Northparkes Mines Mining Operations Plan · Page 6 of 110 1. INTRODUCTION Northparkes Mines is a joint venture between CMOC Mining Pty ltd (80%), Sumitomo Metal Mining Oceania Pty

Page 1 of 110

Northparkes Mines

Mining Operations Plan

Name of Mine: Northparkes Mines

MOP Commencement Date: 1 Jan 2015

MOP Completetion Date: 1 Jan 2020

Mining Authorisations (Leases/Licence

No.):

ML1247, ML1367, ML1641, MLA514

Name of Authorisation/ Authorisation

holder(s):

CMOC Mining pty ltd, Sumitomo

Metal Mining Oceania pty ltd and

SC Mineral Resources pty ltd.

Name of Mine Operator (if different): CMOC Mining Services pty ltd

operating as Northparkes Mines

Name and Contact Details of Mine

Manager (or equivalent):

Stef Loader

0268613117

Name and Contact Details of

Environmental Representative:

Stacey Kelly

0268613495

Name of Representative(s) of the

Authorisation Holder(s):

Stef Loader

Title of Representative(s) of the

Authorisation Holder(s):

Managing Director

Signature of Representative(s) of the

Authorisation Holder(s): Version

V1.1

Date

23/6/2016

Page 2 of 110

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 6

1.1 History of Operations 6

1.1.1 Background to operations 6

1.1.2 Mine Life Extension Project 7

1.2 Current Consents, Authorisations and Licenses 8

1.3 Land Ownership and Land Use 9

1.4 Stakeholder Consultation 11

2. Proposed Mining Activities 12

2.1 Project Description 12

2.1.1 Processing 17

2.1.2 Expected Mine Life 19

2.1.3 Proposed Mining 19

2.2 Asset Register 19

2.3 Activities during the MOP Term 20

2.3.1 Exploration 20

2.3.2 Construction Activities 22

2.3.3 Mining Operations 28

2.3.4 Rock / Overburden Emplacement 29

2.3.5 Processing Residues and Tailings 31

2.3.6 Waste Management 38

2.3.7 Decommissioning and Demolition Activities 39

2.3.8 Temporary Stabilisation 39

2.3.9 Progressive Rehabilitation and Completion 42

2.3.10 Material Production Schedule during MOP Term 42

3. Environmental Issues Management 42

3.1 Environmental Risk Assessment 42

3.2 Environmental Management System/Risk Management 49

3.2.1 Rehabilitation Risks 50

4. Post Mining Land Use 56

4.1 Regulatory Requirements 56

4.2 Post Mining Land Use Goal 57

4.3 Rehabilitation Objectives 58

5. Rehabilitation Planning and Management 59

5.1 Domain Selection 59

5.1.1 Domain 1 – Infrastructure Area 60

5.1.2 Domain 2 – Tailings Storage Facility 60

5.1.3 Domain 3 – Water Management Area 60

5.1.4 Domain 4 – Overburden Emplacement Area 61

5.1.5 Domain 5 – Stockpile Material 61

5.1.6 Domain 6 – Voids 62

5.1.7 Domain 7 – Buffer Lands (Pasture Areas) 62

5.1.8 Domain 8 Underground Mining Areas 62

Page 3 of 110

5.1.9 Domain 9 – Limestone State Forest Offset Area 62

5.2 Domain Rehabilitation Objectives 63

5.2.1 Infrastructure 65

5.2.2 Tailings Storage Facility 65

5.2.3 Water Management Areas 65

5.2.4 Overburden Emplacement Areas 65

5.2.5 Stockpile Management 66

5.2.6 Voids 66

5.2.7 Buffer Lands (Pasture Areas) 66

5.2.8 Limestone State Forest Offset Area 66

5.3 Proposed Rehabilitation Activities 66

5.4 Rehabilitation Phases 67

6. Performance Indicators and Completion Criteria 69

7. Rehabilitation Implementation 78

7.1 Rehabilitation Status at MOP Commencement 78

7.2 Proposed Rehabilitation Status at MOP Completion 83

7.2.1 Buildings 85

7.3 Summary of Rehabilitation Areas during the MOP Term 85

7.4 Relinquishment Phase achieved during MOP period 89

7.5 Rehabilitation of Disturbed Land 89

7.5.1 Exploration Activities 89

8. Rehabilitation Monitoring and Research 90

8.1 Rehabilitation Monitoring 90

8.1.1 Rehabilitation Monitoring Methodology: 90

8.2 Research and Rehabilitation Trials and Use of Analogue Sites 92

9. Intervention and Adaptive Management 94

9.1 Threats to Rehabilitation 94

9.2 Trigger Action Response Plan 96

10. Reporting 102

10.1 Annual Review 102

10.1.1 Annual Environmental Management Report 102

10.2 Incident Reporting 102

10.3 Regular Reporting 102

11. Plans 103

11.1 Cross Sections 103

12. Review and Implementation of the MOP 104

12.1 Review of the MOP 104

12.2 Implementation of the MOP 104

13. References 106

Page 4 of 110

Figures

Figure 1 Northparkes Land ownership............................................................................................ 10 Figure 2 North-South Cross Section of Northparkes Geology Showing Main Resources ..... 13 Figure 3 Block Cave Mining Method .............................................................................................. 15 Figure 4 Comparison of Block Caving and Sub Level Cave Mining Methods ....................... 16 Figure 5 Process flow sheet for Northparkes Operations ............................................................ 18 Figure 6 Proposed Vent Fan Drill Collar Locations ....................................................................... 24 Figure 7 Rosedale TSF Topsoil and Subsoil Stockpile Plan ........................................................... 25 Figure 8 Rosedale TSF Site Overview .............................................................................................. 26 Figure 9 Rosedale TSF Pipeline and Drainage .............................................................................. 27 Figure 10 Location of waste rock dumps ........................................................................................ 30 Figure 11 Estcourt TSF Site Overview ................................................................................................ 37 Figure 12 New access road onto Mine Lease. .............................................................................. 41 Figure 13 Rehabilitation at MOP commencement ...................................................................... 79 Figure 14 Rehabilitation at MOP commencement ...................................................................... 80 Figure 15 Tree Planting / Rehabilitation Undertaken to Date – All Landholdings ................... 82 Figure 16 Proposed rehabilitation areas ......................................................................................... 84 Figure 17 Design Depths of Plots in Capping Trials ....................................................................... 93

Plates

Plate 1 Current Preferred Option for TSF 1 Prefeasibility Study ................................................. 33 Plate 2 Proposed Final Landform Showing Buttress on Outer Batters ..................................... 34 Plate 3 Conceptual View of this Proposed Final Land Form Option ...................................... 35 Plate 4 Northparkes environmental staff collecting nest boxes constructed by the Parkes

Men’s Shed ................................................................................................................................................ 81

Tables Table 1 Northparkes Statutory Approvals ......................................................................................... 8 Table 2 Asset Register ......................................................................................................................... 19 Table 3 Proposed Drilling Activities during MOP term .................................................................. 20 Table 4 Proposed Construction and Demolition Activities .......................................................... 22 Table 5 Current Waste Rock Dump and Stockpile Volumes and Dimensions ........................ 31 Table 6 Surface Area of and Current Approved Final Heights of TSFs ...................................... 36 Table 7 Provisional Production and Waste Schedule during MOP Term ................................. 42 Table 8 Risk matrix .............................................................................................................................. 43 Table 9 Risk management response ................................................................................................ 43 Table 10 Consequence descriptions ................................................................................................. 43 Table 11 Likelihood descriptions ......................................................................................................... 44 Table 12 Environmental risk assessment outcomes ........................................................................ 45 Table 13 Summary of Environmental Management Plans as Required by Existing Approvals 49 Table 14 Risks associated with Rehabilitation at Northparkes ...................................................... 50 Table 15 Chemical Characteristics of Waste Rock ........................................................................ 51 Table 16 Chemical Characterisation of Tailings.............................................................................. 52 Table 17 Northparkes Soil Units ........................................................................................................... 53 Table 18 Conditions towards post mining land use ........................................................................ 56 Table 19 Post Mining Regulatory requirements ............................................................................... 56 Table 20 Rehabilitation Objectives .................................................................................................... 58 Table 21 Primary and Secondary Domains for Northparkes Mines ............................................. 59 Table 22 Overburden Emplacement Area Rehabilitation Status ................................................ 61 Table 23 Summary of Rehabilitation Objectives for Closure Domains ....................................... 64 Table 24 Current Rehabilitation Phases Per Domain ...................................................................... 68 Table 25 Performance Indicators and Completion Criteria ......................................................... 70 Table 26 Disturbance and Rehabilitation Progression over the MOP term ............................... 85

Page 5 of 110

Table 27 Rehabilitation during MOP period ..................................................................................... 86 Table 28 Stage 4 Capping Trial Design ............................................................................................. 94 Table 29 Threats to Rehabilitation from Rehabilitation Management Plan ............................... 94 Table 30 Threats to Rehabilitation Per Domain ............................................................................... 95 Table 31 Rehabilitation TARPs ............................................................................................................. 97 Table 32 MOP Responsibilities ........................................................................................................... 104

Page 6 of 110

1. INTRODUCTION

Northparkes Mines is a joint venture between CMOC Mining Pty ltd (80%), Sumitomo Metal

Mining Oceania Pty ltd (13.3%) and SC Mineral Resources Pty ltd (6.7%). The mine is operated

by CMOC Mining Services Pty ltd (CMOC) operating under the business name Northparkes

Mines (Northparkes). All reference from here on in to CMOC or Northparkes refer to the

operating business of the Northparkes Mines.

This Northparkes Mining Operations Plan (MOP) submission is a requirement of ML1247,

ML1367, ML1641and MLA514 (mining lease conditions 2010- condition 3), and the Step

Change project approval PA11_0600 Mod 2 This MOP has been developed in accordance

with the ESG3: Mining Operations Plan (MOP) guidelines (NSW Trade & Investment 2013).

The Northparkes Mine Step Change Project Approval PA11_0600 Mod 2 is herein referred to

as the Mine Life Extension Approval.

GHD Orange were utilised as an independent third party to provide technical assistance and

review the MOP against the requirements of the new guidelines. GHD Facilitated a workshop

with Northparkes staff on 30 September 2014 to review the site Environmental risks and the

Trigger Action Plan.

1.1 History of Operations

Northparkes conducts the mining and processing of porphyry related copper-gold deposits,

27 kilometres north-northwest of Parkes, New South Wales (NSW). The project has been

operating for 20 years, with a current approved life of mine to 2032.

Northparkes currently operates under the approved MOP 2011-2015. This new MOP

application MOP 2015-2020 incorporates the Mine Life Extension Approval PA11_0600 which

surrenders the previous approvals PA 06_0026 and DA11092. This new MOP has been

prepared to account for the major changes to the mine footprint resulting from the new

project approval.

The previous MOP 2011-2015 was developed under the previous Departmental Guidelines of

EDG3 (Feb 2002). This MOP (Jan 2015 – Jan 2020) has been developed as per ESG5: Mining

Operations Plan (MOP) Guidelines, September 2013.

1.1.1 Background to operations

North Mining Limited originally received development consent for Northparkes in 1992, 15

years after the first onsite resource discovery. This approval was based on open cut mining of

E22 and E27 and underground mining of E26 within the 'Mining Reserve' of 64.1 million tonnes

(Mt).

Underground block cave mining commenced at Northparkes in October 1993 with the

construction of the E26 underground block cave mine through the granting of development

consent DA504/90. Northparkes commissioned its second block cave mine, E26 Lift 2 in 2004.

In 2008, Northparkes commissioned an extension to the second block cave mine, E26 Lift 2

North (E26 Lift 2N). Mining operations at Northparkes focus on the extraction of a range of ore

bodies based on a set of target mineral concentration limits.

Page 7 of 110

Open cut mining commenced with the E27 pit in December 1993 and the E22 pit in January

1994. The gold-enriched oxide ore was processed through a separate carbon-in-pulp (CIP)

gold circuit, including the use of cyanide for gold extraction, prior to the construction of the

copper-gold sulphide processing circuits in 1995. Ore was then stockpiled for blending with

E26 underground material. Open cut mining at Northparkes operated on a campaign basis

determined by economic and environmental viability. Previous open cut mining at

Northparkes ceased in October 2010 with the completion of the E22 open cut campaign.

The CIP processing plant has been decommissioned from site, with cyanide no longer used in

process circuits on site.

In February 2007, the NSW Minister for Planning granted PA06_0026 under Part 3A of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). This approval provided for the

ongoing operation of the previously approved mining operations and facilities and the

extension of underground block cave mining into the E48 ore body. This project was known

as the E48 Project. After approval in 2007, Northparkes commenced construction of E48 Lift 1,

its third major block cave mine. Initial production of E48 Lift 1 began in 2010 and forms part of

the approved underground mining operations in conjunction with E26 Lift 2 and E26 Lift 2N.

In October 2009, approval was granted for two modifications to PA06_0026 under Section

75W of the EP&A Act. Section 75W modification 1 (Mod 1) provided for the construction of

the Estcourt Tailings Storage Facility (TSF), a mine and mill upgrade to increase processing up

to 8.5Mtpa and extension of mine life until 2025. Section 75W modification two (Mod 2)

provided for the development of a 1200m2 warehouse within the approved mine

infrastructure area.

In 2012 Northparkes was granted approval for development of a block cave knowledge

centre under Part 4 of the EP&A Act (DA 11092) from Parkes Shire Council (PSC).

In July 2014, approval was granted for PA11_0600 under section 75J of the EP&A Act. This

approval PA11_06600 surrendered the current project approval PA06_0026 and DA11092 in

accordance with section 104A. This requirement does not extend to the Forbes Water

Pipeline Development Consent DA2009/0057.

The Mine Life Extension approval encompasses the continuation of underground block cave

mining in two existing ore bodies, the development of underground block cave mining in the

E22 resource, additional campaign open cut mining, augmentation to the approved TSFs

and a seven year extension to the mine life to 2032.

In July 2015 approval was granted for PA11-0060 Mod 1 to incorporate the use of Sub Level

cave mining technology and also to amend a typing error by the Department of Planning in

regards to the approval number. The correct Approval number is PA11_0060, and had

previously been stated as PA11_0600.

In April 2016 approval was granted for PA_11_0060 Mod 2 to reference an unformed road

land parcel and update the schedule of lands table to incorporate this crown road area on

Caloola. (MLA514)

1.1.2 Mine Life Extension Project

The Mine Life Extension approval incorporates the existing mining related activities along with

the following major components of the project:

Continuation of block cave mining in E48 and E26;

Development of underground block cave mining in the E22 resource beneath the E22

open cut void;

Campaign open cut mining through development of five open cut resources including:

o Development of four small open cut pits

o E26 open cut

Amendments to the configuration of TSF’s including:

Page 8 of 110

o Continuation of tailings disposal to the existing TSF’s (TSF1, TSF2 and Estcourt) to

a height of 28m

o Additional raises of Estcourt for an increased height from 25m to 28m

o Development of a new TSF3 to a height of 28m and incorporates the approved

Rosedale TSF

Development of new waste dumps for the management of open cut waste rock. Waste

rock from open cut mining areas can be utilised in the development of TSF 3;

Continuation of approved ore processing infrastructure up to 8.5Mtpa capacity, and

road haulage of copper concentrate to the existing Goonumbla siding;

Continued use of existing site administration, mining and water supply infrastructure;

Development of an amended access road, new visitors parking and access control;

Continuation of approved mining operations for an additional seven years until the end

of 2032; and

Rehabilitation and closure of the site after the end of the project life in accordance with

relevant legislation.

1.2 Current Consents, Authorisations and Licenses

This MOP variation is the first following the project approval PA11_0060 Mod 1 and Mod 2. The

project approval PA11_0060 Mod 2 is attached as Appendix 1.

The project approval 11_0060 was granted on 16 July 2014. In conjunction with this project

approval the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999

approval for Northparkes was also granted on the 13 February 2014.

As per NSW T&I 2013, as the Minister for Planning is the consent authority the mine is classified

as a Level 1 mine.

Northparkes has a large number of statutory approvals and associated legal obligations that

regulate mining and associated activities onsite.

Northparkes’s main statutory approvals are listed in Table 1Error! Reference source not found..

Table 1 Northparkes Statutory Approvals

Approval Description Issue Date

ML 1247 Mining Lease (1629.6 ha) 27/11/1991

ML1367 Mining Lease (826.2 ha) 21/03/1995

ML1641 Mining Lease (24.4 ha) 25/03/2010

MLA514 Mining Lease (approx. 194ha) TBA-Offer has

been received

by Northparkes.

EL 5800 Exploration Lease (245 km2) 08/01/2001



PA11_0600 Project Approval 16/07/2014

EPBC 2013/6788 EPBC Approval 13/02/2014

Surrended

DC 06-0026

Development Consent

Modification 1

Modification 2

28/02/2007

06/10/2009

28/10/2009

N/A PSC Approval for Road Train Access on Bogan Road 19/11/1999

EPL 4784 Environmental Protection Licence 30/05/2001

Page 9 of 110

Approval Description Issue Date

35/02983 Dangerous Goods Notification -

07-100146-001 Licence to Store (Explosives) 27/07/2009

70WA600026 Joint Water Supply Works 01/07/2004

70AL600028 Water Access Licence 8241 01/07/2004

70AL603187 Water Access Licence 10082 18/10/2005

70BL226550 Bore Licence (Mining, Irrigation, Stock and Domestic) 01/07/2008

70BL230929 Bore Licence (Mining and Irrigation) – Bore 7 10/07/2009

70BL229975 Bore Licence (Domestic and Stock) 26/07/2004

70BL226584 Bore Licence (Mining) – Bore 8 27/05/2008

80BL356559 Bore Licence (Dewatering – Mining) – E26 and E48 18/01/2010

80BL245449 Bore Licence (Dewatering – Mining) – E22 18/01/2010

80BL245450 Bore Licence (Dewatering – Mining) – E27 18/01/2010

DA2009/0057 Development Consent (Forbes Water Pipeline) 19/03/2009

HD 48307 Limestone State Forest Occupation Permit 24/09/2009

1.3 Land Ownership and Land Use

The Mine is located in the central west region of NSW and has had a long history of rural land

use. The majority of the region consists of cleared land used for agricultural pursuits with

patches of remnant vegetation associated with State Forests.

Page 10 of 110

Figure 1 Northparkes Land ownership

Crown Road

Page 11 of 110

The mine is located on land owned by Northparkes. Overall, Northparkes owns approximately

6481ha within and around the Site. Much of this land acts as a buffer between the operational

areas and the surrounding privately-owned land holdings, refer Figure 1.

A crown road (Paper road) under MLA514 is currently not owned by CMOC. An application

has been submitted to the department of lands to purchase this crown road. (Application for

Road Closure –reference number DPIW563265)

The existing NSW State Forest, Limestone National Forest (LNF), is not owned by CMOC. The

24.4ha portion of the LNF required for on-going operations has been acquired through a land

swap agreement with Department of Primary Industry – Forests.

Historic aerial photography indicates the area around Northparkes has been extensively

cleared. The known historical context of the area suggests the Northparkes site and surrounds

has been subject to intensive agricultural practices since the 1800’s.

As well as mining, the Mining Lease is also used for commercial crop production. The future

land uses for the Mining lease are divided into three main categories:

1. Native vegetation areas with areas of native grasses;

2. Agricultural land, primarily for cropping; and

3. Restricted access areas, associated with subsidence and open cut voids.

As part of the site decommissioning, Northparkes will ensure all these areas are geo-technically

stable, with appropriate buffer areas maintained, and access appropriately restricted.

1.4 Stakeholder Consultation

Extensive community consultation was undertaken as part of the Environmental Assessment

(EA) Northparkes Mines Step Change Project (Umwelt 2013). The stakeholders included in the

consultation were determined by the Director Generals Requirements’ (DGR’s) as follows:

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

(SEWPaC) (now the Department of the Environment (Commonwealth));

NSW Office Environment and Heritage (OEH);

NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA);

Department of Primary Industries (including New South Wales Office of Water (NOW),

NSW Forestry and Fisheries and Aquaculture, Land and Natural Resources);

NSW Trade and Investment –Department of Resources and Energy;

Transport for NSW (including Centre for Transport Planning, RMS);

Dams Safety Committee;

Mines Subsidence Board;

Forbes Shire Council; and

Parkes Shire Council.

The key issues identified through consultation with these agencies have been captured in the

DGR’s for the step change project and have been assessed in Umwelt 2013.

End of mine life concerns raised during this consultation focussed on employment, economic

development, community participation, transport and accommodation, and flow on effects

through the local communities. Post mining land use, rehabilitation objectives and completion

criteria were not specifically addressed. The statement of commitments detailed in Umwelt

2013 committed to undertaking stakeholder consultation regarding mine closure five years

prior to end of mine life.

Page 12 of 110

2. PROPOSED MINING ACTIVITIES

2.1 Project Description

Northparkes conducts the mining and processing of porphyry related copper-gold deposits,

27km north-northwest of Parkes, NSW. The project has been operating for 20 years, with a

current approved life of mine to 2032. The mine is a joint venture partnership between CMOC

Mining Pty Ltd and the Sumitomo Group of Companies, with management of the operation

undertaken by Northparkes.

The Northparkes deposits are typical porphyry copper systems in that the mineralisation and

alteration are zoned around quartz monzonite porphyries. The porphyries form narrow

(typically less than 50m in diameter) but vertically extensive (greater than 900m) pipes.

Mineralisation extends from the porphyries into their host lithology. The E26 and E48 deposits

range from 60-400m in diameter (>0.4% copper) and extend vertically for more than 900m.

Figure 2 provides an outline of the underground cross section of the Northparkes geology

showing the main reserves and mining areas.

Block cave mining is the most efficient method for mining these porphyry type deposits due to

their narrow structure and extensive elongation, allowing for the cave to be developed and

sustained.

Current underground operations are undertaken by using block caving methods which also

includes Sub Level Caving within a number of ore bodies (E26 and E48) to target specific ore

grades (refer to Figure 3).

Page 13 of 110

Figure 2 North-South Cross Section of Northparkes Geology Showing Main Resources

Page 14 of 110

Figure 3 shows a typical example of the block cave mining method, which includes the

establishment of various levels, primarily the extraction level, which consists of extraction drives

and associated draw points from which caved ore is drawn, a crushing/haulage level and

ventilation infrastructure.

Figure 4 shows the comparison of block cave mining with sub level cave mining. With both

mining methods the same machinery and drill and blast methodologies are used.

Northparkes’s typical mine layout comprises a number of elements, including energy-efficient

electric loaders, high-volume jaw-gyratory crushers and conveyors, most of which are

automated. The Northparkes layout is also based on a single production horizon, eliminating

the additional trucking/rail haulage levels, effectively requiring two levels to be developed for

block cave mining.

Access to the underground operations is by a 1 in 7 grade, approximately 5 m wide by 5.5 m

high decline from the surface portal located above E26 for person and material access. The

access to the E48 ore body is via an approximately 200 m extension from the E26 access

decline (refer to Figure 2).

The pipe-like E26 ore body is divided into two lifts. Lift 1 (which was completed in October 2003)

extends from the surface to approximately 480 m below the surface. Underground block cave

mining in E26 also consists of Lift 2 and Lift 2N. The extraction level of Lift 2 extends to

approximately 830 metres below the surface (refer to Figure 2).

To create E26 Lift 2 and 2N, approximately 24 km of tunnels were developed and some 161

draw points were excavated through which the broken rock is drawn. The E48 ore body is

located approximately 2 km north of E26, and midway between the E26 hoisting shaft and the

processing plant. Operations in E48 commenced in 2010 using similar block cave methods

described above. The E48 development comprises approximately 12 km of underground

infrastructure with the extraction level located approximately 580 m below the surface (refer

to Figure 2).

Page 15 of 110

Figure 3 Block Cave Mining Method

Page 16 of 110

Figure 4 Comparison of Block Caving and Sub Level Cave Mining Methods

Page 17 of 110

2.1.1 Processing

Ore processing as shown in the Figure 5 includes a number of defined stages including

grinding, floatation and thickening.

The grinding circuit is comprised of two separate modules (Mod 1 and Mod 2), each

incorporating a Semi Autogenous Grinding (SAG) mill, oversize crushing technology, two

stages of ball milling and froth floatation.

The floatation process floats a sulphide concentrate to recover copper and gold bearing

minerals. From the floatation, the concentrate is then processed through the concentrate

thickener then onto the storage shed.

The tailings component is pumped from the floatation stage to a tails thickener then out to the

TSF.

Page 18 of 110

Figure 5 Process flow sheet for Northparkes Operations

Page 19 of 110

2.1.2 Expected Mine Life

The approved mine life at Northparkes is currently 31 December 2032.

2.1.3 Proposed Mining

The mining philosophy at Northparkes is for mill feed. This philosophy ensures the mining rates

are consistent with mill throughput to ensure consistency of feed for the mill to maintain the

required annual throughput.

Mining output during the MOP term will be predominately from E48 and E26 underground.

Development works and feasibility works are being undertaken for other underground

resources such as E22 and GRP.

The mining plan will be updated annually and submitted as part of the AEMR document.

The five open cut resources will be mined as required on a campaign basis to allow

consistency of throughput to the mill if required and also for site development works such as

rock for tails dam development, access roads and wall lifts.

2.2 Asset Register

Table 2 Asset Register

Domain Current Size Asset

1-Infrastructure Area 160 Administration Offices

Laboratory

Maintenance workshop

Power lines

Processing Plant/Mill

Hoisting shaft and Vent Fans

Overland conveyor

Core yard/Core shed

Change rooms

Emergency Response shed

Training Rooms and Warehouse

Roads and laydown areas

Topsoil stockpiles

Clay Stockpiles

E26 Subsidence Zone

E48 Subsidence zone

2-Tailings Storage Facility 336 TSF1

TSF2

E27 and Estcourt TSF

Associated pipeline corridors

3-Water Management Area 66.9 Clean

Page 20 of 110

Domain Current Size Asset

Dirty and

Mine water catchments

Caloola Ponds

4-Overburden

Emplacement Area

88.6 Sound bund around E22 and E27 pits

E26 Lift 1 Mullock dump

E26 Oxide Waste dump

Process water dam stockpile

E26 clay dump

E26 low grade oxide ore

E26 lift 2 waste rock dump

W3 and W4

5-Stockpiled Material Included in Domain 1.

6-Void 30.7 E22 Pit

Total 1337.29

2.3 Activities during the MOP Term

2.3.1 Exploration

Drilling on the mining leases will continue to focus on the resource and grade definition as well

as exploration for potential new deposits. A component of sterilisation drilling shall also be

conducted as an integral component of the mine design and in particular to test areas

proposed for tailings disposal.

Table 3 details the proposed drilling activities to be undertaken on the mining leases

throughout the MOP period.

Table 3 Proposed Drilling Activities during MOP term

Program Period Activity Work Plan

2015 Diamond Drilling E26L1 (2000m)

E26L2 (500m)

GRP314 (3000m)

RC Drilling GRP314 Precollars (2000m)

2016 Diamond Drilling E22 (10000m)

GRP314 (5000m)

RC Drilling E22 Precollars (2000m)

2017 Diamond Drilling E26L2NN (2000m)

E22 Access Geotechnical Drilling ( 5000m)

RC Drilling E22 Access Precollars (3000m)

2018 Diamond Drilling E22 Geotechnical (10000m)

RC Drilling E22 Precollars (3000m)

Page 21 of 110


2019 Diamond Drilling E20 E51 (20000m, straddles ML boundary)

RC Drilling E20 E51 Precollars (3000m)

Disturbance associated with drilling activities will be mainly limited to the drill sites (typically

30 m x 30 m) within the mining and exploration Leases. Drill pads are rehabilitated at the

completion of drilling with the area levelled and topsoil replaced. Records on the number of

drill pads created and rehabilitated are maintained by the Technical Services Long term

(Exploration and Evaluation) Department.

Page 22 of 110

2.3.2 Construction Activities

Table 4 details the proposed construction and demolition activities to be undertaken on the

mining leases throughout the MOP period, whilst Figure 7 and Figure 8, show detail and location

of Rosedale TSF as well proposed topsoil stockpiles as outlined with in the Rosedale

Construction management Plan.

Table 4 Proposed Construction and Demolition Activities


2015 Pre strip of land Construction Environment Management Plan

EA Northparkes Step Change Project s.2.3.5

Clearing vegetation Rosedale Construction Management Plan

Land and Biodiversity Management Plan

Demolition of heritage

outbuildings

Cultural Heritage Management Plan

Construction of new TSF

(Rosedale TSF)

Construction Environment Management Plan

New access road to site Rosedale Construction Management Plan (TBA)

Relocation of new water

and electricity mains

Rosedale Construction Management Plan (TBA)

Sub-level cave at E26 Life of Mine Plan

2016 Construction of new TSF

(Rosedale TSF)


Sub-level cave at E26 Life of Mine Plan

Commissioning of

Rosedale TSF

Development of Vent Fan

Raise and Vent Fan


Projects CEA

2017 Sub-level cave at E26 Life of Mine Plan

Estcourt Lift Life of Mine Plan

2018 Rosedale TSF lift Life of Mine Plan

Construction of Block

Cave E26

Life of Mine Plan

2019 Construction of Block

Cave E26

Life of Mine Plan

Estcourt Lift Life of Mine Plan

Page 23 of 110

Vent Shaft Upgrade

Northparkes is currently undertaking a program to upgrade the underground ventilation

infrastructure. This ventilation upgrade consists of two additional shafts, one intake and one

exhaust. These shafts will be approx. 5m in diameter and connect with the E48 underground

block cave mine. The exhaust shaft vent will consist of two surface ventilation fans, with the

intake shaft not requiring any fans. The design and procurement process for the exhaust fans

has taken into consideration noise limits applicable to the current mining approvals.

The proposed vent fan locations are shown below in Figure 6 and are within the disturbance

footprint that was assessed for the Northparkes Step Change Project (Umwelt 2013).

Rosedale Project

A separate Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been completed for

specific activities related to this project. This Construction Environmental Management Plan will

be reviewed and approved internally by the Northparkes ESH team prior to works

commencing.

The scope of the Rosedale project is to construct the Rosedale Tailings Storage Facility (TSF3)

sequentially with the staged lifts of the Estcourt TSF.

Estcourt TSF design criteria allows for a final crest height of 28m from natural surface. Estcourt

will be constructed in three separate stages. The Rosedale TSF has a design with staged lifts to

a maximum crest height of 28m

Page 24 of 110

Figure 6 Proposed Vent Fan Drill Collar Locations

Page 25 of 110

Figure 7 Rosedale TSF Topsoil and Subsoil Stockpile Plan

Page 26 of 110

Figure 8 Rosedale TSF Site Overview

Page 27 of 110

Figure 9 Rosedale TSF Pipeline and Drainage

Page 28 of 110

2.3.3 Mining Operations

Underground Mining

Access to the underground operations is by a 1 in 7 grade, 5m wide by 5.5m high decline

from surface. Access to the E48 ore body is via a 200m extension from the E26 access

decline. Mined ore is transported to surface via underground conveyors and a dedicated

hoisting shaft. The hoisting shaft is 520m deep.

The E48 extraction level, beneath the ore body, is located approximately 580m below

surface and consists of 13 extraction drives, 143 draw bells (connecting the extraction level

to the block cave above) and 262 draw points through which the broken rock is drawn.

Production mining is primarily undertaken using electric powered load-haul-dump units

with up to 100% of mining using automated loaders. These loaders tram the broken ore

from the extraction level draw points and haul it between 50-400m to the primary crusher.

The rock is crushed to less than 150mm diameter, then conveyed and hoisted up the

hoisting shaft to the surface for overland conveying to the processing plant (Figure 3).

Average production rates from underground mining are between 18,000-20,000t per

operating day resulting in an annual average production rate of 6.5-7.0Mtpa. Daily and

annual production levels will reflect localised changes in mining conditions and the

prevailing throughput of the processing plant.

Open Cut Operations

No open cut operations are scheduled to be undertaken during the MOP period, although

extraction and crushing of small quantities of overburden rock may be undertaken for

construction road building activities onsite from these designated pit areas.

A description of the approved open cut mines is included below. If open cut mining is

required during the MOP period, a variation or amendment to the MOP will be requested.

Proposed open cuts associated with the Step Change project include:

E26: The E26 open cut will be developed within the existing E26 subsidence zone. The

E26 open cut will have an approximate area of 51ha, depth of around 300m and will

result in an extraction of 17Mt of ore on a campaign basis.

E28/E28N: The E28 open pits are located adjacent to the existing E48 subsidence zone.

The E28/E28N open cuts have an approximate area of 5.9ha and 6.2ha respectively,

to a depth of 60m each and will extract approximately 3Mt of ore on a campaign

basis.

E31/E31N: The E31 and E31N pits are located adjacent to the approved Rosedale TSF.

The E31 and E31N open cuts will have an area of approx. 6.3ha and 5.4ha respectively

to a depth of 80m each and will extract a combined 3Mt of ore on a campaign basis.

The open cut mining will be undertaken on a campaign basis using conventional mining

methods. These conventional mining methods include drill and blast and load and haul

using excavators and trucks.

Blasting is addressed in the Blast Management Plan, including notifications, traffic

management, and frequency of blasts and hours of operation.

Page 29 of 110

2.3.4 Rock / Overburden Emplacement

Table 6 and Figure 10 detail the waste rock dumps, stockpile volumes and dimensions (at

June 2014). Some of this waste rock has been used in the construction of TSFs, with the

remainder currently stored in a number of locations.

As previously described, Northparkes are not proposing to undertake open cut mining

during the MOP period, therefore changes to rock/overburden emplacements is not

anticipated.

The underground development waste is deposited at Lift 2 waste dump at the

underground area.

Page 30 of 110

Figure 10 Location of waste rock dumps

Page 31 of 110

Table 5 Current Waste Rock Dump and Stockpile Volumes and Dimensions

Waste Rock Storage Height

(m)

Surface Area (ha) Volume (Mm3)

Waste Rock Stockpiles

Process water dam clay

stockpile

10 1.2 0.06

Open cut clay stockpile 10 4.9 0.40

Oxide / clay stockpile 10 3.0 0.27

Waste Rock Dumps

E26 Lift 1 mullock dump 14 9.0 0.20

Sound bund 10 1.2 0.80

W1 20 25.2 2.70

W2 13 17.4 1.30

W3 13 30.5 2.00

W4 25 39.6 7.12

E26 clay dump 15 9.7 0.90

E26 oxide dump 20 16.7 1.20

E26 Lift 2 waste rock dump 15 5.1 0.31

Total 10.64

Note:

‘Stockpiles’ refers to waste rock or clay storages with future use potential, hence stockpiles are not shaped or

rehabilitated

‘Dumps’ refers to final storages of waste rock, hence dumps are shaped and rehabilitated

2.3.5 Processing Residues and Tailings

Processing

Ore is currently processed within a conventional froth flotation plant. The plant was

commissioned in September 1995 and is designed to process both copper-gold oxide and

sulphide ore. Oxide copper gold flotation was suspended in 1996, with a campaign to

process oxide copper gold conducted in 2005.

The comminution process consists of two parallel modules consisting of a SAG, ball and

tertiary mills. Sulphide copper-gold ore is floated using a standard process where the

copper and gold-bearing sulphide minerals are recovered using xanthate as the primary

collector and Methyl Isobutyl Carbinol (MIBC) as the frother.

Concentrate produced from the flotation circuit is thickened and filtered to produce a

final concentrate containing 7-10% moisture which is stored, transported and marketed.

Concentrate product is transported to Port Kembla and shipped to customers in Australia,

Japan, China and India.

Tailings Management

The TSFs have been designed to provide:

Safe and permanent containment of all tailings solids;

The recovery of free water for reuse within the processing plant;

Containment of all water under extreme rainfall conditions;

Maximised structural strength through the deposited tailings;

Page 32 of 110

Containment of all chemical residues; and

Comply with Dams Safety Committee/ANCOLD 2012 Guideline requirements.

Until June 2014, 88Mt of tailings had been produced, with all tailings discharged within

TSF1, TSF2, E27 and Estcourt. Processing over the next five years will produce approximately

31Mt of tailings. Tailings deposition is managed to maximise water removal and increase

in-situ dry density. The current tailings deposition strategy involves:

Alternating deposition between Estcourt and the E27 in-pit TSF dependent on settling

rates in the E27 in-pit tailings; and

Deposition into the Rosedale TSF upon completion and commissioning.

The site tailings strategy is regularly reviewed and the most optimal disposal strategy

utilised. This process includes reviewing options for future tailings management strategies

including the ongoing development of final landform options for these structures whilst

maintaining compliance with Dams Safety Committee/ANCOLD 2012 Guidelines and

Project Approval requirements. The review includes an assessment of compliance against

changes to ANCOLD 2012 regarding the change in frequency for earthquake events.

Northparkes is currently investigating through a feasibility study, options for a convex final

landform for the TSF’s (Plate 1) This final landform option is being developed in conjunction

with specialist consultants to ensure that design options are developed in accordance

with Dams Safety Committee/ANCOLD Guidelines including changing the seismic hazard

requirements. Prior to the implementation of these changes to the final land form

Northparkes would seek approval as per legislative requirements.

The proposed convex final landform concept includes constructing a buttress on the

northern and north eastern walls of TSF1 (Plate 2). The buttress would be constructed

utilising tailings from the dam which would be compacted and then capped with a

suitable material. This option would provide additional storage capacity for tailings

deposition in TSF1.

The purpose of the convex final landform option is to provide a variable final landform

feature for the TSF. Further investigations are required to determine appropriate final

landform shape and design and rehabilitation methodologies. Cover material types and

depths will also need to be investigated.

A conceptual view of this proposed final land form option is provided below (Plate 3). The

blue area indicates tailings that are proposed to be used as part of the buttress.

Research is also being conducted regarding rehabilitated landform stability with

Landloch. This work is being conducted to assist in developing options for final landform

covers to assist in achieving post landform water quality requirements as specified in Table

25.

Page 33 of 110

Plate 1 Current Preferred Option for TSF 1 Prefeasibility Study

Page 34 of 110

Plate 2 Proposed Final Landform Showing Buttress on Outer Batters

Page 35 of 110

Plate 3 Conceptual View of this Proposed Final Land Form Option

Page 36 of 110

Table 6 Surface Area of and Current Approved Final Heights of TSFs

Parameter TSF 1 TSF 2 TSF1/2

Infill

Open Cut

Voids

Estcourt

TSF

Rosedale

TSF

Footprint Surface

Area

120ha 130ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 344.2ha

Planned Footprint

Surface Area

120ha 130ha 170ha* 200ha* 130ha 344.2ha

Commissioning

date

May 1994 February

1997

- Jan 2009

(E27 pit)

Jan 2013 2015

Tailings Type Gold

Oxide

Sulphide

Copper/

Gold

Sulphide

Copper/

Gold

Sulphide

Copper/

Gold

Sulphide

Copper/

Gold

Sulphide

Copper/

Gold

Sulphide

Copper/

Gold

Current Height 13m (Lift

5)

13m - - - Starter

height 10m

Ultimate Height 28m 28m 28m 20m 20m 28m

*Previously disturbed land

Page 37 of 110

Figure 11 Estcourt TSF Site Overview

Page 38 of 110

2.3.6 Waste Management

Non Mineral Waste

All non-mineral waste on site is managed in accordance with Northparkes Site wide Non-

Mineral Waste Management Plan which has been developed to comply with the Protection

of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Waste Avoidance and Resource Act 2001.

The Plan applies to all non-mineral waste generated on site and includes the collection,

transport, treatment, recycling/reuse, final use/disposal and where applicable, the supervision

and maintenance of final waste facilities.

All Northparkes waste is classified and taken offsite by licensed waste contractor to offsite

recycling facilities and landfills. Northparkes do not currently operate any permanent non

mineral waste storage locations on site. Northparkes do however manage a historical landfill

site which was decommissioned in May 2009.

Northparkes maintain a Non Mineral Waste Inventory and Environmental Data Collection

Spreadsheet to record quantities of non-mineral wastes. Records are kept of the name and

license number of the waste transporter, destination facility, quantity (in tonnes) of material

transported and interstate destinations.

Northparkes waste management requirements are incorporated into several existing induction

and awareness training systems for all staff and contractors. Specific training is received by

environmental high-risk roles in accordance with relevant Northparkes processes. In addition,

the site waste management contractor is required to conduct waste awareness training on

site.

Where practical, all wastes are segregated at source to improve recycling and recovery of

materials, while waste storage and recycling areas are clearly identified by signage and

labelled for approved materials within each department at the mine site. The location of each

waste storage and recycling facility across the site is maintained within the Northparkes GIS

system.

Hydrocarbon storage and containment areas are designed to meet AS1940 - The Storage and

Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids.

Northparkes maintain an inspection and audit schedule to review waste management on site

as well as offsite facilities and contractors.

Waste management is reported annually through the AEMR.

Hazardous Waste

Northparkes uses a range of hazardous substances on site for mining operations and in the ore

processing plant.

The mining operation utilises various Class 1 explosive materials which are stored in several

locations on site. Other substances stored on site include liquefied petroleum gas, Class C1

combustible liquids (e.g. diesel), Class 8 corrosive substances and Class 5 oxidising substances.

Storage details including maximum stored quantities and storage locations for all substances

are listed on the Acknowledgement of Notification of Dangerous Goods on Premises

(acknowledgment number 35/029083) issued by WorkCover NSW.

Page 39 of 110

2.3.7 Decommissioning and Demolition Activities

The decommissioning activities during this MOP term will involve:

Removals of existing mine site access road. This area will be under the new Rosedale

Tailings Storage Facility

Removal or relocation of existing services (water, power, pipes etc.,) for the new tailings

facility

Relocation of existing access control to new site access location.

Following assessment and finalisation of TSF final landform design (including approval process)

it will be determined if TSF1 and TSF2 will be decommissioned within the term of this MOP. If

decommissioning is required this will include;

Preparation of the available areas for rehabilitation works;

Removal of pipes; and

Removal of pumps and other infrastructure no longer required.

These areas will be monitored on an ongoing basis during the operational phase of the mine

for rehabilitation performance against objectives listed in Table 25.

The rehabilitation trials on TSF1 are discussed further in section 8.2 and are dependent on the

capping trials being undertaken in conjunction with the University of Queensland’s Centre for

Mined Land Rehabilitation (CMLR) (Rehabilitation Strategies UQ 2008, UQ 2010a, UQ 2010b and

UQ 2014) as described in Section 8.

2.3.8 Temporary Stabilisation

As a result of the outcomes from the straw bale capping trials on the TSF1, indicating a

reduction in windblown dust, if deemed the most appropriate control the top of TSF2 may in

time also have this straw bale treatment applied.

The Tailings storage facility dust control strategy include a combination of the below as

required;

Maintaining existing straw bale treatments;

Chisel ploughing of surface for roughness;

Planting of winter crops and pasture;

Grading of windrows; and

Utilising the travelling irrigator.

The performance of temporary stabilisation options will be provided in the AEMR. Appendix 3

provides some photographic evidence of the temporary dust measures implemented to date.

Straw Bale Wind Break

Approximately 4000 straw bales have been placed on TSF1 to reduce the wind velocity from

predominantly the north, north easterly and north westerly directions. Bales will remain in

place in areas where barley is not sown.

Page 40 of 110

Ripping TSF1 & 2 Surface and Planting Winter Crops

Trials have been conducted to assess the effectiveness of the use of winter crops on the tailings

dam to reduce dust lift off.

48 hectares of TSF1 and 75 ha of TSF2 were ripped in preparation for sowing barley in May 2016.

A small trial area on the north eastern end of TSF2 was sown with Barley in 2015. The barley

growth was deemed to be successful and as such additional sowing is has been completed

in 2016 along with various trials of nitro humus. Results of these trials will be presented in the

AEMR.]

During 2016 a total combined area of 130ha was seeded on the tops of TSF1 as part of the

dust management strategy.

Grading Windrows on TSF2

Windrows have been constructed on the eastern and western sides of TSF2 in June 2015. These

were constructed to reduce dust lift off.

Use of Irrigator

Sprinkler system is available for use if required. It has been used in the past but has been taken

out of service due to water availabilities and also its limited effectiveness.

During the Rosedale project, temporary stabilisation will be undertaken predominantly on the

topsoil and subsoil stockpiles. This is anticipated to be in the form of a cover crop to allow

stabilisation and weed control prior to sowing with native seeds.

Small square bales of straw have been made from the Northparkes farms and will be utilised

around the site as well as the Rosedale project site for temporary sediment control. All

disturbed land from the Rosedale project will be progressively stabilised and rehabilitated as

outlined in the Surface Water Management Plan (SWM) and the Construction Management

Plan (CMP).

Goonumbla Creek Crossing

The Rosedale project will include the construction of a new access road to the site that will

cross Goonumbla Creek, located on the southern part of the Mine Lease as indicated in Figure

12.

Sediment controls (as per the Blue Book- Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction

Landcom 2005) will be installed prior to clearing and the construction of the associated works;

these will utilise sediment control fences, temporary sediment traps and straw-bale filters down

slope of the stockpiles. All controls highlighted in the SWMP and CMP will incorporate a

maintenance program which is to be adhered to until the land has been completely

rehabilitated.

Page 41 of 110

Figure 12 New access road onto Mine Lease.

Page 42 of 110

2.3.9 Progressive Rehabilitation and Completion

Progressive rehabilitation on the mining leases addressed by this MOP is described in section 7,

with anticipated status at MOP completion outlined in section 7.2.

2.3.10 Material Production Schedule during MOP Term

Table 7 Provisional Production and Waste Schedule during MOP Term

Item Unit Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Stripped

Topsoil

m3 1.5M

120,000 50000 NA NA

Waste Rock Mt 0 0 0 0 0

Ore Mt 6.4 6.3 6.4 6.4 6.4

Processing

Waste

Mt 6.3 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.3

Product kt 173 162 154 136 131

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES MANAGEMENT

3.1 Environmental Risk Assessment

Risk assessments have been undertaken throughout the life of the mine, most recently in 2013

for whole site risk assessment and more specifically within the ‘Environmental Risk Analysis’ for

Umwelt 2013 and also a risk review of the rehabilitation was undertaken onsite facilitated by

GHD in 2014.

Northparkes maintains a Health Safety, and Environment and Quality (HSEQ) management

system, whose environmental component is certified to the requirements of AS/NZS ISO

14001:2004. The Aspects and Impacts register has identified and ranked environmental risks for

all of Northparkes’s operations.

In developing this MOP, a review of the HSEQ aspects and impacts register was undertaken in

accordance with Northparkes risk management process, which follows the principles outlined

in ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines (Standards Australia). The aim

of this review was to:

Identify significant environmental risks relevant to Northparkes mining leases, and

Identify environmental risks associated with rehabilitation activities over the life of the

MOP.

The identified risks are shown in Table 12.

Northparkes uses the risk matrix shown in Table 8, to rate environmental risks on site including

the rehabilitation specific risks. Table 9 to Table 11 detail the likelihood and consequence

descriptors as well as the management response required for identified risks.

Page 43 of 110

Table 8 Risk matrix

Consequence 1-Minor 2-Medium 3-Serious 4-Major 5-Catastrophic

Likelihood

A-Almost certain Moderate High Critical Critical Critical

B-Likely Moderate High High Critical Critical

C-Possible Low Moderate High Critical Critical

D-Unlikely Low Low Moderate High Critical

E-Rare Low Low Moderate High High

Table 9 Risk management response

Rating Class Risk management response

Critical Class IV Risk that significantly exceed the risk acceptance threshold and need

urgent and immediate attention.

High Class III Risk that exceed the risk acceptance threshold and require proactive

management. Includes risks for which proactive actions have been

taken, but further risk reduction is impracticable. However active

monitoring is required and the latter requires the signoff by Business Unit

senior management

Moderate Class II Risks that lie on the risk acceptance threshold and require active

monitoring. The implementation of additional measures could be used

to reduce risk further.

Low Class I Risk that are below the risk acceptance threshold and do not require

active management. Certain risks could require additional monitoring.

Table 10 Consequence descriptions

Consequence Minor Medium Serious Major Catastrophic

Non-Economic (Social and Environmental)

ENVIRONMENT

(on site)

Near-

source

confined

and

promptly

reversible

impact.

(Typically a

shift)

Near-source

confined and

short-term

reversible

impact.

(Typically a

week)

Near-source

confined and

medium term

recovery

impact.

(Typically a

month)

Impact that is

unconfined

and requiring

long-term

recovery,

leaving residual

damage

(Typically

years)

Impact that is wide

spread-unconfined

and requiring long-

term recovery,

leaving major

residual damage

(Typically years)

ENVIRONMENT

(off site)

NA Near-source

confined and

promptly

reversible

impact.

(Typically a

shift)

Near-source

confined and

short-term

reversible

impact.

(Typically a

week)

Near-source

confined and

medium term

recovery

impact.

(Typically a

month)

Impact that is

unconfined and

requiring long-term

recovery, leaving

residual damage

(Typically years)

Page 44 of 110

Table 11 Likelihood descriptions

Likelihood Likelihood description Frequency Substance Exposure

ALMOST CERTAIN Recurring event during the

life-time of an

operation/project

Occurs more than twice

a year

Frequent (daily) exposure

at > 10 x OEL

LIKELY Event that may occur

frequently during the life-

time of an operation

/project

Typically occurs once or

twice per year


at > OEL

POSSIBLE Event that may occur during

the life-time of an operation

/project

Typically occurs in 1-10

years


at >50% of OEL. Infrequent

exposure at > OEL

UNLIKELY Event that is unlikely occur

during the life-time of an

operation /project

Typically occurs in 10-

100 years



exposure at >50% OEL

RARE Event that is very unlikely to

occur during the life-time of

an operation /project

Greater than 100 year

event



exposure at >10% of OEL

Page 45 of 110

Table 12 Environmental risk assessment outcomes

Aspect Unwanted Event Consequence Likelihood Risk Ranking Management

Measures (reference

doc)

Erosion and

sediment control

Failure to appropriately stabilise, close and rehabilitate

tailings storage facilities results in erosion and inability to

establish a sustainable ecosystem

3-Serious C-Possible High Environmental

Management Strategy

Landscape Management

Plan

Water Management Plan

Vegetation Management

Plan

Closure Management Plan

Rehabilitation monitoring fails to detect erosion or shift in

vegetation community structure or diversity

3-Serious D-Unlikely Moderate Biodiversity Management

Plan

High rainfall (1 in 100 year) results in erosion from unstable

landforms washing offsite resulting in a non-compliance

with legal requirements

3-Serious C-Possible High Water Management Plan

Biodiversity Management

Plan

Failure to maintain drainage system leads to inability to

contain runoff from operations resulting in release of

contaminated water to the environment


Lack of maintenance of sediment ponds results in overflow

of sediment laden water


Air quality Failure of rehabilitation of the tailings storage facilities

results in generation of dust and emission in exceedance of

conditions of licence and development consent, or in

breach of POEO Act.

3-Serious C-Possible High Environmental Monitoring

Program

Air Quality Monitoring

Program

Flora/fauna Loss of biodiversity due to uncontrolled clearing 3-Serious E-Rare Moderate Environmental

Management Strategy


Plan

Page 46 of 110


Measures (reference

doc)


Plan

On-going rehabilitation

monitoring (site and

Kokoda)

Increase in pest animal population results in decline in

native fauna diversity

3-Serious E-Rare Moderate Biodiversity Management

Plan

Failure of rehabilitation, or incorrect selection of species

results in low species diversity and high weed loadings in

rehabilitation

3-Serious D- Unlikely Moderate Environmental

Management Strategy


Plan


Plan

On-going rehabilitation

monitoring (site and

Kokoda)

Vegetation clearing and inappropriate management of

rehabilitation results in an inability of Northparkes to

achieve net positive impact to biodiversity at end of mine

life

2-Medium C-Possible Moderate Biodiversity Management

Plan

Drought results in a decline in rehabilitation quality and

success


Plan

Soil type(s) and

suitability

Failure to collect sufficient topsoil during life of operation

for rehabilitation


Plan

Contamination –

Soil & Water

Unknown extent of contamination of contaminated sites

around site results in failure to appropriately remediate sites

to meet closure requirements

3-Serious C-Possible High Northparkes

Contaminated site register,

RAP’s

Page 47 of 110


Measures (reference

doc)

Failure to appropriately dispose of hydrocarbon

contaminated soil

2-Medium C-Possible Moderate Rehabilitation

Management Plan

Waste Management Plan?

PIRMP

Inappropriate disposal of contaminated material (i.e. soil,

enretech)

2-Medium C-Possible Moderate Water Management Plan

Inadequate spill response equipment on site results in

inability to contain spill

1-Minor B-Likely Moderate Rehabilitation

Management Plan


PIRMP

Incident Response

Management Plan

Legal/Compliance Failure to submit regulatory reports on time results in non-

compliance with legal requirements

3-Serious C-Possible High Legal and other

requirements procedure

and register

Unplanned or premature closure of the site failing to meet

closure requirements

4-Major E-Rare High Closure Management Plan

(Draft)

Legal and other


and register

Insufficient planning for closure failing to meet closure

requirements

4-Major E-Rare High Legal and other


and register

Various drivers (economic, non-compliance with standards

etc) result in progressive rehabilitation not been

undertaken over life of mine.

3-Serious C-Possible High Rehabilitation

Management Plan

Legal and other


and register

Page 48 of 110


Measures (reference

doc)

Appropriate environmental approvals not obtained for

developments that occur on site



and register

Government approval of management plans and updates

not obtained as per legal requirements



and register

Changes in legislation not identified or actioned resulting in

non-compliance with new requirements

2-Medium C-Possible Moderate Legal and other


and register

Surface and

Groundwater

Potential contamination not identified due to insufficient

analysis processes in place

3-Serious B-Likely High Water Management Plan

High rainfall or mismanagement of ponds results in overflow

from retention ponds to the environment


High rainfall events result in overflow of sediment ponds 3-Serious C-Possible High Water Management Plan

Insufficient planning and preparation for flood 3-Serious C-Possible High Water Management Plan

Hydrocarbon Failure of hydrocarbon containment results in spillage of

hydrocarbons to the environment

2-Medium C-Possible Moderate Pollution Incident Response

Management Plan (PIRMP)

Page 49 of 110

3.2 Environmental Management System/Risk Management

Northparkes operate and manage the environmental aspects of the existing mining

operations under a certified HSEQ management system to encourage rigor and consistency

in environmental management across the site.

The HSEQ management system provides standards, policies, procedures and a system of work

to ensure Northparkes manages its environmental aspects in a manner that is planned,

controlled, monitored, recorded and audited, using a system that drives continual

improvement. Northparkes is operated in accordance with a range of environmental

management plans required by the existing project approval as outlined in Table 13.

Table 13 Summary of Environmental Management Plans as Required by Existing Approvals

Name of Plan Status

Heritage Management Plan Approved

Air Quality Management Plan Approved

Noise Monitoring Plan Approved

Environmental Management Strategy Approved

Water Management Plan Submitted for approval –new EA requirement

Rehabilitation Management Plan Approved

Blast Management Plan Approved

Biodiversity Offset Management Plan Approved

The environmental risks identified during the MOP review are detailed in Table 12 including

mitigation measures for identified risks.

Page 50 of 110

3.2.1 Rehabilitation Risks

The following section identifies risks, specifically in relation to rehabilitation activities during the

MOP period, which have been identified at Northparkes from within the HSEQ aspects and

impacts register. A summary of these risks and the control measures in place to mitigate their

risks is provided in Table 14. More information on the specific rehabilitation activities is providing

in the following sections.

Table 14 Risks associated with Rehabilitation at Northparkes

Rehabilitation Activity Related Risk Reference

Documents/Control/Management

Geology and

Geochemistry

Use of sodic clay material

Material characterisation for

topsoil and rock

Topsoil management procedure.

Waste Assessment Report.

Material prone to acid

mine drainage

Some isolated incidents of acidic

material

Acid Rock Assessments. Management

plan under preparation

Mine subsidence Uncontrolled subsidence Void Management Plan includes

management controls including

restricted final land use, bunds and

safety fencing

Erosion and sediment

control

Erosion – unable to meet closure

requirements on rehabilitated

areas

sediment impacts to waterways

both onsite and offsite

Erosion and Sediment control is

currently managed by the approved

Water Management Plan (WMP). The

WMP was developed to control and

mitigate erosion and sediment

impacts that may arise from the

Northparkes operations. The WMP

details a range of management

safeguards, practices and controls

that must be maintained at all times

on-site and any ameliorative actions

that are to be carried out in

mitigating erosion and sediment

impacts.

Soil type(s) and suitability Soil types incorrectly identified

Insufficient material stockpiled to

meet rehabilitation closure

requirements

Topsoil Management Procedure.

Rehabilitation Management Plan.

Flora Loss of species during MOP

period

Biodiversity Offset Strategy.

Vegetation Management Plan.

Fauna Loss of species during MOP

period

Biodiversity Offset Strategy.

Vegetation Management Plan.

Page 51 of 110

Geology and Geochemistry –

The mine occurs within the Ordovician Goonumbla Volcanics of the Goonumbla Volcanic

Complex. Deposits are typical porphyry copper systems, the mineralisation and alteration are

zoned around quartz monzonite porphyries. The porphyries form narrow but vertically

extensive pipes. Mineralisation extends from the porphyries into their host lithology (Umwelt,

2013).

All material mined during the MOP period will be sourced from underground deposits,

therefore all material will be processed eliminating waste stockpiles. As such geochemical risks

in respect to rehabilitation are diminished. Possible risk from historic stockpiling is discussed in

the following section “Material prone to generating acid mine drainage”.

Waste Rock Characterisation

Waste rock has been previously characterised, as detailed in Table 15 and Umwelt 2013.

Characterisation investigations continue to be conducted in new waste rock zones and mining

areas, as required.

Table 15 Chemical Characteristics of Waste Rock

Parameter Units Average Range

Net Acid Generation (pH4.5) kg H2SO4/t <0.1 <0.1

Acid Neutralising Capacity kg H2SO4 equ 78.6 60.9 to 95.7

Net Acid Production

Potential

kg H2SO4/t -70.3 -44.4 to -89.3

Total sulphur % 0.27 0.09 to 0.58

Copper mg / kg 1584 947 to 2320

Lead mg / kg 2.9 1.3 to 7.1

Zinc mg / kg 164 54.8 to 458

Cadmium mg / kg 0.02 <0.1 to 0.2

Source: Australian Laboratory Services

Tailings Characteristics

The tailings produced at the Northparkes operations are disposed of in slurry of approximately

55% solids by weight. Testing of the E48 tailings indicates they have a low probability of being

acid producing, similar to the current tailings.

Tailings contain residual sulphur content of approximately 0.2%, the host material being copper

as a residual and sulphate, chloride, calcium, magnesium and sodium and a small amount of

pyrite.

Chemical characterisation tests on tailings samples from the E48 Project are presented in Table

16.

Page 52 of 110

Table 16 Chemical Characterisation of Tailings

Parameter Units Average Range

pH pH units 8.9 8.8 to 9.1

Net Acid Generation

(pH4.5)

kg H2SO4/t <0.1 All <0.1

Acid Neutralising

Capacity

kg H2SO4 equ 39.2 36.7 to 41.6

Net Acid Production

Potential

kg H2SO4/t -36.5 -37.4 to -33.9

Total sulphur % 0.09 0.08 to 0.09

Copper mg / kg 916 386 to 1120

Lead mg / kg 4.1 2.3 to 5.8

Zinc mg / kg 46.1 34.8 to 62.1

Cadmium mg / kg 0.1 <0.1 to 0.2

Material prone to generating acid mine drainage

Characterisation of ore has been undertaken since the mid-1980s and a large number of net

acid generation (NAG) tests have been conducted. These tests have been carried out on

development waste rock, with each drive being tested two to three times per month. The

large majority of these tests give acid NAG titration results to pH 7 that are below the

detection limit, indicating that the waste is very unlikely to produce acid (Umwelt, 2013).

An Acid Rock Drainage Management Plan is currently being prepared to deal with isolated

instances of acid rock drainage and to develop the monitoring procedure going forward for

development waste rock that is destined for surface stockpiling.

Mine Subsidence

Northparkes has experienced subsidence over the life of the mine above block cave mining

areas. As such, management procedures have been developed for controlled subsidence

and protecting the safety of personnel.

The predicted final E26/E48 subsidence zones including the 100m buffer zone will be fenced

with restricted access post mining. Further discussion is included in section 4.

Erosion and Sediment Control

Potential for erosion and sedimentation on sites is isolated to three specific domains. Two

domains being the TSFs and the overburden emplacement areas will have a final land use

goal of erosion stability for 1000 years (Landloch, 2005).

The management of this goal is addressed in the Rehabilitation Management Plan, and

incorporates drainage, rehabilitation materials and monitoring during construction and final

landform. These areas are expected to exclude the grazing of domestic animals at closure

and become secondary domains of either rehabilitated grasslands or conservation and

biodiversity offset areas.

As the surrounding agricultural land is of a gradient of five degrees appropriate cover

cropping and drainage are essential in the control of erosion and sediment for these

domains.

Page 53 of 110

Domain 3 – Water Management Area is managed through internal inspections and internal

documents as outlined below. All ongoing management of these structures will incorporate

appropriate erosion and sediment controls designed in accordance with Managing Urban

Stormwater: Soils and Construction Volume 1 (Landcom 2004).

Erosion and sediment control is currently managed by the approved Water Management

Plan (WMP), by means of a standalone Erosion and Sediment Control Plan incorporated

within the WMP. The WMP was developed to control and mitigate erosion and sediment

impacts that may arise from the Northparkes operations.

The WMP details a range of management safeguards, practices and controls that must be

maintained at all times on-site and any ameliorative actions that are to be carried out in

mitigating erosion and sediment impacts. Any erosion and sediment control is maintained

during the disturbance activities and will not be removed until the area is stabilised and

rehabilitated.

Some specific controls aimed at reducing potential sedimentation into nearby waterways

include:

Site disturbance permit (SDP) process assesses individual clearing activities for their

impact on water drainage and includes specific controls where necessary;

Dirty water management includes run off from disturbed areas being diverted to

sediment ponds to allow the sediment to settle prior to any potential reuse. Installation

and maintenance of drainage lines, diversion bunds and catchment dams;

Minimising cleared areas and promoting progressive rehabilitation; and

Restricting access to rehabilitated areas.

Soil types and suitability

Topsoil stripping and stockpiling is one of the first steps of the site development and

construction, for example preliminary earthworks.

Stripping depths of approximately 310 mm in the area impacted by TSF 3 and 800mm in the

areas impacted by the open cuts E31 and E31N have been identified as being adequate for

rehabilitation objectives for both areas and also meet the existing topsoil and subsoil deficit

present on site. All other areas of impact (including the proposed access road) would only

require topsoil stripping to 120 mm.

Topsoil stripping depths are set at minimum of 120mm as recommended in Cunningham’s

report and the Step Change EA document

Table 17 Northparkes Soil Units

SMU1 SMU2

Soil To 88cm deep, firm to hardsetting surface. To 280cm deep, firm to self-mulching

surface, sometimes loose, soft or hardsetting.

Topsoil Loam sandy clay loam or clay loam, no

gypsum, lime or manganese present, pH

5.0 to 7.0, many roots present, some gravel

and stone, highly pedal, consistency dry

and usually hydrophobic.

Silty clay to heavy clay, roots common, no

lime, gypsum or manganese present, pH 5.0

to 6.0 (occasionally outside this range), no

gravel or stones, highly pedal, firm to strong

consistency dry and sometimes

hydrophobic.

Page 54 of 110

SMU1 SMU2

Subsoil Two subsoil horizons evident, texture

becomes increasingly clayey with depth,

sandy light clay to heavy clay, some roots

present, no lime or gypsum present, some

manganese at depth, some gravel, pH 5.5

to 7.5, highly pedal or massive, very firm to

strong, consistency dry, usually not

hydrophobic.

Up to five distinct horizons, clay texture

throughout with horizons sometimes

becoming gritty near bedrock, usually highly

pedal, mottles increase with depth.

Source: Geoff Cunningham Natural Resource Consultants (2006).

Stockpile management on site should ensure that topsoil stockpiles will be no greater than

2m in height or 5m for subsoil with slopes no greater than 1:4 or as described in the in the

current Topsoil Management Procedure.

Maintaining low stockpiles with a rough but even surface and sowing with stabilising species

should reduce potential runoff and improve the success of plant establishment.

A Stockpile Inventory register is maintained with the locations and volumes of all stockpiles on

site and there status reported on annually through the AEMR.

Prior to initial topsoil stripping and respreading of material, weed management for noxious

species will be undertaken.

Flora and Fauna

A Biodiversity Offset Management Plan (BOMP), incorporating a Flora and Fauna

Management Plan has been developed and outlines procedures and responsibilities for

Northparkes.

As a condition of the project approval, the Kokoda Biodiversity Offset Site has been

approved and as such the Northparkes BOMP has been developed. The combination of

these plans includes the description of threatened species within the project areas and the

handling of these species and isolation methods undertaken on site. These plans ensure that

the risks associated with flora and fauna, in particularly threatened species and Endangered

Ecological Communities (EEC) are managed.

Umwelt conducted desktop studies (EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool database, Atlas of

NSW Wildlife database records, BirdLife Australia Atlas Database and Primary Industries

Fishing and Aquaculture Records Viewer) and flora field surveys and general fauna surveys in

July and September 2011, and January, February and May 2012 incorporating the proposed

disturbance area and the wider study area. Results of these surveys are included below.

Threatened species

Four Threatened flora species with potential to occur in the locality were identified by an

EPBC Act 1999 search. Two Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) as listed under the

Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and EPBC Act, were identified in the

project area;

Inland Grey Box Woodland in the Riverina, NSW South Western Slopes, Cobar Peneplain,

Nandewar and Brigalow Belt South Bioregions (EEC); and

White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Woodland (EEC).

One vulnerable flora species under the TSC Act, being the pine donkey orchid (Diuris tricolor)

was recorded in the project area but not within the proposed disturbance area.

Fifteen threatened fauna species were recorded within the wider study area however only

two threatened species were recorded within the proposed disturbance area, these being;

superb parrot (Polytelis swainsonii); and

Page 55 of 110

grey-crowned babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis)

One vulnerable species outside of the proposed disturbance area but worthy of noting is

Sloane’s Froglet (Crinia sloanei) as it has been sited on site fringes and site is considered

potentially suitable habitat.

Management of Flora and Fauna

The vegetation on the mine site is generally in poor condition as the site has been subject to

recurrent disturbance from forestry, mining and agricultural activities for an extended period

of time. The majority of the vegetation is considered to have a low conservation value.

The BOMP outlines the management of flora and fauna in relation to threatened species, seed

collection, and revegetation and weed and pest management.

Other Risks

Management strategies, plans and monitoring programmes are prepared as required by

development approval conditions, conditions to the relevant mining lease and legislative

and operational requirements.

Environmental procedures have been established, documented and maintained through

the HSEQ management system for all mining related activities that have a potentially

significant impact on the environment.

Procedures provide details of operation and maintenance of facilities, equipment and

machinery where required. Where possible, one management plan or program has been

developed for all operations e.g. Biodiversity Management Plan.

Due to the extensive history of project approvals and environmental assessments, it has been

determined that, as per NSW T&I 2013, ‘other environmental risks’ do not need to be detailed

in the Northparkes MOP.

Page 56 of 110

4. POST MINING LAND USE

4.1 Regulatory Requirements

Land use and rehabilitation requirements within Umwelt, 2013 specifically address progress

towards post mining land use and are included in Table 18. The regulatory requirements for

rehabilitation and land use detailed in the mining lease and project approval are

summarised in Table 19.

Table 18 Conditions towards post mining land use

Conditions Reference

The Proponent shall rehabilitate the site progressively as soon as

reasonably practicable following disturbance. All reasonable and

feasible measures must be taken to minimise the total area

exposed for dust generation at any time. Interim rehabilitation

strategies shall be employed when areas prone to dust

generation cannot be permanently rehabilitated.

Schedule 3, Condition 40

The Proponent shall prepare and implement a Rehabilitation

Management Plan for the project to the satisfaction of the

Executive Director, Mineral Resources.

Schedule 3

Condition 41

The Proponent shall rehabilitate the site to the satisfaction of the

Executive Director Mineral Resources. This rehabilitation must be

generally consistent with the proposed rehabilitation strategy

described in the EA.

Schedule 3

Condition 39

Table 19 Post Mining Regulatory requirements

Regulatory

Requirement

Commitment Domain (Post

Mining)

Mining Lease

ML1641

Condition 7: Disturbed land must be rehabilitated to a

sustainable/ agreed end land use to the satisfaction of

the Director-General

Entire Site

Mining Lease

ML1247

Condition 19: Upon completion of operations or the

sooner determination of this authority the registered

holder shall rehabilitate any areas disturbed to the

satisfaction of the Minister

Condition 145: On completion of operations the

registered holder shall rehabilitate all area disturbed as

a result of the operations having been carried out

within the subject area and shall ensure that such areas

are adequately maintained for such a period as is

necessary to satisfy the Minister that long term

rehabilitation standards and environmental safeguards

have been fulfilled.

Mining Lease

ML1367

Condition 16: On completion of operations the lease

holder must rehabilitate all areas as a result of

operations being carried out within the subject area

and must ensure that such areas are adequately

maintained for such a period as is necessary to satisfy

the Minister and subject of any conditions he may

stipulate.

Page 57 of 110

Regulatory

Requirement

Commitment Domain (Post

Mining)

Project Approval • Safe, stable and non-polluting.

• Constructed landforms drain to the natural

environment (excluding final voids and subsidence

areas).

• Minimise visual impact of final landforms as far

as is reasonable and feasible.

Entire Site

• Land is returned to a condition that sustains

agricultural land use and requires a level of

management that is comparable to adjacent

agricultural areas.

(G) Rural Land

Capability

Classification I -

viii

• Minimise the size and depth of the final voids

and subsidence zones so far as is reasonable and

feasible.

• Minimise the drainage catchment of the final

voids and subsidence zones so far as is reasonable and

feasible.

• Negligible high wall instability risk.

• Restrict access.

• Revegetate areas surrounding final voids and

subsidence zones to minimise erosion.

• Minimise risk of flood interaction for all flood

events up to and including the Probable Maximum

Flood level.

Final Void

• No seepage to surrounding areas.

• Filled and shaped to final landform levels as

provided in Plan4.

• Final landforms to be capped and revegetated

to be stable, self-sustaining, free draining and consistent

with surrounding rehabilitated areas.

(c) Rehabilitation

Area – Grassland

(D) Rehabilitation

Area – Pasture

(J)- Conservation

and Biodiversity

Offset Area

• Any seepage from waste rock dumps to be

contained and treated on the site.

(c) Rehabilitation

Area – Grassland

• To be decommissioned and removed, unless

the Executive Director, Mineral Resources agrees

otherwise

(c) Rehabilitation

Area – Grassland

• Revegetation is sustainable for the long term,

contains native vegetation communities, second

generation trees and habitat for native fauna species.

• Populations of Pine Donkey Orchid located to

the north of the project area (near Adavale Road) and

near the E48 subsidence zone are actively managed,

maintained and expanded.

(J)- Conservation

and Biodiversity

Offset Area

4.2 Post Mining Land Use Goal

Northparkes is committed to developing a stable landform that is capable of supporting

sustainable ecosystems and enables sustainable land use after the completion of mining

operations at the Northparkes.

The agreed final landscape as stated in the project approval includes the following:

Agricultural land use;

Page 58 of 110

Native vegetation;

Restricted land use,

Limestone National Forest; and

Offset Areas – Estcourt and Kokoda.

A conceptual final rehabilitation plan detailing the proposed final land use is shown on Plan

4.

4.3 Rehabilitation Objectives

Northparkes rehabilitation objectives as outlined in the project approval and captured within

the Rehabilitation Management Plan have been included as Table 20.

Table 20 Rehabilitation Objectives

Feature Objective

Mine site (as a whole) safe, stable and non-polluting

constructed landforms drain to the natural environment (excluding final voids and

subsidence areas)

minimise visual impact of final landforms as far as is reasonable and feasible

Agricultural Areas Land is returned to a condition that sustains agricultural land use to at

least the original rural land capability and agricultural productivity and

requires a level of management that is comparable to adjacent

agricultural areas

Final Voids and Subsidence

Zones

minimise the size and depth of the final voids and subsidence zones so far

as is reasonable and feasible

minimise the drainage catchment of the final voids and subsidence zones

so far as is reasonable and feasible

negligible high wall instability risk

restrict access

re-vegetate areas surrounding final voids and subsidence zones to

minimise erosion

minimise risk of flood interaction for all flood events up to and including

the Probable Maximum Flood level

Tailings Storage Facilities any seepage from TSFs to be contained and treated on the site

filled and shaped to final landform levels as provided in Plan 4

final landforms to be capped and re-vegetated to be stable, self-

sustaining, free draining and consistent with surrounding rehabilitated

areas

Waste Rock Dumps Any seepage from waste rock dumps to be contained and

treated on the site

Surface infrastructure To be decommissioned and removed, unless the Executive

Director, Mineral Resources agrees otherwise

Native Vegetation Re-vegetation is to be sustainable for the long term, contains native

vegetation communities, second generation trees and habitat for native

fauna species

Community ensure public safety

minimise adverse socio-economic effects associated with mine closure

Page 59 of 110

5. REHABILITATION PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

Northparkes will undertake rehabilitation as soon as practicable following the completion of

mining activities. However, due to the ongoing operations of the site, final closure is not

anticipated during the MOP term and the opportunities for rehabilitation will be focussed on

the capping and rehabilitation of TSF1.

The Rehabilitation and Closure Strategy outlined in Umwelt 2013 provides detail on the

conceptual final land use for the site, and the rehabilitation objectives for the mining lease

area.

This information, as well as the performance criteria provided in Section 6 is further

developed as part of this MOP, and will continue to be refined over time through the MOP

and AEMR process, as further monitoring information becomes available.

This rehabilitation information will also be refined through the detailed closure planning

process, which will be triggered when the mine reaches a Life of Mine (LOM) of less than five

years, at which time, a Detailed Mine Closure Plan will be developed.

5.1 Domain Selection

Domains for the site have been selected based on the operational areas of the site, and

proposed final land use post closure of the operation. The proposed final land use has been

obtained from the conceptual information provided in Umwelt 2013.

Table 21 below provides a summary of the domains of the Northparkes Project Area

encompassed by this MOP. These domains are represented in Plan 2.

Table 21 Primary and Secondary Domains for Northparkes Mines

Primary Domain Proposed Post mining Landuse

1 – Infrastructure A-Infrastructure

D-Pasture Land

2 – Tailings Storage Facilities C-Grassland

3 – Water Management Area B Water Management Area

D-Pasture Land

4– Overburden Emplacement Area C-Grassland

5 – Stockpiled Material D-Pasture Land

6 - Voids I-Final Void

7 – Buffer lands D-Pasture Land

G-Rural Land Capability Classification i-viii

9 - Limestone Forest J-Conservation and Biodiversity Offset Land

Further Information relating to the assets and features of each of the domains is provided in

the sections below.

Page 60 of 110

5.1.1 Domain 1 – Infrastructure Area

The infrastructure area is shown on Plan 2 and consists of the following:

administration offices;

a Laboratory;

a Processing Plant;

2 x overland conveyors (one decommissioned);

1 x hoisting shaft;

a core storage yard;

change rooms;

an Emergency Response Shed;

a Workshop;

a Heavy Vehicle Workshop;

a Warehouse;

Vent Shafts;

an Open Cut area office, mess and ablutions;

Roads and electrical equipment; and

Surface Contractor Laydown Area.

5.1.2 Domain 2 – Tailings Storage Facility

Northparkes currently has four active TSFs:

TSF1;

TSF2;

E27 Pit; and

Escort TSF.

TSF1 is not being utilised for deposition of tailings. The majority of batters on TSF1 are

rehabilitated and further works may be required on the batters of both TSF 1 and TSF2.

Capping trials are currently being conducted on the top of TSF1 through the University of

Queensland.

TSF2 is not currently being utilised for the deposition of tailings but approval has been given

from the consulting Design engineer for capping layers of tailings to be placed on TSF2 for

dust mitigation. The construction and commissioning of TSF3 (Rosedale) will be completed in

early 2016. TSF3 (Rosedale) is located to the south of the TSF2 as shown on Plan 2.

5.1.3 Domain 3 – Water Management Area

The Water Management Area encompasses the whole of site including, infrastructure such

as pipework, pumping stations and drainage channels. Sedimentation dams, site water

process dams and E22 pit as it is currently utilised as water storage however TSFs are outside

of this domain and are capture within Domain 2.

Page 61 of 110

5.1.4 Domain 4 – Overburden Emplacement Area

The Overburden Emplacement Areas utilised at Northparkes include:

The Sound Bund around E22 and E27 pits;

The E26 Lift 1 Mullock Stockpile;

The E26 Oxide Waste Rock Dump;

The Process Water Dam Stockpile;

The E26 Clay Dump;

The E26 Low Grade Oxide Cu/Au Ore; and

The E26 Lift 2 Waste Rock Dump.

The sound bund around E22 and E27 pit areas and the overburden emplacement facilities

adjacent to these pits are yet to be rehabilitated. The batters of these structures have been

rehabilitated, however capping has not commenced.

Current rehabilitation status for the remaining overburden emplacement areas is provided in

Table 22 below.

Table 22 Overburden Emplacement Area Rehabilitation Status

Area Status as per MOP Guidelines

E26 Lift 1 Mullock Stockpile has been shaped and rehabilitated and is classed as

being in the growth media phase.

E26 Oxide Waste Rock Dump Has been shaped rehabilitated with native grassland and is classed as

being in landform establishment phase.

Process Water Dam Stockpile Currently active

E26 Clay dump Has been rehabilitated with native grassland and is classed as being in

landform establishment phase.

E26 Low Grade Oxide Cu/Au Ore No rehabilitation has commenced, options for blending still being

considered.

E26 Lift 2 Waste Rock Dump is currently Active.

Further information on rehabilitation status for all domains is provided in section 5.4.

5.1.5 Domain 5 – Stockpile Material

Topsoil Stockpiles

Topsoil stockpiles are located within Domain 5 as shown on Plan 2. This topsoil material has

been obtained from pre-stripping activities associated with any site disturbance. Topsoil

stockpile monitoring will be undertaken annually as per the Environmental Management

Strategy.

Clay Stockpiles

Northparkes stockpiled material area contains a number of different stockpiled materials.

These stockpiles include:

Page 62 of 110

a clay stockpile which exists adjacent to the Process Water Dam to store material

extracted to develop the dam;

a second clay stockpile which has been constructed adjacent to the E26 subsidence

zone from pre-strip material removed above the E26 subsidence zone;

a series of smaller clay stockpiles established as a result of the construction of the E48

overland conveyor realignment; and

a clay stockpile established from material removed for the construction of the Estcourt

TSF.

Temporary clay stockpiles will also be created following the construction of TSF3 on the

former Rosedale property (refer to Plan 1C).

5.1.6 Domain 6 – Voids

E22 and E27 are the two current voids remnant from open cut mining. Although E22 pit is

currently utilised as a water storage onsite and as such has been included in Domain 3.

These voids are managed on site through the Void Management Plan. Closure management

of these voids will be addressed in the Closure Management Plan.

5.1.7 Domain 7 – Buffer Lands (Pasture Areas)

Pasture areas are those non disturbed areas within the Project Approval area that are not

being actively utilised for mining related activities. It is anticipated that minor works will be

undertaken in these areas to assist in the maintenance of cover crops for dust management

in accordance with relevant agreements for the land and the Biodiversity Management

Plan.

5.1.8 Domain 8 Underground Mining Areas

The subsidence areas onsite include those above the block cave mining areas E26, E27 and

E48.

E27 is currently being utilised as a TSF.

E26 commenced full production in August 1997 and was mined until October 2003.

Subsidence from this underground operation was identified in November 1999. This area is

currently a void and proposed to remain as a final void following the completion of mining.

Subsidence from E48 operations was identified in December 2010 as the block cave

propagated through to the surface. This area is currently a void and proposed to remain as a

final void following the completion of mining.

Underground mining areas will remain active during the period of this MOP, however closure

management of these areas will be addressed in the Closure Management Plan.

5.1.9 Domain 9 – Limestone State Forest Offset Area

The Limestone State Forest Offset Area is currently managed in accordance with Occupation

Permit for access and land use as agreed between Northparkes and the Forestry

Corporation of NSW. The Occupation Permit outlines the requirements for the use of the area,

the maintenance and repair works to be carried out and the requirements for the Offset

Area prior to closure of the operation, including the requirements for environmental baseline

reports upon termination of the agreement.

Page 63 of 110

5.2 Domain Rehabilitation Objectives

As previously outlined rehabilitation opportunities during the MOP term will concentrate on

capping trial activities at the TSF’s.

There are a number of final land use options available to Northparkes and these will be

refined as closure approaches, as part of the closure planning process.

Based on site constraints and opportunities for consistency with adjacent land uses, it is

considered that the most sustainable final land use option for the majority of disturbed areas

across the Project Area will be the establishment of native vegetation, with areas of native

grassland. The final land use will also involve the maintenance of agricultural land, primarily

for cropping use.

The proposed final land use will include a number of restricted areas which are associated

with the subsidence and open cut mining voids. As part of site decommissioning,

Northparkes will ensure that that these areas are geotechnically stable, with appropriate

buffer areas maintained and access appropriately restricted.

The proposed final land use at Northparkes will be implemented to meet the following

rehabilitation objectives:

provide a safe and sustainable final landform and use that can co-exist with surrounding

land uses;

provide suitable conditions for establishment of a vegetation cover where practical;

maintain sustainable agricultural lands;

produce a diverse mosaic of sustainable native ecosystems within the agricultural

landscape with the aim of conserving biodiversity and maintaining evolutionary

potential;

provide for the safety of employees and the public during and following the closure of

the mining operations;

control erosion and develop self-sustaining water management infrastructure;

mitigate any exposure hazard from residual chemicals or mining wastes; and

minimise the potential for exclusion of other potential post mining land use options should

they be determined to be viable and preferable as part of the detailed mine closure

planning process that commences at least five years prior to the planned cessation of

mining.

In achieving these objectives, Northparkes will also aim to:

minimise the potential environmental impacts from closure activities;

comply with relevant regulatory requirements and attain regulatory consensus on the

successful closure and rehabilitation of the site; and

reduce the need for long term monitoring and maintenance by achieving effective

rehabilitation.

As part of the refinement of criteria and performance indicators for the site over time (refer to

Section 6), the productivity of the land will be considered in accordance with the results of

future rounds of rehabilitation and environmental monitoring.

Future MOPs will include the results of any consultation with community regarding

rehabilitation. Future MOPs will also detail progression towards completion criteria, as the

operation enters detailed mine closure planning.

Page 64 of 110

Table 23 below provides a summary of each of the domains and their rehabilitation

outcomes. Further details on the rehabilitation for each domain are provided in section 5.2 to

5.2.8. Specific performance indicators and completion relinquishment criteria is provided in

section 6 of this MOP

Table 23 Summary of Rehabilitation Objectives for Closure Domains

Domain Rehabilitation Objective

Infrastructure - 1D Soil quality meets required soil quality requirements as

required by the completion criteria for the site.

Area can be used for grazing or cropping activities based on

the requirements of a final closure plan for the site.

Runoff to meet post mining water quality guidelines.

Tailings Storage Facility - 2C Provide a self-sustaining land form post mine closure.

Design of capping to prevent soil erosion and exposure of

tailings material.


Water Management Area - 3D Maintain water quality requirements in accordance with post

mining water quality guidelines.

Prevent adverse impacts on agricultural activity as a result of

poor water quality in runoff from the site.

Overburden Emplacement Area

- 4C


Provide a self-sustaining landform post mine closure.

Dust deposition levels meet the EPL and Project Approval

criteria for the site.

Final landforms blend with surrounding landscape where

possible.

Stockpiled Material – 5D Provide stable landforms which are not susceptible to erosion

and pose a risk to water quality or agricultural productivity on

adjacent lands.

Voids - 6I Final voids will be managed in accordance with a Final Void

Management Plan for the site. This management plan is yet to

be developed.

Access to voids would be prevented to avoid injury to people

or animals.

Pasture - 7D Develop a sustainable grassland community post mine

closure. Provide the opportunity to conducting grazing or

cropping activities in this domain.

Limestone Forest - 9J Complete maintenance, rehabilitation and remediation

activities in accordance with the Occupation Permit, in

particular the requirements outlined in Sections 3.14 to 3.19

and 4.10 of the permit. These sections outline the

environmental and maintenance requirements and post

termination environmental reporting requirements for the

Offset Area.

Page 65 of 110

5.2.1 Infrastructure

All infrastructure that is not to be utilised as part of the final land use are proposed to be

removed to make the site safe and free of hazardous materials.

All infrastructure that is to remain as part of the final land use is required to be safe and not

pose any hazard to the community.

Contaminated soil is to be remediated to provide a soil quality that is compatible with the

final land use. Where practical, materials removed from demolition works will be recycled.

5.2.2 Tailings Storage Facility

The TSFs will be filled and capped to comply with the proposed final landform. The primary

objective of the capping design will be to minimise the potential for exposure of potentially

environmentally sensitive tailings material in the rehabilitated landform which may impact on

runoff water quality from Northparkes.

Following capping, these areas will be re-vegetated with native vegetation including areas

of open grassland.

Options for final landform designs are currently being investigated to determine the most

suitable design which will meet Dams Safety Committee/ANCOLD Guidelines and provide a

stable landform post closure. The options currently being investigated are discussed in

Section 2.3.5.

5.2.3 Water Management Areas

Water management areas are proposed to be filled, capped and utilised as pasture areas in

accordance with the proposed surrounding land use (refer to Plan 2). Excess sediment will be

removed from those water storage facilities that have been identified as having a potential

agricultural use post mining.

Remaining storage facilities which are not proposed to be used for agricultural purposes post

mine closure will be filled, capped and rehabilitated with native grassland species.

There may be a requirement to maintain some water management structures to ensure

compliance with water quality criteria. These may include sediment control structures and

settling ponds. These works would be conducted, if required, to assist with maintaining water

quality requirements for runoff from Northparkes until landform and rehabilitation activities

have been completed.

5.2.4 Overburden Emplacement Areas

Overburden emplacement areas will be capped, shaped and re-vegetated with native

grassland species. This will be conducted in a manner which aims to:

achieve the required water quality criteria for runoff from the area; and

provide a self-sustaining landform post mine closure.

These areas could be used for grazing purposes, final landuse options will be confirmed as

part of the final closure report on the basis of landuse studies, and the results of future rounds

of rehabilitation monitoring for the site.

Page 66 of 110

5.2.5 Stockpile Management

Where possible, stockpiled material such as clay or oxidised waste rock material may be

utilised for rehabilitation activities.

Stockpiled materials will be characterised and if the material is not able to be used for

rehabilitation, it will be managed appropriately according to the quality of material and

rehabilitated with native grassland species.

The objective of the management of the stockpiled material is to provide stable landforms

which are not susceptible to erosion or pose a risk to water quality or agricultural productivity

on adjacent lands.

Stockpiled material may also be utilised as a replacement for subsoil following the

completion of land shaping works.

5.2.6 Voids

On completion of mining each void, the option of utilising the voids as emplacement areas

for tailings disposal will be investigated. These investigations will be completed during future

MOP periods and the potential use of the void areas for emplacement will be detailed in

future MOP documents. The feasibility of the use of final voids as emplacement areas will be

considered in future version of the Northparkes MOP.

Northparkes would aim to exclude access to these void areas. The method of restricting

access would be determined through completion of a risk assessment of the final voids at the

mine closure stage of the operation.

Final voids will be managed in a manner which prevents impacts on water quality for the

surrounding environment, both natural and agricultural.

5.2.7 Buffer Lands (Pasture Areas)

Soil testing will be conducted in the Pasture Domain areas to determine soil health and

ameliorant requirements.

Additional seeding may be required to improve pasture species composition and to provide

a sustainable grassland community post mine closure. These areas will be rehabilitated in a

manner which provides the opportunity to conduct grazing or cropping activities.

5.2.8 Limestone State Forest Offset Area

Works undertaken within the Limestone State Forest Offset Area include maintenance and

monitoring activities, which are undertaken on an as required basis. Maintenance activities

and any other works will be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the

Limestone State Forest Occupation Permit with Forestry Corporation NSW, which outlines the

requirements of Northparkes in relation to the Offset Area.

5.3 Proposed Rehabilitation Activities

Land management is conducted according to the Biodiversity Management Plan, Mine

Closure Plan, Rehabilitation Management Plan, Void Management Plan and the Cultural

Heritage Management Plan. These plans were developed in consultation with the Office of

Environment and the DPI and are approved by Department of Planning and Environment.

Page 67 of 110

5.4 Rehabilitation Phases

As discussed in Section 5.0, Northparkes will undertake rehabilitation as soon as practicable

following the completion of mining activities. However, due to the ongoing operations of the

site, closure is not anticipated during the MOP term and the opportunities for rehabilitation

are limited. Table 24 below outlines the current phase of rehabilitation for each site Domain.

Page 68 of 110

Table 24 Current Rehabilitation Phases Per Domain

Rehabilitation Phase 1D –

Infrastructure

2C - TSF 3D – Water

Management

Area

4C – Overburden

Emplacement Area

5D – Stockpiled

Material

6I - Voids 7D -

Pasture

9J Limestone

Forest

Active Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Decommissioning No No1 No No No No No N/A2

Landform

establishment

No No No No No No No N/A3

Growing Medium

Development

No No No No No No No Yes

Ecosystem and Land

Use Establishment

No No No No No No No Yes

Ecosystem and

Landuse Sustainability

No No No No No No No No

Relinquished Lands No No No No No No No No

1 Rehabilitation works will be undertaken on TSF1 during the MOP period. Further information on rehabilitation implementation is provided within section 7 of this document.

2 There are no decommissioning works anticipated in the Limestone Forest as there are no Northparkes infrastructure items present

3 Landform establishment works are not anticipated to be required in the Limestone State Forest

Page 69 of 110

6. Performance Indicators and Completion Criteria

The performance indicators and completion criteria represented in Table 25 of this MOP are

representative of the current knowledge derived from monitoring data and operational

experience relating to the proposed final landform at Northparkes.

These indicators and criteria are targets and may be refined over time as more information is

obtained from monitoring programs or knowledge gained from industry and operational

experience. It is expected that the indicators and criteria will be dynamic throughout the

operational phase of the operations.

Management strategies, monitoring actions, performance and completion criteria for

Northparkes is provided in Section 5.0 of the Northparkes Mines Biodiversity Offset Management

Plan (BOMP).Two distinct vegetation areas have been monitored and describes as “Woodland

rehabilitation sites” and “Grassland rehabilitation Sites”. These sites have been given separate

performance indicator tables and are consistent with the proposed final land use categories at

the Northparkes Mines. The performance criteria for these sites are provided as an Appendix in

the Northparkes BOMP.

Page 70 of 110

Table 25 Performance Indicators and Completion Criteria

Objective Performance

Indicator

Completion Criteria Justification /

Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

Phase 1 - Decommissioning

Mining related infrastructure not required post mining to be removed

Removal of

infrastructure,

equipment and non-

production wastes,

except for heritage

and other agreed

areas

Inspection conducted by

a suitably qualified

person to check that

electrical and

mechanical sources

have been isolated as

per the Mine Closure Risk

Assessment. Remaining

infrastructure to be

inspected by a qualified

engineer and

determined to be

suitable and safe as part

of the intended final land

use.

Infrastructure not required for

post mining land use has

been removed.

Rehabilitation and Mine

Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report

Section 2.3 (Umwelt,

2013)

No Infrastructure Rehabilitation

Area –

Grassland

ecosystems

Not commenced

Infrastructure in

use throughout

MOP period.

Removal of services

(power, water and

communication)

Inspection conducted to

verify that the final

landform plan includes

all remaining services.

Services removed as per Mine

Closure risk assessment. Any

services remaining are

documented on the final

landform plan and a suitable

caveat developed to provide

that they are readily

identifiable for future

landholders.


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Infrastructure

Removal of services

– Water infrastructure

– pipes, pumps etc

Removed. If

Underground services

cannot be removed,

services marked on final

landform plan

Pumps, Pipes and power

removed or surveyed onto

plan

No Water

Management

Area

Relevant water

infrastructure

maintained

Relevant drains and

dams remain for future

land use

Drains and dams maintained No Water

Management

Area

Page 71 of 110


Indicator


Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

Removal of

contaminated

materials including

(exposed) soils.

There is no residual soil

contamination on site

that is incompatible with

intended land use or that

poses a threat of

environmental harm.

Contamination will be

appropriately remediated so

that appropriate guidelines

for the intended final land use

are met.


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Infrastructure Grassland

Ecosystems

Not commenced

Infrastructure in

use throughout

MOP period.

Structures to be safe. Inspection conducted by

a suitably qualified

person to verify that the

integrity of TSF wall is

satisfactory.

Sign off from the Dam Safety

Committee that TSF Engineer


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Tailings Storage

Facility

Not commenced

TSF's in use

throughout MOP

period.

Phase 2- Landform Establishment

Landform suitable and safer for final land use

Landform suitable for

final land use and

compatible with

surrounding

landscape.

Visual assessment

conducted to verify that

landforms developed are

compatible with

surrounding landscape.

Sign off from relevant

government department that

the landforms developed are

compatible with the

surrounding landscape.


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Infrastructure,

Tailings Storage

Facility, Water

Management

Structures,

Overburden

Emplacement

Areas, Voids,

Stockpiled

Areas.

Grassland

Ecosystems

and Voids

Rehabilitation

commenced on

TSF on some

OEA's.

Rehabilitate to the

agreed final

landform, landscape

design and end land

use

Maximum landform slope Slope of embankment wall

<1:5 (V:H)


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

Downstream wall

of initial lifts

appropriately

shaped

Maximum embankment

height

Approximately 25 m Rehabilitation and Mine

Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

Pending closure

Page 72 of 110


Indicator


Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

tailings storage facility

capping permeability

TBC based on CLMR trials Rehabilitation and Mine

Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

Pending closure

Free drainage cover to

prevent water logging

TBC based on CLMR trials Rehabilitation and Mine

Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

Pending closure

Maximum longitudinal

grade of surface water

control structures

All surface water control

strictures with a maximum

longitudinal slope grade 2%


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

Clean water

diversion

structures to be

installed and

reported in AEMR

Stable Landforms Soil pH Similar range to control sites Rehabilitation and Mine

Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No NA NA Opportunistic

areas only. Final

landform pending

Closure. Reported

in AEMR

Landforms are inherently

stable

Elevate areas battered at

minimum 1:5 slope


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No TSF,

Overburden

emplacement

area

Rehabilitation

Area -

Grassland

Commenced

Water structures no

erosion and inherently

stable

Minimal erosion on water

management structures

Water

Management

area

Water area On-going

Final voids and pit slopes

assessed as stable by

qualified engineer

Signed off by Suitable

qualified Engineer

Void Final Void Routinely

Inspections conducted

by suitably qualified

persons to check and

verify landform stability.

Drainage structures are stable

and there is no evidence of

overtopping or significant

scouring as a result of runoff.


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Grassland

Ecosystems

and Voids

Rehabilitation

commenced on

TSF on some

OEA's.

Page 73 of 110


Indicator


Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

Runoff water quality from

rehabilitation areas is within

the range of water quality

data recorded from

analogue sites and does not

pose a threat to downstream

water quality.

Infrastructure,

Tailings Storage

Facility, Water

Management

Structures,

Overburden

Emplacement

Areas, Voids,

Stockpiled

Areas.

Landform capping designs

and construction methods

are assessed as competent.

Contamination Monitoring data and site

inspections by a suitably

qualified person

indicates stability of

capping materials.




data recorded from



water quality.


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Infrastructure,

Tailings Storage

Facility, Water

Management

Structures,

Overburden

Emplacement

Areas,

Stockpiled

Areas.

Grassland

Ecosystems

and Voids

Rehabilitation

commenced on

TSF on some

OEA's.




data recorded from



water quality.

Security Areas of restricted land

use appropriately

secured

Sufficient fencing or barriers

are installed

No Voids,

subsidence

zones

Final Void –

Restricted

access

Ongoing

Phase 3 - Growth Medium Development

Growth medium is capable of supporting sustainable vegetation growth

Suitable growing

media used in

rehabilitation to

achieve final

rehabilitation

requirements.

Growth medium is

capable of supporting

sustainable vegetation

growth.

Monitoring of rehabilitated

sites indicates that soil profile

development to be in the

range of monitored analogue

sites for each of the relevant

final land use domains.


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Rehabilitation

commenced on

TSF on some

OEA's.

Page 74 of 110


Indicator


Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

Monitoring of rehabilitated

sites indicates that soil profile

development to be in the

range of monitored analogue

sites for each of the relevant

final land use domains.

Infrastructure,

Tailings Storage

Facility, Water

Management

Structures,

Overburden

Emplacement

Areas,

Stockpiled

Areas, Pastures

and Limestone

Forest.

Grassland

Ecosystems,

Woodland

Ecosystems

and

Agricultural

Uses.

Topsoil condition Rehabilitation soil reports

show trends in soil quality

pH similar to analogue sites No All Rehabilitation

Areas (C-G)

Rehabilitation

commenced on

TSF on some

OEA’s

Sufficient cover of topsoil Minimum of 100mm topsoil

unless defined otherwise

No Rosedale TSF Rehabilitation

Areas (C-G)

Ongoing as per

Topsoil

Management

Plan

Phase 4 - Ecosystem Land Use and Establishment

Stable and

permanent

landforms, with soils,

hydrology, and

ecosystems with

maintenance needs

no greater than

those of surrounding

land

Native tree, shurb

groundcover and grass

tubelock/ seeding rate

Trees 2m centres. Shurbs 1m

centres. Ground cover 1m

centres. Grasses 8-12kg/ha.

Rehabilitation

Management Plan and

Closure Management

Plan

Reported in AEMR

Gypsum applied in

accordance with

manufacturer

recommendation. Soil

retested to confirm

dispersibility

Evidence of fruiting of native

species observed.

No

Page 75 of 110


Indicator


Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

Establishment of

revegetation that is

to achieve the final

land use.

Revegetation is

sustainable for the long

term and only requires

maintenance that is

consistent with the

intended final land use.

Rehabilitated areas provide a

range of vegetation structural

habitats (e.g. eucalypts,

shrubs, ground cover,

developing litter layer, etc.)

to encourage use by native

fauna species.


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

Infrastructure,

Tailings Storage

Facility, Water

Management

Structures,

Overburden

Emplacement

Areas,

Stockpiled

Areas, pastures

and Limestone

Forest.

Grassland

Ecosystems,

Woodland

Ecosystems

and

Agricultural

Uses.

No domains in this

phase during

MOP period.

The percentage of the tree

population in healthy

condition is comparable to

reference sites as indicated

by long term monitoring.

There is no significant weed

infestation such that

management requirements

are similar to reference native

vegetation sites.

Feral animal populations are

appropriately managed and

are comparable to reference

sites.

Appropriate bushfire hazard

controls have been

implemented on the advice

from the NSW Rural Fire

Service (RFS).

Appropriate bushfire hazard

controls have been

implemented on the advice

from the NSW Rural Fire

Service (RFS).

Phase 4 - Ecosystem Land Use and Sustainability

Page 76 of 110


Indicator


Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

Development of self

sustaining

ecosystems as per

the final land use.

The vegetation is

developing in structure

and complexity

comparable to that of

the local remnant

vegetation and final land

use.




data recorded from



water quality


Closure Northparkes

Step Change Report


2013)

No Infrastructure,

Tailings Storage

Facility, Water

Management

Structures,

Overburden

Emplacement

Areas,

Stockpiled

Areas, pastures

and Limestone

Forest.

Grassland

Ecosystems,

Woodland

Ecosystems

and

Agricultural

Uses.

No domains in this

phase during

MOP period.

Downstream water

quality meets

statutory

requirements.

Water quality meets

statutory requirements

Water quality monitoring data

provides evidence of

compliance against statutory

requirements for air quality.

Analogue site No Offsite Offsite Ongoing as per

Environmental

Monitoring

Program

Air quality meets

statutory

requirements

Air quality meets

statutory requirements

Air quality monitoring data

provides evidence of

compliance against statutory

requirements.

Project Approval All areas Rehabilitation

Areas (C-G)

Ongoing as per

Environmental

Monitoring

Program. No

domains

Groundwater quality

meets statutory

requirements.

Groundwater quality

meets statutory

requirements.

Groundwater quality

monitoring data provides

evidence of compliance

against statutory

requirements.

Project Approval All areas Rehabilitation

areas (C-G)

Ongoing as per

Environmental

Monitoring

Program. No

domains in this

phase during

MOP period.

Agricultural Land Use Land returns to

Agriculture that requires

similar management to

surrounding areas

Grazing areas sustainable

and returns similar to district

Comparision to district

and Northparkes farm

sites

No Farm land Rehabilitation

Area – Rural

land capability

classification -

viii

Ongoing as per

Environmental

Monitoring

Program. No

domains in this

phase during

MOP period

Page 77 of 110


Indicator


Source

Complete

(yes/no)

Applicable

Domain

Final Land

use

Domain

Progress at

start of MOP

Vegetation is self-

sustaining

The vegetation is

developing in structure

and complexity to that of

the local remnant

vegetation and final land

use.

Monitoring data from

rehabilitation sites for criteria

such as

foliage cover

litter cover

annual plants

total ground cover

soil characteristics

Analogue sites No All areas Rehabilitation

areas (C-G)

Ongoing as per

Environmental

Monitoring

Program. No

domains in this

phase during

MOP period

Page 78 of 110

7. REHABILITATION IMPLEMENTATION

7.1 Rehabilitation Status at MOP Commencement

Major areas disturbed for Northparkes operations (Plan 3B) are:

Two open cut pits (E22 and E27) and associated waste dumps and ore stockpiles;

Two underground subsidence zone areas (E26 and E48) and associated waste dumps

from development of underground mining;

An ore processing plant with ore stockpiles;

Three TSFs;

Borrow pits and water retention ponds; and

Conveyor routes.

The areas currently rehabiliated on the mining lease include parts of the waste rock dumps

around the E26 and E22 Mines as well as the TSF 1 and TSF2 batters.

Figure 13 and Figure 14 show the areas that have been rehabiliated or partially to date and

include:

E26 Oxide Waste dump- outside batters rehabiliated;

E26 Clay Dump;

E26 Lift 1 Mullock Dump;

E22 waste dumps W1-W4 outside batters; and

TSF1 and TSF2 batters.

Page 79 of 110

Figure 13 Rehabilitation at MOP commencement

Page 80 of 110

Figure 14 Rehabilitation at MOP commencement

Page 81 of 110

Tree Planting and Rehabilitation

Revegetation activities are designed for erosion control, aesthetic improvement and

ecosystem regeneration and are undertaken on constructed landforms such as waste rock

dumps, TSFs, topsoil stockpiles and other disturbed areas. Revegetation is also undertaken to

create wildlife corridors and for screening and landscaping purposes.

The Biodiversity Management Plan and rehabilitation undertaken to date is illustrated in

Figure 15.

Species utilised are dependent on the area to be vegetated with:

Introduced grasses and legumes selected for erosion control on embankments and

topsoil stockpiles (i.e. temporary landforms or rehabilitation); and

Local provenance native tree and shrub species for infill planting, wildlife corridors and

screening of disturbed areas (i.e. long term rehabilitation).

Wildlife corridors are established or improved along fence lines, road verges, creeks and

drainage lines through an annual revegetation program. This program involves the planting

of approximately 10,000 trees per annum, if conditions are suitable, as part of the continuing

rehabilitation strategy. In excess of 200,000 trees have been planted to date within the

landholding as shown in Figure 15.

Northparkes is designing a next box program, to compliment the ongoing tree planting

strategy. The majority of the planted trees are not yet mature enough to contain substantial

hollows or nesting sites. As part of the Northparkes EPBC referral Northparkes is required to

replace each cleared potential superb parrot nest with a nest box. Northparkes has extended

this to include nest boxes to also include other birds, bats and arboreal mammals. The progress

of the nest box program will be updated in the AEMR. As part of Northparkes community

engagement, the Parkes Men’s Shed has constructed approximately 75 nest boxes

constructed for the program (Plate 4).

Plate 4 Northparkes environmental staff collecting nest boxes constructed by the

Parkes Men’s Shed

Page 82 of 110

Figure 15 Tree Planting / Rehabilitation Undertaken to Date – All Landholdings

Page 83 of 110

7.2 Proposed Rehabilitation Status at MOP Completion

The proposed rehabilitation to be commenced during the MOP term is outline in Figure 16.

Plan 2 shows the status of rehabilitation at MOP commencement, whereas Plans 3A-3G

outline rehabilitation progress over the MOP term.

Page 84 of 110

Figure 16 Proposed rehabilitation areas

Page 85 of 110

Table 26 Disturbance and Rehabilitation Progression over the MOP term

87 Total

Disturbance

Area (ha)

Total

Rehabilitation

Area (ha)

Cumulative

Rehabilitation

Area (ha)

Comment/Explanation

2014 1038 308 308 TSF1 capping trail started

2015 1425 308 308 Construction of new

tailings dam (326 ha)

TSF1 Capping trails in

progress

2016 1425 410 410 Pre-Feasibility study and

Capital Approval for TSF1

closure design

2017 1850 410 410 Implementation of TSF1

Closure Design

2018 1850* 410* 410* Implementation of TSF1

Closure


Closure


Closure Note: * MOP will be reviewed, submitted for approval if disturbance footprint changes

7.2.1 Buildings

There are several historical buildings located within the Mining Lease. These sites have been

subject to a Heritage Significance Assessment. The assessment included preparation of a site

plan of the area and elevations, compilation of these details with the documentation and

recordings and provision of this information to the Parkes and District Historic Society and the

Parkes Shire Council.

The structures consist of a blacksmith’s shed, worker’s hut. In the absence of historic

documentation, the construction methods and materials of the structures combined with the

oral histories collected with respect to the structures indicate that the two pise structures

were constructed during the early twentieth century. The two pise structures, the workman’s

hut and blacksmith shed are believed to have been constructed between 1900 and 1910.

These buildings will be removed during construction of the new tailings facility as they lie

within the disturbance footprint.

7.3 Summary of Rehabilitation Areas during the MOP Term

During the MOP term rehabilitation will commence on TSF1. Results of the current capping

trials will be used to determine the volumes of capping material and topsoil required to

rehabilitate the TSF1. Planning for the capping will commence in 2015 and it is anticipated a

rehabilitation campaign will be commenced in 2016 for the TSF1.

The capping materials for the TSF1 will be derived from the waste rock stockpiles around the

E22 Pit, with the topsoil and timber sourced from the stockpiles located North of E22 and the

Estcourt TSF.

Rehabilitation works will be undertaken on the batters of the new Rosedale TSF after each lift

has been completed.

Rehabilitation activities during the MOP period are summarised in

Table 27 and Plans 3A-3F.

Page 86 of 110

Table 27 Rehabilitation during MOP period

Domain Area Affected / Rehabilitated (ha)

Total Area at MOP Start Total Area at MOP End

Mine Lease Area

ML 1247, 1367, 1641,MLA514 2674.22 2674.22

Active Mining Area 60 66.9 66.9

Infrastructure Area

Active 46.93 64.25

Decommissioning 0 0

Landform Establishment 0 0

Growth Medium Development 0 0

Ecosystem Establishment 0 0

Ecosystem Development 0 0

Relinquished Land 0 0

Total 46.93 64.25

Tailings Storage Facilities

Active (TSF1, TSF2, TSF3) 336 680.2

Decommissioning 0 0

Landform Establishment 7.25 7.25





Total 424.25 768.45


Active 67 67

Decommissioning 0 0






Total 14.3 24.5

Overburden Emplacement

Active 88.6 88.6

Decommissioning 0 0



Page 87 of 110






Total 106.6 106.6

Stockpile Material

Active 9.5 9.5

Decommissioning 0 0






Total 9.5 9.5

Voids

Active 30.7 30.7

Decommissioning 0 0






Total 30.7 30.7

Buffer Lands

Active 68 68

Decommissioning 0 0






Total 68 68

Limestone Forest

Active 45.14 45.14

Decommissioning 0 0





Page 88 of 110




Total 45.14 45.14

Page 89 of 110

7.4 Relinquishment Phase achieved during MOP period

No lands are to be relinquished from the mining lease during the term of the MOP.

7.5 Rehabilitation of Disturbed Land

Rehabilitation will be limited to TSF1 during the MOP period as the planned development

activities restrict the area available for final landform revegetation. The current and

additional mining infrastructure will remain active beyond 2020.

The results of the CMLR rehabilitation trials (UQ 2008, UQ 2010a, UQ 2010b and UQ 2014), with

the current Feasibility report for TSF1 and the erosion modelling study by Landloch will drive

the rehabilitation process of the TSF 1 structure.

7.5.1 Exploration Activities

Rehabilitation of disturbed land from exploration activities commences as soon as

practicable following the completion of works. Rehabilitation of access tracks involves:

Removal of culverts (e.g. pipes, logs) and re-establish natural drainage pathways;

Rip or roughen tracks, pads or other compaction;

Level any windrows and re-spread stockpiled soil onto the track; and

Spread cleared vegetation back out over the track, to aid in the prevention of erosion,

and in capturing seed stock for rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation of drill pads and sumps involves:

Removal of all general rubbish and remediation of any hydrocarbon spills;

Excess drill spoil should be removed from the site;

Re-shape the pad to its original contour. The re-shaping must include correct drainage;

Drill pads may require deep ripping to break up compacted areas; and

Stripped soil and rock must be spread over all disturbed areas.

Any vegetation removed whilst constructing the drill pad will be stockpiled and re-spread

over the pad to hold the soil together and aid in seed collection and storage. Re-spreading

topsoil and vegetation over the disturbed ground promotes germination of existing seed.

All sumps must be filled in to the surface contour, allowing for subsidence, and stockpiled

topsoil and vegetation respread over them.

All drill holes are capped at the completion of drilling to prevent fauna entering the drill hole.

All rotary air boring (RAB) and air core drill holes are back-filled with cuttings. All diamond

and percussion drill hole collars must be excavated, the casing cut, the casing capped and

a concrete paver placed over the cap. The top of the concrete cap must be a minimum of

1m below the ground level.

Page 90 of 110

8. REHABILITATION MONITORING AND RESEARCH

8.1 Rehabilitation Monitoring

Rehabilitation at Northparkes incorporates the entire landholding and not just the area

covered by the mining leases. Northparkes own and manage approximately 6370ha of

surrounding agricultural land that acts as a buffer zone for the operations.

8.1.1 Rehabilitation Monitoring Methodology:

The rehabilitation monitoring protocol currently used at Northparkes includes the monitoring

of 21 permanent sites. There are seven reference sites including four woodland and three

native grass sites. There are 14 rehabilitation monitoring sites including six rehabilitated

woodland sites in agricultural areas and eight rehabilitated pasture areas in the mining

disturbance area.

Rehabilitation sites will be monitored annually for the first three years and then every three

years over a nine year period. A decision for further monitoring of these sites will be made

after this period of 12 years, depending on performance in against relinquishment criteria.

Permanent transects and photo points have been established and the methodology of the

monitoring program includes a mixture of landscape function analysis (LFA), soil analysis and

various ecosystem diversity measurements based on the biometric methodology.

Data from the reference sites is used to provide upper and lower ecological performance

indicator limits for the rehabilitation areas. The key performance indicators are separated into

completion performance indicators and desirable performance indicators.

Landscape Function Analysis

LFA is a methodology to assess key indicators of ecosystem function including landscape

organisation and soil surface condition. The LFA methodology collects data at two nested

spatial scales:

1. At a coarse scale, landscape organisation is characterised. Mapped to .5 to 100m

scale with a gradient orientated transect.

2. At a fine scale, soil surface assessment (soil quality) examines processes at the <1m

scale

In the first stage patches and interpatches are identified along a line orientated directly

downslope which provides a measure of heterogeneity.

In the second stage the following parameters are monitored:

Rain splash protection

Perennial vegetation cover

Litter

Cryptogram cover

Crust brokenness

Soil erosion

Deposited material

Soil surface roughness

Page 91 of 110

Surface nature

Slake test

Soil surface texture.

These 11 features are compiled and calculated into three indices of soil quality:

1. Stability

2. Infiltration

3. Nutrient cycling.

Soil Analysis

Soil samples are taken using standard soil sampling techniques with 12 samples taken from

each site and bulked together and sent to a NATA accredited laboratory for analysis.

The soil samples are analysed for:

pH

EC

Cation Exchange Capacity

Available Ca, Mg, K, N, S

Organic matter

Exchangeable Na, Ca, Mg, K, H, Mn, Fe, Cu, B, Si, Al, Mo, Co and Se

Total Carbon

Heavy metals including Cd, Pb, As, Cr, Ni, Hg, Ag.

Monitoring ecosystem biological diversity attributes

This includes monitoring structural diversity, floristics and other biodiversity attributes.

This ecological assessment provides quantitative data for the following parameters:

Floristic diversity including species area curves and growth forms

Groundcover diversity and abundance

Vegetation structure and habitat characteristics

Understory density and growth

Overstorey characteristics

Other habitat attributes such as presence of hollows, mistletoe and fruiting.

Page 92 of 110

8.2 Research and Rehabilitation Trials and Use of Analogue Sites

Since 2008, Northparkes has been working with the CMLR on a series of studies associated

with the rehabilitation of TSFs (UQ 2008, UQ 2010a, UQ 2010b and UQ 2014).

The CLMR work has been undertaken in four stages.

1. Stage 1 Review of site environmental data and literature review;

2. Stage 2 Field sampling of geochemical and physical characteristics;

3. Stage 3 Hydrological and geochemical modelling; and

4. Stage 4 Conduct small scale field trials to validate required cover system.

Stages 1 to 3 have been completed and currently stage 4 is in progress. Stage 4 results will be

available during this MOP period. This information will be the driver for the TSF capping design

requirements.

Based on the results of stages 1-3 the following criteria in regard to cover performance are

being investigated:

Depth of cover (relates to deep drainage, storage of rainfall, salt movement, run off

and plant growth; and

Depth of topsoil (relates to plant growth, run off, precipitation storage)

The trials have been restricted to 100mm of topsoil due to constraints on topsoil volumes.

Waste rock has been substituted for plant growth material below the topsoil. The waste rock

is benign and suitable for plant growth and water storage.

The stage 4 field trials involve setting up four small trial plots 20m X 20m with different levels

and layers of cover over the tailings. In each of these trial plots different arrays of suction

plates, suction sensors and moisture sensors have been installed. The design depth of each

plot is illustrated below in Figure 17. Table 28 also shows the trial design and parameters being

monitored.

Page 93 of 110

Figure 17 Design Depths of Plots in Capping Trials

Page 94 of 110

An overview of The Stage 4 capping trial designs is shown below in Table 28.

Table 28 Stage 4 Capping Trial Design

Design Plot 1 Plot 2 T3 T4

No

sp

ec

ific

co

ve

r

Sh

allo

w c

ov

er

Sh

allo

w c

ov

er

with

ca

pill

ary

bre

ak

Sta

nd

ard

co

ve

r

Topsoil [m] 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Waste rock [m] -- 0.4 0.4 0.9

Capillary break [m] -- -- 0.3 --

Total trial depth [m] ‘0.1’ 0.5 0.8 1

Water balance parameters to be monitored:

Suction (# of sensors) 3 5 5 7

Moisture content (# of sensors) 3 3 3 4

Deep drainage with suction plate 1 1 1 1

Geochemical parameters to be monitored

Seepage quality ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Potential salt movement from tailings into cover ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

9. INTERVENTION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

9.1 Threats to Rehabilitation

Threats to rehabilitation at Northparkes have been identified in the Rehabilitation

Management Plan (Table 29) and the HSEQ Risk Register.

These two processes identified similar threats to rehabilitation. The threats that could impact

on rehabilitation objectives for the identified domains, during this MOP period, are detailed in

Table 30.

Table 29 Threats to Rehabilitation from Rehabilitation Management Plan

Risk/Impact Description

Biodiversity Loss Reduction in biodiversity value of rehabilitated area due to inability to

replace lost habitat and communities.

Erosion Erosion due to failure of rehabilitation causes risks to human safety, wash outs,

potential runoff and contamination of water courses.

Contamination Rehabilitation fails due to inability to adequately consider risks of mineral

waste resulting in contamination release.

Landform Stability Stability of landforms on site is reduced due to poor rehabilitation design,

inadequate rehabilitation and ground cover, posing risks to community and

surrounding environment.

Species Richness Poor planning and incorrect species selection results in dominance of

unwanted plant species.

Page 95 of 110

Risk/Impact Description

Compliance Failure to meet legislated rehabilitation goals of site, or change of legislation

and or community expectations

Visual Amenity Failure to consider surrounding landscape and community expectations in

landform design results in detrimental impact on visual amenity.

Dust Generation Failure to establish adequate ground cover through rehabilitating prioritised

areas results in excess dust generation and topsoil loss.

Soil Fertility Failure to rehabilitate areas limiting the stability, infiltration and nutrient cycling

capacity of the soil directly affecting physical and chemical fertility.

Fragmentation Habitat fragmentation occurs resulting in loss of species diversity and richness,

accelerating edge effects.

Contamination Failure to properly rehabilitate exposed areas of waste rock/soil result in Acid

Rock Drainage (ARD) generation and heavy metal mobility affecting

ground/surface water and soil.

Table 30 Threats to Rehabilitation Per Domain

Domain Rehabilitation threats

Domain 1 – Infrastructure No rehabilitation is to be undertaken in this

domain during the MOP period

Domain 2 – Tailings Storage Facility Biodiversity

Erosion

Landform stability

Species richness

Compliance

Visual amenity

Dust generation

Soil fertility

Domain 3 – Water Management Area No rehabilitation is to be undertaken in this


Domain 4 – Overburden Emplacement Area No rehabilitation is to be undertaken in this


Domain 5 – Stockpile Material No rehabilitation is to be undertaken in this


Domain 6 – Voids No rehabilitation is to be undertaken in this


Domain 7 – Pasture Areas Dust generation

Soil fertility

Domain 8 – Limestone State Forest Offset Area Biodiversity loss

Species richness

Habitat fragmentation

Page 96 of 110

9.2 Trigger Action Response Plan

The following Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP) identifies the proposed contingency

strategies in the event of unexpected variations or impacts to rehabilitation outcomes.

Table 31 below outlines the key identified risks, their trigger and proposed mitigation

measures to manage the identified risks, and means of monitoring the effectiveness of

response actions.

Major impacts to rehabilitation would be reported to the NSW T&I within seven days of

identification. The report to NSW T&I would include a strategy to remedy the failure. All other

impacts to rehabilitation would be reported to NSW T&I through the AEMR.

Page 97 of 110

Table 31 Rehabilitation TARPs

Rehabilitation

Threat

Trigger Response Reference Responsibility

Erosion and

sediment

control

Failure to appropriately

stabilise, close and rehabilitate

TSFs results in erosion and

inability to establish a

sustainable ecosystem

Any significant adverse change in

the appearance of TSF structures

during daily, weekly, monthly

inspections e.g. topping covers,

roadways, dam walls, fall

structures.

Initiate remediation works for the

areas of concern.

Monitor effectiveness of response

through daily, weekly, monthly

inspections.

Environmental

Management

Strategy

Operations

Manager

Rehabilitation monitoring

detects erosion or shift in

vegetation community

structure or diversity

Ecological monitoring reporting Identify area of impact and assess.

Implement 12 month improvement

program in consultation with

ecologist

Monitor progress through

rehabilitation monitoring program.

Biodiversity

Management Plan

Rehabilitation

Management Plan

Environmental

Superintendent

Significant rainfall event results

in erosion from unstable

landforms washing offsite

resulting in a non-compliance

with legal requirements

Downstream/off-site water quality

monitoring indicates data outside

of the range from the analogue

sites.

Inspections after significant rainfall

events identify erosion or sediment

loading in water management

structures.

Immediate notification to

regulatory bodies where required

by PIRMP.

Implement erosion control

measures as determined in

consultation with the HSEF Team.

Monitor response using site

inspections.

Water

Management Plan

Senior

Environmental

Officer

Operations

Superintendent

Page 98 of 110

Rehabilitation

Threat


Failure to maintain drainage

system leads to inability to

contain runoff from operations

resulting in release of

contaminated water to the

environment

Uncontrolled release of sediment

laden water to the environment as

identified through either site water

quality monitoring program or

complaint from external party.

Immediate notification to

regulatory bodies as per PIRMP.

Review maintenance of water

management infrastructure and

implement recommendations.

Redirect contaminated water to

on-site retention ponds.

Monitor through site water quality

monitoring program.

Water

Management Plan

Superintendent

Tails and water

Wind and water erosion Monitoring or vegetation

assessments indicate vegetation

cover or soil structure outside

acceptable ranges.

Implement measures to improve

groundcover or soil structure

including reseeding areas, soil

remediation, and external

agronomic advice.

Monitor condition through annual

rehabilitation monitoring program.

Rehabilitation

Management Plan

Senior

Environmental

Officer

Air quality Failure of rehabilitation of the

TSFs results in generation of dust

emissions in exceedance of EPL

conditions and project

approval.

Breach of air quality criteria in

project approval as identified

through onsite and offsite

monitoring or compliant by

external party.

Undertake dust exceedence

investigation

Review dust suppression measures

onsite.

Investigate the rehabilitation failure

and rectify.

Notify regulators as required by

PIRMP.

Environmental

Monitoring

Program

Superintendent

Tails and water

Page 99 of 110

Rehabilitation

Threat



actions through rehabilitation

monitoring program and onsite

dust monitoring equipment.

Flora/fauna Loss of biodiversity due to

uncontrolled clearing

Complaint received regarding

vegetation clearing being

undertaken without approval.

Implement recommended actions

from incident investigation.

Report to relevant agencies.

Environmental

Management

Strategy

Biodiversity

Management Plan

Environmental

Superintendent

Failure of rehabilitation, or

incorrect selection of species

results in low species diversity

and high weed loadings in

rehabilitation areas

Large areas of rehabilitation under

increased competition from weeds

as identified through rehabilitation

monitoring program.

Species monitoring indicates

incorrect selection.

Review and ensure topsoil

management practices prevent

the spread of weeds.

Undertake targeted weed spraying

in accordance with the

requirements of the Noxious Weeds

Act 1993.

Review management practices

and ensure rapid establishment of

ground cover.

Review of species selection

Audit of seed collectors

management plans, procedures

etc.

Monitor progress via rehabilitation

monitoring program

Environmental

Management

Strategy

Environmental

Ecologist

Drought results in a decline in

rehabilitation quality and

success

Notable decline in plant survival in

rehabilitated areas identified

through rehabilitation monitoring

program.

Initiate program of irrigation of

rehabilitation areas to maintain

cover

Continue to monitor rehabilitation

success

Review rehabilitation

procedures/commitments during

drought periods

Biodiversity

Management Plan

Senior

Environmental

officer

Tails and Water

Superintendent

Environmental

Ecologist

Page 100 of 110

Rehabilitation

Threat


Vegetation clearing and

inappropriate management of

rehabilitation results in an

inability of Northparkes to

achieve net positive impact to

biodiversity at end of mine life

Annual flora and fauna monitoring

suggest not achieving biodiversity

targets

Implement improvement actions or

similar approved site.

Review of rehabilitation

management across site


success via rehabilitation

monitoring program.

Biodiversity

Management Plan

Environmental

Ecologist

Contamination -

Soil

Unknown extent of

contamination around site

results in failure to

appropriately remediate sites

to meet closure requirements

Final rehabilitation is not to the

closure standard

Site contamination assessment.

Implement remediation measures

as outlined from above

investigation.

Monitor rehabilitation as per

monitoring program.

Rehabilitation

Management Plan

Senior

Environmental

Officer

Site Operations

Manager

Subsidence Surface subsidence is greater

than that predicted

Data obtained from the

subsidence monitoring program

indicates subsidence is caving in a

direction different to prediction

Geotechnical and mine engineers

to evaluate data and remodel

predicted subsidence

Subsidence

Management Plan

Geotechnical

Superintendent

Topsoil Soil

type(s) and

suitability

Inadequate or insufficient

topsoil to create/enhance the

desired ecological

communities.

Monitoring and vegetation

assessments highlight inadequate

ground cover and/or paucity in

species diversity/distribution.

Import additional quantity of

topsoil to provide sufficient soil

profile for rehabilitation


success through rehabilitation

monitoring program

Biodiversity

Management Plan

Topsoil

Management Plan

Mine Planning/

Senior

Environmental

Officer

Failure to collect sufficient

topsoil during life of operation

for rehabilitation

Annual topsoil monitoring shows

shortfall of topsoil against future

rehabilitation requirements

Import additional quantity of

topsoil to satisfy shortfall

Continue to monitor topsoil

requirements

Topsoil

Management Plan

Mine Planning/

Senior

Environmental

Officer

Inadequate or Insufficient

landform shaping to achieve a

free draining surface

Identification of major ponding

areas during site inspections.

Review and undertake any

required earthworks to reshape the

land, and/or provide a drainage

path to the nearest sediment or

retention pond where practical.

Conduct works, in

accordance with

an approved SDP

and Environmental

Management

Plan

Senior

Environmental

Officer

Page 101 of 110

Rehabilitation

Threat



through site inspections.

Page 102 of 110

10. REPORTING

10.1 Annual Review

As per the project approval, by the end of March each year, or otherwise agreed by the

Secretary, the proponent shall review the environmental performance of the project to the

satisfaction of the Secretary. The review must:

a) describe the development that was carried out in the previous calendar year, and the

development that is proposed to be carried out over the next year;

b) include a comprehensive review of the monitoring results and complaints records of

the project over the previous calendar year, which includes a comparison of these

results against the

i. The relevant statutory requirements, limits or performance measures/criteria

ii. The monitoring results of previous years

iii. The relevant predictions in the EA

c) identify any non-compliance over the last year, and describe what actions were (or

are being) taken to ensure compliance;

d) identify any trends in the monitoring data over the life of the project;

e) identify any discrepancies between predicted and actual impacts of the project, and

analyse the potential cause of any significant discrepancies; and

f) describe what measures will be implemented over the next year to improve

environmental performance of the project.

10.1.1 Annual Environmental Management Report

The Northparkes AEMR will be submitted and developed in accordance with the current

NSW Department of Primary Industry-Mineral Resources Guidelines EDG03.

The Annual Review and AEMR document will be combined into one report which will be

submitted to the relevant stakeholders as the AEMR document.

10.2 Incident Reporting

The project approval requires that the proponent shall notify, immediately the Secretary and

any other relevant agencies of any incident. Within 7 days of the date of the incident, the

proponent shall provide the Secretary and any relevant agencies with a detailed report on

the incident, and such further reports as may be requested.

A Pollution Incident Response Management Plan (PIRMP) has been developed by

Northparkes which describes Northparkes response to a potential pollution incident. The

PIRMP can be found in Appendix A.

10.3 Regular Reporting

The project approval requires that the proponent shall provide regular reporting on the

environmental performance of the project on its website, in accordance with the reporting

arrangements in any plans or programs approved under the conditions of this approval.

Northparkes publishes its Environmental Monitoring Results Summary Report and Pollution

Monitoring data as required by the Environment Protection Licence on its website every

quarter. All environmental monitoring (water, dust and noise) results for the quarter are

explained and compared with the year to date monitoring data and published on its

website.

Page 103 of 110

11. PLANS

P1A Pre-Mining Environment – Project Locality

P1B Pre-Mining Environment – Natural Environment

P1C Pre Mining Environment – Built

P2 Mine Domains at MOP Commencement

P3A Conceptual Mine Plan – Year 1 (2015)

P3B Conceptual Mine Plan – Year 2 (2016)

P3C Conceptual Mine Plan – Year 3 (2017)

P3D Conceptual Mine Plan – Year 4 (2018)

P3E Conceptual Mine Plan – Year 5 (2019)

P3F Conceptual Mine Plan – Year 6 (2020)

P4 Final Rehabilitation and Post Mining Land Use

11.1 Cross Sections

P5A Conceptual Mine Plan Cross Sections

P5B Conceptual Mine Plan Cross sections

P5C Final Landform Cross Sections – Tailings Storage Facilities

P5D Tails Storage Facility – Conceptual Construction Design – Cross Section

Page 104 of 110

12. REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MOP

12.1 Review of the MOP

This section provides the protocol for periodic review of this MOP. Reviews are conducted to

assess the effectiveness of the procedures against the objectives of the MOP.

The MOP may be reviewed, and if necessary revised, due to:

The Annual Review or revision of strategies, plans and programs as required by project

approval;

As a result of the findings from the Independent Environmental Audit as required under

the project approval;

Recommendations resulting from the monitoring and review process;

Changing environmental requirements;

Improved knowledge or technology becomes available;

Changes in legislation;

Changes in the activities or operations associated with the Mine operation;

Research and trials producing data which can be used to establish, modify and

monitor the rehabilitated area; or

Where a risk assessment identifies the requirement to alter the MOP.

Any major amendments to this MOP which affect the fundamentals of the plan will be

undertaken in consultation with the appropriate regulatory authorities with a modification

submitted for approval.

12.2 Implementation of the MOP

Table 32 below defines personnel who are responsible for the monitoring, review and

implementation of this MOP.

Table 32 MOP Responsibilities

Title Responsibility

Managing Director Implement the procedures referenced in this MOP.

Undertake training in relevant Management Plans and procedures as

required.

Provide resources required and support to implement these

procedures.

Allow for forward planning to prepare rehabilitation areas.

PSE Manager Implement the procedures referenced in this MOP.

Undertake training in relevant Management Plans and procedures as

required.

Provide resources required to implement these procedures.

Allow for forward planning to prepare rehabilitation areas.

Ensure mine planning is compliant with the requirements of the MOP.

Allow for forward planning to allow for any possible reviews of the

MOP required by future mine planning.

Ensure all personnel undertaking works in relation to this MOP are

trained and competent.

Environment and Farm

Superintendent

Prepare the relevant Management Plans.

Implement, monitor and review the programmes and procedures

linked to this MOP.

Consult with regulatory authorities as required.

Undertake monitoring as required.

Undertake maintenance as required.

Page 105 of 110

Title Responsibility

Provide measures for continual improvement to this MOP and

procedures.

Ensure all personnel undertaking works in relation to this MOP are

trained and competent.

Report the progress of any rehabilitation and monitoring of biodiversity

in the AEMR.

Environment Advisor Provide support for the implementation of the Environmental and Farm

Superintendent and Manager responsibilities.

Page 106 of 110

13. REFERENCES

Centre for Mined Land Rehabilitation The University of Queensland 2008. Assessment of

historical data and information for rehabilitation strategy and capping of Tailings Storage

Facilities at Northparkes - Stage 1.

Centre for Mined Land Rehabilitation The University of Queensland 2010a. Rehabilitation

Strategies for Tailings Storage Facilities Stage 2 Report.

Centre for Mined Land Rehabilitation The University of Queensland 2010b. Rehabilitation

Strategies for Tailings Storage Facilities - Planning for Closure -Stage 3 Report.

Centre for Mined Land Rehabilitation The University of Queensland 2014. Rehabilitation

Strategies for Tailings Storage Facilities - Planning for Closure – Stage 4: Field trial for testing of

cover systems Construction report.

DNA Environmental 2015. 2014 Rehabilitation Monitoring Report for Northparkes Mines

Landcom 2004. Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction Volume 1.

Landloch and Golder 2005. Northparkes Mines landform Study: Stage 4 Report.

NSW Department of Planning & Environment 2014 Mod 2. Project Approval Application

Number 11_0060 Northparkes Mines Step Change Extension Project

NSW Department of Primary Industry 2006. Mineral Resources Guidelines and Format for

Preparation of an Annual Environmental Management Report: EDG03.

NSW Trade & Investment 2013. ESG3: Mining Operations Plan (MOP) Guidelines, September

2013.

Umwelt 2013. Environmental Assessment Northparkes Mines Step Change Project.

Page 107 of 110

APPENDICES

Page 108 of 110

Appendix 1 – Project Approval PA11_0060

Page 109 of 110

Appendix 2 – Topsoil Management Plan

Page 110 of 110

Appendix 3 – TSF Dust Management