

disturbed areas in pit,

aquifer interception.

Storage – pumped to Access

Road Dam

1969 Industrial

Dam

750 ML Runoff from Rail Loop

Dam and industrial

areas, and pumped

from DC2

Haul road dust suppression,

and supply to Access Road

Dam




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 16 of 62



Ref.

No.

Dam

Names

Approx.

Storage

Capacity (ML)

Supply Source Water Use

2081 Access

Road Dam

615ML Runoff from undisturbed

and rehabilitated land

and pumped from

Industrial Dam and ES

Void.

Industrial areas, CHP and fire

system

2114 Rail Loop

Dam

18ML Runoff from DC2 Dam,

and coal stockpile area

Transfer to Industrial Dam

Pringles

Dam*

20ML Pumped from ES Void,

runoff from undisturbed

land.

Transfer to Savoy Dam

1609* Savoy

Dam*

145ML Runoff from undisturbed

and rehabilitated land,

ES Void transfer point

Mine water storage or transfer

to west pit fill station via

Turkey’s Nest Dam

SW13

Void

West Pit

Void

1000ML Runoff from Southern

Offset Rehabilitation and

excess water during wet

weather.

Storage for Drayton and Mt

Arthur Coal. Drayton has a

water sharing arrangement

with Mt Arthur Coal Mine

which allows both companies

to store and extract water from

SW13 Void for the life of the

arrangement.

SPE

Void

SPE Void 8140ML Runoff from disturbed

areas in pit, water

pumped from ES Void.

Mine water storage

*From late 2017, Pringles Dam, Dam 1609 and Turkeys Nest will no longer be used for the transfer of water.

They will remain in place however and will only accept water form limited catchment areas to each

Dam 2081 (Access Road Dam) is prescribed by the DSC under the provisions of the Dams

Safety Act 1978. The Dams Safety Committee (DSC) requires the Access Road Dam to be

inspected by a suitably qualified engineer every five years. A Type 3 surveillance report is

required to be completed by the engineer and submitted to the DSC. The most recent

inspection was conducted in August 2015, and a report submitted to the DSC.

Recommendations from this report and feedback received from the DSC (if applicable) will be

reviewed and implemented where appropriate. The next inspection report is due in August

2020.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 17 of 62



The SW13 void is available for the storage of excess water generated on site. Water from this

void can be used by Mt Arthur Mine or Drayton, although Drayton does not currently draw

water from this void.

The ES Void and SPE Void are used as the main water storages for Drayton. Water enters

the ES void from tailings disposal and in pit sumps. Water is pumped from ES void to the West

water truck fill point via Pringles and Savoy dams, or out to the Access Road Dam for recycling

through the washery and fines plant at the CHP.

Any potentially contaminated rainfall runoff from the Industrial area is diverted to the Oil

Pollution Control Dam (OPC) which is located immediately upstream of the Industrial Dam.

The OPC has two oil / water separators in place which remove oil residue from the water runoff

prior to it being fed into the Industrial Dam. Washdown water from the workshop also flows to

the OPC.

Potable water for domestic use is supplied by pipeline from town supplies. This water is used

for drinking, showering and toilets within the personnel facilities. Potable water is also trucked

to site for use in field crib rooms.

Drayton operates a small onsite waste water treatment plant, which treats effluent on site and

discharges the water to a small area of rehabilitation on Drayton’s East Tip area. The disposal

of this effluent is approved under Drayton’s Environmental Protection Licence No. 1323.

Whilst operating, Drayton implemented annual water action plans. These plans addressed

operational needs relating to water conservation and responsible use of water on site.

Key actions implemented in the 2015-2016 action plan (as reported in the 2016 AEMR)

included:

• Returning water from the V-Notch sump downstream from the Access Road to the

Access Road Dam , a component of the mine water management system; and

• Maintaining the Rail Loop Dam at a level to minimise potential risk to offsite

discharge.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 18 of 62



Figure 1: Mine Water Dams




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 19 of 62

DOC # DRA_


Figure 2: Mine Water System




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 20 of 62



7.2 Site Water Balance

7.2.1 2007 EIS predictions

The surface water impact assessment undertaken for the Drayton Environmental Assessment

(Hansen Bailey 2007) included a review of the mine water management system and predicted

the water balances for potential wet, dry and average rainfall events in Year 5 (or 2012) and

Year 10 (2017) of the operation.

A summary of the water balance predictions from the Drayton Environmental Assessment is

presented in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Predicted Site Water Balance

Water Balance

Annual Water Volume (ML)

Year 5 Year 10

Dry Average Wet Dry Average Wet

Water Supply Sources

Surface Water Run-off 515 780 1000 410 620 795

Groundwater Inflow 815 815 815 980 980 980

Industrial Area Run-off 90 140 175 85 125 160

Rehabilitated Area

Run-off 80 120 155 95 145 185

Dam Catchments 145 215 285 135 205 265

Sub-Total 1640 2065 2425 1705 2075 2385

Water Losses

Dust Suppression

Haul Roads 600 600 600 300 300 300

Coal Stockpiles 50 50 50 25 25 25

Industrial Use 400 400 400 200 200 200

Coal Handling Plant 600 600 600 130 130 130

Evaporation Losses 370 330 280 370 325 275




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 21 of 62



Water Balance

Annual Water Volume (ML)

Year 5 Year 10

Dry Average Wet Dry Average Wet

Sub-Total 2020 1980 1930 1025 980 930

SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) (380) 85 495 680 1095 1455

The predictions for wet, dry and average rainfall years were made using rainfall and

evaporation data from the Jerrys Plains (1884 to 2005) and Scone Soil Conservation (1965 to

2005) Bureau of Meteorology stations. The Dry year water balance has been conservatively

assessed using the 10th percentile rainfall and 90th percentile evaporation. Further, the Wet

year water balance has been assessed conservatively using the 90th percentile rainfall and

10th percentile evaporation.

The various water supplies and demands have been calculated based on assumptions from

more than twenty years of operational experience.

7.2.2 Working Water Balance and Water Security

Anglo requires all its sites to have a water balance that is updated monthly. The water balance

model is a simple tool that allows Drayton to calculate and track the losses and gains in a

month and compares the calculated change against the measured change in dam storage.

The main sources of mine water for the mine water management system are:

• Rainfall run-off from industrial areas;

• Rainfall run-off from within the open cut pit area, including rehabilitation areas;

• Minor groundwater inflow into open cut areas: and

• Recycled water from tailings, and washdown around the workshop and the plant.

Groundwater is a minor water supply to the site water balance. The groundwater impact

assessment undertaken for inclusion in the Drayton Environmental Assessment predicted

rates of groundwater inflows ranging from 2.2 ML/day in Year 5 to 2.7 ML/day in Year 10.

Historically, site water uses and losses are as follows:

• Dust suppression on haul roads and around the CHP, for example transfer points and

stockpiles;

• Industrial use such as workshops and vehicle washdown facilities;

• Coal handling and processing;

• Entrainment in product and tailings; and

• Natural losses due to evaporation.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 22 of 62



Figure 3 is a schematic of the Drayton water balance. Items identified in the predicted water

balance (Table 3), such as Industrial run-off and Rehabilitation run-off are generally captured

in a single Rainfall and Runoff category.

The water balance is updated on a monthly basis, and the change in storage (A) from the start

of the month to the end of the month equals (raw water in (B) plus recycled mine water (C))

minus (water removed from the storage (X) plus water lost from the system (Y)).

Figure 3: Monthly Water Balance schematic

Table 4 shows the comparison between the prediction for Year 5 (2012) and the actual figures

recorded for 2012. 2012 was an average rainfall year. The predicted surplus for year 5 was

85 ML, and the calculated surplus was 1303 ML. The larger calculated surplus can be

attributed to water being supplied from SW13 pit, and water entrained in coal, which were not

included in the original predictions. Any surplus mine water is stored in existing voids and

established dams on site for use in the water management system.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 23 of 62



Table 4: Comparison of predicted and actual Year 5 Water Volumes.

Water Balance Annual Water Volume (ML)

Year 5 as modelled in Environmental Assessment 2012 Actual year 5

Dry Average Wet Total

Water Supply Sources

Groundwater Inflow 815 815 815 740

Rainfall contributions

Pit Water - Surface Water

Run-off 515 780 1000

Industrial Area Run-off 90 140 175

Rehabilitated Area Run-

off 80 120 155

Dam Catchments1 145 215 285

Rainfall total 830 1255 1615 1273

Water from coal 502

SW13 contribution 1125

Sub-Total 1640 2065 2425 3640

Water Demands

Coal Handling Plant and

other entrainment 600 600 600 638

Industrial Use 2 400 400 400 538

Evaporation

Haul Roads dust

suppression 600 600 600

Coal Stockpiles dust

suppression 50 50 50

Evaporation direct from

dams 370 330 280 402

1 Includes Industrial Dam, Access Road Dam, Rail Loop Dam, Savoy Dam, misc small dams 2 Washdown water in workshop and truck wash.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 24 of 62



Evaporation Losses 1020 980 930 1161

Sub-Total 2020 1980 1930 2337

SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) (380) 85 495 1303

Historically, Drayton’s water balance has remained in surplus. Throughout drought periods,

water storage levels have dropped, however water storage supplies remained sufficient for

normal mining operations to occur (Figure Figure 4). With more than thirty years of operation

during wet and dry years, Drayton has not experienced any water shortages, and as such the

water balance on site is considered adequate for the life of the mine.

Figure 4: Stored volume vs Surplus / Deficit

7.2.3 Off-site Water Transfers

Drayton has no approval to discharge water under its Environmental Protection Licence

however credits have historically been retained under the Hunter River Salinity Trading

Scheme (HRSTS) for water trading purposes. Drayton has a water sharing arrangement with

Mt Arthur Coal Mine which allows both companies to store water in SW13 Void, located near

a shared boundary.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 25 of 62



7.2.4 Minimisation of Water Use

Drayton’s use of fresh water is limited to the potable water piped from the Muswellbrook Town

water supply for human consumption and bathing, which accounts for approximately 0.01% of

the water used on site.

The majority of water used at Drayton is recycled water. Water usage in the CHP is minimised

through the presence of thickeners and a medium density cyclone configuration.

7.3 Erosion and Sediment Control

Mining activities can impact on landforms and create serious erosion issues. Such activities

include loss of vegetation through clearing, stockpiling of topsoil, construction of infrastructure

and roads, construction of overburden spoil dumps, rehabilitation works, coal stockpiling, and

coal loading activities.

If not managed successfully, these activities can lead to increased surface erosion from

disturbed lands and increased sediment load entering dams and creeks.

Drayton manages these issues in line with Anglo’s Erosion and Sediment Control Standard,

and Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction Volume 1 (Landcom, 2004) and

Volumes 2A, 2C, 2D and 2E (DECC, 2008) (the Blue Book). Its goals are to identify and

implement the preferred erosion and sediment control techniques on-site, and define

appropriate maintenance requirements to ensure that regulatory requirements are met.

To manage erosion and sediment risks across site, three cornerstones of erosion and sediment

control will be used to guide management activities.

These cornerstones are:

• Drainage Control – prevention or reduction of soil erosion caused by concentrated

flows and to appropriately manage and separate the movement of clean and worked

water through the area of concern.

• Erosion Control – prevention or minimisation or soil erosion (from dispersive, non-

dispersive or competent material) caused by rain drop impact and exacerbated

overland flow on disturbed surfaces.

• Sediment Control – trapping or retention of sediment either moving along the land

surface, contained within runoff (i.e. from up-slope erosion) or from windborne particles.

Figure 5 shows the general drainage patterns around site. Mining has now reached its full

extent, and all out of pit overburden dumps have been rehabilitated. As discussed in section

7.3.1, control structures are in place around the main industrial areas.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 26 of 62



Figure 5: Drainage catchments




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 27 of 62



7.3.1 Sediment Control Measures

The installation of erosion and sediment control measures is the first step in the process of

land disturbance. The following control measures are used at Drayton as required:

Erosion Control

• Limit the extent of disturbance that occurs, including areas to be cleared prior to mining,

new tracks and roads, and other infrastructure.

• Use a permit process to clearly identify and delineate areas to be disturbed (including

new tracks and roads), and ensure that disturbance is limited to those areas.

• Install diversion banks upslope of areas to be disturbed to direct clean water runoff

away from disturbed areas where practical. The diversion banks will be designed to

ensure effective segregation of sediment-laden runoff and allow clean surface water to

return to natural watercourses.

• Stabilisation of disturbed areas through progressive rehabilitation, in line with the

Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan, and the Mining Operations Plan.

• Temporary vegetation of areas where deemed necessary.

Drainage Control

• Construction of catch drains to capture runoff from disturbed areas and direct runoff

into sediment dams. All permanent catch drains will be designed to have the capacity

for a critical duration 100 year ARI storm event and be non-scouring in a critical duration

20 year ARI storm event.

• Construction of drainage controls such as toe drains on stockpiles and overburden

emplacement areas.

• Construction of graded banks by suitably qualified contractors over final reshaped

overburden areas to minimise erosion and re-direct runoff to catch drains and water

disposal areas. These banks are typically constructed with a 0.5-1.5% slope, a 3-5m

basal width, and spaced to minimise down slope flows. They end with level spreaders

(typically 5m wide). The function of these structures is to divert water through

rehabilitated lands at a rate that does not create erosion or damage and to deliver it to

established dams or water holding bodies located in strategic locations near

rehabilitated areas. Mining spoil is generally not dispersive and so these banks are

suitable.

• Construction of rock drain structures in key areas on rehabilitation areas to reduce

water velocities and prevent scouring.

Sediment Control

• Construction of sediment traps in runoff zones of industrial areas. Catch drains direct

waste water from the coal treatment unit to sedimentation ponds. Storm water runoff

from around the main industrial area (workshop, warehouse, washbays) is captured

and directed to sediment traps and dams.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 28 of 62



• These structures also double as water storage dams, and therefore have been

designed and constructed to be larger than the 1 in 10 Average Recurrence Interval

rainfall event required by Landcom (2004). As there is very little dispersive soil being

collected in these structures, they are considered Type F sediment ponds that catch

fine silts, and no chemical flocculant is used.

• Regular review and maintenance of all controls and inspection of all works to ensure

erosion and sediment controls are performing adequately.

There are no locations where water from the pit is discharged offsite, and all run-off water flows

into the pit area where it is managed through the site water management system. This ensures

that any sediment carried in these waters is kept on site. All of Drayton’s out of pit overburden

storages are now rehabilitated, which minimises erosion and sediment loss from these areas.

7.3.2 Maintenance of Sediment Control Structures

Maintenance and inspections of diversion banks, dams and voids are integral to water

management on site.

Drayton environmental personnel conduct periodic inspections of rehabilitated areas for

potential erosion and sediment control issues. If damage, such as washouts of drainage lines,

is discovered, actions are implemented to repair the damage as soon as practical after the

event. Any remediation work undertaken is detailed in the AEMR.

For the key erosion and sediment control dams, which include the Rail Loop Dam, DC 2 Dam

and the Oil Pollution and Control Dam, operational control plans have been developed to

ensure maintenance (such as maintaining the pumps or desilting the dam) is triggered based

on the observations of regular inspections. The Rail Loop Dam cells required regular desilting

due to the sediment runoff collected from the CHPP area whilst processing was taking place

and coal was stockpiled. Desilting of the Rail Loop Dam was completed in May 2017 and

minimal accumulation of sediment is anticipated now that coal handling has ceased.

The maintenance actions for these dams are coordinated by the Manager Mechanical

Engineering in consultation with the Environment Superintendent.

The Manager Mechanical Engineering directs maintenance contractors to manage the flow of

water around site to reduce the risk of off-site discharges. During heavy and prolonged rainfall

events, the team check all the dams frequently, and implement a pumping strategy that

removes water from dams such as the Rail Loop Dam, which have the potential to flow off-

site, to in pit dams with no potential off-site flow. High level alarms are installed at the Rail

Loop Dam and the Access Road V-notch Sump, with email and text alarm messages

generated if the water levels exceed the pump activation level.

7.4 Surface Water Monitoring

Drayton is located at the headwaters of a group of first and second order ephemeral creeks

which drain from the area as follows:

• Ramrod Creek, flows north-east and north-west towards the Hunter River in two

separate tributaries




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 29 of 62



• Saddlers Creek flows south-west towards the Hunter River

• Bayswater Creek, flows south east towards Lake Liddell; and

• Saltwater Creek, flows south towards Plashett Reservoir

There are also some smaller unnamed drainage paths which cross the undisturbed areas of

the Project area and drain eastward towards the Liddell Power Station Ash Dam.

7.4.1 Baseline Data

Since mining began, monitoring has occurred in the Bayswater and Ramrod (east and west)

creek lines when they flowed, however there is no true baseline data available for pre-

disturbance periods. Table 5 shows the average parameters for these creeks over the periods

listed.

Table 5: Catchment Baseline Data

Ref Description pH EC TDS Na Mg Cl SO4 Data

µS/cm mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Years

1895 Bayswater

Creek (Far

East Tip)

8.8 5308 4136 817 315 713 1816 1990 – 2010

2081 Ramrod Creek

(Access Rd

Dam)

8.2 4529 3517 491 249 743 1458 1993 – 2010

RR3 Ramrod Creek

(NW)

7.8 5439 4538 674 417 795 1914 1990 – 2009

These creeks no longer carry water from site as the upstream catchments have been removed

through mining. The Far East Tip Dam and the Access Road Dam sit on the Bayswater Creek

and Ramrod Creek (east) respectively, and contain any run off.

Electrical conductivity and pH levels for these dams are displayed in Figure 6 to Figure 11 to

demonstrate historical performances of each site. Naturally saline conditions exist in the area

of the mine and these are reflected here.

3 Note: sampled depending on availability of water




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 30 of 62



Figure 6: Far East Dam Historical Data - Electrical Conductivity4

Figure 7: Far East Dam Historical Data - pH Levels

4 This dam was constructed in 1990 during the construction of the Far East Tip. It collected runoff from disturbed

areas as the out of pit tip approached. Around 1999, the tip underwent final rehabilitation. Due to sedimentation and water quality being impacted on during the construction phase, the dam was pumped out and desilted in 2005, leaving the dam only 5% of its total volume. Drought conditions then prevailed, concentrating the existing salts in an ever decreasing volume of water. During 2007, an extreme rainfall event occurred, filling the dam with natural

Dam dewatered. Small amount of water gradually

evaporated until June 2007 when dam filled

following excessive rainfall event




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 31 of 62



Figure 8: Access Road Dam- Historical Electrical Conductivity

Figure 9: Access Road Dam- Historical pH Levels 5

runoff from fully rehabilitated land. This returned water quality to below background levels, where it currently remains. This demonstrates that the rehabilitation process has been successful, with water quality returning to a natural pattern and no additional silt load being evident in the dam 5 This dam was constructed in 1993. Its purpose is to store mine water for use in the Coal Preparation Plant, dust

suppression and industrial water use. It has a minimal catchment (approximately 15 hectares) and receives water from Drayton’s Industrial Dam. It is a mine water dam, thus electrical conductivity reflects saline conditions.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 32 of 62



Figure 10: Ramrod Creek - Historical Electrical Conductivity

Figure 11: Ramrod Creek - Historical pH Levels 6

6 This small creek lies to the north of the existing operation. The surrounding area is a naturally saline catchment

which is reflected in long term conductivity levels. Due to the location of this creek, it is highly dependent on rainfall for flows and as such on most occasions small ponds of water were sampled. Conductivity levels were highly

Drought conditions




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 33 of 62



All mine water is contained within the internal mine water management system and is not

discharged off site.

7.4.2 Surface water monitoring program

Surface water monitoring occurs on a monthly basis and at the following locations. The locations of these sampling sites are shown in Figure 12.

• SW13 pit

• Savoy Dam (1609)

• Far East Tip (1895)

• Industrial Dam (1969)

• Oil Pollution Control Dam (OPC)

• Access Road Dam (2081)

• DC2 Dam (2109)

• Rail Loop Dam (2114)

• Antiene Dam (2221)

• V notch

Analysis undertaken on these samples include pH, electrical conductivity, total dissolved

solids, total suspended solids, sodium, magnesium, calcium, potassium, chloride, sulphate and

bicarbonates.

7.4.3 Downstream Management

The creeks in the area have always been small and ephemeral, and no permanent water flow

has been removed from downstream users. All mine water is contained within the internal

mine water management system and is not discharged off site, therefore downstream

management is negligible.

Inspections of the water storages are undertaken following storm events of 30 mm or more in

a 24 hr period, to determine that no mine affected water has left the site. These inspections

continue until the effects of the rainfall event have subsided.

7.4.4 Surface Water Impact Assessment Criteria

Drayton has no specific limits set for water quality under its EPL or PA. If a discharge of mine

water is detected, the incident would be investigated as soon as site personnel became aware

of the incident and measures would be implemented to prevent a recurrence. The relevant

regulatory agency would also be notified.

variable due to the nature of the site. pH levels remained relatively stable throughout the historical data. During 2008, Ramrod Creek had no overland flows to monitor




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 34 of 62



In the event a discharge occurs, discharge water will be sampled and the ANZECC Guidelines

for Fresh and Marine Water Quality will be applied. To the north of Drayton lies the Antiene

area composed of large lifestyle blocks. Dams on these blocks capture surface water flow,

with the water being used for livestock. To the south of Drayton, the land is used for cattle

grazing. East and west is industrial land. Water quality guidelines in Section 4.3: Livestock

Drinking Water Quality would be used to determine the possibility of impacts.

Should monitoring indicate that any of the parameters fall into a range that could impact stock,

the relevant stock owner will be notified, and possible mitigation actions discussed.

7.4.5 Reporting of Results

As a requirement of Drayton’s project approval conditions and Drayton’s environmental

protection licence, all monitoring data must be presented in the AEMR to the Director General.

A copy of this report is also forwarded to the DRE; DPI-Water; MSC; DSC; OEH; and Drayton’s

Community Consultative Committee members, and made available on Drayton’s public

website.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 35 of 62



Figure 12: Water Monitoring Sites




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 36 of 62



7.5 Groundwater Monitoring

Drayton has had a ground water monitoring plan in place for the life of the mine which

addresses both standing water levels and water quality. As part of this plan, monthly standing

water levels are monitored at sites located around the current mining operation as well as off-

site locations. Long term data is available for some locations with some data being available

for in excess of twenty years.

The regional groundwater system consists of three aquifer systems including:

• Colluvial sediments in creeks and alluvium along the Hunter River and Muscle

Creek;

• Weathered bedrock near the natural surface; and

• Permian coal seam aquifers (Greta coal measures).

The aquifer system that was predicted to be impacted by Drayton’s operations is the Permian

coal seam aquifer, which contains brackish to saline water in the region of 4,000 to 12,000

µs/cm7. Some private bores were constructed in the area (Table 6), however as discussed in

section 7.5.1, these are no longer used.

7.5.1 Baseline Data

Monitoring of groundwater levels has been undertaken at Drayton since the late 1970’s and

therefore an extensive historical database exists. Figure 14 illustrates the groundwater level

contours in various bores around Drayton. As mining has progressed, a number of bores have

been mined through, however several new bores have been installed in conjunction with

exploration programs. Piezometers located both on and off site allow for groundwater impacts

to be assessed. Mining was generally above the water table until 1994, after which the pit

began to impact on the aquifer, therefore data collected prior to 1994 could be considered

baseline. Other existing mines and users in the area may also have impacted the aquifer

system.

Historical data from the following piezometers are considered to provide baseline information:

• F1024, F1167, F1168, F1162, F1163, R4171, R4243, R4220, R4224, R4241 and

W1102. R4243, R4220 and R4224 have since been removed by mining.

• Figure 12 shows the location of these piezometers.

Figure 13 illustrates the baseline data available for these piezometers since their construction.

This raw data (blue line) is illustrated in the following graphs, together with trend lines (red

line).

7 From the Australian Government’s Bioregional Assessment Programme http://www.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/assessments/11-context-statement-hunter-subregion/1142-groundwater-quality

http://www.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/assessments/11-context-statement-hunter-subregion/1142-groundwater-quality

http://www.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/assessments/11-context-statement-hunter-subregion/1142-groundwater-quality




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 37 of 62



Review, assessment and long term trend analysis of the bores that are monitored at Drayton

are included as a component of Drayton’s AEMR. The monitoring results are compared to the

baseline data and an assessment of comparisons with EA predictions will be incorporated into

Drayton’s AEMR.

Figure 13: Standing water (m RL) trend diagrams for selected piezometers




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 38 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 39 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 40 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 41 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 42 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 43 of 62



No water is drawn from these bores, or regionally from the Permian aquifer, therefore yield and

quantity information is not recorded.

In the Drayton Environmental Assessment, a drawdown in the Permian coal seam aquifer is

predicted to occur over time (Figure 15). A search of the DPI-Water register identified four

offsite bores which the Drayton Environmental Assessment assessed as possibly being

impacted by the depressurisation of the coal seam aquifer by mining operations at Drayton

(Table 6). Attempts to locate these bores have been unsuccessful and discussions with the

landholders and DPI-Water has confirmed that these bores are no longer used. There are no

other known active bores located within the vicinity of the mining operation which could be

adversely affected.

Table 6: Registered Private Bores




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 44 of 62



Figure 14: Interpreted groundwater contours – pre mining8

8 Drayton Environmental Assessment, Appendix G, Australian Groundwater & Environmental Consultants, 2006




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 45 of 62



Figure 15: Simulated Drawdown during mining operations




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 46 of 62



7.5.2 Augmenting Baseline Data

Monthly monitoring of standing water levels, and quarterly water quality analysis supplements

the baseline data and indicates potential or actual changes in either standing water level or

water quality. The results of this monitoring are reported in the AEMR.

7.5.3 Groundwater Assessment Criteria

Adverse effects that relate to groundwater would include drawdown removing water from

private production bores, or altering the quality of the water drawn from these bores. As noted

in section 7.5.1, there are no private bores that the predicted drawdown of water would impact

on.

Drayton has licences that outline the volume of groundwater interception that is permissible.

This volume is tracked on a monthly basis and reported in the AEMR.

Should concerns be raised about the possible impacts of the mine, then these will be

investigated using suitably qualified experts.

7.5.4 Monitoring Program

Groundwater levels and quality

Table 7 provides a list of the current groundwater monitoring piezometers, and Appendix 4

identifies those bores that have been lost to mining.

Table 7: Groundwater Monitoring Program

Bore

ID

Easting Northing Collar

Elevation

Bore

Depth

Water

Level

Elevation

Installation

Date

Monitoring

Frequency

(m) (m) (mAHD) (m) Median

(mAHD)

DS1 305592.4 6420379.95 223.94 15 224.42 April 2015 Monthly

DS2 305233 6419920.22 241.58 15 238.76 April 2015 Monthly

DS3 305247.9 6419753.41 250.34 15 235.27 April 2015 Monthly

F1024 293875 1420221 236.70 236 204.62 1982 Monthly

F1162 292389 1421249 228.20 274 158.09 1982 Monthly

F1163 289085 1416250 194.70 384 177.63 1982 Monthly

F1164 292350 1420900 220.80 191 167.89 1982 Monthly

F1167* 305229.67 6421809.42 - 164 183 1986 Monthly

F1168 305235 6420775 212.90 189 194.40 1982 Monthly




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 47 of 62



Bore

ID

Easting Northing Collar

Elevation

Bore

Depth

Water

Level

Elevation

Installation

Date

Monitoring

Frequency

(m) (m) (mAHD) (m) Median

(mAHD)

R4241 293901 1416670 195.98 150 181.90 2005 Monthly

W1102 289030 1416600 186.70 23 178.18 1982 Monthly

*as provided in Table 30, Drayton Mine 2016 Annual Environmental Management Report.

Monthly standing water levels will continue to be recorded for each of sites listed in Table 7.

Figure 12 shows the location of these sites. Groundwater Levels monitored will be assessed

and reported against EA predictions.

In addition, sampling of groundwater sites will be conducted on a six monthly basis. Analysis

will consist of pH, Electrical Conductivity, Total Dissolved Solids, Total Suspended Solids,

sodium, magnesium, calcium, potassium, chloride, sulphate and bicarbonates.

Should any publicly owned bores be identified in the future, Drayton will monitor these bores

in accordance with the above to identify if mining is impacting on the groundwater supply. An

investigation on the current use will also be conducted to assist in impact assessment for future

consideration. Results of this monitoring and any impacts will be included in Drayton’s AEMR.

Groundwater seepage

The Groundwater Impact Assessment undertaken as part of the Drayton Environmental

Assessment predicted that the average inflow into the active mining areas will be up to

2.7ML/day (at Year 10 or 2017) from surrounding aquifers. Table 8 below (extracted from

Drayton’s environmental assessment 2007) details predicted inflows.

Table 8: Predicted Average Inflows to Pits (Extracted from EA07)

Groundwater seepage volumes are estimated using the water balance discussed in Section

7.2. These volumes are reported in the AEMR. To date, the calculated rate (estimated actual)

has not exceeded the predicted rate (from EA07).




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 48 of 62



Groundwater pressure response

The Drayton Environmental Assessment identified that depressurisation of the coal seam

aquifer will not impact on the flow in the Hunter River or other creeks and associated alluvial

aquifers.

Groundwater pressure response in surrounding coal measures is monitored using the existing

network of piezometers. Changes will occur as mining encroaches allowing for groundwater

responses in coal seam aquifers to be assessed. Results of these piezometers will be included

in the AEMR and will be compared with long term averages for trend analysis.

Seepage from Water storages and tailings dams

The major dams on site are discussed in Section 7.1. The water storage levels for these dams

are measured monthly, along with water quality parameters.

The Access Road Dam is monitored for any potential seepage. A catchment area has been

constructed downstream from the dam that collects rainwater, and water from this catchment

is pumped back into the dam to prevent any rainwater leaving site. A piezometer has been

installed downstream from the dam wall, and this is monitored in the groundwater monitoring

programme.

Tailings have been disposed of into the ES Void since 2012. Mining at Drayton has created a

depression cone in the area, as predicted in the EA, so seepage from this void is likely to be

into the working pit rather than externally. Once mining ceases and the immediate

groundwater level starts to rise, the EA predicts that seepage may start to flow very slowly east

towards Liddell Ash Dam. Tailings water is slightly alkaline (7.62 – 7.68 pH) and has an EC of

between 3500 and 5500 µS/cm, which is very similar to the naturally occurring coal seam water

sampled through the groundwater monitoring program (1500 up to 5000 µS/cm). Given the

similarity in water parameters, it is unlikely that seepage from the tailings will have any impact

on the groundwater, however monitoring of the groundwater bores will continue.

Groundwater Model Verification

The Groundwater modelling report completed for the EA shows a predicted depth of water at

certain years of mining. Piezometer monitoring collects data on the depths of water in different

areas around the mine. The measured depths can then be compared with the modelled

depths, which will give an indication of whether the modelling has correctly predicted the

changes.

To date, comparison of the change in piezometer depths against the modelled depths show

that the bores in the south are generally in line with the modelling, however, the bores in the

north generally show a greater response to mining, i.e. they are deeper than expected.

Reporting of Results

As a requirement of Drayton’s project approval conditions, all monitoring data must be

presented in the AEMR, including a review against the groundwater model predictions from

the EA. The estimated volume of groundwater interference is also included. A copy of this

report is forwarded to DPI; DPI-Water; MSC; DSC; OEH; and Drayton’s Community

Consultative Committee members. A copy is also placed on Drayton’s public website.




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 49 of 62



7.6 Surface and Ground Water Response Plan

As discussed in sections 7.4.4 and 7.5.3, there are no impact assessment criteria to exceed.

However, should a concern be raised regarding water impacts, the following process would be

implemented.

Table 9: Handling Concerns

Steps to be taken Process to be followed

1 Record time and date of concern, person calling and the nature of

the concern.

2 Confirm the location where the proposed event occurred.

3 Confirm the weather conditions at the time of the observed event -

if relevant

4 Identify any contributing factors to the event

5 Assess any monitoring results and / or observations recorded

6 Develop an appropriate mitigation and management strategy in

consultation with DPI-Water and DP&E

7 Implement mitigation and management measures

8 Review any follow up results

9 Report the event and solution in the AEMR

Mitigation Measures

If Drayton receives a request from a landowner whose primary water supply is extracted from

a licensed bore and believes the bore to be affected by Drayton’s mining, the following

measures would be implemented in the timeframes specified.

Table 10: Mitigation steps

Steps to be

taken

Process to be followed Timing

1 Receipt of a written request from the landowner in

regards to adverse impact of a water supply

N/A

2 Visit the landowner and gather details of the impact. 7 days

3 Determine whether the source of the impact could be

Drayton (i.e. not environmental).

7 days

4 Commission an investigation by a qualified expert.

This will include:

28 days from

landowner request




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 50 of 62



Steps to be

taken

Process to be followed Timing

• All relevant standing water levels and water

quality results

• Consideration of any changes in land use that

may have affected the groundwater level or

data over a period of time

• Meteorological conditions relevant to standing

groundwater levels

• Groundwater modelling

• Impacts from Drayton Mine

• Impacts from other industrial sites

5 Provide a copy of the report to the landowner 28 days from

commission

6 Develop mitigation and management strategies based

on the findings of the report, and in consultation with

relevant authorities. This could include supply of water

to the landowner.

As required

7 Implement the mitigation and management strategy As required

8 Review and follow up the results As required

9 If the landowner is not satisfied with the outcome of the

report, then they can contact the DP&E with their

concerns. The Dispute Resolution Process is detailed

in Appendix 10 of the PA.

Incident Management

Drayton maintain a Pollution and Incident Response Management Plan (PIRMP) in

accordance with the requirements of the Part 5.7A of the POEO Act and Chapter 7, Part 3A of

the Protection of the Environment Operations (General) Regulation 2009 (POEO(G)

Regulation). Any pollution incident that causes material harm (being non trivial harm or

resulting in total costs, e.g. clean up, repair, exceeding $10,000) will be reported to the relevant

agencies immediately after it is identified as described in the PIRMP.

A copy of the PIRMP is located on the Drayton Mine website at -

http://australia.angloamerican.com/~/media/Files/A/Anglo-American-Australia-

V3/document/drayton-environtment/2017/170327-pollution-incident-response-management-

plan.pdf

Any incidents not causing material harm are tracked and reported. All incidents are entered

into the recording system, which captures incident details and tracks corrective actions.

http://australia.angloamerican.com/~/media/Files/A/Anglo-American-Australia-V3/document/drayton-environtment/2017/170327-pollution-incident-response-management-plan.pdf






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 51 of 62



8 APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Regulatory Correspondence

Appendix 2: Historical Monitoring Piezometers




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 52 of 62



Appendix 1: Regulatory Correspondence

Document Reference

2017 DP&E Correspondence to Drayton Mine Response or Where Addressed in this Document

18/09/2017 Approval of Water Management Plan received Appendix 1

b) iii) Update Water Management and Monitoring Plan resulting from 2015 Independent

Environmental Audit as follows:

Section 7.6 Further detail, is contained in Section 6 of the PIRMP located at http://australia.angloamerican.com/~/media/Files/A/Anglo-American-Australia-V3/document/drayton-environtment/2017/170327-pollution-incident-response-management-plan.pdf Section 7 of this document addresses staff training

Incident response procedures within the WMP are to be updated to refer to the immediate

reporting requirements under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, and

staff are to be made aware of these requirements;

Erosion and sediment control be reviewed to confirm compliance with the Managing Urban

Stormwater: Soils and Construction Manual (Landcom 2004, or its latest version); and

Section 7.3

The Water Management Plan should be updated so that it refers to the current network of

surface and groundwater monitoring locations

Sections 7.4.2 and 7.5.4, and Figure 12

It is recommended that the system of post rainfall inspections be reviewed to include

rehabilitation areas, sediment and erosion control measures, and the potential for offsite

discharge;

Sections 7.3.2 and 7.4.3 Post rainfall inspections are conducted after 30mm of rainfall. Te inspections focus on Access Dam Road, V-Notch weir, DC2 abd Rail Loop dam as these dams have the potential for offsite discharge. Other dams are observed during the monthly inspection.

The current water level gauge used at the Access Road Dam be reviewed to confirm

whether the current reading times (once per half hour) are adequate for the site to be able

to sufficiently comprehend when a sudden overflow event has occurred;

The water level gauge reading times have been updated to 15-minute intervals.

There is an electrical conductivity result of 22,100 from 21 September 2015, but not

indication that this was followed through as it appears to indicate non-compliance with the

site’s criteria. However, as this commitment itself is not entirely clear when read in

conjunction with the original Groundwater Impact Assessment prepared in 2006, it is

recommended that the site confirm what this requirement relates to;

This exceedance relates to recently installed monitoring location DSC2 (see Figure 12) 2016 AEMR The result is not a non-compliance. The groundwater monitoring result came from an onsite monitoring location with a baseline high in electrical conductivity. This monitoring location has been installed since the last review of the Water Management Plan. The Water Management Plan is currently under review to incorporate these recommendations.







MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 53 of 62



Document Reference

2017 DP&E Correspondence to Drayton Mine Response or Where Addressed in this Document

It is also recommended that future AEMRs include:

- The volume (if any) of water supplied to Mt Arthur during the relevant reporting period;

- A review against the groundwater model predictions and water usage predictions

contained in the environmental assessment; and

- A comparison of standing water levels to the steady state calibration results as detailed in

the environmental assessment.

2016 AEMR It should be noted that Drayton does not supply water to Mt Arthur mine. The two mines have an agreement, which expires December 2016, allowing both to store water in a void located near a shared boundary. As at December 2016 no water from Drayton was being placed in the SW13 Void (see Section 7.3 of the 2016 AEMR ).




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 54 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 55 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 56 of 62






MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 57 of 62



Appendix 2: Historical Monitoring Piezometers

Bore ID Easting Northing Collar Elevation Bore Depth Water Level Elevation Installation Date Comments

(m) (m) (mAHD) (m) Median (mAHD)

AGC1 304879 6417458 200.00 71 187.36 1983 Removed by mining 2004

AGC3 305118 6417372 188.00 99 179.59 1983 Removed by mining 2004

BC102 304157 6418605 239.26 100 186.26 1982 Removed by mining 1984

BC99 304096 6418134 250.80 111 182.70 1982 Removed by mining 1986

C3067 292061 1420424 219.00 115 194.75 2000 Removed by mining 2004

F1030 290100 1417156 215.20 26 204.20 1982 Removed by mining 1983




F1160 306243 6416717 195.50 371 174.85 1982

Inundated by Liddell Ash Dam

1988

F1167 305124 6421791 230.50 314 190.54 1982 Removed by mining





MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 58 of 62





GT001 293129 1417787 205.72 114 167.39 2001 Removed by mining 2004




L1123 293238 1417492 204.20 95 151.73 2003 Removed by mining 2004

L1153 292480 1420060 222.62 95 146.08 2003 Removed by mining 2003

R2277 301363 6415552 231.95 96 184.60 1986 Removed by mining 1990










MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 59 of 62






















MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 60 of 62
















R4171A 292924 1419612 229.62 138 218.39 2000 Removed by mining

R4171B 292924 1419611 229.62 138 160.58 2000 Removed by mining




MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 61 of 62









R4214 292653 1416668 257.89 136 224.21 2005 Removed by mining












MP_8-118

PRINT DATE

13/12/2017

ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE

1 February 2003


7 / June 2017

Page 62 of 62





T105 293270 1418623 181.60 91 161.30 1982 Removed by mining 2005

W1 293280 1418620 183.00 88 173.74 1983 Removed by mining 2005




Documents

Anglo American Australia - Water Management Plan/media/Files/A/Anglo...Anglo American (Drayton Management) Pty Ltd Policies and Procedures Water Management Plan MP_8-118 PRINT DATE