Public Environmental Review Carina Iron Ore Mine: Yilgarn Region Wa

PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CARINA IRON ORE MINE: YILGARN REGION WA

Draft 3

FEBRUARY 2010

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Carina Iron Ore Project; Yilgarn Region WA Invitation to make a submission The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) invites people to make a submission on this proposal. Both electronic and hard copy submissions are welcome. The environmental impact assessment process is designed to be transparent and accountable, and includes specific points for public involvement, including opportunities for review of environmental impact assessment documents. In releasing this document for public comment, the EPA advises that no decision has been made to allow this proposal to be implemented. The Carina iron ore project consists of open cut mining 21.4 million tonnes of hematite/goethite ore from a single open pit. Mining will be conducted by conventional drill, blast, load and haul operations using hydraulic excavators and off highway trucks. The project involves construction of all infrastructure to support the 5 year operation, ancillary infrastructure such as accommodation village and airstrip, haul road from the mine to a rail siding, situated adjacent to the trans Australian rail line, construction of the rail siding and train loading at the siding. This document covers the assessment of the Carina iron ore project. In accordance with the Environmental Protection Act 1986, a Public Environmental Review (PER) has been prepared which describes the proposal and its likely effects on the environment. It also includes draft Management Plans and procedures for identified environmental impacts. The PER is available for a public review period of 4 weeks from xx, closing on xx. Comments from government agencies and from the public will assist the EPA to prepare an assessment report in which it will make recommendations to the government. Why write a submission? A submission is a way to provide information, express your opinion and put forward your suggested course of action - including any alternative approach. It is useful if you indicate any suggestions you have to improve the proposal. All submissions received by the EPA will be acknowledged. Electronic submissions will be acknowledged electronically. The proponent will be required to provide adequate responses to points raised in submissions. In preparing its assessment report for the Minister for the Environment, the EPA will consider the information in submissions, the proponent’s responses and other relevant information. Submissions will be treated as public documents unless provided and received in confidence subject to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 1992, and may be quoted in full or in part in the EPA’s report Why not join a group? If you prefer not to write your own comments, it may be worthwhile joining with a group interested in making a submission on similar issues. Joint submissions may help to reduce the workload for an individual or group, as well as increase the pool of ideas and information. If you form a small group (up to ten people) please indicate all the names of the participants. If your group is larger, please indicate how many people your submission represents. Developing a submission You may agree or disagree with, or comment on, the general issues discussed in the PER or the specific proposal. It helps if you give reasons for your conclusions, supported by relevant data. You may make an important contribution by suggesting ways to make the proposal more environmentally acceptable. When making comments on specific proposals in the PER: • clearly state your point of view; • indicate the source of your information or argument if this is applicable; and • suggest recommendations, safeguards or alternatives. Points to Keep in Mind By keeping the following points in mind, you will make it easier for your submission to be analysed:

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• attempt to list points so that issues raised are clear. A summary of your submission is helpful; • refer each point to the appropriate section, chapter or recommendation in the PER; • if you discuss different sections of the PER, keep them distinct and separate, so there is no confusion as to which section you are considering; • attach any factual information you may wish to provide and give details of the source. • make sure your information is accurate. Remember to include: • your name; • address; • date; and • whether and the reason why you want your submission to be confidential The closing date for submissions is Monday xx The EPA prefers submissions to be made electronically. You can either; • e-mail the submission to the following address: [email protected] OR • use the submission form on the EPA’s website: www.epa.wa.gov.au/submissions.asp OR • You can post your submission to: The Chairman Environmental Protection Authority Locked Bag 33, Cloisters Square WA 6850

Attention: Digby Drake-Brockman Where to Get Copies of this Document Electronic copies of the PER, PER appendices, supporting plans and procedures are available on the website www.polarismetals.com.au Printed copies of the PER may be obtained from Polaris Metals, at a cost of $10 per copy, or a CD- ROM version is available at no cost from: Aliesha Waru Level 2 1109 Hay Street WEST PERTH WA 6005 Phone: (08) 9215 1222

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Carina iron ore project Polaris Metals NL (Polaris) proposes to develop the Carina iron ore deposit, located approximately 60 km northeast of Koolyanobbing and 100 kilometres northeast of Southern Cross. Development and operation of the Carina deposit is scheduled to commence from end of 2010. The project involves the following components; • open cut mining from a single pit, • ore haulage approximately 50 kilometres to a siding on the existing trans Australian railway and • dry crushing and screening, • train loading at the siding. The mining rate is largely determined by available port and rail capacity. A mining rate ramping up to 4 Million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) is anticipated. The Carina deposit reserves identified so far provide an estimated 21.4 million tonnes of mineable iron ore, with an expected mine life based on that reserve of 5 years. In the event that further exploration identifies additional resources nearby that can be blended with ore for Carina, the mine life may be extended to ten years from start up, by reducing the mining rate per year. These other resource areas, if found, will be the subject of separate environmental applications. Key characteristics of the proposed Carina project are summarised in Table 1. Table 1: Key project characteristics Project description Components Open pit, mine waste landform and ancillary mine infrastructure. Mineral resource Direct shipping ore (DSO) – hematite / goethite. Processing type Dry crushing and screening. Date of commencement End of 2010 Life of pit 5 – 10 years. Date of completion 2016 – 2021 Mine Tenements Exploration tenement granted E77/1115 Mining lease M77/1244. Miscellaneous license applications for haul road, rail siding and ancillary infrastructure to be submitted. Resource 21.4 Mt at an average grade of 59% Fe. Mine waste volume 22.8 million bank cubic metres (bcm). This equates to 30.8 million loose cubic metres (lcm) Mining rate Up to 4 Mtpa. Stripping ratio (t:t) 1:2.88 Mining method Conventional open pit, drill and blast, hydraulic excavation, load and haul. Estimated project footprint 500 ha PAF mine waste The majority will be non acid forming (NAF). Approximately 1 to 2% by volume will be potential acid forming (PAF). This is to be encapsulated in the waste landform.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Infrastructure requirements • Crushing and screening plant. • Administration facilities, accommodation. • Workshop and equipment park-up area. • Reverse osmosis water treatment plant. • Power generation. • Wastewater treatment plant. • Access and haul roads. • Railway siding. • Airstrip. Stockpile requirements • Vegetation stockpile. • Topsoil stockpile. • Waste landform. • ROM ore stockpile. • Product stockpiles Water use Mine and immediate surrounds: 1,210 KL/d (442 ML/yr) Haul road and rail siding: 650KL/d (236ML/yr) Potable water Groundwater will be treated via a reverse osmosis plant for potable use. Power source and requirements Stand alone diesel powered generation facilities are proposed. Average demand of 4MW, with a maximum generating capacity of 5MW. Hours of operation 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Ore haulage 45-50 km unsealed haul road 200 tonne payload road trains operating 24/7 Rail siding Siding Ore stockpiles and loading facility on the existing trans Australian railway Train loading FEL operation loading train consists of 90 cars (7,000 tonnes per train). Approximately 10 trains per week

Assessment Polaris referred the Carina project to the Commonwealth Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) on 8 October 2008. On 5 November 2008, DEWHA advised Polaris that the project was not a Controlled Action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Polaris referred the Carina project to the West Australian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) on 15 September 2008. On 3 November 2008, the EPA published its decision to assess the project at a Public Environmental Review (PER) level of assessment, with a 4 week review period. Three appeals were received against this determination. On 2 April 2009, the Minister for Environment and Youth dismissed all appeals, retaining the PER with 4 week review period. The Scoping Document was approved by the EPA on 6 August 2009. This PER document describes the project and presents an assessment of its environmental impacts, for the purpose of obtaining Ministerial approval to implement the project.

Regional context Carina is located in the Coolgardie 2 Bioregion (COO2 – Southern Cross subregion) as defined by the Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA). The region is ii

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW east of the wheat belt and although it has a long history of pastoral, historic woodcutting and mining land uses, remains largely uncleared. Carina is approximately 20 kilometres from both the existing Mt Manning Nature Reserve and the Helena and Aurora Conservation Park. These reserves are located to the north and west of Carina. Regional surface drainage generally flows in a southwest direction, so there is a negligible risk of any surface drainage effect to existing reserves from the Carina project. The Carina project is located on the former Jaurdi pastoral station, purchased by CALM in 1989. In EPA Bulletin 1256, the former Jaurdi pastoral station is proposed to be included in the northern yilgarn conservation reserve system as the Jaurdi Conservation Park. The proposed Jaurdi Conservation Park is recognised for inclusion in the State’s conservation reserve system based on landscape and biodiversity values which are currently poorly represented, including flora and fauna of conservation significance.

Key environmental issues The Scoping Document, approved by the EPA on 6 August 2009, identified the following environmental issues as being the key issues requiring detailed assessment and management: 1. Clearing of vegetation for the mine and ancillary infrastructure. 2. Impact on individuals of Priority flora. 3. Impact on significant fauna. 4. Mine dewatering. 5. Possible acid generation from sulfidic rock. 6. Dust emissions. 7. Rehabilitation.

Key environmental outcomes Polaris Metals has consulted extensively with all stakeholders in the region over the last two years, particularly with the government departments involved. DEC and EPA have clearly outlined their preferences: • That any ground disturbance be kept to a minimum. • That development on the proposed park be minimised. • That transit movement across the proposed park be minimised. Polaris final decisions have reflected these requirements: • The choice of several accommodation village sites has focussed on a site near the railway junction with its access road being entirely off the conservation park area. • The haul road has been sited to the east of the conservation park area to minimise penetration and has been sited off the sand plain country where significant road work construction is required to sustain heavy haulage. • The locations chosen allow the use of the Mt Walton Road for access purposes and the haul road for final access to the mine site such that other access roads are avoided.

iii

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• The requirement for an airstrip near the mine site has been avoided by agreement to extend and use the existing Jaurdi Station airstrip. These steps alone have reduced the project footprint by 60 ha inside the proposed park and 56 ha overall. Polaris believes that it has consciensciously addressed the issue of reduction of the project’s impact as reflected in this proposal, the details of which follow.

• Minimise disturbance to the proposed Jaurdi conservation park A key factor in considering alternative locations for mine components is the cumulative disturbance footprint for the project. Individual project components (eg; open pit, waste landform and accommodation village) have a required disturbance area. Consolidating mine components can have the following benefits: • reduce overall disturbance area. • reduce length of interconnecting access roads and service corridors, • increase efficient use of space at one location, avoiding the need for additional clearing to duplicate functions at other locations. • reduce possible secondary impacts from such things as fauna deaths on roads and indirect vegetation impact. Alternative infrastructure location options have been examined, to maximise operational efficiencies and minimise disturbance within the proposed Jaurdi conservation park. Table 2 shows that disturbance inside the proposed Jaurdi conservation park boundary can be reduced by 60 hectares, and overall disturbance by 56 hectares, by locating ancillary infrastructure close to the rail siding. Table 2: Disturbance area comparison Mine work centre Siding work centre Project components inside outside inside outside proposed proposed proposed proposed park park park park Open pit 60 60 Evaporation pond 151 151 Waste landform 140 140 ROM pad 20 2 infrastructure including 28 10 office / workshops Accommodation village 4 4 Haul road 138 12 138 12 Access tracks 10 10 Hardstand areas 10 10 Borrow pits 8 8 Rail siding 50 50 Airstrip 20 0 0 subtotal 438 62 378 66 Total disturbed land 500 444 % of proposed park 0.172 0.153 Notes: 1 Inside waste landform footprint. iv

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• Identify the optimum haul road alignment Three haul road alignments were considered during preparation of the PER. The first two were identified in the Scoping Document and the third considered during consultation with stakeholders. These alignments are: 1. Haul road through the central portion of the proposed Jaurdi conservation park to the Darrine rail siding (also located in the proposed park). 2. Haul road on the eastern side of the proposed Jaurdi conservation park, to a rail siding located outside the proposed park. 3. Haul road on the eastern edge of the proposed Jaurdi conservation park, to exit the proposed park in the shortest possible route and then utilise an existing road.

Figure 1 shows the three haul road alignments considered. Table 3 summarises the factors considered in reviewing these alignment options, to select the optimum route.

Figure 1: Haul road options

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 3: Haul road options Factors Darrine Mt Walton Carina East (1) (2) (3)

Length inside the proposed park (km) 51 38 28.5 Length outside the proposed park (km) 0 12 28.5 Total HR length (km) 51 50 57 Rail siding relative to proposed park In Out Out Traverse sand topography (additional earthwork) No No Yes Multi-user potential No Yes No Visual impact / public contact Yes No Yes Overall rating √√ √√√ √

• Low impact to significant flora Botanical surveys have not identified any Declared Rare Flora (DRF) in the entire project footprint area, which includes the mine, haul road and rail siding. Priority species have been identified. Project components such as the waste landform and haul road have been relocated to avoid or reduce impact on these plants. All species identified have also been located outside project disturbance areas.

• Low potential for acid mine drainage formation Both major waste types (mafic schist and BIF/chert) have been shown to be non acid forming, and clearly so, by three separate static test methods: i. Total S significantly less than 0.3%. ii. NAPP all zero or negative / highly negative values.

iii. NAG values less than 5 kg H2SO4/t and most values significantly less than 1 kg H2SO4/t. The use of multiple methodologies indicating the same result increases confidence in the conclusion that the vast majority of mine waste is non acid forming. Combined, these two waste types comprise approximately 98% by volume of mine waste. The only waste material shown to be potentially acid forming is transition zone material around fault zones. This material represents only 1-2 % by volume of mine waste and will be encapsulated in the waste landform using high acid neutralising or acid consuming waste. Kinetic test methods indicate the rate at which acid generation is likely, in material that is acid generating. There is little value in kinetically testing non acid forming material. During operations, additional kinetic testing of fault zone material will be undertaken. These results will be used in refining the encapsulation cell design and construction.

• Final mine void issues considered early in mine closure planning Polaris has prepared a Conceptual Mine Closure Plan, consistent with the Australian and New Zealand Minerals and Energy Council / Minerals Council of Australia (ANZMEC/MCA) (2000) document Strategic Framework for Mine Closure. vi

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Polaris recognises there will be a pit void left after mining. Open mine voids after mining is a significant issue in a State such as WA, with a long history of open pit mining. Three key factors have been considered on the possible long term impacts from the final mine void at Carina. These are: 1. Groundwater quality. Local groundwater at Carina is currently saline, approximating that of sea water. Groundwater modelling predicts the final pit void to act as a groundwater sink, which will increase in salinity over time as a result of evapo-concentration. Such poor quality water is not naturally attractive to animals. If such water quality was a significant fauna attractant, evidence of concentrated grazing pressure would be present in similar situations in the region, such as around the many salt lakes, where water collects and remains for extended periods. This does not appear to be the case. 2. Precedent. There are historic open pit mine voids in the local area (within 20 kilometres). Water quality in these voids is unknown. There is no evidence of increased grazing impacts around these existing open pits as a result of population increase of grazing animals in the local area. 3. Absence of significant populations of feral animals, with low potential for population increase. There are few large introduced grazing animals in the local area. Carina is located in the former Jaurdi pastoral lease, which was purchased by CALM in 1989. The station was originally over 320,000 hectares in area. It has been destocked now for 20 years. There are no active pastoral stations abutting the former Jaurdi station area that could be a source of migrating stock. The fauna surveys conducted noted the presence of only two introduced grazing animals; camel and rabbit, with the rabbit being quite numerous and suggested as having a significant grazing effect on ground-level vegetation. There are few, if any, sheep, cattle or goats. With DEC management in the wider area, it is unlikely populations of these animals will migrate the substantial distance to establish a presence in the area and then build up sufficient numbers to damage vegetation by heavy grazing. On the information available, the future possible risk of a significant increase in grazing pressure, as a result of sustained concentration of feral animals, is considered unlikely. Polaris will continue to revise and implement the Mine Closure Plan during the life of mine. Post closure monitoring will provide data on the pit void lake.

• Develop initial rehabilitation plan Polaris has prepared an initial rehabilitation plan. Key sections of the plan are listed below. 1. Design of specific rehabilitation earthwork components: a. PAF encapsulation cell b. Landfill c. Abandonment bund. 2. Waste landform cover material and revegetation 3. Water management 4. Research trials 5. Monitoring 6. Performance targets 7. Remedial actions 8. Bond review 9. Reporting

vii

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Polaris will implement progressive rehabilitation during the life of mine. Local provenance seed, collected from the mine area and immediate surrounds, will be used in rehabilitation. These actions are consistent with the mitigation sequence steps; to rectify, minimise and reduce.

• Sharing information with adjacent tenement holders and locating infrastructure to enable multi-use of these facilities Information sharing between companies in the region has significant benefits, in increasing knowledge on key environmental factors such as flora, vegetation, Short Range Endemic fauna and subterranean fauna. Generally, there is a paucity of historical survey work in this region, so it is highly likely any new surveys will record new species, or range extension of known species. Information on environmental surveys is shared between companies, which has resulted in an improving, collective, knowledge base. Infrastructure sharing also has significant benefits, in eliminating the need to duplicate facilities. This reduces clearing and cost. A factor considered in the haul road alignment was that the option selected (Mt Walton) enables multi-user access to resources being examined in the Mt Finnerty area by other companies. If these deposits are developed, the Carina haul road provides access to these areas and avoids the need for other companies to duplicate a haul road.

Surveys and studies Baseline environmental surveys have been conducted for significant environmental factors. Polaris also uses an internal risk analysis methodology for environmental and safety management. This methodology has been used to develop a risk based approach to identify issues and develop appropriate management strategies. Studies conducted to date include: • Flora and vegetation surveys of: o the exploration tenement, o mine footprint, o haul road and siding. o accommodation village and siding. • Terrestrial fauna and short range endemic surveys of the mine area. • Subterranean fauna surveys of the mine area. • Hydrogeological studies on local aquifer and groundwater abstraction. • Hydrological studies on the local catchment and potential of flooding. • Aboriginal heritage surveys of project disturbance areas. • Mine waste characterisation for acid mine drainage potential. • Economic and social assessments.

viii

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Plans and procedures The PER includes a number of supporting plans and procedures covering specific environmental aspects as appendices. The public are also invited to comment on these documents as part of the review process. Plans and procedures are: 1. Project Environmental Management Plan (PEMP). 2. Vegetation Management Procedure. 3. Fauna Management Procedure. 4. Waste Management Procedure. 5. Acid Rock Management Procedure. 6. Water Monitoring Procedure. 7. Hydrocarbon and Chemical Procedure. 8. Dust Procedure. 9. Rehabilitation Plan. 10. Conceptual Mine Closure Plan.

Environmental factors Table 4 summarises the environmental factors identified for the project, together with proposals for their management. While all environmental factors listed in Table 4 are relevant, Polaris considers many are able to be managed using practices and procedures commonly applied in the mining industry. Polaris considers the seven key issues above require more detailed, project specific management and mitigation measures to be implemented, to ensure adverse environmental impacts from these factors are prevented or minimised and the stated EPA environmental objectives can be met. The predicted outcome in Table 4 for all 19 factors is no significant impact. Polaris considers there are only localised impacts on specific factors from the project and these can be adequately managed.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 4: Environmental factors and management No. Environmental EPA Objective Existing Environment Potential Impacts Environmental Management Predicted Outcome Factor Biophysical 1 Biodiversity Avoid adverse impacts on Carina is located in the Minor reduction in Design project to avoid areas of No significant impact biological diversity, Coolgardie Botanical District, biological diversity impact greatest biodiversity significance. on biodiversity comprising plants and animals which is characterized by at the local level due to land Clearing of native vegetation will and the ecosystems they form, Eucalypt woodlands and clearing and habitat be kept to a practical minimum. at the levels of genetic covers 5% of WA. removal. Rehabilitation of mined areas to diversity, species diversity and Vegetation communities are return native vegetation and ecosystem diversity. well represented in the region. habitat for native fauna. Weed and feral animal control programs. 2 Vegetation Maintain the abundance, Vegetation and flora studies The proposal will result in a Clearing of native vegetation will No significant impact diversity, geographic have been conducted over the total of 500 ha of vegetation be kept to a practical minimum. on vegetation distribution and productivity project site. being cleared. Minor reduction in abundance of of vegetation communities. There are no Threatened Refer to Table 17: vegetation communities due to Ecological Communities 7.6% of S2 community in clearing. (TEC’s) listed in the the Carina exploration All communities are well Coolgardie Botanical District. tenement to be cleared. represented in the region. One vegetation community in 1.7% of S2 community in the project site (S2) has a low the combined Carina and similarity to the Finnerty Chamaeleon exploration Range Priority Ecological tenements to be cleared. Community (PEC). 3 Flora Maintain the abundance, Flora species are well The clearing of 500 ha will Clearing procedure implemented No significant impact diversity, geographic represented in the wider result in loss of individuals to minimise disturbance area to on flora distribution and productivity region. of flora species. All species that required for the work. of flora at species and No flora species unique to the are well represented in the Collect seed before clearing. ecosystems levels through the region. project disturbance area. Strip topsoil and stockpile for use avoidance or management of in rehabilitation. adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge. Cleared vegetation will be respread on rehabilitated areas.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

No. Environmental EPA Objective Existing Environment Potential Impacts Environmental Management Predicted Outcome Factor 4 Significant Protect declared rare and No DRF identified in the Removal of a small number Individuals of priority species No significant impact flora priority flora, that occur project site. of individuals of Priority will be avoided where possible. on significant flora within the proposal area. Priority species have been flora. Seed collection from priority Protect other flora species of recorded in the project site. Many others of these species. particular conservation These species have also been species have been recorded Rehabilitation completion criteria significance (e.g. undescribed located in the wider tenement in the wider area. will be established in conjunction taxa, range extensions). area. with DMP and DEC.

5 Weeds Avoid introduction of invasive Two weed species have been Machinery and equipment Implement procedures to clean No introduction or weeds which may have a recorded in the exploration may introduce and spread down equipment and site spread of significant negative impact on native tenement. weeds in the project area. inspection to identify weed weeds vegetation communities. infestations. 6 Fauna Maintain the abundance, No fauna species unique to the The clearing of 500 ha of Clearing procedure implemented No significant impact diversity, geographic project disturbance area. vegetation and open pit to minimise disturbance area to on fauna distribution and productivity mining will result in a minor that required for the project. of fauna at species and reduction of fauna habitat in Re-establish fauna habitat on ecosystem levels through the the region. waste landform during avoidance or management of rehabilitation. adverse impacts and Feral animal control programs. improvement in knowledge. 7 Significant Protect Specially Protected No Threatened fauna species Clearing for mining will Rehabilitation completion criteria No significant impact fauna (Threatened) fauna consistent has been recorded unique to reduce available terrestrial will be established in conjunction on Threatened fauna. with the provisions of the the project disturbance area. fauna habitat. with DMP and DEC. Habitat at the project Wildlife Conservation Act Short range endemic site is not critical 1950. invertebrate identified has also habitat for significant Protect other fauna species of been recorded locally and 300 fauna or fauna unique particular conservation km away in the region. significance (e.g., short range endemic species, range extensions).

xii

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

No. Environmental EPA Objective Existing Environment Potential Impacts Environmental Management Predicted Outcome Factor 8 Subterranean Maintain the abundance, No stygofauna species found Open pit excavation and pit Conduct further troglofauna Increased knowledge fauna diversity, geographic at Carina. dewatering have the surveys to improve knowledge on of subterranean fauna distribution and productivity 6 troglofauna species found at potential to affect these species. in the region. of subterranean fauna at Carina : troglofauna species. No significant impact species and ecosystem levels on subterranean fauna through the avoidance or • 1 species inside the pit, not management of adverse yet found elsewhere. impacts and improvement in • 2 species outside the pit, knowledge. not yet found elsewhere. • 3 species also recorded at a control site. 9 Surface water Maintain the quantity of water The project area is in an arid The project will not use Establish flood management No significant impact quantity so that existing and potential climatic region. No permanent surface water supplies. procedure. on surface water environmental values, surface watercourses or Minor diversion of 1:100 including ecosystem wetlands occur in the project year flood event around maintenance are protected. area. mine pit and infrastructure Surface water only occurs is required. intermittently from rainfall events. 10 Surface Water Ensure emissions do not Surface water only occurs Potential exists for Runoff will be directed to No significant impact quality adversely affect environmental intermittently from rainfall contamination of surface sediment basins prior to on surface water values or the health, welfare events. water with sediment and discharge to natural waterways. and amenity of people and pollutants. Hydrocarbons and other land uses by meeting statutory chemicals will be stored in requirements and acceptable bunded facilities. standards. Water from potentially contaminated locations will be treated prior to discharge. Establish a site drainage plan

xiii

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

No. Environmental EPA Objective Existing Environment Potential Impacts Environmental Management Predicted Outcome Factor 11 Groundwater Maintain the quantity of Groundwater is approximately Pit dewatering model shows Evaporate surplus water in a No significant impact quantity groundwater so that existing 60m below ground level. a water budget surplus for pond within the waste landform on ground water and potential environmental No groundwater-dependent the first 3 years. footprint, bury with mine waste values are protected. vegetation ecosystems are in Major groundwater and rehabilitate. the local area. drawdown is confined to the Monitoring bores will record open pit and surrounding changes in groundwater levels zone of less than 500metres. Pit dewatering may affect surrounding vegetation and subterranean fauna in the vicinity of the open pit 12 Groundwater Ensure emissions do not Groundwater is saline, at There is a low risk of Bulk hydrocarbons are to be No significant impact quality adversely affect environmental approximately the level of significant contamination to stored in bunded facilities. on ground water values or the health, welfare seawater. groundwater as it occurs at Engineering controls and and amenity of people and depth and is naturally operational procedures will land uses by meeting statutory unsuitable for most reduce impact of spills. requirements and acceptable alternative uses. Monitoring bores will record standards. changes in groundwater quality parameters. Groundwater potentially impacted by oxidation of minerals in pit walls will be contained in a groundwater sink system. 13 Landform Ensure that the post mining Carina is a green fields Alteration of the current Mining will be conducted in No significant impact landform is safe, stable and is project. Existing environment landform due to mining. accordance with approved mine on regional landforms compatible with the intended contains only natural Open pit and a waste plans. post mining land use and landforms. landform will remain at the Rehabilitation and final mine surrounding environment. conclusion of mining closure plan will be established in conjunction with DMP and DEC. 14 Mine waste Ensure that waste is contained Carina is a green fields Contamination of soil, Encapsulation of PAF rock in the No significant impact and isolated so it does not project. Existing environment groundwater and surface waste landform from mine waste result in long term impacts on contains no mine waste water from acid rock the surrounding environment. landforms. drainage

xiv

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

No. Environmental EPA Objective Existing Environment Potential Impacts Environmental Management Predicted Outcome Factor Pollution Management 15 Waste disposal Ensure that wastes are Carina is a green fields Incorrect disposal of wastes Collection facilities are to be No significant impact contained, treated or collected project. Existing environment may cause pollution of provided for suitable wastes. from waste disposal so there is no long-term contains no waste disposal surface and ground waters Waste disposal facility on site is impact on the environment. sites. or land contamination. to comply with relevant Regulations and guidelines. Recycling is to be implemented for selected items. 16 Noise Protect the amenity of nearby Carina is in a remote location There is a low risk of noise No specific management No significant impact residents from noise impacts of the State. The nearest impact as the project site is measures proposed. from noise resulting from activities residential premises is 50km remote from any nearby associated with the proposal away. sensitive premises. be ensuring that noise levels meet statutory requirements and acceptable standards. 17 Air quality Ensure that air emissions Carina is in a remote location Dust from mining and ore Water carts will be used to No significant impact (particulates, greenhouse of the State. There are no transport may adversely suppress dust in operational from air emissions gases) do not adversely affect nearby dust sensitive premises. affect vegetation and flora areas. environmental values or the Existing environment contains in close proximity to Progressive rehabilitation will be health, welfare and amenity of no significant dust generation operations. implemented as soon as practical. people and land uses by sources. Greenhouse gas emissions Monitoring to record effects of meeting statutory from fuel combustion dust on adjacent vegetation. requirements and acceptable (earthmoving machinery, Best practice management to standards. power generation). reduce greenhouse emissions. Quantity of project emissions from fuel combustion not considered as a significant emitter.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

No. Environmental EPA Objective Existing Environment Potential Impacts Environmental Management Predicted Outcome Factor Social Surroundings 18 Aboriginal and Ensure that the proposal Surveys have not identified Impact to one Submit an application under No impact on cultural complies with the any ethnographical sites in the archaeological site. Section 18 of the Aboriginal significant Aboriginal heritage requirements of the Aboriginal project area. Heritage Act 1972 to obtain heritage sites, Heritage Act 1972; One archaeological site has permission to disturb the been identified in the open pit archaeological site. boundary. 19 Visual amenity Ensure that aesthetic values Carina is in a remote location There is a low risk of Mine closure measures No significant impact are considered and measures of the State and is not on impact on visual amenity as implemented to ensure that waste on visual amenity are adopted to reduce visual elevated land visible from any the project site is remote landform and other structures are impacts on the landscape distance from the project. from any nearby sensitive blended into the local landscape. where practicable. premises or public transport routes.

xvi

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ...... 1 1.2 OBJECTIVE ...... 1 1.3 THE PROPONENT ...... 1 1.4 LOCATION ...... 2 1.5 LAND USE ...... 3 1.6 CHANGES FOLLOWING REFERRAL ...... 7 1.7 JUSTIFICATION ...... 7 1.8 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ...... 8 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 13 3. THE PROPOSAL ...... 17 3.1 SITE LAYOUT ...... 17 3.2 CLEARING ...... 21 3.3 TOPSOIL MANAGEMENT ...... 21 3.4 MINING OPERATIONS ...... 21 3.5 ORE HAULAGE ...... 25 3.6 RAIL SIDING ...... 25 3.7 WATER BALANCE ...... 29 3.8 ANCILLARY COMPONENTS ...... 30 4. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ...... 37 4.1 CLIMATE ...... 37 4.2 GEOLOGY AND LANDFORMS ...... 38 4.3 SOILS ...... 39 4.4 SURFACE HYDROLOGY ...... 40 4.5 GROUNDWATER ...... 40 4.6 VEGETATION AND FLORA ...... 42 4.7 FAUNA ...... 56 5. SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 68 5.1 DEMOGRAPHY ...... 68 5.2 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE ...... 68 5.3 VISUAL ASSESSMENT ...... 69 6. CONSULTATION ...... 70 7. REGIONAL REVIEW ...... 75 7.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT ...... 75 7.2 GOVERNMENT POLICY ...... 76 7.3 GREAT WESTERN WOODLANDS ...... 79 8. RISK ANALYSIS ...... 81 9. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ...... 82 9.1 MINE WASTE ...... 82 9.2 SURFACE WATER ...... 90 9.3 GROUNDWATER ...... 92 9.4 VEGETATION AND FLORA ...... 97 9.5 TERRESTRIAL FAUNA ...... 104 9.6 SUBTERRANEAN FAUNA ...... 106

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.7 REHABILITATION...... 112 9.8 NOISE ...... 119 9.9 AIR EMISSIONS ...... 120 9.10 SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 126 10. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMITMENTS ...... 128 11. ABBREVIATIONS ...... 129 12. REFERENCES ...... 132

FIGURES Figure 1: Haul road options ...... v Figure 2: Project location ...... 4 Figure 3: ESA and Schedule 1 areas ...... 5 Figure 4: Figure 3 insert ...... 6 Figure 5: Carina project components layout ...... 19 Figure 6: Open pit plan view ...... 22 Figure 7: Open pit cross section ...... 23 Figure 8: Haul road location ...... 26 Figure 9: Rail siding layout ...... 27 Figure 10: Southern Cross climate data ...... 37 Figure 11: Annual evaporation ...... 38 Figure 12: Disturbance of vegetation communities by the Carina project ...... 55 Figure 13: SRE survey sites ...... 65 Figure 14: Flood pathways ...... 91 Figure 15: Indicative evaporation pond location ...... 94 Figure 16: Groundwater depression contours from pit dewatering ...... 96 Figure 17: Troglofauna habitat assessment ...... 110 Figure 18: Drill hole lithology ...... 111 Figure 19: Waste landform design ...... 114 Figure 20: Southern Cross 9am wind rose ...... 123 Figure 21: Southern Cross 3pm wind rose ...... 124

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

TABLES Table 1: Key project characteristics ...... i Table 2: Disturbance area comparison ...... iv Table 3: Haul road options ...... vi Table 4: Environmental factors and management ...... xi Table 5: Study team ...... 2 Table 6: Disturbance area comparisons ...... 12 Table 7: Principles of environmental protection ...... 15 Table 8: Area of disturbance ...... 17 Table 9: Mine water balance ...... 29 Table 10: Other location water balance ...... 29 Table 11; Alternative airstrip comparison ...... 36 Table 12: Vegetation characteristics of the southern cross subregion ...... 42 Table 13: Definition of conservation significant communities ...... 43 Table 14: Definition of conservation significant flora ...... 45 Table 15: Significant flora results from DEC database search ...... 47 Table 16: Critical value assets ...... 49 Table 17: Mine area disturbance on vegetation communities ...... 51 Table 18: Priority flora found in botanical surveys ...... 54 Table 19: Conservation significant species ...... 56 Table 20: Fauna and SRE sampling sites ...... 58 Table 21: Significant bird species recorded ...... 60 Table 22: Summary of Myglomorph spider species collected ...... 63 Table 23: Stakeholder consultation ...... 71 Table 24: Mine waste acid producing potential ...... 85 Table 25: Drill assay results ...... 85 Table 26: Acid base accounting of mine waste types ...... 86 Table 27: Trigger levels of metals in water ...... 87 Table 28: Emerson class results ...... 89 Table 29: Pit dewatering options ...... 93 Table 30: Clearing principles ...... 99 Table 31: Kwinana EPP Atmospheric Wastes Policy ...... 121 Table 32: NEPC Air Quality Standard ...... 121

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 33: NPI Conversion factors ...... 121 Table 34: Beaufort wind scale ...... 124 Table 35: Environmental Commitments ...... 128

APPENDICES Appendix 1: DEWHA decision Appendix 2: Surface water report Appendix 3: Groundwater report Appendix 4: Vegetation and Flora reports Appendix 5: Terrestrial fauna and SRE report Appendix 6: Subterranean fauna report Appendix 7: Project Environmental Management Plan Appendix 8: Conceptual Mine Closure Plan Appendix 9: Visual assessment report

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND In 2006, Polaris Metals NL (Polaris) acquired a number of iron ore tenements in the Yilgarn area of Western Australia. Those tenements included exploration tenement E77/1115-I within which the Carina deposit is located. Mining lease M77/1244, granted on 7/12/2009 by the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), covers the Carina iron ore project area. Exploration drilling identified the Carina deposit as being prospective for iron ore mining. The project, known as the Carina Iron Ore Project (Carina project), involves mining from a single open pit, crushing and screening and export of iron ore through the Port of Fremantle (Kwinana). Polaris referred the Carina project to the Commonwealth Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) on 8 October 2008. On 5 November 2008, DEWHA advised Polaris the project was not a Controlled Action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act 1999). Polaris referred the Carina project to the West Australian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) on 15 September 2008. On 3 November 2008, the EPA published its decision to assess the project at a Public Environmental Review (PER) level of assessment, with a 4 week review period. Three appeals were received against this determination. On 2 April 2009 the Minister for Environment and Youth dismissed all appeals, retaining the PER with 4 week review period. The EPA approved the Scoping Document on 6 August 2009.

1.2 OBJECTIVE This document is submitted to the EPA for the purpose of describing the project’s characteristics, environmental impacts and proposed management measures, in sufficient detail for the EPA to assess the project under the Environmental Protection Act 1986. Preparation of this document has been undertaken in accordance with the Scoping Document and according to the ‘Guidelines for Preparing a Public Environmental Review/ Environmental Review and Management Programme (EPA, 2004).

1.3 THE PROPONENT The proponent for the Carina iron ore mine is Polaris Metals NL. The company address is: Level 2, 1109 Hay Street, West Perth, WA 6005

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Postal address: PO Box 670 West Perth WA 6872

Telephone: (08) 9215 1222 Fax: (08) 9215 1299

Additional information regarding Polaris can be obtained from the website: www.polarismetals.com.au. The Polaris contact is Paul Rokich (Environmental Manager). Polaris has also engaged a range of specialist consultants to assist in particular aspects of the project assessment. The list of specialist service providers is presented in Table 5. Table 5: Study team Team member Organisation Experience Libby Mattiske Mattiske Consulting Pty Vegetation and flora surveys. Ltd. Jan Henry Ninox Wildlife Consulting Terrestrial and SRE fauna surveys. Stuart Halse Bennelongia Environmental Subterranean fauna surveys Consultants Peter de Broekert Rockwater Pty Ltd Ground and surface water assessment / modelling ALS Laboratory Group Mine waste characterisation. Charles Newland Pilbara Flora Peer review

1.4 LOCATION The Carina project is located in the western section of the Goldfields, approximately 60 kilometres northeast of Koolyanobbing and 100 kilometres northeast of the town of Southern Cross (Figure 2). The proposed mine is located in the Shire of Yilgarn. The mine is located in exploration tenement E77/1115-I. Mining lease M77/1244, which covers the mine area, was granted by DMP on 7/12/2009. The proposed Mt Walton rail siding, located at the intersection of the access road to the Mt Walton Intractable Waste Facility and the trans Australian railway, is located in the Shire of Coolgardie. Carina is located approximately 20 kilometres from both the existing Mt Manning Nature Reserve and the Helena and Aurora Conservation Park (Figure 2). These conservation reserves are located to the north and west of Carina. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show Carina is not in or adjacent to any Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) or Schedule 1 Area, as described in Regulation 6 and Schedule 1, clause 4 of the Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004. Carina is located in the former Jaurdi pastoral station, proposed in EPA Bulletin 1256 (May 2007) for inclusion in the extended Yilgarn conservation reserve system as the Jaurdi Conservation Park. This proposal has not yet been implemented by Government.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

1.5 LAND USE The project is located in a former pastoral lease (Jaurdi Station), purchased by CALM (now DEC) in 1989. The station has been destocked and pastoral activities no longer occur. The former station homestead is occasionally used by visitors. The CALM Goldfields Regional Management Plan No. 27: 1994-2004 (CALM 1994) includes the following relevant details on Jaurdi Station. The station was purchased using funding from the Sandalwood industry to achieve sandalwood management objectives under the Sandalwood Conservation and Regeneration Project. Recommendation 1: That Jaurdi pastoral lease should become State forest, vested in the Lands and Forest Commission. State forest is an appropriate form of tenure to achieve the multiple objectives of sandalwood, arid-zone woodland and flora and fauna conservation without unduly restricting other land uses, particularly mining. Recommendation 2: That the northern portion of Jaurdi pastoral lease including the Hunt Range be excised from the lease and incorporated into Reserve No. 36208 Mt Manning Range Nature Reserve, an area of 37 240 ha. 'C' Class status is recommended for the proposed addition. Recommendation 2 has been implemented. More recently, the remaining area of the former pastoral lease is proposed to be reclassified as the Jaurdi Conservation Park (EPA, 2007, DEC 2007 & 2008). There is a small gold treatment plant in use on a tenement approximately 15 km northwest of Carina. There are historic mines but no operational mines in the immediate locality. The State’s highest level waste disposal facility, the level IV Mount Walton Intractable Waste Storage Facility is approximately 15 km north east of Carina. The area of E77/1115 is 19,947 ha and M77/1244 is 1,000 ha. General Purpose lease (G) G15/21A for 438 ha, to cover the siding was submitted to DMP on 3/2/2010. Miscellaneous license (L) L15/305A for 707 ha to cover the haul road was submitted to DMP on 3/2/2010. L15/303A for 9 ha to cover the accommodation village was submitted to DMP on 25/1/2010. L15/306A for 22 ha to cover the village access road was submitted to DMP on 3/2/2010. A request for a separate lease to the Dept of Regional Development & Lands under the Land Administration Act 1997 to cover the rail siding was submitted on 28/1/2010. At a later stage, a number of other miscellaneous licences may also be required for additional water bores and pipeline corridors. These bores have not been identified at this time.

675 000 700 000 725 000 750 000 775 000 800 000 825 000

NT LEGEND Lake Barlee WA Carina deposit SA Major road Perth Minor road Existing track

Railway Drainage

Exploration tenement E77/1115-1

Lake Barlee Youanmi Road Elvire Rock

Existing conservation park Lake Barlee Road Barlee Lake

Broadbents Existing nature reserve Lake Giles

Lake Environmentally sensitive area (ESA) Bullfinch Evanston Road

Pigeon Rocks File notation area (FNA) Proposed Symonds Jackson/ Range Existing Mt Manning Range Nature (Class C) Nature Reserve Reserve

Marda

FNA 668

FNA 667

Nierguine Rock FNA 275 Hamersley Lakes Mount Walton Road Carina at Mount Jackson Road kson Fl Clar Yendilberin Hills

Watt Hills

FNA 2939 Lake Deborah East

Lake Deborah East

Lake Deborah West Dowd Hill Koolyanobbing

Railway rlie Darrine

lgoo Lake Walton a Lake Baladjie K Lake Seabrook Perth to Lake Julia Lake Julia Lake Eva

Note: Nature reserves and conservation parks have been interpreted N from the Northern Yilgarn Conservation Reserves Issues Paper, March 2008. Lake Koorkoordine 020km Source: Roads, rivers, railway, lakes, forest/shrub and place names from Scale 1:1,100,000 GEODATA TOPO 250k (Optimum scale 1:250,000) Carina deposit from Prodemas Page size: A4 Tenements and file notation areas from DoIR Environmentally sensitive areas from DEC Projection: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50

6 525 000675 000 6 550 000 6 575 000 700 000 66 00 000 725 000 6 625 000 750 000 6 650 000 6 675 000 775 000 6 700 000 800 000 6 725 000 825 000 6 750 000 6 775 000 6 525 000 6 550 000 6 575 000 66 00 000 6 625 000 6 650 000 6 675 000 6 700 000 6 725 000 6 750 000 6 775 000 Date: Figure No: 12.09.2008 MXD: Polaris Metals NL PolarisYilgarnIronOreGIS.mxd Locality plan and regional setting 2 File Name: 8054_05_F001.1_GIS_AI Carina Iron Ore Project POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Figure 3: ESA and Schedule 1 areas

Source: DoIR (July 2008)

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Figure 4: Figure 3 insert

Carina

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

1.6 CHANGES FOLLOWING REFERRAL A number of changes to the proposal have occurred since the project was referred to the EPA. Some were flagged in both the referral and Scoping Document, as options under consideration. These principally involved choices of haul road alignment and rail siding location, in turn determined by the choice of port for export of product. Others changes have been made resulting from baseline survey work identifying significant environmental features and comments from stakeholders. Mine redesign has occurred to implement the steps in the mitigation sequence to, avoid or minimise impacts. Project changes have been made as follows: a) Preference for Fremantle (Kwinana) as the port for export of ore. Initial consideration was for train loading to occur at the Darrine siding. Although the Darrine siding and connecting haul road to the mine provides a shorter transport distance to Fremantle (Kwinana), an alternate rail siding location at the junction of the Mt Walton Road and the rail line was selected. This alternate location reduces impact to the proposed Jaurdi conservation park from haul road and siding activities. The alternate location also provides both general site access as well as ore haulage, eliminating the need for construction of an additional general access road to Darrine. b) Consolidate the 3 separate infrastructure areas into a single area to the south of the open pit. c) Examine options to locate a range of mine infrastructure either close to the mine or close to the rail siding. The processing plant, accommodation village and airstrip can be located close to either of the major work centres. One of the benefits of locating this infrastructure close to the rail siding is that it moves this infrastructure outside the proposed Jaurdi conservation park boundary. d) Move the waste landform to the west of the open pit. The outcome of this is to: o avoid all individuals of Grevillea georgeana (P3) in the mining tenement. o avoid all W12 vegetation community. o avoid all impact to the intermittent creekline The above changes have been incorporated into this assessment document, are not considered to materially affect the scope of the proposal and in fact reduce the environmental impact of the proposal.

1.7 JUSTIFICATION 1.7.1 State and National Benefits WA’s economy is heavily dependent on mineral resource projects, their ability to provide direct employment over a sustained period and flow on benefits in infrastructure construction and supply of goods and services. The Carina project is located in close proximity to existing State infrastructure. This includes standard gauge rail infrastructure only 45 kilometres south of the project, with export of ore possible from either of two existing port locations (Fremantle (Kwinana) or Esperance). Development of the Carina project will result in positive regional and state benefits, including: • Investment of capital into the WA economy (estimated at $280 million). • Major infrastructure construction in both rail and port sectors. • Anticipated revenue from the project is estimated at $1.6 billion.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• Direct local employment with an operational workforce of approximately 100 and a construction workforce between 200-300. • Indirect benefits from demand for goods and services from local communities. • Additional Commonwealth and State Government revenues through additional royalties, taxes and other charges. State royalty payments for the project are estimated at $150 million. • Increased export value of WA iron ore to international customers.

1.8 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The location of the orebody, and hence the open pit, is fixed. All other project components have some degree of flexibility in where they are located. This allows Polaris flexibility to move or redesign components to implement steps in the mitigation sequence; avoid or minimise, impacts on environmental features. Alternatives for the project considered the following factors: • geological location, • tenement holdings, • resource quality, • resource accessibility, • location of areas of recognised high conservation value, • practical resource extraction issues, and • economically viable scale of operation.

Criteria used in determining alternatives were: • Proposal meets relevant Federal and State environmental objectives and standards. The proposal has been determined to not be a Controlled Action by the Commonwealth Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (Appendix 1). The State EPA’s objectives for the project, as described in Section 9, are likely to be achieved. • Avoid areas identified as having the highest conservation values in the region (i.e. avoid major BIF ranges with known high conservation values, as contained in reference documents such as EPA Bulletin 1256 (May 2007)). • Proposal provides economic benefits to the proponent, State economy and local community. This realises the Government’s position to balance the protection of environmental values and develop mineral resources in the region. This is consistent with guidance documents such as the “Strategic Review of the Banded Iron Formation Ranges of the Midwest and Goldfields” (DEC and DoIR 2007). • Project would not cause adverse social impacts.

1.8.1 Mine location The discrete zone of mineralisation defining the Carina deposit excludes alternative locations for the mine. No alternative locations to the Carina deposit are currently available. Carina is the most advanced of Polaris’ exploration targets to date.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Iron ore mineralisation has been identified at a number of other locations in the region but resource definition drilling for these targets has not yet been completed. Polaris is confident further exploration of these targets will prove the establishment of a long term iron ore province in the region.

1.8.2 Port and rail Description of ore transport and export (Section 1.8.3) is provided to fully describe the project. However, the project scope under this assessment does not include these components. Unlike iron ore projects in the Pilbara, where rail transport of ore and port operations have historically been constructed and operated by the proponent as ‘private infrastructure’, the facilities proposed for use by Polaris are existing and common use (public) infrastructure, controlled and managed by third parties. All project activities on this infrastructure are covered by the respective agencies controlling the infrastructure. This is Westnet Infrastructure Group for the rail network and the Fremantle Port Authority (FPA) for port operations and product export.

1.8.3 Ore transport and export In the project referral and scoping document stages, two possible ports for export of product were identified for consideration, the Port of Fremantle (Kwinana) and Port of Esperance. Final selection of a port is dependent on the respective port authority requirements. The choice of rail siding location on the trans Australian rail line would in turn define the haul road alignment from the mine to the siding. The port of Fremantle (Kwinana) is preferred as the port for export of ore. However, licences and leases over sufficient land will be made at the rail siding, to allow infrastructure to direct trains to either Fremantle (Kwinana) or Esperance, so that neither option is excluded from future planning options. The Mt Walton rail siding location (with connecting haul road from the mine) has been selected as the location of the ore storage and loading facility. It is considered this alignment provides the best overall outcome, by reducing impact to the proposed Jaurdi conservation park from haul road and siding activities and eliminating the need to construct an additional general access road to an alternative siding location. The port of Fremantle (Kwinana) currently imports and exports bulk quantities of iron ore, coal and clinker from berth 2. There are existing train unloading, conveyors, storage areas and ship loading facilities at the site. Train configurations are proposed as 2 x Q class locomotives pulling 90 cars, with a total payload per train of 7,000 tonnes to Fremantle (Kwinana). To allow for space constraints at the Kwinana port site, these trains are to be split at the Kewdale marshalling yards into shorter lengths, for travel to the port and unloading. Four train sets are required to transport the 4 Mtpa mine production to port.

1.8.4 Rail siding location and haul road Early consultation with DEC staff indicated preferred support for the Mt Walton road siding option over an alternative at Darrine siding, as it directs mine traffic to the eastern edge of the

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW proposed Jaurdi conservation park rather than the more central road to Darrine. In addition, the Mt Walton siding itself is outside the proposed park. Vegetation and flora surveys have been undertaken for the haul road and siding. The surveys are reported in Section 4.6.5 and flora and vegetation management discussed in Section 9.4.4.2. The haul road alignment has been modified to avoid priority species where possible or impact the least number of individuals.

1.8.5 Ancillary infrastructure With 50 kilometres separating the two main work centres (the mine and rail siding), alternative locations for key ancillary infrastructure, close to either work centre, is possible. Duplicating infrastructure at both sites is inefficient and costly. Locating the main centre for ancillary infrastructure close to one work centre is logical, with smaller scale infrastructure located at the other site as needed. The rail siding has been selected as the main work centre. This means that clearing and development of the processing plant, accommodation camp and airstrip are removed from the proposed conservation park and the area required for ROM stockpiles, workshop and power supply at the mine can be reduced. Further details on each item are as follows:

1.8.5.1 Processing plant The crushing, screening and product stockpile plant is to be located at the siding.

1.8.5.2 Power supply The processing plant is the project’s largest power user, so the main power generation capacity will be located close to the processing plant.

1.8.5.3 Workshop The main workshop complex. Smaller facilities will be established at the other work centre for servicing and routine maintenance.

1.8.5.4 Accommodation village During 2008, an exploration camp was established approximately 2 kilometres west of the proposed mine. This camp was demobilised over summer of 2008-09. With the site now decommissioned, the option exists for Polaris to review the selection criteria for the location of the accommodation village. Criteria considered are: • Location between 2 – 5 kilometres from a major work centre. This allows sufficient distance to attenuate possible noise and dust issues but close enough for short commute distance to work and minimal disturbance from access roads and infrastructure. • Proximity to central power and water infrastructure. This allows supply to the accommodation village from spur lines off the central supply network. The accommodation village location at the siding work centre is shown in Figure 5.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

1.8.5.5 Airstrip An airstrip is required for workforce FIFO commuting and emergency events. The optimum location of the site’s airstrip is also within a short distance from the main work centre and associated infrastructure, with all weather vehicle access to the airstrip. An existing 1,200 metre airstrip exists at the Mt Dimer mine, approximately 20 kilometres northwest from Carina and an 800 metre airstrip at the Jaurdi Station homestead, approximately 35 kilometres south east of Carina. While these airstrips are sufficient for small planes, longer airstrips are required to accommodate larger aircraft routinely used on mines for FIFO rosters and the Royal Flying Doctor Service (RFDS). With the main work centre and accommodation village located close to the rail siding, the airstrip at Jaurdi Station is a practical option as a site airstrip (Figure 5). The airstrip has been separately approved to be upgraded and lengthened to accommodate RFDS planes. Use of the upgraded airstrip by Polaris also eliminates the need for further clearing to build a new airstrip.

1.8.6 Disturbance area A key factor in considering alternative locations for mine components is the cumulative disturbance footprint for the project. Individual project components (eg; open pit, waste landform and accommodation village) have a required disturbance area. Consolidating mine components can have the following benefits: • reduce overall disturbance area. • reduce length of interconnecting access roads and service corridors, • increase efficient use of space at one location, avoiding the need for additional clearing to duplicate functions at other locations. • reduce possible secondary impacts from such things as fauna deaths on roads and indirect vegetation impact. Alternative infrastructure location options are discussed in Sections 1.8.5 and 3.8. Table 6 shows the effect of alternative locations on reducing disturbance to the proposed conservation park.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 6: Disturbance area comparisons Mine work centre Siding work centre Project components inside outside inside outside proposed proposed proposed proposed park park park park Open pit 60 60 Evaporation pond 151 151 Waste landform 140 140 ROM pad 20 2 infrastructure including 28 10 office / workshops Accommodation village 4 4 Haul road 138 12 138 12 Access tracks 10 10 Hardstand areas 10 10 Borrow pits 8 8 Rail siding 50 50 Airstrip 20 0 0 subtotal 438 62 378 66 Total disturbed land 500 444 % of proposed park 0.172 0.153 Notes: 1 Inside waste landform footprint.

Additional clearing per kilometre for infrastructure: Haul road @ 30 m wide 3.0ha Access road @4m wide 0.4ha Power corridor @10m wide (partial clearing) 1.0ha

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Polaris referred the Carina Iron Ore Mine project to the Commonwealth DEWHA on 8 October 2008. On 5 November 2008, DEWHA advised Polaris the project was not a Controlled Action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Appendix 1). Polaris referred the Carina Iron Ore Mine project to the West Australian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) on 15 September 2008. On 3 November 2008, the EPA published its decision to assess the project at a Public Environmental Review (PER) level of assessment, with a 4 week review period. Three appeals were received against this determination. On 2 April 2009 the Minister for Environment and Youth dismissed all appeals, retaining the PER with 4 week review period. A scoping document was prepared in consultation with the EPA and other stakeholders, consistent with requirements in Section 6.1 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (Part IV Division 1) Administrative Procedures 2002. The document identifies key environmental factors applicable to the project. The factors listed in Table 4 also include information on objectives, existing environment, potential impact, environmental management and predicted outcomes relating to each factor. The scoping document also details the proposed scope of investigation works, stakeholder consultation programme and anticipated project timeline. A draft scoping document was submitted to the EPA on the 20 April 2009. Changes to the document were incorporated as a result of consultation with the EPA Service Unit (EPASU) and the final document was approved by the EPA on 6 August 2009. Polaris considers management measures can be implemented to ensure significant environmental impacts from the project are prevented or minimised and the stated EPA objectives are met for all identified environmental factors. The EPA takes into account the following principles in assessing development proposals: 1. The Precautionary Principle 2. The Principles of Intergenerational Equity 3. The Principle of the Conservation of Biological Diversity and Ecological Integrity 4. Principles in relation to Improved Valuation, Pricing and Incentive Mechanisms 5. The Principle of Waste Minimisation The Carina project has considered these principles in the project scope and design. Table 7 outlines how these principles have been considered in this proposal.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 7: Principles of environmental protection Principle Relevant Consideration of principle PER section /Appendix

The Precautionary Principle Yes Specialist surveys and assessment have been Flora: Section 4.6 undertaken to assess the existing environment and Fauna and SRE: Section 4.7. Where there are threats of serious or determine the likelihood of serious or irreversible irreversible damage, lack of full scientific Subterranean fauna: Section 4.7.4 impacts. certainty should not be used as a reason for Groundwater: Section 4.5 postponing measures to prevent Surface water: Section 4.4 environmental degradation. In the application ARD: Section 9.1.4.1 of the precautionary principle, decisions should be guided by • careful evaluation to avoid, where Polaris has developed a risk matrix, which is used Section 8 to quantify potential risk on both general and practicable, serious or irreversible damages to the environment; specific environmental factors. Polaris’ objective • an assessment of the risk-weighted is that residual risk (after management) is in the consequences to various options. moderate or low categories. Specific plans and procedures have been Appendix 7 developed to reduce the residual risk on environmental factors to acceptable levels.

The Principles of Intergenerational Equity Yes Polaris has prepared a Conceptual Mine Closure Appendix 8 Plan to prevent or minimise long-term The present generation should ensure that the environmental impacts and address long term health, diversity and productivity of the post mining land use considerations. environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations

The Principle of Conservation of Biological Yes The project has been designed to avoid impacts Section 9 Diversity and Ecological Integrity where possible or minimise impacts through planning, design and rehabilitation. Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Principle Relevant Consideration of principle PER section /Appendix

Principles in relation to Improved Yes Environmental management costs (including Appendix 8 Valuation, Pricing and Incentive remediation of contamination, waste Section 9 Mechanisms management, rehabilitation and revegetation) are incorporated into planning and financing of the Environmental factors should be included in project. the valuation of assets and services. b) The polluter pay principle – those who generate pollution and waste should bear the cost of containment, avoidance and abatement. c) The users of goods and services should pay prices based on the full life cycle costs of providing goods and services, including the use of natural resources and assets and the ultimate disposal of any wastes. d) Environmental goals, having been established, should be pursued in the most cost effective way, by establishing incentive structures, including market mechanisms, which enable those responses to environmental problems.

The Principle of Waste Minimisation Yes Polaris will implement the waste minimisation Section 9.1 hierarchy for the Carina project, namely the All reasonable and practicable measures sequence to avoid, reduce, reuse, recycle and should be taken to minimise the generation of recover waste. waste and its discharge to the environment. Polaris has a waste management procedure for the Appendix 7 project.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

3. THE PROPOSAL

3.1 SITE LAYOUT Key characteristics of the project are summarised in Table 1. The Carina project layout is shown in (Figure 5). The project will consist of the following components: • Open pit. • Topsoil and vegetation stockpiles. • ROM pad, crushing and screening plant and product stockpiles. • Mine waste landform. • Access and haul roads. • Administration, workshop and supply buildings. • Accommodation village. • Support infrastructure: power station, bore field, laboratory, airstrip, reverse osmosis water treatment and wastewater treatment. • Rail siding with product stockpiles.

Table 8 provides a summary of the anticipated area of disturbance for major project components. Table 8: Area of disturbance Area of Disturbance Indicative Footprint (ha) Open pit 60 Waste landform 140 Infrastructure, ROM, and accommodation 70 Haul road 150 Rail siding facility 50 Ancillary / incidental clearing 30 Total proposed disturbance 500

The site will comprise a single open pit of approximately 40 ha in area. The dimensions of the proposed open pit are approximately 1,500 metres long by 380 metres at its widest point, extending to 170 metres below ground level at its deepest point. However, approximately 1,000 metres of the open pit length will only be approximately 100-120 metres deep. Mined ore will be deposited on the Run of Mine (ROM) pad for dry crushing and screening. A total clearing area of 60 ha has been allowed, to provide for clearing around the pit perimeter to construct safety bund walls, ramps, access roads and allow for sight lines.

Mine waste will be transported to the waste landform, situated to the west of the open pit. Approximately 31 million lcm of mine waste will be extracted over the life of the project. A waste landform will be required with an approximate area of 120 hectares. An additional 20 hectares will be required for clearing an additional zone around the perimeter of the waste landform for topsoil and vegetation stockpiles. The waste landform will be 30-35 metres high, which is the approximate height of the Yendilberin hills, immediately to the south of the project area. The waste landform will therefore reflect the current surrounding topography.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

3.2 CLEARING Clearing will be kept to the minimum required to undertake site operations. Polaris has an internal clearing procedure, originally developed for exploration activities. The procedure has been revised to cover all clearing activities during the mining phase of the project and is included as part of the Vegetation Management Procedure. This procedure is a component of the Project Environmental Management Plan (Appendix 7). The procedure involves: • Internal application to clear with management signoff. • Induction/training of personnel on the importance of minimising clearing. • Marking out the extent of clearing and exclusion areas. • Supervision of clearing activity. The extent of clearing will be reported in the annual environmental report (AER).

3.3 TOPSOIL MANAGEMENT Topsoil will be stripped from cleared areas and stored in low stockpiles approximately 2 metres high. Stored topsoil will be respread over areas undergoing rehabilitation. Where possible, topsoil will be directly returned. That is, topsoil stripped off one area will be placed directly on another area undergoing rehabilitation. In the early stages of mine development, all topsoil stripped will need to be stored. The internal clearing procedure also covers topsoil removal and storage.

3.4 MINING OPERATIONS 3.4.1 Open pit The mining method will use conventional drill and blast techniques followed by hydraulic excavation, load and haul. Likely configuration of mine equipment is a 150-200 tonne excavator, with a 30 tonne bucket capacity, matched to 150 tonne off highway trucks. Mine waste will be deposited on the waste landform, to the west of the open pit. Ore will be deposited on the ROM stockpile at the crushing location. Design parameters for the open pit are: Bench slopes 650 Bench height 20m Berm width 7.5m Inter ramp angle 500 Ramp width 25m Ramp grade 10% Figure 6 and Figure 7 show plan and cross section views of the open pit respectively. The pit is 1,500 metres long and 380 metres wide at its widest point. The northern portion is the deepest, at a maximum of 170 metres below natural ground level, although approximately 1,000 metres of the pit would average approximately 100 metres deep.

Figure 6: Open pit plan view Figure 7: Open pit cross section POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

3.4.2 Mine waste Approximately 22.8 million bcm, or 30.8 million lcm, of mine waste will be extracted over the project’s life. A waste landform will be required with an approximate area of 120 hectares. The waste landform will be 30-35 metres high, which is the approximate height of the surrounding ridgelines. The waste landform will therefore reflect the current landscape and topography. The waste landform is located 100 metres from the pit edge and has the following design parameters: Lift height 15m Berm width 10m Final face angle 180 Overall slope angle 160

3.4.3 Mine infrastructure area The mine infrastructure area will contain the following components: 1. ROM pad 2. Power supply 3. Workshop 4. Equipment park area 5. Water storage dam 6. Administration, lunch room and ablution buildings Two possible locations are shown in Figure 5. An initial infrastructure area south of the open pit was identified in both the Referral and Scoping Documents. However, flood modelling indicates that a significant proportion of this area could be inundated in a 1:100 year flood event. This is discussed further in Section 4.4. The alternative infrastructure area location, on higher ground, is shown in Figure 5 as Infrastructure 2. Key issues to consider in the final decision on location of the infrastructure area are: • The northern location (Infrastructure 2) adds approximately five kilometres (2.5 km each way) to ore haulage from the mine to the rail siding. This adds substantial operating and maintenance cost, increases fuel use and emissions. • Potential flooding of the southern area is a rare event (1:100 years). • Modelling also indicates potential flood water ingress to the open pit. This necessitates construction of a flood protection levee bank, at least over a portion of the floodway area, to protect the open pit. • Continuing the levee bank is a practical solution to mitigate flood impact at the southern site. This then avoids the additional cost of haulage from Infrastructure 2. • Flood warning procedures are required to be included into the site’s Emergency Response Plan. • The flood levee bank can also form part of the abandonment bund system at mine closure, so fulfil a number of functions. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 1: Prior to construction, make a decision between infrastructure areas 1 and 2 for the final location of the mine infrastructure area.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

3.5 ORE HAULAGE Ore will be hauled approximately 50 kilometres in 200 tonne payload road train trucks, from the mine ROM to the rail siding adjacent to the trans Australian railway. Ten trucks, each making 8 trips per day, are needed to haul the required quantity of ore to the rail siding. This equates to one truck movement (empty return or loaded) approximately every 10 minutes. The haul road route is shown in Figure 8. The haul road will also function as the main site access to the Carina mine for supplies, workforce traffic and visitors. The haul road will be maintained and watered to provide a safe, trafficable surface. The haul road will have a trafficable width of 8-9 metres, with V drains on either side of 6-8 metres each. The total width of the road will be between 25 – 30 metres.

3.6 RAIL SIDING Ore will be crushed, screened and stockpiled into separate lump and fines products at the rail siding, before being loaded and transported on the existing trans Australian railway. An area of 50 hectares has been allocated for rail siding infrastructure. This is discussed further in Section 9.4.4.2 The rail siding will contain the following components: 1. ROM ore pad 2. Crushing and screening plant 3. Product stockpiles 4. Train loading facility 5. Power supply 6. Workshop 7. Equipment park area 8. Water storage dam 9. Administration, lunch room and ablution buildings The likely rail configuration is a ‘balloon loop’ (Figure 9). This allows trains to exit off the main line, pass through the siding to be loaded, travel in an arc returning to the main line pointing in the direction for the return journey. This avoids the need to de-couple and transfer locomotives to the other end of the train. Train loading is by front end loader (FEL) loading wagons from either lump or fines product stockpiles. Train configurations are proposed as 2 x Q Class locomotives pulling 90 cars. Each car carries 78 tonnes of ore, for a total load of approximately 7000 tonnes per train.

Figure 8 HR 102

HR 103

HR 105

Figure 9 POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

3.7 WATER BALANCE Water will be required for dust suppression on active work areas, ore processing and ancillary uses. The estimated quantity of water required at the mine and for the first section of haul road is shown in Table 9 and for the balance of the haul road and rail siding in Table 10. The combined usage is approximately 1,860 KL/day or 21.5 L/sec.

Table 9: Mine water balance ML/yr KL/day Comments Inputs Pit dewatering 411 1,126 av 13L/sec (combined pumping) Rainfall capture 30 82 av 300mm/yr in 60 ha pit Total Inputs 441 1,208 Usage Dust suppression -mine 273.8 750 50t truck x 15loads/day HR watering_section 1 25t semi trailer_ 15-20km x 91.2 250 from mine 10loads/day Crushing 47.5 130 1.5 L/sec_sprays Washdown/infrastructure 50 KL/day_washdown, ablutions, 14.6 40 area stockpile sprinklers (RO water: av 200L/person/day x Accommodation village 14.6 40 100 persons) x 2 = raw water input Total Use 442 1,210

Table 10: Other location water balance ML/yr KL/day Comments HR watering_section 2 and 3 25t semi trailer_ 30-35km x Usage 182 500 from mine 10loads/day Siding - dust suppression, 36 100 10t truck_ 10 loads/day Siding - stockpile sprinklers 18 50 Total Use 236 650

Water for mine use shown in Table 9 will be sourced from pit dewatering bores and rainfall capture in the open pit. Potable water from a reverse osmosis (RO) plant will be used to supply the accommodation village. A second, smaller RO plant may be installed at the mine to provide potable supply to administration buildings and ablutions, rather than pump or transport potable water from the accommodation village RO plant. Bottled water will be used to supply potable water to satellite work centres.

The mine usage is consistent with others in the region. Globe Environments (2009) quote groundwater abstraction and use at Cliffs Windarling Range mine of 560Ml/y and 380Ml/y for 2006 and 2007 respectively.

Due to the significant length of haul road and distance of the siding from the mine site, water use for the purposes shown in Table 10 cannot practically be sourced solely from bores at the mine. Separate bores will be constructed to provide water for dust suppression along the haul road. Capacity of water trucks used in similar situations is limited to approximately 10-15 kilometres before refilling. The exact location of these stations has not been determined. These will be determined based on the configuration (and therefore range) of the haul road water truck. Two or three filling stations along the haul road are anticipated.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

3.8 ANCILLARY COMPONENTS 3.8.1 Ore processing Ore will be placed in separate grade control stockpiles and blended into the crushing and screening plant by front end loader (FEL). A primary and secondary crusher system will process ore into two products; lump (>6.3mm - < 32 mm) and fines (< 6.3 mm). Crushed and screened ore will be stored in separate product stockpiles. Product stockpiles of approximately 40,000 tonnes will be held at the rail siding.

3.8.2 Workforce The project will require a permanent workforce of approximately 110 people, working on a continuous roster basis. Rosters of 2 weeks on:1 week off (2:1) or 9 days on:5 days off (9:5) are common in the mining industry. Other rosters may also be considered. Some of the workforce is also anticipated to be on a fly in – fly out (FIFO) roster. Therefore, an airstrip is required close to the mine to service this, as well as any emergency requirement. Workforce rosters are discussed further in Section 5.1. With towns such as Kalgoorlie, Coolgardie and Southern Cross reasonably local, it is anticipated much of the workforce will come from these centres. Due to the significant distance from the mine to the nearest towns and city of Perth, both fly-in-fly-out (FIFO) and drive-in-drive-out (DIDO) arrangements will be available.

3.8.3 Accommodation village In addition to the permanent workforce of approximately 110 people, external providers will be required to supply maintenance and service personnel on an as needed basis. This is estimated to average 10 additional personnel. Catering personnel are estimated to add another 10 and visitors 10, providing a total of 140. With approximately one third of the total workforce rostered off, it is anticipated approximately 90-100 people will be on site at any one time. A 150 person accommodation village is proposed, located in close proximity to the main work centre. Workers will commute daily from the village to work centres. During 2008, an exploration camp was established approximately 2 kilometres west of the open pit. This camp was demobilised prior to the summer of 2008-09. The location of the initial exploration camp was only approximately 1.5 kilometres due west of the proposed mine and downwind of prevailing morning winds. For these reasons, locating the permanent accommodation village on the site of the exploration camp is not supported. The accommodation village has been located a few kilometres north of the rail siding (Figure 9). Detailed design of the accommodation village has not been undertaken at this point in time. Site selection was based on the following criteria: • Located a short commute distance from the main work centre. • On elevated, well draining local topography, providing flood protection and efficient drainage for wastewater systems. • Existing access roads can be used to reduce the extent of clearing required. • Proximity to central power and water infrastructure.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

A targeted flora and fauna survey of the site have been undertaken, to ensure it avoids significant environmental factors such as Malleefowl nests and priority plant species. A miscellaneous licence has been submitted for the accommodation village site.

3.8.4 Administration Administration infrastructure at the mine site and rail siding will include portable office buildings, lunch room and ablutions.

3.8.5 Laboratory A laboratory will be required to process grade control samples. The laboratory will be located in the main infrastructure area and serviced by central power and water services.

3.8.6 Communications A stand alone satellite link system will provide television, telephone and data communication for the site.

3.8.7 Workshop A fully equipped maintenance workshop will be constructed at the main work centre, to service the mining fleet, ore haulage and light vehicles on site. The workshop will be equipped with a wash down bay connected to an oil/water separator. A smaller workshop will also be located at the other work centre, for routine servicing and maintenance.

3.8.8 Power supply Stand alone diesel powered generators will generate power for the project. The main generating capacity will be located at the main work centre, to supply power for ore processing, workshop, administration and the accommodation village. Due to the significant distance between the two work centres, a separate generator will be located at the other work centre.

3.8.9 Water bores

3.8.9.1 Mine As discussed in Section 3.7 bores constructed to dewater the open pit will provide water for the mine area.

3.8.9.2 Haul road Along the remaining length of haul road, additional water filling stations will need to be located. The exact location of these stations has not yet been determined. The supply requirement of each station is modest, at approximately 250 KL/day. Water will be piped from local bores to the filling stations.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

3.8.9.3 Siding Table 10 shows the quantity of water required at the siding is also modest, at approximately 150 KL/day. One or two bores within or close to the siding is considered sufficient for this supply.

3.8.10 Hydrocarbons The largest quantity of hazardous material stored on site will be diesel fuel, used for power generation and mining equipment. Site storage of 220 kilolitres is required, as self bunded tanks or on ground tanks located in a bunded compound compliant with AS 1940:2004. A range of lubricating oils will also be required. Bulk storage tanks of 10 kilolitres for each oil grade will be required. These will similarly be either self bunded tanks or tanks located in a bunded compound. A licence to store dangerous goods will be submitted to DMP when exact storage capacities and locations are finalised.

3.8.11 Explosives Explosives magazines are licensed by DMP. A licensed facility will be constructed at the mine to store explosives required for mining operations.

3.8.12 Waste

3.8.12.1 On site landfill A site landfill will be located in the mine waste landform, for domestic waste from the accommodation village and administration buildings as well as solid industrial waste from the workshop, laboratory and supply areas. Domestic and industrial waste will be buried on at least a weekly basis, but usually on a daily basis using mine waste.

Recyclable items such as steel, batteries and aluminium will be stored in a laydown area on site and periodically transported to recycling contractors at Kalgoorlie.

3.8.12.2 Liquid waste Waste oil will be stored in bulk tanks for periodic collection by licensed contractors.

3.8.12.3 Sewage treatment A wastewater treatment plant will treat wastewater from the accommodation village prior to discharge. Treated water from the plant will require discharge to the environment. The environmental acceptability of potential discharge methods will be evaluated prior to selecting the final design (e.g., subsoil infiltration, evaporation pond or irrigation), in consultation with appropriate government departments and the local Shire.

At an average domestic water consumption of 200 litres/person/day, an estimated disposal volume of 18 kilolitres per day is anticipated. This accounts for workforce rosters so that

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW approximately 90 people are on site at any one time. This quantity is below the Category 85 Registration threshold (>20 but <100kL/day) and well below the Category 54 Licence threshold of >100kL/day.

The quantity of wastewater from ablutions at the mine site is expected to be significantly less than the accommodation village. The mine site facilities do not include shower, laundry or kitchen wastewater. Disposal of mine site ablution wastewater will be by either conventional septic tank and leach drain or alternative systems which dispose wastewater to an irrigation area.

3.8.13 Access Site access for the project includes a portion of the existing Mt Walton intractable waste facility access road, Reserve 44102, from the Great Eastern Highway to the trans Australian railway. This section is approximately 45 kilometres in length. Polaris has obtained agreement from the government agency managing the waste facility and access road (Department of Treasury and Finance – Building Management and Works, (BMW)) to use this section of road for mine support traffic. That is worker commute traffic, supply of goods, services and site visitors. It does not include ore haulage. The rail siding is located at the intersection of the rail line with the waste facility access road. A private access road into the siding area will exit the waste facility access road. This private access road joins the main dedicated haul road from the mine to the siding. All mine traffic therefore uses the Mt Walton access road from the highway to the rail siding and then private access road / haul road to the mine. The total length of this access route is approximately 90 km (Figure 8). Detailed consultation has occurred between Polaris and BMW on the use of their access road. Polaris fully support the outcome of that consultation, that ore haulage is not appropriate on the Mt Walton road, for a range of reasons. The key reasons are: • safety considerations for other road users, • duty-of care to employees and the public, • interaction of ore haulage with hazardous waste deposition campaigns. The Mt Walton access road is not a public use road reserve. There is no automatic right or entitlement for Polaris, or any other company, to be able to use this road. In short “we can’t use it – just because it’s there”. In examining any option to use the Mt Walton road for ore haulage, in order to get from the Carina mine to the Mt Walton road – at any point, some length of haul road is required. A number of possible connection points were discussed with BMW. The exclusion radii from the waste facility dictated the minimum possible haul road distance would be approximately 18 kilometres. Other connection points discussed that were further down the road required a haul road of 30 and 40 kilometres. These distances correspond to clearing areas of 54, 90 and 120 hectares respectively. All these alignments run east to southeast, between Carina and the Mt Walton road. Figure 8 shows there is only one existing track in this region and that it crosses both the proposed Polaris haul road and the Mt Walton road. Visitors using this track would therefore need to cross haul road traffic anyway. Polaris considers a single crossing point to not represent a significant potential impact to public access or activity.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

The existing Mt Walton road is not suitable for sustained heavy haulage. The majority of the 45 kilometre length of the Mt Walton access road north of the rail line traverses yellow sandplain country. These deep sands are not suitable for sustained heavy haulage of 200 tonne payloads (with total vehicle mass approximately 240 tonnes), without costly earthworks to build a basecourse of sufficient strength to take these loads. The existing road is not capable of supporting this traffic. The other significant constraint on this section of the Mt Walton road is that it crosses the undulating sand dune system in the region. Trucks are therefore either pulling hard up hills or braking down hills, increasing damage and corrugations on the road surface, increasing fuel consumption and wear and tear on vehicles. Two of the key criteria for the haul road route selected in the PER was to avoid sand areas and align the haul road on contour (rather than cross contour) as much as possible. One key finding from the botanical survey conducted over the chosen route (Mattiske October 2009)(pg 13) (Appendix 4) is that “The scrub community which was present on the yellow sandy soils towards the southern end of the proposed transport route was populated by a more diverse range of species…” This is not surprising considering other sandplain regions in WA are regarded for their high floristic diversity. A high proportion of the Priority species identified in the survey over the chosen route were in the yellow sandplain country. The chosen haul road route minimises disturbance in this floristically diverse landform type.

3.8.14 Airstrip Like the accommodation village, the optimum location of the site’s airstrip is also within a short distance from the main work centre, with all weather vehicle access. As discussed in Section 1.8.5.5, with ancillary infrastructure located close to the siding work centre, use of the upgraded Jaurdi airstrip is a practical option. This eliminates the need for additional clearing to construct another airstrip in the region. The airstrip length will be determined from Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) requirements, based on the anticipated type of aircraft used in the FIFO operation and to accommodate RFDS aircraft. In discussion with OEPA, an analysis of the following alternative airstrip locations was undertaken: 1. Extend and use the existing Jaurdi station airstrip 2. Extend and use the existing Mt Dimer mine airstrip 3. Alternative airstrip locations, close to the proposed accommodation village and outside the proposed Jaurdi conservation park. A separate agreement to extend the existing airstrip, from 850m to 1,200m has been provided by DEC to Reed Resources. This is to enable the airstrip to meet the minimum requirements for Royal Flying Doctor Service (RFDS) use. The figure provided by the DEC identifies 3 proposed options to extend the runway to 1,200m. The total length (of all options) is 1,500 metres. This information indicates a 1,500m runway could be achieved with minimal vegetation clearing.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Extending the runway a further 500m (300 m runway plus 200m clearway), would enable use by larger aircraft routinely used in FIFO operations. At 100m wide, this equates to an additional 5ha more clearing than shown in the DEC agreement. In comparison, the Mt Dimer airstrip is currently 1,200m long. Extending this to 2,000m (1,800m runway plus 200m clearway) requires 8ha of additional clearing. Now that the main work centre and accommodation village is based near the rail siding, use of this airstrip would also mean a travel distance of approximately 60 kilometres. This airstrip is also located on a tenement not held by either Polaris or Reed Resources. Permission from the Tenement holder would be required to implement this option. Multi use infrastructure. Figure 5 shows the location of Reed Resources Finnerty 9, 10 and 11 project areas in relation to the Polaris Haul Road. Polaris and Reed Resources have established an access agreement to allow Reed Resources to utilise the Polaris haul road, in the event these project areas are developed. This will avoid the need to clear additional haul roads, substantially reducing the cumulative impact in the region. A similar process has been agreed, to allow Polaris to use the airstrip at Jaurdi station that is extended by Reed Resources. Consolidating mine infrastructure to minimise overall disturbance from duplication of infrastructure and additional length of interconnecting access roads has been addressed in both the ESD and PER – and is considered a significant environmental benefit. Existing tracks provide access to the Jaurdi airstrip. There is no requirement for additional clearing. Alternative locations close to the accommodation village require complete construction of a new 2,000m x 100m airstrip. This requires clearing 20ha for the runway plus clearway and approximately 50m x 50m = 0.25ha for the aircraft apron. The landform and soil type of this area is generally described as undulating yellow sandplain. The sandy soils are unsuitable for the load bearing capacity of aircraft. Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) Regulations provide detailed specifications of runway pavement density. A gravel basecourse is required to achieve a safe runway landing and takeoff surface. This means further clearing for borrow pits. Previous borrow pits in the area developed for basecourse material for the Mt Walton road show average gravel depths of 1 - 1.5m. Therefore at least 3ha of borrow pits are required. It is unknown where these borrow pits are located at this point in time. Logically, at least some (if not most) would not be located adjacent to existing tracks. Therefore additional clearing is also required for access tracks to these gravel resource(s). An estimate of 5 kilometres of additional tracks (at 4m wide) is an additional 2ha of clearing. Approximately 1kilometre of additional access track is also required to access either of the alternative airstrip sites from the accommodation village. At approximately 4 m wide, this equates to 0.4ha of additional clearing. In comparison to the 5ha of additional clearing required to extend the Jaurdi airstrip, the total clearing necessary to construct a new airstrip in either of the alternative locations is 20.25+3.0+2.0+0.4 = 25.65ha. The undulating yellow sandplain covers a vast area to the north, east and south of the rail siding location. Botanical surveys undertaken for the project’s haul road, rail siding and accommodation village indicate these sandplains have a high floristic diversity, occurrence of priority and range extension flora - more so than the Eucalypt woodlands on red sandy clay soils to the west. The existing Jaurdi airstrip is located on the latter vegetation type while both alternative airstrips are located on sandplains.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This means not only will locating a new airstrip outside the proposed park require clearing over 20 ha more land than extending the Jaurdi airstrip, the vegetation is more likely to contain priority, range extension or undescribed species. Polaris maintains its preference, to use the extended airstrip at Jaurdi station. This- • makes maximum use of existing facilities and tracks, • allows multi use by two companies in the region and • is the option with least additional disturbance (in both ‘quantity’ and ‘quality’). Table 11 summarises factors used in supporting this view. Table 11; Alternative airstrip comparison Factor Jaurdi Mt Dimer Alternatives Existing approval for part extension Y N N Further clearing required for 1,800m runway (ha) 5 8 25.65 Use of existing tracks Y Y N Location relative to proposed park IN IN OUT Commute distance (approx) (km) 10 60 1-2 Multi use infrastructure Y ? ? Vegetation type Euc. Euc. Sandplain woodland woodland Likelihood of priority, range extension, undescribed spp √ √ √√√√ Overall preferred rating 1 3 2

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

4.1 CLIMATE The climate of the Coolgardie region is described as arid non-seasonal to semi arid Mediterranean. This is characterised as an arid climate with cool winters and hot, dry summers. Annual precipitation ranges from 200 mm to 300 mm, falling predominantly in the winter months, with sporadic summer cyclonic rainfall. Figure 10 shows climate data from Southern Cross, which is located 100 kilometres to the southwest of the project area (BOM 2009). Figure 10 shows rainfall occurs in all months, with the wettest period from May to August. The average annual rainfall of 294 mm is exceeded by the average annual evaporation rate of approximately 2,400 millimetres (Figure 11) by a factor of approximately 8 to 1. Evaporation exceeds rainfall in all months of the year, with June being the minimum at approximately 70 millimetres and January, the maximum, at approximately 360 millimetres.

Figure 10: Southern Cross climate data

40 45 40

30 35 30 25 oC 20 mm 20 15 10 10 5 0 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Mean rainfall (mm) Mean maximum temperature (°C) Mean minimum temperature (°C)

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Figure 11: Annual evaporation

Carina

Source: http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/cgi_bin_scripts/evaporation.cgi

4.2 GEOLOGY AND LANDFORMS The Carina project is located in the Coolgardie bioregion, which lies within the Yilgarn Craton, a major geological province of the Eastern Goldfields in Western Australia. The Yilgarn Craton consists of greenstone belts and granites of Archaean age (2,400-3000 million years old). The bioregion is characterised by granite rocky outcrops, low greenstone hills, laterite uplands and broad plains (CNS 2008). There are no major rivers in the bioregion. Numerous salt lakes of varying size occur across the region. Carina is situated in the south-eastern part of the Marda-Diemals greenstone belt, within the Archaean Yilgarn Block. A craton scale sinistral fault zone, the Mt Dimer Shear Zone, separates the Marda-Diemals and Hunt Range greenstone belts. The Marda-Diemals belt can be divided into two greenstone successions. The lower 3.0 gigayear (Ga) greenstone succession is characterised by mafic volcanics and BIF and is subdivided into a lower sequence of basalt and ultramafic rocks overlain by a relatively thick BIF/chert unit, which is then overlain by dominantly mafic volcanics. The upper 2.73 Ga greenstone succession unconformably overlays the lower succession and consists of felsic to intermediate volcanic rocks and clastic sedimentary rocks (CNS 2008). The Kalgoorlie Province (Tille 2006) occupies about 148,400 km2 (5.9% of WA). It is based on the Kalgoorlie Province of Bettenay (1983) and correlates with the bulk of the Coolgardie Botanical District of Beard (1990) and the Coolgardie IBRA region of Environment Australia (2000), the south-east of the Yilgarn Craton tectonic unit of Tyler and Hocking (2001), and the south-east of the Yilgarn Plateau Province of Jennings and Mabbutt (1977).

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Tille (2006) describes landforms of the Kalgoorlie Province as consisting of an extensive plateau of low relief. This includes: Flat to undulating plains with small valleys (occasionally broken by low narrow rocky hills, ridges, tors and bosses) are most commonly found on granitic terrain. On these plains may be found some silcrete duricrust, claypans, salt lakes with dunes and lunettes, gilgai areas, small remnants of sand plain, and small dune tracts. Low breakaways with short saline footslopes are also occasionally present. Broad, flat to undulating, shallow valley plains are below these undulating plains and are formed on Quaternary alluvium and colluvium. These valley plains show little defined drainage and some seasonal lakes and claypans with isolated granitic and basic rock outcrops. Slightly lower down in the landscape are broad, flat valleys with chains of salt lakes. Also present on these valley floors are saline flats, claypans, kopi dunes, sand dunes, and sometimes tors and bosses of outcropping granites. Gently sloping to undulating plateau areas on granites and gneisses are situated higher in the landscape. These have long gentle slopes and, in places, abrupt erosional scarps. Some granitic bosses and tors are present. Rocky ranges, hills and ridges on the greenstone, along with some undulating to low hilly country. Associated with this hilly terrain are gently undulating stony plains and low rises on limonite. Level to gently undulating sandplains and gravelly sandplains are mostly found over lateritic residuals and granitic basement. There are also some extensive loamy plains with sandy surfaces.

4.3 SOILS Tille (2006) describes soils of the Kalgoorlie Province as consisting of the following: Undulating plains on granite have extensive areas of calcareous loamy earths with red loamy earths, red deep loamy duplexes and red shallow loamy duplexes. Red-brown hardpan shallow loams, yellow loamy earths, salt lake soils, red shallow sands and cracking clays are present, and red shallow sandy duplexes on breakaways. Broad valley plains have red loamy earths and calcareous loamy earths, with Red-brown hardpan shallow loams and red/brown non-cracking clays. There are also some alkaline grey shallow and deep sandy duplexes and yellow loamy earths. Saline valley floors have salt lake soils with saline wet soils and red deep sandy duplexes. Red deep sands are found on lunettes associated with the lakes. Gently sloping uplands on granite have yellow sandy earths and yellow loamy earths, with some yellow deep sands and ironstone gravelly soils. Hilly terrain on greenstone has red loamy earths, calcareous loamy earths and calcareous shallow loams, along with stony soils and red shallow loams. Sandplains have red deep sands, with some yellow deep sands in the west. On the sandy surfaced plains there are red deep sands and red loamy earths with red sandy earths.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4.4 SURFACE HYDROLOGY There are no permanent surface water bodies in the region. The project area is located within the Yilgarn catchment of the Avon River Basin. The Avon River has a catchment of approximately 120,000 km2. On a more local scale the project lies within the Lake Eva sub- catchment (CNS 2008). The Carina open pit is situated on a small rise, so the majority of the project area is water shedding. Surface drainage in the surrounding area is characterised by a combination of minor ephemeral drainage lines and broad imperfectly drained flats. Figure 5 shows minor drainage lines to the south and east of the project area. Culverts will be installed under road crossings to enable surface flow to continue downstream past the project site. Rockwater (2009) undertook surface water flow modelling for catchments around the project site. Their report is attached as Appendix 2. Catchments C1 and C2 have the potential to impact on the open pit and southern infrastructure area in a 1:100 year flood event. Key outcomes from the report are summarised below: • The estimated 1 in 100 year peak flow from catchment C2 could impact below 458.25 m AHD at the southern portion of the mine pit. Existing ground level is approximately 458m AHD at this point. It is recommended that a perimeter levee with added free board be constructed to protect the mine pit. • The combined 1 in 100 flow of catchments C1 and C2 extend to ground level 455.35 m AHD and will impact the proposed infrastructure area. The existing contour in the lowest section of the infrastructure area is approximately 455m AHD. • The large event flow paths take the form of wide sheet flows in an area of relatively flat terrain. • The maximum velocity for the 1 in 100 years ARI peak is low, in the order of 0.5 m/s and 0.6 m/s. The estimated duration of peak flow is in the order of 2 to 3 hours. This data indicates scour hazard to protective levees is not considered a serious issue. • The peak water level from the main catchment is estimated at 448.50 m AHD and will not adversely impact the proposed project area.

4.5 GROUNDWATER The project area is located in the Deborah sub-area of the Goldfields groundwater area (DoW, 2009). Rockwater (2008) undertook a desktop review of hydrogeology in the region surrounding the project area. Climate data (Section 4.1) shows that evaporation greatly exceeds rainfall, therefore groundwater recharge is limited and restricted to short term events where rainfall exceeds evaporation. In combination with the region’s elevated topography and bedrock dominated geology, it is considered conditions are generally poorly suited for groundwater development. Exploration drilling at Carina indicates that groundwater is approximately 60 metres below ground level and has a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) value of approximately 30,000 milligrams per litre, which approximates that of seawater. Such a level eliminates this groundwater from the majority of other beneficial uses such as irrigation, stock water or potable use (without treatment).

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

The Australian Natural Resources Atlas (ANRA) and the Department of Environment and Conservation Native Vegetation Viewer show there are no groundwater-dependent ecosystems in the local area. Rockwater (2009a) undertook modelling on the effect of pit dewatering on groundwater levels. Their report is attached as Appendix 3. Key outcomes from the report are summarised below: • Dewatering rates required to maintain groundwater level below the descending pit floor are: o 22 L/sec for the first three years, o 16 L/sec for year 4, and o 12 L/sec for year 5. • At the conclusion of mining, the maximum groundwater level drawdown will be at 315m RL. This is approximately 90 metres below natural ground level. • The major impact of groundwater depression is very localised, mostly confined to the open pit and a surrounding zone of approximately 200 metres. • Groundwater level depression beyond 500 metres from the open pit is less than 10 metres after five years of pumping. • Groundwater levels will recover once dewatering activities cease. • Post mining, the pit void will act as a groundwater sink.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4.6 VEGETATION AND FLORA 4.6.1 Regional vegetation The Carina project is located in the Coolgardie Botanical District, which is characterized by Eucalypt woodlands and covers 5% of the State of Western Australia (Beard 1990). The dominant plant families within the Coolgardie Botanical District include Myrtaceae (myrtles such as eucalypts and melaleucas), Asteraceae (daisies), Chenopodiaceae (salt bushes) and Poaceae (grasses) (Beard 1972; 1990). Table 12 shows the vegetation characteristics associated with generic environments including uplands, valley and salt lake surfaces and granite basement outcrops. Table 12: Vegetation characteristics of the southern cross subregion Environment Description Characteristic vegetation Type Uplands The uplands make up the Mallees (Eucalyptus leptopoda, E. platycorys upper level of the and E. scyphocalyx) and scrub-heaths landscape and are the (Allocasuarina corniculata, Callitris preissii, eroded remnants of a Melaleuca uncinata and Acacia lateritic duricrust. beauverdiana) occur on these uplands. The scrubs are rich in endemic Acacia and Myrtaceae. Valleys and salt Valleys have quaternary Valleys consist of diverse Eucalyptus lake surfaces duplex and graduational woodlands (Eucalyptus salmonophloia, E. soils and include chains salubris, E transcontinentalis, E. longicornis) of saline playa-lakes. rich in endemic eucalypts. Salt lake surfaces support dwarf shrublands of samphire. Granite basement The granite basement Support swards of Borya constricta with outcrops outcrops are at midlevels stands of Acacia acuminata and Eucalyptus in the landscape. loxophleba. Source: Cowen et al. (2001).

4.6.2 Communities of conservation significance Communities of plants are described as Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) if they have been defined by the Western Australian Threatened Ecological Communities Scientific Advisory Committee and gazetted under the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 (WC Act, 1950). Some Western Australian TECs have also been listed as TECs under the Commonwealth EPBC Act 1999. Some communities which are under consideration for listing as TEC’s but do not meet the defined criteria, or are not yet adequately surveyed for a decision to be made, are added to the DEC's list of Priority Ecological Communities (PEC’s). PEC categories are ranked in order of survey priority for; Evaluation of conservation status - Priority 1 to 3, are rare but not threatened - Priority 4, or conservation dependent - Priority 5. Table 13 describes definitions of conservation significant communities.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 13: Definition of conservation significant communities Category Code Category Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC) Presumed Totally Destroyed An ecological community will be listed as Presumed Totally Destroyed if there are no recent records of the community being extant and either of the following applies: PTD (i) records within the last 50 years have not been confirmed despite thorough searches or known likely habitats or; (ii) all occurrences recorded within the last 50 years have since been destroyed. Critically Endangered An ecological community will be listed as Critically Endangered when it has been adequately surveyed and is found to be facing an extremely high risk of total destruction in the immediate future, meeting any one of the following criteria: (i) The estimated geographic range and distribution has been reduced by CE at least 90% and is either continuing to decline with total destruction imminent, or is unlikely to be substantially rehabilitated in the immediate future due to modification; (ii) The current distribution is limited ie. highly restricted, having very few small or isolated occurrences, or covering a small area; (iii) The ecological community is highly modified with potential of being rehabilitated in the immediate future. Endangered An ecological community will be listed as Endangered when it has been adequately surveyed and is not Critically Endangered but is facing a very high risk of total destruction in the near future. The ecological community must meet any one of the following criteria: (i) The estimated geographic range and distribution has been reduced by E at least 70% and is either continuing to decline with total destruction imminent in the short term future, or is unlikely to be substantially rehabilitated in the short term future due to modification; (ii) The current distribution is limited ie. highly restricted, having very few small or isolated occurrences, or covering a small area; (iii) The ecological community is highly modified with potential of being rehabilitated in the short term future. Vulnerable An ecological community will be listed as Vulnerable when it has been adequately surveyed and is not Critically Endangered or Endangered but is facing high risk of total destruction in the medium to long term future. The ecological community must meet any one of the following criteria: (i) The ecological community exists largely as modified occurrences V that are likely to be able to be substantially restored or rehabilitated; (ii) The ecological community may already be modified and would be vulnerable to threatening process, and restricted in range or distribution; (iii) The ecological community may be widespread but has potential to move to a higher threat category due to existing or impending threatening processes.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Category Code Category Priority Ecological Communities (PEC) Poorly-known ecological communities Ecological communities with apparently few, small occurrences, all or most P1 not actively managed for conservation (e.g. within agricultural or pastoral lands, urban areas, active mineral leases) and for which current threats exist. Poorly-known ecological communities Communities that are known from few small occurrences, all or most of which are actively managed for conservation (e.g. within national parks, P2 conservation parks, nature reserves, State forest, un-allocated Crown land, water reserves, etc.) and not under imminent threat of destruction or degradation. Poorly known ecological communities (i) Communities that are known from several to many occurrences, a significant number or area of which are not under threat of habitat destruction or degradation or: (ii) Communities known from a few widespread occurrences, which are either large or within significant remaining areas of habitat in which P3 other occurrences may occur, much of it not under imminent threat, or; (iii) Communities made up of large, and/or widespread occurrences, that may or not be represented in the reserve system, but are under threat of modification across much of their range from processes such as grazing and inappropriate fire regimes. Ecological communities that are adequately known, rare but not threatened P4 or meet criteria for Near Threatened, or that have been recently removed from the threatened list. These communities require regular monitoring. Conservation Dependent ecological communities Ecological communities that are not threatened but are subject to a specific P5 conservation program, the cessation of which would result in the community becoming threatened within five years.

There are no TEC’s listed in the Coolgardie Botanical District. Ten PECs are found in the region. These are: 1. Helena and Aurora Range vegetation complexes (P1) 2. Finnerty Range vegetation complexes (banded ironstone formation) (P1) 3. Die Hardy Range/Diemels vegetation complex (banded ironstone formation) (P1) 4. Koolyanobbing vegetation complexes (P1) 5. Diehardy Range vegetation complex (P1) 6. Mount Jackson Range vegetation complex (P1) 7. Windarling Ranges vegetation complex (P1) 8. Mount Manning Range vegetation complex (P3) 9. Yilgarn Hills vegetation complex (P3) 10. Dislodging Ridge vegetation complex (P3).

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4.6.3 Species of conservation significance Species of flora are defined as rare or of priority conservation status where their populations are restricted geographically or threatened by local processes. Rare flora species are gazetted under Subsection 2 of Section 23F of the WC Act 1950 and therefore it is an offence to “take” or damage rare flora without Ministerial approval. Section 23F of the WC Act, 1950 defines “to take” as “… to gather, pick, cut, pull up, destroy, dig up, remove or injure the flora or to cause or permit the same to be done by any means.” Priority flora are under consideration for declaration as rare flora and are in urgent need of further survey (Priority 1 to 3) or require monitoring every five to ten years (Priority 4). Table 14 describes definitions of conservation significant flora under both the State WC Act, 1950 and the Commonwealth EPBC Act, 1999. Table 14: Definition of conservation significant flora Code Category State categories of threatened species Declared Rare Flora – Extant Taxa R “Taxa which have been adequately searched for and are deemed to be in the wild either rare, in danger of extinction, or otherwise in need of special protection and have been gazetted as such.” Priority One – Poorly Known Taxa “Taxa which are known from one or a few (generally <5) populations which are P1 under threat, either due to small population size, or being on lands under immediate threat. Such taxa are under consideration for declaration as ‘rare flora’, but are in urgent need of further survey.” Priority Two – Poorly Known Taxa “Taxa which are known from one or a few (generally <5) populations, at least P2 some of which are not believed to be under immediate threat (i.e. not currently endangered). Such taxa are under consideration for declaration as ‘rare flora’, but urgently need further survey.” Priority Three – Poorly Known Taxa “Taxa which are known from several populations and the taxa are not believed to P3 be under immediate threat (i.e. not currently endangered), either due to the number of known populations (generally >5), or known populations being large, and either widespread or protected. Such taxa are under consideration for declaration as ‘rare flora’ but needs further survey.” Priority Four – Rare Taxa P4 “Taxa which are considered to have been adequately surveyed and which, whilst being rare (in Australia), are not currently threatened by any identifiable factors. These taxa require monitoring every 5 - 10 years.” Commonwealth categories of threatened species Taxa where there is no reasonable doubt that the last member of the species has Extinct died. Taxa where it is known only to survive in cultivation, in captivity or as a Extinct in the naturalised population well outside its past range; or it has not been recorded in its wild known and/or expected habitat, at appropriate seasons, anywhere in its past range, despite exhaustive surveys over a time frame appropriate to its life cycle and form.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Code Category Critically Taxa that are facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the endangered immediate future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Taxa which are not critically endangered and is facing a very high risk of Endangered extinction in the wild in the near future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Taxa which are not critically endangered or endangered and is facing a high risk of Vulnerable extinction in the wild in the medium term future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Taxa which are the focus of a specific conservation program the cessation of which would result in the species becoming vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered; or (b) the following subparagraphs are satisfied: (i) the species is a species of fish; (ii) the species is the focus of a plan of management that provides for actions Conservation necessary to stop the decline of, and support the recovery of, the species so dependent that its chances of long term survival in nature are maximised; (iii) the plan of management is in force under a law of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory; (iv) cessation of the plan of management would adversely affect the conservation status of the species.

Table 15 lists Rare and Priority flora species from the DEC database that have been recorded in the region. Project specific botanical surveys have identified the following: Two Priority species in the Carina mine area; • 1 P3 • 1 P4. Eleven Priority species in the haul road and rail siding area; • 3 P1 • 1 P2 • 6 P3 • 1 P4. Six Priority species in the accommodation village and siding extension areas; • 2 P1 • 3 P3 • 1 P4 All the recorded species have been found elsewhere in the region, outside project disturbance areas.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 15: Significant flora results from DEC database search Species 1 Code Carina Haul road Village and Mine Site 2 and Siding 3 Siding 4 Leucopogon spectabilis R No No No Tetratheca aphylla R No No No Tetratheca aphylla subsp. aphylla R No No No Acacia adinophylla P1 No Yes No Acacia sp. Bungalbin Hill (J.J. Alford P1 No No No 1119) Baeckea sp. Helena and Aurora Range P1 No No No (G.J. Keighery 4424) Calytrix creswellii P1 No Yes Yes Chamelaucium paynterae P1 No No No Echinopogon ovatus subsp. pubiglumis P1 No No No Hibbertia lepidocalyx subsp. tuberculata P1 No No No Homalocalyx grandiflorus P1 No Yes Yes Lepidosperma bungalbin P1 No No No Lepidosperma ferricola P1 No No No Persoonia leucopogon P1 No No No Lepidium genistoides P2 No No No Phlegmatospermum eremaeum P2 No No No Spartothamnella puberula P2 No No No Stylidium choreanthum P2 No Yes No Acacia crenulata P3 No Yes No Acacia cylindrica P3 No No No Acacia formidabilis P3 No Yes Yes Acacia sp. Mt Jackson (B.Ryan 176) P3 No No No Astartea sp. Bungalbin Hill P3 No No No (K.R.Newbey 8989) Frankenia georgei P3 No No No Gnephosis intonsa P3 No No No Grevillea georgeana P3 Yes Yes No Lepidosperma lyonsii P3 No Yes Yes Mirbelia sp.Helena & Aurora P3 No Yes Yes (B.J.Lepschi 2003) Neurachne annularis P3 No No No Spartothamnella sp. Helena &Aurora P3 No Yes No Range (P.G.Armstrong 155-109) Stenanthemum newbeyi P3 No No No Verticordia mitodes P3 No No No Daviesia purpurascens P4 Yes Yes Yes Eucalyptus formanii P4 No No No Grevillea erectiloba P4 No No No Notes: 1. Mattiske June 2008 Appendix H 2. Mattiske Sep 2008 3. Mattiske Oct 2009. 4. Recon Environmental Feb 2010.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4.6.4 Critical value assets The EPA considers the relative value of environmental assets in the EIA process. EPA (June 2007 Appendix 3) defines these asset categories as: Critical value assets represent the most important environmental assets in the State that must be fully protected and conserved for the State to meet its policy and statutory obligations. A summary of critical value assets is provided in Table 16. High value assets are environmental assets that are in good to excellent condition, are considered valuable by the community and/or government, but are not identified as critical environmental assets. Whether or not an asset is high value involves a judgement. Low to Medium value assets are those assets that are less than good to excellent condition as recognised by government agencies and /or community. The Carina project will not have a significant effect on any critical value asset. Reference to Priority species in Table 16 is stated as “having regard for the Priority Species List prepared by the Department of Environment and Conservation”. The project will affect a few individuals of priority flora taxa. These taxa are also represented elsewhere in the region, so the level of impact on all these species is not considered to be significant. This is further discussed in Sections 4.6.5 and 4.6.6 below.

4.6.5 Project vegetation and flora surveys The following flora and vegetation studies have been undertaken over the Carina project. A number of these have been targeted surveys over specific exploration drilling programmes, while others have been detailed flora and vegetation surveys. The surveys have included vegetation mapping over the entire Carina exploration tenement and traversing the entire mining tenement and haul road. 1. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. Oct 2007. Flora and vegetation survey of drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/1115 Carina Prospect. 2. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. Mar 2008. Flora and vegetation survey of proposed access route exploration tenement E77/1115 Carina Prospect. 3. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. Mar 2008a Flora and vegetation survey of infill drill sites in exploration tenement E77/1115 Carina Prospect. 4. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. July 2008. Flora survey of the proposed gravel pit within exploration tenement E77/1115. 5. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. Aug 2008. Flora and vegetation survey of the proposed Carina transport route: Darrine siding. 6. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. Sep 2008. Flora and vegetation survey of the Carina exploration lease area (Appendix 4). 7. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. April 2009. Declared rare and priority flora survey: Carina mine tenement M77/1244A (Appendix 4). 8. Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd. Oct 2009. Flora and vegetation survey of the proposed Carina transport route: Carina mine to Mt Walton road siding (Appendix 4). 9. Recon Environmental (Feb 2010) Carina iron ore project: Mt Walton siding vegetation. Report for Polaris Metals NL. (Appendix 4).

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 16: Critical value assets Public Conservation Reserve System Nature reserves, national parks, conservation parks, regional parks, marine parks, marine nature reserves and marine management areas. Native Vegetation Where adverse impacts to native vegetation are seriously at variance to the principles to protect native vegetation listed under Schedule 5 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 or associated Regulations. Where adverse impacts to a native terrestrial vegetation complex would result in a 30% or less representation of the pre-clearing extent of that vegetation complex in a bioregion (noting however that this threshold has been exceeded in some areas). Where adverse impacts to a native vegetation complex in constrained areas (i.e. areas of urban development in cities and major towns) on the Swan Coastal Plain would result in a 10% or less representation of the preclearing extent of that native vegetation complex. Bush Forever sites (not including those areas subject to negotiated planning solutions or complementary mechanisms and for which agreement has been reached that such areas fall outside the conservation requirements) having regard for the Western Australian Planning Commission’s Statement of Planning Policy No. 2.8 ‘Bushland Policy for the Perth Metropolitan Region (Draft)’. Biodiversity Declared Rare Flora - that significantly impacts local populations. Declared Threatened Fauna - that significantly impacts local populations. Having regard for Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC) - which fit into any of the following categories: critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable; or priority ecological communities (where it would not be unreasonable to assume the community would fit into one of the other listed categories). Having regard for the Priority Species List prepared by the Department of Environment and Conservation. Wetlands Ramsar Wetlands core conservation areas (as defined in the statement of values for nomination). A wetland listed in A Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia 3rd edition and more recent additions as contained in the Australian Wetlands Database at http://www.deh.gov.au/water/wetlands/database/index.html. Environmental Protection Policy wetlands. Conservation Category Wetlands not included in an Environmental Protection Policy may be viewed in the context of whether they have a reasonable chance of medium to long term survival of their environmental values although the underlying presumption is that they would normally be considered a critical asset. Rivers Wild and Scenic Rivers. Landscape Where an important landscape, natural feature or environmental icon will be irreversibly impacted or destroyed. Such landscape features may be identified by planning instruments, systematic reviews of conservation reserves or the like. Environments sensitive to emissions / discharges In areas where new or an addition to existing emissions present a significant risk to human health or the environment. In areas where new or an addition to existing emissions exceed a prescribed environmental or health standard. Where emissions contribute to a global environmental problem such as ozone depletion. Ecosystems vulnerable to threats Where the introduction of a key threatening organism, process or activity threatens, or has potential to threaten, the survival, abundance or evolutionary development of an indigenous species or ecological community as identified for ‘biodiversity critical assets’. Heritage Identified places of State, National or World Heritage significance (where potential impacts could compromise identified values) within the scope of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. Places of Indigenous Heritage of high importance.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

A summary of results of the project vegetation and flora surveys is presented below. Exploration and mine tenements • 237 taxa from 103 genera and 45 families were recorded in the exploration tenement. These represent taxa typical of the Coolgardie District. • No taxa were recorded in the Carina project which are gazetted as Declared Rare Flora pursuant to Section 37F(2) of the WC Act 1950 or listed as Threatened pursuant to Schedule 1 of the EPBC Act 1999. • Six taxa listed as Priority species were recorded in the exploration tenement. Only two of these, Grevillea georgeana (P3) and Daviesia purpurascens (P4) were recorded in the Carina mining lease area. Both these taxa were also recorded in multiple locations that will not be disturbed. • Mining lease M77/1244 covers 1,000 hectares. The Carina mine footprint occupies approximately 250 hectares of this tenement. A total of 330 Grevillea georgeana (P3) plants were recorded in M77/1244, in two separate groups. The larger group of 300 plants is an estimate based on the average density of plants and was originally located within the proposed waste landform footprint. Relocation of the waste landform has occurred to avoid this population in its entirety. The second group of 30 plants is located on the eastern boundary of the tenement, and will not be disturbed. • A total of 87 Daviesia purpurascens (P4) plants were recorded in 22 separate locations in mining lease M77/1244. 31 of these plants in two locations may need to be removed by the project. Outside the tenement, regional surveys have identified over 850 of these plants. • There are no TEC’s listed in the Coolgardie Botanical District. • Twenty-five plant communities were defined and mapped in the exploration tenement. The project will impact 4 of these communities (Figure 12). • The vegetation communities can be broadly divided into two major groups: o A sclerophyllous Eucalypt woodland of Eucalyptus salmonophloia and Eucalyptus salubris, together with a range of other Eucalypt species, over an understorey composed predominantly of Acacia, Eremophila and Atriplex species. o Acacia dominated scrub and thicket communities. • During the preparation of the survey report of the Carina exploration tenement, a search of PEC’s in the area of the tenement was made. A list of PEC’s which occur in the region were provided but the detailed boundary of each PEC was not provided at the time of preparing the report. • A recent search was undertaken on DEC's Threatened Ecological Communities database (21-0210). The database boundaries are provided as approximate. Boundaries for the Finnerty Range PEC were mapped from a combination of broad scale 1:100,000 and 1:250,000 geology mapping, Beard vegetation, topography and endemic flora. • In comparison, the vegetation mapping reported in Mattiske (Sept 2008) is detailed mapping at 1:10,000 scale. This detailed mapping shows the Finnerty Range PEC is actually a mosaic of different vegetation communities, rather than a single community. Most of these communities are widespread through the rest of the exploration tenement and certainly extend well beyond the boundaries of the delineated PEC. Defining the possible restricted or significant community that is the subject of the PEC listing and then the implication of that to the Carina project is the key factor.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• In order to adequately address the similarity of surveyed sites to PEC’s, detailed comparative site information is required. Data for sites surveyed by Gibson et al. has now been provided. Statistical comparison has been undertaken between site data collected by Gibson et al., with site data for the S2 community as defined by Mattiske Consulting Pty. Ltd. The S2 community most closely relates to the banded ironstone formation description of the PEC. With the exception of one site, all the S2 survey sites are grouped together, and have a low association with the Gibson sites. • In addition, a similarity matrix, comparing all sites with each other was undertaken. This data also indicated a low level of similarity between the Mattiske sites and those of Gibson. These analyses show the S2 community type has a low similarity to the Gibson data for the Finnerty Range PEC. • In summary, analysis of available data indicates the ridgeline vegetation community at Carina has a low similarity to vegetation types identified in DEC surveys as the Finnerty Range PEC. Vegetation mapping at a detailed scale shows this community is well represented in the local area, with less than 2% of the currently mapped unit being impacted by the Carina project. • Table 17 shows the extent of disturbance from the project on affected communities. The S2 community in the region is well represented, with only 7.6% in tenement E77/1115 being affected by the proposal. Vegetation mapping in exploration tenements to the north (E77/946 and E77/1418) recorded a further 382 hectares, representing a total impact on this community, as currently mapped, of 1.7%. Logically, more S2 community also occurs beyond the boundary of these tenements, as indicated by the extend of the PEC, so total disturbance to this community type in the wider region is expected to be insignificant. Table 17: Mine area disturbance on vegetation communities Vegetation communities Mine area S2 W2 W4 W22 total Mine Disturbance (ha) 8.63 66.5 95.15 73.1 243.38 Carina tenement E77/1115 (ha) 113.7 4,898.4 1,470.6 543.9 7,747.8 E77/1115 (%) 7.6 1.4 6.5 13.4 3.1 Chamaeleon tenements E77/946; 1418 (ha) 382.5 2,237.9 0.0 431.5 4,007.9 Total tenements E77/1115; 946; 1418 (%) 1.7 0.9 6.5 7.5 2.1 Source: Mattiske September 2008 (Table 2); Mattiske July 2009) Table 4; Figure 12 • A dendrogram showing the classification of sites is attached in Appendix 4. Classification based on species presence-absence alone is inadequate for thorough site classification. Both species presence-absence and percentage cover classifications have been used, together with photographic maps and site notes made whilst conducting surveys in the field. A combination of all four processes has been used to arrive at final site groupings. • A two way table of the classification is attached in Appendix 4. Scrub and Eucalypt Woodland communities have species which are unique. As indicated above, statistical data has been used together with field observations and aerial photographic maps in making final decisions on vegetation community delineation. • Whilst a 20 m x 20 m plot (400 m2) size is a DEC recommended survey area size, a 25 m radius survey plot (1964 m2), or approximately five times the recommended survey

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

area, was used during the vegetation survey of the tenement to maintain consistency with the size plots used for drill hole surveys within the tenement. • A map showing the vegetation units identified during the vegetation survey, together with the locations of the survey sites is included at the back of Mattiske (Sept 2008) (Appendix 4). • The possible collection of Lepidosperma bungalbin in the exploration tenement, reported in Mattiske (September 2008, Appendix B) is most likely not to be Lepidosperma bungalbin. Mattiske (September 2008, Appendix C) shows presence of this plant at only 2 of the 235 sites surveyed; C027 and CR020. The vegetation map in the Mattiske report shows these survey sites to correspond to vegetation units W27 and S1 respectively. Both are located many kilometres from the Carina project area. • The specimens collected are vegetative samples only (no flowers). While the leaves have some features similar to Lepidosperma bungalbin, the samples can not be confirmed as Lepidosperma bungalbin. It is our understanding that the confirmed range of Lepidosperma bungalbin is restricted to the Helena and Aurora range. The collections made in the current survey are in sandy flat woodland communities, significantly different to the ironstone ridges of the known populations. It is highly likely the plants collected are not Lepidosperma bungalbin. Haul road and siding • No taxa were recorded in the haul road and siding area which are gazetted as Declared Rare Flora pursuant to Section 37F(2) of the WC Act 1950 or listed as Threatened pursuant to Schedule 1 of the EPBC Act 1999. • Eleven taxa listed as Priority species were recorded in the haul road and siding area. Table 18 shows 7 of these have also been recorded in other regional surveys. Not all plants identified in the survey will be disturbed. All the Calytrix creswellii P1 identified in plots within the siding boundary will be avoided (Figure 9). The survey covered a haul road corridor of 60 metres, however the road itself will be approximately 30 metres wide. At construction, flexibility exists to move the road alignment within the corridor, to avoid or minimise impact to Priority species at particular locations. • Two Lepidosperma species were also recorded that are not currently listed on the Western Australian Herbarium database. These are currently named Lepidosperma sp. Aurora Sandplain (R.L. Barrett 2809B) and Lepidosperma sp. Mt. Finnerty (S. McNee LCS 9486). Verbal advice indicates that both these species will be eventually listed as Priority species. In particular, the former species has only previously been recorded on sandplain country north of the Helena and Aurora Ranges (R. Barrett, personal communication to Mattiske Consulting), so the record from this survey represents a significant range extension for this species. The second species has been widely recorded in the Mt Finnerty area by Western Botanical. • The majority of the Priority species recorded along the haul road route were found in the last 7 – 8 kilometre section before the siding. This corresponds with vegetation communities growing in yellow sand. An alternative haul road alignment, 100 metres to the east of the original route was surveyed, to confirm if Priority species found on the original alignment were more widely dispersed. This second survey found a number of Priority species including Stylidium choreanthum P2, Acacia formidablis P3, Mirbelia sp. Helena & Aurora Range (BJ Lepschi 2003) P3 and more Lepidosperma sp. Aurora Sandplain (RL Barrett 2809B) on the alternate alignment. The survey indicated Lepidosperma sp. Aurora Sandplain (RL Barrett 2809B) was present in greater numbers on the alternative alignment than on the original route. It is

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

likely more of all these Priority species will occur on the S12 vegetation community in this region. Based on results of these surveys the original alignment was chosen, as it impacted the smallest number of plants. This implements the second step in the mitigation hierarchy (minimise). Accommodation village and siding extension • No taxa were recorded which are gazetted as Declared Rare Flora pursuant to Section 37F(2) of the WC Act 1950 or listed as Threatened pursuant to Schedule 1 of the EPBC Act 1999. • Six taxa listed as Priority species were recorded. Table 15 shows all these have also been recorded in the haul road and siding survey. Not all plants identified in the survey will be disturbed. The new accommodation village tenement is 500m x 500m, but the actual village is approximately 150m x 150m. The village can be located within the tenement to avoid significant flora. Similarly, the access track can be aligned to avoid significant flora. • Four species were also recorded that are not currently listed on the Western Australian Herbarium database. These are Lepidosperma sp. Aurora Sandplain (R.L. Barrett 2809B), Lepidosperma sp. Lake King (RL Barrett 3442), Lepidosperma sp. (MWP12) and Leucopogon sp. Mt Walton. • Lepidosperma sp. Aurora Sandplain (R.L. Barrett 2809B) has been previously recorded in the immediate area. Verbal advice from Russell Barrett to Tara Read (Recon Environmental) is that Lepidosperma sp. Lake King (RL Barrett 3442) appears to be quite widespread, but is not well collected. The two other species are possibly new species and are not presently recorded on Florabase.

Polaris considers there is a low likelihood that flora species of conservation significance are present at the Carina mine area but undetected in the flora and vegetation survey. The Mattiske Consulting report (April 2009) Carina mine tenement M77/1244A: Declared Rare and Priority Flora survey was a targeted survey, with search transects at 100 metre spacing covering the entire mining tenement area. The report lists targeted Priority species in Section 5.1. No DRF species were identified in this survey or the exploration tenement vegetation mapping survey (Mattiske Sept 2008). Both these reports are included in Appendix 4. All the Priority species potentially present in the area are perennial plants, so observable if present. It is considered the transect methodology used has an excellent survey coverage over the impact area and a high likelihood of identifying these plants, if they were present.

4.6.6 Regional flora surveys In addition to botanical surveys undertaken for the Carina iron ore project and reported in Section 4.6.5, a number of botanical surveys have been undertaken on other project sites in the region by Polaris and other companies. Table 18 shows these surveys have also recorded many of the Priority species identified in project surveys, confirming a wider distribution of these species in the region.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 18: Priority flora found in botanical surveys Mine Haul Road

Survey

P4 P4

P3 P3 Spartothamnella sp. Helena Range &Aurora Armstrong (P.G. 155-109) P3 Daviesia purpurascens Daviesia Daviesia purpurascens Acacia P1 adinophylla Calytrix creswellii P1 Homalocalyx P1 grandiflorus Stylidium P2 choreanthum crenulata Acacia P3 Acacia formidablis P3 Grevillea georgeana Mirbelia sp. Helena & Aurora (BJ Range Lepschi 2003) P3 Lepidosperma lyonsii P3 Grevillea georgeana

Mattiske (Dec 2007) 51 5 23 Mattiske (May 2008) 79 7 41 Mattiske (Nov 2008) 25 5 29 1 Mattiske (Mar 2008) 18 23 162 Mattiske (Jun 2008) 1 Mattiske (Apr 2008) 4 3 Mattiske (Jul 2008) 56 Mattiske (Oct 2007) 1 8 As for Mine Mine As for As for Mine Mine As for

Regional surveys Mattiske (Jun 2008) 9 Mattiske (Oct 2007) 6 32 10 Mattiske (Mar 2009) 65 272 197 2 Western Botanical 1122 434 3601 138 254 15 (Oct/Nov 2008) 1 Mattiske (Sept 2008) 12 8 8 2 Mattiske (April 2009) 330 87 Mattiske (Oct 2009) 1 15-30 1 25-50 20-40 1 2-5 1 34-70 1 2-5

Project area Recon (Feb 2010) pnd 1+ pnd pnd pnd pnd Total 1708 955 466 15-30 0 25-50 3629-3649 1 1710-1713 141 288-324 19 957-960 Max disturbance (No.) 0 31 1 0 0 25 40 1 5 1 35 0 5 Max disturbance (%) 0 3.2 0.2 0 0 50 1.1 100 0.3 0.7 10.8 0 0.5 Notes: 1. Assumes count=1 in blank spreadsheet cells 2. pnd = population not determined

Figure 12 POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4.6.7 Weeds Mattiske (Sept 2008) recorded two introduced species in the exploration tenement area, Erodium cicutarium and Erodium botrys. Neither species is a Declared Plant under the Agricultural and Related Resources Protection Act 1976. Both species are considered as Environmental Weeds by DEC. (Conservation and Land Management 1999). Erodium cicutarium has a ‘Moderate’ rating and Erodium botrys has a ‘Low” rating (CALM 1999). Both species have been recorded in the exploration tenement (E77/1115) but have not yet been recorded in the project area.

4.7 FAUNA The region in which the Carina project is located is a zone that straddles the boundary between the Eremaean and the South-West Botanical Provinces: the ‘mulga - eucalypt line’ (Burbidge et al. 1995). This mulga - eucalypt line marks the transition from the mainly Acacia shrublands of the arid interior to the eucalypt woodlands and forests of the wetter, more predictable rainfall areas of the South-west. As a consequence, the fauna includes a range of species that are respectively at their south-western and north-eastern limits of their distribution. This results in a very diverse range of species (Ninox 2008).

4.7.1 Species of conservation significance Table 19 details 6 reptile, 13 bird, 6 mammal and 2 invertebrate species listed as significant fauna that could possibly occur in the region. These are species listed under the EPBC Act 1999, Wildlife Conservation Act 1950, DEC’s Priority Fauna list or are strongly associated with BIF (DEC 2007). Table 19: Conservation significant species Species EPBC Act WC Act DEC DEC Recorded Priority # (BIF) at Carina 3 Reptiles 1 Egernia stokesii badia Endangered Schedule 1 No Western Spiny-tailed Skink Vulnerable Cyclodomorphus branchialis Schedule 1 Yes No Gilled Slender Blue-tongue Vulnerable Morelia spilota imbricata Schedule 4 No Carpet Python (no ranking) Aspidites ramsayi Schedule 4 P1 No Woma (Ramsay’s Python) (no ranking) (SW popl.) Delma butleri Yes No Unbanded Delma Cyclodomorphus melanops Yes Yes elongatus Spinifex Slender Blue-tongue Birds 1 Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl Vulnerable Schedule 1 No Threatened Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee- JAMBA Yes eater Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift JAMBA No CAMBA

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Species EPBC Act WC Act DEC DEC Recorded Priority # (BIF) at Carina 3 ROKAMBA Platycercus icterotis Schedule 1 No xanthogenys Vulnerable Western Rosella Cacatua leadbeateri Schedule 4 Yes Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo (no ranking) Falco peregrinus Peregrine Schedule 4 Yes No Falcon (no ranking) Ardeotis australis Australian P4 Yes Bustard Burhinus grallarius P4 No Bush Stone-curlew Hylacola cauta whitlocki P4 Yes No Shy Groundwren (Shy Heathwren) Artamus minor Little Yes Yes Woodswallow Eopsaltria australis Yes No griseogularis Western Yellow Robin Pachycephala inornata Yes Yes Gilbert’s Whistler Pachycephala pectoralis Yes No Golden Whistler Mammals 1 Dasyurus geoffroii Chuditch Critically Schedule 1 No Endangered Vulnerable Myrmecobius fasciatus Numbat Vulnerable Schedule 1 No Vulnerable Sminthopsis longicaudata P3 Yes No Long-tailed Dunnart Nyctophilus timoriensis P4 Possible Greater Long-eared Bat (central form) Pseudantechinus woolleyae Yes No Woolleys’ Antechinus Leporillus apicalis Extinct Schedule 2 Old nest Lesser Stick-nest Rat Extinct remains Invertebrates 2 Aganippe castellum Tree-stem Schedule 1 No 4 Trapdoor Spider Idiosoma nigrum Shield-backed Schedule 1 No 4 Trapdoor Spider Source: 1: Ninox April 2008, Table 6. 2: Ninox April 2008, Appendix 3. 3: Ninox (June 2009) Table 11. 4: Ninox (June 2009) Table 5.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4.7.2 Terrestrial fauna Six systematic sampling sites were chosen, in consultation with the flora and vegetation consultants, as representing the major vegetation / habitat associations in the project area. Comparison sites were established in another prospect area (Chamaeleon (CM)), located approximately 12 kilometres north of Carina. Field surveys were undertaken in June and October 2008. An additional site, a dam approximately 8 km northwest of Carina was also surveyed in October. Summary descriptions of these sites are given in Table 20. Surveys for SRE invertebrates were undertaken concurrently with vertebrate fauna surveys. Results of SRE surveys are detailed in Section 4.7.3. Separate subterranean fauna surveys were also undertaken and are detailed in Section 4.7.4. Table 20: Fauna and SRE sampling sites Site Veg. Code 1 Habitat 1 Easting Northing Carina Zone 50 Zone 50 CR1 W24 Open Low Woodland of Eucalyptus corrugata, Eucalyptus 785 035 6 623 245 loxophleba subsp. lissophloia, Eucalyptus salubris, Eucalyptus pileata and other mixed eucalypts over Acacia burkittii, occasional patches of Callitris preissii over Phebalium filifolium, Prostanthera grylloana over Grevillea acuaria and Triodia irritans on red to yellow sandy clay flats. CR2 W2 Woodland of Eucalyptus salmonophloia with Eucalyptus 784 865 6 625 830 ravida over Eremophila ionantha, Exocarpos aphyllus, Atriplex nummularia and Acacia colletioides over Atriplex vesicaria on flat red clay soils. CR3 S2 Scrub of Allocasuarina campestris, Casuarina pauper, 212 170 6 626 335 Banksia arborea, Melaleuca hamata, Melaleuca (Zone 51) nematophylla, Acacia sibina, Calycopeplus paucifolius and Brachychiton gregorii over Baeckea elderiana and Philotheca brucei subsp. brucei and Eremophila decipiens subsp. decipiens, with emergent Eucalyptus ewartiana, Eucalyptus horistes and Eucalyptus oleosa subsp. oleosa on red-brown clay upper slopes and ridges including ironstone outcropping. CR4 W2 Woodland of Eucalyptus salmonophloia with Eucalyptus 787 580 6 624 040 ravida and mixed Eucalypts over Eremophila ionantha, Exocarpos aphyllus, Atriplex nummularia and Acacia colletioides over Atriplex vesicaria on flat red clay soils. CR5 W12 Open Woodland of Eucalyptus sheathiana, Eucalyptus 787 770 6 623 310 salubris, Eucalyptus loxophleba subsp. lissophloia, Eucalyptus ravida and Eucalyptus salmonophloia over Acacia burkittii, Eremophila ionantha, Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia and Acacia colletioides over Grevillea acuaria on red-brown clay to sandy clay on flats with scattered ironstone pebbles. CR6 W4 Woodland of Eucalyptus longicornis, Eucalyptus salubris, 787 925 6 622 360 Eucalyptus corrugata and Eucalyptus moderata over Eremophila ionantha, Eremophila scoparia, Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia, Exocarpos aphyllus, Atriplex nummularia and Santalum acuminatum over Acacia colletioides and Atriplex vesicaria on red-brown sandy clay flats with scattered ironstone and quartz pebbles.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Site Veg. Code 1 Habitat 1 Easting Northing Comparison sites DAM W1? Water body seasonal - surrounded by tall younger eucalypts 780 626 6 633 274 and mixed shrubs at the base of the wall CM1 S6 Scrub of Acacia burkittii, Grevillea zygoloba, Hakea 783 140 6 633 485 francisiana and Baeckea elderiana over low scrub of Prostanthera grylloana and Philotheca brucei subsp. brucei and with emergent mixed eucalypts on low to mid slopes. CM2 S2/W22 Scrub of Allocasuarina campestris, Casuarina pauper, 779 890 6 634 340 Banksia arborea, Melaleuca hamata, Melaleuca nematophylla, Acacia sibina, Calycopeplus paucifolius and Brachychiton gregorii over Baeckea elderiana and Philotheca brucei subsp. brucei and Eremophila decipiens subsp. decipiens , with emergent Eucalyptus ewartiana, Eucalyptus horistes and Eucalyptus oleosa subsp. oleosa on red-brown clay upper slopes and ridges .

Open Low Woodland of Eucalyptus corrugata with mixed Eucalypts over Allocasuarina campestris and Acacia burkittii over Alyxia buxifolia, Philotheca brucei subsp. brucei and Isopogon gardneri over Scaevola spinescens and Olearia muelleri on red-brown clays soils on mid and lower slopes. CM3 W22 Open Low Woodland of Eucalyptus corrugata with mixed 779 650 6 636 870 Eucalypts over Allocasuarina campestris and Acacia 779 875 6 636 810 burkittii over Alyxia buxifolia, Philotheca brucei subsp. brucei and Isopogon gardneri over Scaevola spinescens and Olearia muelleri on red-brown clays soils on mid and lower slopes. CM4 W2 Woodland of Eucalyptus salmonophloia with Eucalyptus 778 360 6 637 560 ravida and mixed Eucalypts over Eremophila ionantha, Exocarpos aphyllus, Atriplex nummularia and Acacia colletioides over Atriplex vesicaria on flat red clay soils. CM5 W2 Woodland of Eucalyptus salmonophloia with Eucalyptus 778 335 6 638 305 ravida and mixed Eucalypts over Eremophila ionantha, Exocarpos aphyllus, Atriplex nummularia and Acacia colletioides over Atriplex vesicaria on flat red clay soils. CM6 W28 Woodland of Eucalyptus salmonophloia, Eucalyptus 778 425 6 640 325 transcontinentalis, Eucalyptus ravida and Eucalyptus calycogona over Eremophila interstans subsp. interstans, Eremophila interstans subsp. virgata, Eremophila ionantha and Santalum acuminatum over Atriplex nummularia and Atriplex vesicaria on sand with quartz pebbles on flats. Note 1: Mattiske July 2009, vegetation map.

Ninox Wildlife Consulting undertook the terrestrial fauna surveys. The full report is supplied in Appendix 5. A summary of the Carina survey results is presented below.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• No frogs were recorded. • 22 species of reptile were recorded. This is similar to the 28 species recorded from the Helena and Aurora Range (Chapman and Pronk 1997), although 42 species were recorded from three seasonal surveys at Bungalbin Hill (Dell and How 1985). One species, the skink Cyclodomorphus melanops elongatus is considered of conservation significance (Table 19) as it appears to be habitat-specific to BIF outcrops. This skink also occurs on Jack Hills and the Helena and Aurora Range. One specimen was trapped at site CR3 (vegetation community S2). This vegetation community is widely represented in the local area. • 59 species of birds were recorded. This compares to 52 at the Helena and Aurora Range in 1995 (Chapman and Pronk 1997) and 65 at Bungalbin Hill in 1979-81 (Dell and How 1985). Five species of conservation significance (Table 19) were recorded and are listed in Table 21. A disused nest mound of the Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata), was recorded nearby Carina but outside the exploration tenement. Table 21: Significant bird species recorded Species Status Description Merops ornatus EPBC Act These birds are summer migrants to southern Australia but Rainbow Bee-eater 1999 may be resident in the north. They prefer lightly wooded (JAMBA) country, near water and preferably with sandy soils suitable for their breeding burrows. Recorded at Carina sites CR1 and CR2. Cacatua leadbeateri WC Act 1950 This cockatoo has a widespread but disjunct distribution Major Mitchell’s Schedule 4 which includes the Great Sandy, Gibson and Great Victoria Cockatoo (no ranking) Deserts, Murchison and parts of the Eastern Goldfields. It prefers lightly wooded country and tall eucalypts, generally in the vicinity of water. A single bird was seen flying over site Carina site CR3 and also recorded at Chamaeleon. Ardeotis australis DEC Priority This large bird is widespread throughout Australia with the Australian Bustard #P4 exception of the densely forested areas. It inhabits a range of habitats and is highly nomadic. Two birds were seen in the vicinity of camp in October 2008. Artamus minor BIF (DEC) Considered by DEC to be of regional significance in the Little Woodswallow Midwest and Goldfields due to its dependence on BIF for refuge, breeding and roosting sites. It appears to be restricted to BIF in the region. Observed at Carina flying over sites CR5 and CR6. Also recorded at Bungalbin Hill and Helena & Aurora Range (Ninox 2009; Table 14). Pachycephala inornata BIF (DEC) This bird has a patchy distribution through the southern Gilbert’s Whistler Murchison, Eastern Goldfields and Great Victoria Desert. Recorded in Carina sites CR4, CR5 and CR6 and also at Chamaeleon. • Native mammal records were poor, with the exception of bats. Only four species of non- volant mammals but eight species of bat were recorded. The remains of nests built by the extinct Stick-nest Rat (Leporillus apicalis) were noted in caves and overhangs in the BIF outcropping. None of the five species of conservation significance (Table 19) were recorded. Some bat call sequences could not be identified reliably to species level. The calls of Nyctophilus are typically difficult to identify to species, and those recorded may be attributed to the lesser long-eared bat Nyctophilus geoffroyi or the central greater long- eared bat Nyctophilus timoriensis (central form), which is listed under Priority 4 in Table 19.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• Five introduced mammal species were recorded with the rabbit being extremely common. Grazing impact from this species appears to be substantial, with little regeneration of native grasses.

4.7.3 Short range endemic invertebrates Prior to the field survey, discussions were held with Dr Mark Harvey and Ms Shirley Slack- Smith of the Western Australian Museum (WAM), in order to identify the target group of potential short range endemic invertebrate taxa in the Carina area. The following groups were identified for targeted sampling: • mygalomorph spiders; • myriopods (particularly millipedes); • scorpions; • pseudoscorpions; and • terrestrial molluscs (and aquatic if suitable habitat located). SRE surveys were undertaken by Ninox Wildlife Consulting in June and October 2008 and submitted to WAM for identification. The full report is supplied in Appendix 5. A summary of the Carina survey results is presented below. • The specimens collected in June 2008 included spiders and scorpions. While none of the scorpions collected are considered to be SRE’s, the taxonomic status and difficulties in identifying female and juvenile spiders has not allowed for a definitive statement on the status of some of the specimens collected. One male Missulena ‘occatoria-group’ from site CR2 could represent a short-range endemic species, but a full taxonomic revision of the genus Missulena in Western Australia is necessary to confirm this status. Four of the five genera of spiders were collected from site CR3 as was one of the two scorpion genera. Three of these genera (Aname, Anidiops/Gaius and Aganippe) would require adult males to confirm their status as potential SRE’s. • The October survey collected spiders, scorpions, pseudoscorpions and millipedes. As for the June collection, the spider Missulena ‘occatoria’ group and the spider Aganippe requires further investigation and/or taxonomic revision before stating whether or not they are possibly SRE’s. • All but one species of the millipede genus Antichiropus are known to be SRE. Males and females of Antichiropus sp. nov. (‘Mt Gibson 1’) were taken at two sites (CR3 and CM5). Examination of the male gonopods revealed that the specimens are conspecific with a species so far known only from Mt Gibson, representing a considerable range extension for this species. As this species is only known from two localities, although widely spaced, it is considered a SRE. Specimens were collected from both Carina (CR3) and the comparison site (Chamaeleon, CM5), confirming the population extends over at least a 12 kilometre range in the local area. Of note, the Chamaeleon site (CM5) corresponds to vegetation community type W2 (Table 20), which is a low woodland, a very different habitat to the upper slopes and ridgelines of the S2 community at Carina site CR3. It should also be noted that the distance between the Carina/Chamaeleon project area and Mt Gibson is approximately 300 kilometres. This is considerably more than the 10,000km2 (100km x 100km) often quoted as a main criterion for inclusion as a SRE species. There are a number of BIF hills and ranges between these two locations. It is

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

considered likely these two populations, identified so far apart, could also be represented on some of the intervening ranges. • Although not in the Carina project, it is possible that the juvenile millipede Atelomastix collected at the dam is an undescribed species. An adult of this animal was also collected at Chamaeleon (site CM4). This animal has not been reported from any other locality in Western Australia before. It is closely related to Atelomastix ‘bamfordi’, reported from the Mt Jackson area to the west (Edward and Harvey, in prep). • Specimens of land snails collected at Carina belong to the families Bulimulidae, Punctidae, Pupillidae and Camaenidae. Species identifications have been based on shell characters that, in these four families, generally vary only slightly within each genus. None of the taxa collected in either the June or October surveys are considered to be SRE’s, as all are believed to belong to species that occupy extensive geographic ranges.

The following extracts from Framenau.V.W and Harvey.M.S. (March 2009) (Appendix 5) summarise the findings for Mygalomorph (“trapdoor”) spiders. The Western Australian mygalomorph fauna is vast and, despite long-term and ongoing research by Drs Barbara Main (University of Western Australia) and Robert Raven (Queensland Museum), remains taxonomically poorly known for many families and genera (e.g. Barychelidae: Idiommata; Idiopidae: Aganippe; Nemesiidae: Aname, Chenistonia, Kwonkan): Missulena occatoria group (family Actinopodidae) Spiders of the genus Missulena are commonly known as “Mouse Spiders”. The survey at Yendilberin Hills included a single juvenile. It belongs to the M. occatoria-group which was previously reported from Yendilberin Hills. Missulena occatoria is the type species of Missulena and is wide-spread in Australia; however, Main (1996, pg. 355) advises that its taxonomy needs revision as the species “as it is currently defined, appears to have several species confused with it”. However, emergent juveniles of Missulena are known to disperse via ballooning, thus potentially allowing them to disperse large distances. It is possible that the specimen represents a short range endemic species, but a full taxonomic revision of the genus Missulena in Western Australia is necessary to confirm its status. Cethegus sp. (family Dipluridae) The genus Cethegus is represented in Western Australia by one named species, C. fugax and several unnamed species. The genus has previously been reported from Yendilberin Hills and the Western Australian Museum has records from many different regions of the State. The status and distribution of these species are not well understood and detailed taxonomic work is needed to understand the Western Australian fauna. Male specimens are required for accurate species identification, but the Yendilberin Hills collection consists of females and juveniles. It is unlikely that these specimens represent a short-range endemic species. Anidiops sp. (family Idiopidae) An early instar juvenile, presumably of the idiopid genus Anidiops or Gaius, was recovered from Yendilberin Hills. Gaius has previously reported from Yendilberin Hills. As males possess the best taxonomic feature for species identification, it remains impossible to assess the conservation status of this species.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Aganippe spp. (family Idiopidae) The genus Aganippe is common throughout Western Australia. Fourteen species are described from Australia and many new species await description. As during the previous survey, Aganippe was also the most commonly collected mygalomorph genus at Yendilberin Hills. The current sample included more than one species but only females. These are difficult to identify to species level as adult males possess the best taxonomic characters. It is currently not possible to say if the Aganippe specimens from Yendilberin Hills represent short-range endemic species. Aname sp. (family Nemesiidae) The genus Aname is very well represented in the Western Australian fauna by several named and numerous unnamed species. The Western Australian Museum has records from many different regions of the State. Male specimens are required for accurate species identification, but the current Yendilberin Hills collection consists of a single female adding to the juvenile reported from the site previously. It is unlikely that this specimen represents a short-range endemic species. Aname tepperi (family Nemesiidae) Aname tepperi is widespread from South Australia into Western Australia, although the species may represent a species complex with at least two species. It is not considered a short- range endemic species. Teyl `MYG021` (family Nemesiidae) The genus Teyl is currently known from one species in Western Australia only, in addition to three species from Victoria, however, the collection of the Western Australian Museum contains many more species. Two males of Teyl were collected at Yendilberin Hills and assigned the morphospecies code `MYG021`. This species appears to have not been found previously in Western Australia, however status and distribution of many species of Teyl are poorly understood and detailed taxonomic work is needed to understand the Western Australian fauna. It is possible, that Teyl `MYG021` represents a short-range endemic species. The information above can be summarised into those species considered to (i) not be, or unlikely to be, SRE’s and (ii) those that may possibly be SRE, but cannot be definitively stated as such at this time. Table 22 provides this information and also shows what survey sites these species were captured. The table shows that all but one genius (Anidiops or Anidiops/Gaius) were captured at more than one survey site and also many were captured at both Carina (CR) and the comparison site, Chamaeleon (CM). Figure 13 shows the location of the survey sites. Teyl `MYG021` (family Nemesiidae) was recorded only from the comparison site, Chamaeleon, 12 kilometres to the north of Carina. Table 22: Summary of Myglomorph spider species collected SRE status Genus or Family Collected at site not or unlikely to be Aname tepperi (family Nemesiidae), CR5, CM3 SRE’s Aname sp. (family Nemesiidae) CR1,CM3 Cethegus sp. (family Dipluridae) CR3,CR6 may possibly be Teyl `MYG021` (family Nemesiidae) CM4,CM6 SRE, but cannot be Aganippe spp. (family Idiopidae) CR4,CM6,CR3, CM3,CR2, definitively stated as Anidiops sp. female CR3, such at this time Anidiops/Gaius juvenile CR3, Missulena occatoria group (family Actinopodidae) CR1, CR2

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Slack-Smith. S and Whisson. C (November 2008) Table 2 (Appendix 5) shows the land snail Bothriembryon was collected at sites CR5,CR6,CM3,CM4,CM5 and CM6, indicating a wide distribution in the local area. Both the millipede species collected are not in immediate threat from the Carina project. Antichiropus sp. nov. (‘Mt Gibson 1’) is present at both Carina and Chamaeleon, which are 12 kilometres apart (as well as Mt Gibson). Atelomastix has not been located at Carina. It has been found in 2 locations, approximately 8 and 12 kilometres north of Carina. Further surveys are planned in 2010, over additional geological target areas, which are located between Carina and Chamaeleon. This will add to the knowledge base of SRE species in the region. The regional dataset of invertebrate, and specifically SRE species, is poor, so any surveys are highly likely to add to the knowledge base of this environmental factor. In applying the precautionary principle to situations where there is a knowledge gap, The EPA report Review of the Environmental Impact Assessment Process in Western Australia (March 2009), section 5.3.1, provides the following relevant information: The application of a risk-based approach infers that there is no “zero” risk associated with proposals as this is not achievable. The precautionary principle (one of the guiding principles in the Act) is sometimes used to justify that “zero” risk is an appropriate policy position. This is not the intent of the principle which reads: Where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In the application of the precautionary principle, public and private decisions should be guided by: i. careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment; and ii. an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.

The SRE invertebrate studies undertaken show there is a low risk to possible SRE spiders. Most species were collected from multiple sites. The vegetation / habitat types surveyed are well represented locally, as evident from vegetation mapping of the exploration tenement. Polaris considers the minor and localised impact from the Carina project does not constitute “threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage” to this factor. Polaris recognises there will not be “zero” risk or impact on invertebrate fauna by implementing the Carina project. The following extract from the Fauna Report (pg 36) (Appendix 5) is relevant: While most birds, larger mammals and reptiles will be able to avoid the impact of clearing for exploration, mining and construction of infrastructure, most small mammals, reptiles and burrowing frogs will be unavoidably killed by the large machinery used for vegetation removal and ground preparation, or by exposure to predators. While the local impact on individual animals is high, the clearing will have very little impact on the species overall.

780000mE 785000mE

W12

CM6 6640000mN S8 CARINA & CHAMAELEON PROJECT AREAS S2 W28 W1 FAUNA SURVEY SITES

134 Bushby Road, Lower King WA 6330 Phone: 9844 8914 Fax: 9844 8948 CAD Ref: g1531_fauna_01.dgn Author: J Henry Scale: 1:50,000 Ninox Wildlife ConsultingDrawn: CAD Resources ~ www.cadresources.com.au Figure: W22 Tel: (08) 9246 3242 ~ Fax: (08) 9246 3202 W2 Date: Dec 2009 Rev: A A3

CM5 790000mE 13

CM4 W1 S2 LEGEND W12 CR3 Ninox fauna site CM3a CM3b S2 INV prefix denotes Inv_CR3 invertibrate site S5 W22 0 1km S7 Site overlaid on Mattiske Scale Consulting Pty Ltd W1 vegetation mapping W2 W1 MGA94 (Zone 50)

W22 S2 W1 6635000mN

S2 S2 W22 W12

W1 CM2

S2 W2 W13 W1 W22 S6 W2 CM1 S6 W2 Inv_DAM S2

W15 W2

W15 S6

W28 W15 S6 W22 W22 W2

W12

W2 S6

W12 W11 6630000mN W2

W12 W2 W21

W22 S6 W5 W12 W2 W2 W12 S1 W22 W22 S1 W22 W21

W17 W24 W11 W2 W2 W2

Inv_CR3-3 W17 W24 W2 Inv_CR3-2 W22

W11 W21 Inv_CR3-1 S2 W2 S1 Inv_CR3-4 W2 CR3 Inv_CR3 Inv_CR3-5 W22 Inv_CR2 CR2 W2 W17 W2

6625000mN W21 W12

W4 W15W15 S1 W27 W27 W17 Inv_CR4 CR4 W15 S1 W2 W25 Inv_CR5 W5 CR1 Inv_CR1 CR5 W15 W4 S2 S1 W24

Inv_CR6 CR6 S1

W13 POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

4.7.4 Subterranean fauna Subterranean surveys were undertaken by Bennelongia Consulting in August –October 2008 and April-June 2009. A third round of scrape samples only was undertaken at Chamaeleon in September 2009. The full report is supplied in Appendix 6. A summary of the Carina survey results is presented below. Management of subterranean fauna is discussed in Section 9.6

4.7.4.1 Stygofauna No stygofauna were collected in the first round of sampling. With this result and the saline nature of groundwater, it was considered unlikely stygofauna were present and highly unlikely the project site contained significant stygofauna populations. No further stygofauna sampling was undertaken

4.7.4.2 Troglofauna A total of six species were found at Carina. Analysis of the distribution of these species is as follows: • 1 species not yet found elsewhere and inside the pit boundary (line 12, hole #5). • 2 species not yet found elsewhere and outside the pit boundary (line 2, hole #63). • 3 species also recorded at a control site (Chamaeleon), 12 km to the north.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

5. SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

5.1 DEMOGRAPHY The Carina mine, haul road and rail siding are located in a remote part of the State. The Carina open pit, mine infrastructure and half the haul road is located in the shire of Yilgarn. The rest of the haul road and rail siding is in the shire of Coolgardie. The shire of Yilgarn is 30,720 square km in area and has a population of approximately 3,000. Southern Cross (370km east of Perth) is the major town in the shire. Other town sites include Bodallin, Bullfinch, Koolyanobbing and Marvel Loch (Shire of Yilgarn 2009). Carina is located approximately 100 kilometres northeast of Southern Cross and 60 kilometres northeast of Koolyanobbing The shire of Coolgardie is approximately 30,400 square km in area and has a population of approximately 5,900. Coolgardie and Kambalda are the two major town centres (Shire of Coolgardie 2009). Carina is located approximately 125 kilometres northwest of Coolgardie. The local towns of Southern Cross, Coolgardie and Kalgoorlie have a long history of involvement with the mining industry and are capable of supplying a significant proportion of employees, goods and services. Common with many small rural towns, feedback from Shire representatives (McKenzie (undated)) confirm they do not support FIFO mining operations, due to the limited direct contact/involvement in local towns by workers and their families. Some level of FIFO operation will be required, to accommodate some employees. The Carina mine is located approximately 100 km from Southern Cross and 125 km from Coolgardie. This represents at least a 2 hour commute travel time (each way). With daily shift rosters of 10 – 12 hours, Polaris considers there is an unacceptably high risk of vehicle accidents from driver fatigue, if workers commuted on a daily basis from local towns. However, DIDO from local towns on a work roster basis is fully supported. This enables workers families to live in local communities and children attend local schools. Where possible, Polaris will also source the supply of goods and services from local towns. This will provide additional benefits to local towns in the region. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 2: implement an ‘employ local - source local’ policy where possible, to maximise employment opportunity and flow on benefits to local towns in the region.

5.2 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE 5.2.1 Sites of significance An Aboriginal heritage survey of 5 proposed exploration areas in the region was undertaken in 2007. Area 5 covered the Carina project area. No sites of significance were recorded in this survey. A new survey over the Carina project area has been undertaken (O’Connor 2009). No ethnographical sites were identified in this survey. The survey did identify one possible archaeological site within the open pit footprint. A further survey has been undertaken over this site, which confirmed the site as an archaeological site (O’Reilly 2009).

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

5.2.2 Native title The project area is situated on the border between the southwest and goldfields native title administrative regions. Three claims were listed over the project area but have now been deregistered. There are no currently registered claims over the Carina project area.

5.3 VISUAL ASSESSMENT The Carina project is located in a remote part of the State, with minimal direct impact to neighbours. As evident from Figure 4, Carina is located on a low ridge, with the highest point at 485 metres RL, approximately 20 metres above the surrounding plain. This contrasts with more prominent landforms in the local area such as the Yendilberin Hills at 505 metres RL, Mount Walton at 510 metres RL and major regional landforms, such as the Helena and Aurora range at approximately 700 metres RL. This low relief means the existing site is not visible from locations accessible to the public. Factors contributing to this include; • There are few access tracks in the region. • Where access tracks exist, they are usually located on the plain, behind the crest of hills or not on the edge of ridgelines, so visibility is restricted by the immediate vegetation and topography, • The region is almost totally covered in Eucalypt woodland, with tree heights of 8-10 metres. Visibility when on the plain is restricted by the immediate woodland to distances of approximately 500 metres. Appendix 9 provides photographs taken at various vantage points. These confirm that there are few, if any, sight lines to Carina from surrounding access tracks. The waste landform will be constructed to approximately 500m RL (30-35 m above natural surface), the same height as the Yendilberin Hills. Regional high points, such as the Helena and Aurora Range are 30 – 40 kilometres from Carina. Photos in Appendix 9 confirm the low relief of the Carina ridge is not visible from this distance. The more prominent features, Yendilberin Hills and Mt Walton are visible on the horizon and the waste landform will add to these features. The open pit will not be visible from any vantage point. Only the top level of the waste landform is expected to be visible from a limited number of vantage points. As rehabilitation establishes over the waste landform, it will blend into the surrounding low range of hills. It is concluded visual amenity impact from the Carina project is not significant.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

6. CONSULTATION Polaris has undertaken ongoing discussions on the Carina project with stakeholders over the last 18 months. These discussions are planned to continue through the development and operational phases of the project. Key stakeholders identified as having an interest in the Carina iron ore mine include: • Indigenous groups: o The Central West Goldfields People. o The Gubrun People. o The Kelamaia Kabu(d)n People. • Government agencies: o Department of Minerals and Petroleum (DMP). o Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). o Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA). o Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). o Department of Water (DoW). o Department of Health (DoH). o Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DPI). o Department of Transport (DoT) o Department of Treasury and Finance – Building Management and Works (BMW). o Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA). o Main Roads of Western Australia (MRWA). o Fremantle Port Authority (FPA). o Esperance Port Authority (EsPA). • Non-government organisations: o Westnet Infrastructure Group (Westnet) o Australian Rail Group (AGR) o Western Australian Conservation Council. o Wildflower Society of Western Australia. o Goldfields Land and Sea Council. • Shire Councils: o Shire of Esperance. o Shires of Yilgarn and Coolgardie. A summary of consultation undertaken, issues raised and the relevant section(s) in the PER where these issues are addressed is provided in Table 23.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 23: Stakeholder consultation Date Stakeholder Polaris Representative Issues raised Consultation undertaken November/ Representatives from: Rory O’Connor (anthropologist). Proposed exploration drilling activities at Carina. December 2007 • The Central West Goldfields The indigenous groups did not raise any specific (Site visit) People. concerns with regard to the exploration drilling • The Gubrun People. activities. • The Kelamaia Kabu(d)n People. 4/2/2008 DEC: Norm Caporn, Ian Jonathan Lea, Alan Tough, Derrick Overview of Polaris’ exploration activities and (Meeting) Kealley, Wendy Thompson and Kettlewell. tenement holdings in the Yilgarn region. Sandra Thomas. Andy Pym (Coffey Natural Systems (CNS)). 4/3/2008 DEC: Norm Caporn, Nicholas Derrick Kettlewell and Chris Wilcox. Proposed exploration drilling in the YIOP and (Meeting) Woolfrey, Wendy Thompson Lorna Davies (CNS). requirements of the EEMP (including Carina). and Sandra Thomas. 7/3/2008 Conservation Council and Alan Tough, Jonathan Lea and Introduction to Polaris, tenements held in the (Meeting) Wildflower Society: Tim Derrick Kettlewell. Yilgarn area and exploration activities. Nichol and Brian Moyle. Andy Pym and Lorna Davies (CNS). 3/4/2008 DMP: Andrew Bartleet and Jonathan Lea and Derrick Kettlewell. Programme of Work (PoW) for exploration (Meeting) Tony White. Andy Pym and Lorna Davies (CNS). activities at Carina. 8 to 9/4/2008 DEC: Wendy Thompson and Chris Wilcox. Proposed exploration drilling in the YIOP and (Site visit) Kym Pearce. Lorna Davies and Rena Koufakis requirements of the EEMP (including Carina). (CNS). 23/5/2008 DEC: Nicholas Woolfrey, Derrick Kettlewell. Proposed exploration drilling and feedback on the (Meeting) Wendy Thompson, David Lorna Davies and Jessica Taylor Carina EEMP (submitted to DEC on 30 April Pickles and Sandra Thomas. (CNS). 2008). 27/5/2008 DMP: Andrew Bartleet and Alan Tough and Derrick Kettlewell The PoW for Carina and the outcome of the (Meeting) Stephen Lance. Lorna Davies (CNS). meetings held with DEC (23 May 2008).

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Date Stakeholder Polaris Representative Issues raised 13/6/2008 DEC: David Pickles Polaris drilling crew including Jim DEC inspection of the site preparation activities for (Site visit) Nicholson exploration drilling at Carina. 7/8/2008 DMP: Andrew Bartleet, Mike Alan Tough and Paul Rokich. Development of the Carina deposit and (Meeting) Freeman, Lee Hassan, Simon differentiating the deposit from major BIF outcrops Skevington and Rosemarie De in the Helena and Aurora Ranges. Bari. Water requirements. 12/8/2008 Department of Housing and Paul Rokich and Jim Nicholson The potential co-use of the access road to the (Meeting) Works: Stewart Barrett and intractable waste disposal facility Mount Walton, to Randall Haigh gain access for the Carina Iron Ore Project. High risk considered with use of the road as an ore haulage route. 13/8/2008 EPA: Ray Claudius Paul Rokich. Referral of the project to the EPA. Key issues, (Meeting) clearing, water discharge, dewatering, stygofauna, ASS. 22/8/2008 DEC : Sandra Thomas, Daniel Paul Rokich, Alan Tough Referral of the project to the EPA. Key issues flora, (Meeting) Coffey fauna, subterranean fauna, hydrological, maximise infrastructure out of the proposed Park, rehabilitation. 28/10/2008 Department of Housing and Paul Rokich. Use of the road for ore haulage not likely to be (Meeting) Works: Stewart Barrett and supported. Use for ancillary traffic more likely to be Randall Haigh supported. Need to prepare a road maintenance agreement to document details of use. 9/3/2009 Building Management and Paul Rokich. Haul route selection to possible siding at Mt Walton (meeting) Works (BMW). Formerly Road/Railway crossing. Use of Access road. Department of Housing and Submission of draft agreement. Works: Randall Haigh 13/3/2009 DEC : Sandra Thomas, Daniel Paul Rokich Haul route selection to possible siding at Mt Walton Coffey, David Pickles Road/Railway crossing. Use of Mt Walton road for mine support traffic.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Date Stakeholder Polaris Representative Issues raised 19/3/2009 Westnet: Geoff Brook, Paul Alan Tough, Paul Rokich Mt Walton siding location; train configurations; Hamersley passing bays and Esperance line. 8/9/2009 DEC: Daniel Coffey, David Paul Rokich, Alan Tough Discussed mine area, haul road and siding: Pickles Vegetation and flora. Priority flora issues. Left CD of available reports. Terrestrial fauna. Left CD of report. Troglofauna. Results to date and action to submit brief of further surveys.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

7. REGIONAL REVIEW

7.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT Carina is located in the Coolgardie 2 Bioregion (COO2 – Southern Cross subregion) as defined by the Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA). The region is east of the wheat belt and although it has a long history of pastoral, historic woodcutting and mining land uses, remains largely uncleared. In this sense, environmental issues commonly associated with fragmented habitats in extensively cleared regions generally do not apply. Figure 2 shows Carina is located approximately 20 kilometres from both the existing Mt Manning Nature Reserve and the Helena and Aurora Conservation Park. These reserves are located to the north and west of Carina. Regional surface drainage generally flows in a southwest direction, so there is a negligible risk of any surface drainage effect to the Parks from the Carina project. The Continental Divide is located approximately 15 kilometres east of Carina. This major geologic feature separates surface drainage flowing towards the coast from drainage flowing to inland salt lake systems. Hydrological investigations have concluded (Section 4.5) that groundwater abstraction for the project will have only a localised effect. Groundwater quality is saline, so not naturally suited to other beneficial uses. Post mining groundwater effects from the open pit are also expected to be localised. Carina is outside the buffer radii of the Mt Walton Intractable Waste Storage Facility. Polaris has consulted with the agency managing the facility and its access road, the Department of Treasury and Finance- Building Management and Works. An agreement has been reached for Polaris to use the southern half of the access road, from the Great Eastern Highway to the trans Australian railway, for general traffic. It is anticipated the Carina project will have a negligible effect on the waste facility or intermittent transport of waste on the access road. Broad regional vegetation types reflect the two distinct underlying soil and geological types. These are mixed Eucalypt woodlands on red-brown sandy clay soils of sedimentary origin and shrublands on yellow sandplains of granitic origin. Detailed flora and vegetation surveys over tenements and project areas have improved botanical knowledge in the region. Surveys have identified no DRF, added to distributions of Priority species in the region, identified one undescribed species of Acacia and range extension of an undescribed species of Lepidosperma. The surveys indicate the low relief ridge of the Carina deposit does not appear to contain the high level of diversity and endemism characterised by other surveys of some major BIF ranges in the Midwest and Yilgarn regions. This adds to the knowledge base of the diversity in BIF landforms in the region. Flora and vegetation surveys of Eucalypt woodlands on red sandy clay soils identified Priority species broadly distributed through the region, with none being confined to particular soil or vegetation types. The majority of Priority species recorded on the haul road route were recorded on yellow sandplain soils of granitic origin. Based on DEC data from Florabase, the sandplain area is not well represented in herbarium collections. This is due to a combination of relatively poor access and low level of survey effort. The project surveys add to botanical knowledge in the

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW area and indicate these soils are populated by a more diverse range of species than previously considered. Terrestrial fauna surveys have identified a significant range extension of a short range endemic millipede, Antichiropus sp. nov. (‘Mt Gibson 1’), previously only recorded at Mt Gibson, some 300 kilometres to the west. Animals were collected at two sites in the local area, 12 kilometres apart, indicating this species is significantly more widely distributed than previously considered. The paucity of subterranean fauna data in the region means any surveys will significantly add to the knowledge base for this environmental factor. New species have been recorded at Carina as well as new species common to sites 12 kilometres apart. Further surveys are proposed as exploration drilling in other target areas enables surveys to be conducted in more locations.

7.2 GOVERNMENT POLICY Reserves over Crown land are classified under the Land Administration Act 1997 (Part 4), for a range of purposes in the public interest, into two categories; ‘Class A’ or ‘reserves’ (which are all reserves other than Class A). The 1997 Act superseded the Land Act 1933 which classified reserves into three categories, ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’. In simple terms, once a Class A reserve has been created, the Minister can only add Crown land to the reserve or make minor amendments to the purpose or boundary (5% or one hectare, whichever is the less). All other amendments to a Class A reserve must go before each House of Parliament. The Minister can implement changes to the purpose or boundary of reserves (not Class A). The Carina project is not located in any existing reserve area.

7.2.1 Northern Yilgarn Conservation Reserves This overview of the proposed northern yilgarn conservation reserve system is compiled from the following documents. • EPA (May 2007). Advice on the areas of the highest conservation value in the proposed extensions to Mount Manning Nature Reserve (Bulletin 1256) • DEC/DoIR (2007) Strategic review of the conservation and resource values of the banded iron formation of the yilgarn craton and associated Cabined decision sheet Strategic approach to balancing conservation and mining interests in the Midwest and goldfields banded ironstone formation (BIF) ranges (Strategic review). • DEC (March 2008). Northern yilgarn (Mt Manning range, Mt Elvire and Jaurdi) conservation reserves management plan: Issues paper • Office of the Appeals Convenor (March 2008) Appeal against level of assessment set by the EPA: Carina Iron Ore Mine. Appeal numbers 209-211 of 2008. Report to the Minister for Environment. • Minister’s appeal determination (14 July 2009). Appeal against report and recommendations, Koolyanobbing iron ore- W2 pit – Mining below the groundwater table. Shire of Yilgarn. Cliffs Natural resources Pty Ltd. • Minister’s appeal determination (24 July 2009). Appeal against report and recommendations, Mungada iron ore project – Report 1322, Karara Mining Limited.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• Current Government policy - Hansard. • Industry Working Group (April 2009) Review of Approval Processes in Western Australia. Prepared for the Minister for Mines and Petroleum (tabled in the Legislative Council 13 August 2009).

The proposed northern yilgarn conservation reserve system has a long history of development. It was identified in the EPA’s Conservation Reserves of Western Australia: System 11 in 1975. It encompasses both existing (then) C class reserves of 337,000 hectares and an additional collection of proposed areas, under various tenures, of 963,000 hectares, for a total area of approximately 1,300,000 hectares. The Mt Manning Range Nature Reserve was gazetted as a C class reserve in 1979. This reserve originally excluded the Mt Manning range. This was subsequently included as a C class Conservation Park in 2005. The existing collection of reserves (not A Class) is shown in Figure 2. The Carina project is located on the former Jaurdi pastoral station, purchased by CALM in 1989. The Jaurdi and Mt Elvire pastoral stations were purchased by CALM using funding from the sandalwood industry to achieve sandalwood management plan objectives under the Sandalwood Conservation and Regeneration Project (SCARP). They have since been included by the DEC in the tenure and conservation reserve process. The Jaurdi pastoral lease was originally 321,000 hectares. The CALM (1994) management plan proposed excising the northern portion, which included the Hunt Range, and incorporating it into the Mt Manning Range Nature Reserve (No. 36208). The proposed excision was an area of 37,240 hectares. 'C' Class status was recommended for the proposed addition. This recommendation was implemented. In EPA Bulletin 1256, Jaurdi pastoral station, now approximately 289,776 hectares, is proposed to be included in the northern yilgarn conservation reserve system as the Jaurdi Conservation Park (not Class A). The Jaurdi pastoral station is nominated as number 5 on the list of reserve recommendations, listed in order of importance. The action detailed in the EPA Bulletin 1256 for this area is “further investigation of the current Conservation Park recommendations to ensure adequate conservation of rare and endemic flora and other significant factors”. The Mt Jackson pastoral lease is owned by Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd (Cliffs). A portion of the pastoral lease covering 37,700 hectares, encompassing Mt Jackson, Muddarning, Boondine and Yenyanning Hills is proposed in EPA Bulletin 1256 to become managed by DEC in 2015, as part of the pastoral lease exclusion process. A portion of the existing Diemals pastoral lease covering 51,279 hectares, encompassing the Die Hardy Range, Windarling and Yokradine Hills is proposed to become managed by DEC in 2015, as part of the pastoral lease exclusion process. The Strategic Review was produced in September 2007. It comprises documents produced by the DEC and DoIR, with an executive summary and suggested actions arising ‘endorsed by Government’, which was the (then) State Labor Government. Subsequently, a State election saw a change of Government. The current Liberal Government has not formally adopted the Strategic review. The Minister’s appeal determination (24 July 2009) states “While the State Government has not adopted the Strategic Review, it is noted that this document provides valuable assistance to the EPA and Government agencies through the availability of background information and guidance for environmental assessment.”

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This view is further supported in the following Parliamentary question to the Premier from Mr C.J Tallentire (Hansard Tuesday 5 May 2009): Qu. Does the Premier accept the major findings of the Strategic Review of the Conservation and Resource Values of the Banded Iron Formation (BIF) of the Yilgarn Craton produced by the Department of Environment and Conservation and Department of Industry and Resources? R. The Strategic Review is now dated due to new information on both conservation values and mineralisation from ongoing surveys and exploration activities, but that it retains some value as a guide to decision making. The Industry Working Group report (April 2009) contains the following relevant information: In the document titled “Strategic Review of the Banded Iron Formation Ranges of the Midwest and Goldfields”, released in October 2007 by the Departments of Environment and Conservation and the then Department of Industry and Resources, policies attributed to the former Government relating to intended creation of reserves, exploration and development restrictions and other intentions were indicated, which still appear to be pursued by the Department of Environment and Conservation. This has led to difficulties between departments and agencies, as well as with proponents seeking to pursue the advancement of exploration and projects. Where such issues arise, the departments involved have a responsibility to seek Government clarification of any such policy differences. Above all, Government should also ensure that its policy in such circumstances is clearly understood by the departments and agencies responsible for handling the approval processes. Recommendation 9 – Review Government Policy Information made available to the Industry Working Group strongly suggests that decision making within some agencies is still being made on the basis of previous Government policy. It is recommended that Government immediately review the policies of the former Government that impact on the approvals processes to ensure that they reflect the current policies of the present government. This would include the document titled “Strategic Review of the Banded Iron Formation Ranges of the Midwest and Goldfields”, the associated “Draft North Yilgarn Management Plan”, and all other relevant mining and petroleum, environmental, native title and heritage policies.

Potential impact from, increased access, activity, noise and light on the existing and proposed conservation reserves are not expected to be a significant issue. The existing reserves are shown in Figure 2 to be 20 kilometres away. The Helena and Aurora range is 31 kilometres (in a straight line) from Carina. Polaris considers these distances provide sufficient buffer for any significant impact on the values and visitor amenity to the existing reserves. The PER process is intended to focus on key environmental factors which have the potential to have a significant environmental impact. The EPA approved Scoping Document, Section 5 includes the following text: Of the 20 environmental factors listed in Table 6, the seven key factors in Table 4 are considered to be of greatest significance for the Carina proposal. While the other environmental factors listed in Table 6 are relevant, Polaris considers these to be less

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

significant for the Carina proposal and able to be managed using practices and procedures commonly applied in the mining industry. The EPA approved Scoping Document (Table 6) shows: • Visual Amenity to require a visual assessment from adjacent locations as an Investigation and N/A (not applicable) for Potential Management. • Noise has a N/A for Investigation and N/A for Potential Management. • Light has a N/A for Investigation and N/A for Potential Management. The above outcomes are based on statements that the project is in an isolated area, with a low risk of significant impact from these factors. The visual assessment is provided in Appendix 9 and discussed in section 5.3. Figure 8 shows site access, on the proposed haul road, to be going away from the existing reserves, increasing the separation distance from them. Also, the haul road is on the eastern side a range of hills, comprising the Yendilberin hills, Mt Walton, Watt hills and Mt Finnerty. These hills provide an additional visual barrier from existing reserves. Figure 8 shows the existing access tracks (red lines) through the region. The main ‘Jaurdi track’ runs approximately parallel to the proposed haul road and from 5 to 10 kilometres west of it. The range of Yendilberin and Watt hills separates the two roads. Appendix 9 - Photograph 5, titled Jaurdi track: view towards Carina, 4 kms west shows visibility distance when on the flat woodland plains to be restricted to about 500 metres. This indicates there is no point on the Jaurdi track where the Carina project or haul road will be visible. This also confirms there will be no interruption to visitor access on Jaurdi track from the Carina project. Figure 8 shows there is only one existing track in the region that crosses the proposed Polaris haul road, at approximately half way down its 48 kilometre length. Polaris considers a single crossing point to not represent a significant potential impact to public access or activity. In summary: • The Carina project is located on the former Jaurdi pastoral station, in the proposed extended Yilgarn conservation reserve system. • The former Jaurdi pastoral station has not yet been converted into a Crown reserve, of any category nor vested in the Conservation Commission under the Land Administration Act 1997. • The Carina project is not in a location recognised as having the highest conservation significance (identified in EPA Bulletin 1256 for A class reservation). • Former Government policy, as detailed in EPA Bulletin 1256 and the Strategic Review has not been formally adopted by the current Government. • Mining as a land use is considered compatible with both the existing and proposed land tenure.

7.3 GREAT WESTERN WOODLANDS The Great Western Woodlands covers approximately 16,000,000 hectares in southern Western Australia, broadly east of the rabbit proof fence (Wilderness Society 2009). In relative terms, this area is twice the size of Tasmania.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

No specific management strategy or vesting currently applies to the Great Western Woodlands. In its current form, it includes towns, highways, roads, railways, private property, Crown reserves, pastoral activities and mining tenements. The Wilderness Society is a keen advocate for recognition and overall management of the Great Western Woodlands. It supports a multiple land use / cooperative management model for the region, which includes mining (pers. com. Dr A Watson of Wilderness Society to P Rokich of Polaris Metals, 20 May 2009). The Carina project will involve an impact of approximately 500 hectares (0.003%) of the Great Western Woodlands. As impacts on environmental and social factors assessed in this PER document are not expected to be regionally significant, it is concluded the project is compatible with the general values of the Great Western Woodlands.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

8. RISK ANALYSIS Internally, Polaris uses a risk analysis model based on Australian/New Zealand Standard (AS/NZS) 4360:2004 Risk Management, as an assessment tool for environmental and safety issues. The model uses a 5x5 risk matrix with 4 determined risk levels. The generally accepted measure of risk is the product of the likelihood of an event occurring and the consequence of that event. For example an event that has a high likelihood and moderate consequence may be considered to have a similar risk level as an event that has a moderate or low likelihood but high consequence. To maximise the outcome of managing risks it is important that manpower and other resources are allocated on a priority basis. It is normally accepted that the highest priority issues are actioned first. Polaris has undertaken a risk analysis of major project tasks and activities (aspects) that have potential to impact on environmental factors. This risk assessment is detailed in the Project Environmental Management Plan. The priority risk rating from this analysis indicates that most site activities have an inherent risk level of moderate or low. Polaris considers this generally low level of risk is consistent with the nature and scale of the project, which includes factors such as: 1. Operations restricted to open pit mining and physical processing of ore (dry crushing and screening). No chemical treatment of ore, processing/beneficiation or storage of process tailings is required. 2. Ore being mined (iron ore) is essentially benign, and has no inherent health concerns that are associated with some other metals or ores concentrated through a processing/beneficiation process. 3. A relatively small scale of overall disturbance. Only 500 hectares in a region mostly uncleared. 4. Most potential impacts having only a localised affect, which can be readily managed or remediated. 5. Key environmental factors, such as vegetation communities, flora and terrestrial fauna are widely represented in the region. 6. No populations of flora or fauna unique to the project area, eliminating the risk of catastrophic or major consequences to specific environmental factors. 7. Location in an isolated area of the State with no neighbours resident within a minimum of 30 kilometres from the mine. The nearest regional town 100 kilometres from the mine. 8. Location in an arid environment (less than 300 millimetres of rainfall per year), with no permanent surface water bodies in the vicinity. This results in low risk of surface water contamination and no risk to wetlands. 9. Deep local groundwater (approximately 60 metres below surface) with naturally poor quality (salinity approximating sea water). This results in low risk of contamination for other uses. Polaris considers that by implementing control measures identified in this document and also the Project Environmental Management Plan, the residual level of risk for all assessed aspects can be reduced to moderate or low levels.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Environmental management of impacts associated with this proposal is based on the risk management framework detailed in Section 8. The framework involves the following general process: 1. Identify activities that could result in environmental impacts to key factors. 2. Quantify the relative level of inherent risk from the activity (without control measures applied). 3. Formulate and implement control measures to reduce the inherent risk to an acceptable level (residual risk). 4. Monitor the effectiveness of control measures. A key outcome of the risk based model is to rank impacts, so specific management measures can be developed for high risk impacts, to reduce residual risk to as low as practicable. Polaris adopts the mitigation sequence (EPA 2006) for environmental management. The mitigation sequence is: 1. Avoid – avoid the impact altogether. 2. Minimise – limit the severity of the impact. 3. Rectify – rehabilitate affected site as soon as possible. 4. Reduce – eliminate impact over time. 5. Offset – if significant residual impacts remain to critical value assets. As different activities differ in scale and nature of impact, control measures are tailored to ensure they are relevant and effectively mitigate the risk. Specific management plans may be required for moderate or high risk aspects while routine procedures are considered sufficient to adequately manage low risk aspects. Polaris has developed a Project Environmental Management Plan (PEMP) for the Carina project (Appendix 7). The PEMP includes plans and procedures to mitigate risks to as low as practically possible. This plan was developed from the DEC approved Exploration Environmental Management Plan, for exploration activities, established in 2007. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 3: to implement the Project Environmental Management Plan. The PEMP is designed to use the first four steps in the mitigation sequence. Polaris considers the Carina iron ore project does not have a level of impact to critical value assets that warrant the consideration of offsets.

9.1 MINE WASTE 9.1.1 Objectives The EPA objectives for management of mine waste are to: Ensure that mine waste is contained and isolated so it does not result in long term impacts on the surrounding environment. Ensure that other wastes are contained, treated or collected so there is no long-term impact on the environment.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.1.2 Relevant standards Environmental Protection (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002. WRC (2000) Water Quality Protection Guidelines No. 9: Mining and Mineral Processing - Acid mine drainage. DoIR (2006) Environmental Notes on Mining: Acid Mine Drainage.

9.1.3 Potential impacts AMD in mine waste landform leaching into surrounding environment. AMD in pit walls leaching into the final pit void lake. Pollutants leaching from landfill into the surrounding environment. Wind blown refuse from site landfill.

9.1.4 Management

9.1.4.1 Mine waste The Carina Iron Ore Mine will comprise a single open pit of approximately 40 ha in area. Mined ore will be taken to the Run Of Mine (ROM) pad for dry crushing and screening. Mine waste will be transported to a waste landform or utilised for construction of mine infrastructure. Approximately 31 million lcm of mine waste will be mined over the life of the project. A waste landform will be required with an approximate area of 120 hectares. Characterisation of mine waste is an important component of mine planning. Mine waste can contain a range of properties that cause impacts to the surrounding environment if released, or problems for successful rehabilitation of the waste landform. Such properties can include: • Acid mine drainage (AMD). Also known as acid rock drainage (ARD). Sulphide components in mine waste, when oxidised, can form sulphuric acid in water. • Metaliferous drainage. Usually (but not always) associated with AMD, as acidic conditions increase the solubility of many metal species. • Salinity. Many mines in the midwest and goldfields regions of WA occur in locations where local groundwater is saline or hypersaline. • Poor soil structure. Properties of mine waste often include material with high clay content and dispersive characteristics. AMD Acid-Base Accounting (ABA) evaluates the balance between acid generating processes and acid neutralising processes (DITR 2007). This involves determining the maximum potential acidity (MPA) and the inherent acid-neutralising capacity (ANC) of a material, expressed in units of kg H2SO4/ tonne. The Net Acid Producing Potential (NAPP) is the difference between these two factors; that is the capacity of a material to generate acid and its capacity to neutralise acid and is calculated as: NAPP = MPA-ANC Total sulfur content, expressed as a percentage (%S) is commonly used as an estimate to calculate MPA, on the assumption that, when oxidised, sulphur is converted to sulphuric acid.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

(MPA = %S x 30.6 [to convert units to kg H2SO4/ t]). The literature indicates material with a total sulphur content of <0.3% contains too little sulphur to produce acid of any significant quantity. Such material is generally classed as Non Acid Forming (NAF). However, not all minerals containing sulphur are acid generating, so total sulphur content often over estimates MPA. Some minerals contain sulphur in forms that are already oxidised to a sulphate (SO4-S) which are very stable and rarely react further to produce sulphuric acid. For example, barite, gypsum, anhydrite, alunite and native sulfur, are non acid generating sulfur forms. Also, sulfur may occur as other metal sulfides (such as covellite, chalcocite, sphalerite and galena) which yield less acidity than pyrite or, in some cases, are non-acid- generating. A more realistic estimate of MPA for mine waste is therefore total sulphur content minus sulphate-sulfur:

MPA(kg H2SO4/t) = (Total S – (SO4-S) %) x 30.6 ANC measures the capacity of a material to neutralise acid. However, like MPA, ANC determination is not precise and prone to potential interferences that may not represent the actual capacity to neutralise acidity. Two measures of acid–base accounting are generally used; NAPP and the ANC/MPA ratio. 1. NAPP is negative if the material’s acid neutralising capacity is greater than its ability to generate acid (ANC>MPA). If it is highly negative (<-40) the material is regarded as acid consuming. Conversely, if NAPP is positive, the material may be net acid- generating, with highly positive numbers (>40) regarded as strongly acid generating. 2. The ANC/MPA ratio provides an indication of the relative margin of safety to prevent acid generation. As a general rule, an ANC/MPA ratio of ≥2 indicates a high probability the material will not be a net acid generator (ie; there is twice as much acid neutralising capacity as there is acid generating capacity). Another test, the Net Acid Generation (NAG) test, is used in association with the acid–base calculations, to provide greater certainty on the acid generating potential of a material. Individually, ABA and NAG tests have limitations, but in combination the reliability of acid generation prediction is greatly enhanced. The risk of misclassifying NAF material as Potentially Acid Forming (PAF), and vice versa, is substantially reduced by conducting both ABA and NAG tests. The NAG test involves reaction with hydrogen peroxide to rapidly oxidise any sulphide minerals. Both acid generation and acid neutralisation reactions occur simultaneously and the result represents a direct measure of the net amount of acid generated. The amount of acid produced is determined by titration and expressed in units of (kg H2SO4/t). A pH after reaction (NAG pH) of < 4.5 indicates the material is acid-generating. A pH after reaction (NAG pH) of ≥ 4.5 indicates the sample is not acid-generating. Considering all the above indicators, Polaris has adopted the following indicators of potential acid formation from mine waste for the Carina project (Table 24).

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 24: Mine waste acid producing potential Material Total ANC/MPA NAPP (kg NAG sulphur H2SO4/t) (pH) (%S) Potential Acid Forming -High Capacity (PAF-HC) >1.0 0 >40 <4.5 Potential Acid Forming (PAF) 0.5-1.0 <1 >20 <4.5 Potential Acid Forming -Low Capacity (PAF-LC) 0.3-0.5 1-2 5-20 <4.5 Non Acid Forming (NAF). <0.3 >2 ≤ 5 ≥4.5 Acid Consuming (AC) <0.3 >50 < -40 ≥4.5

Polaris included total sulphur content in periodic assays of drill samples, which covered both ore and waste profiles. Table 25 shows that of 1,583 assay records in the database, only 185 have total sulphur values greater than 0.3%. This data indicates the majority of mine waste is likely to be NAF, containing insufficient sulphur to generate acid to any significant level. Table 25: Drill assay results Category 1 Total sulphur Number % (%) PAF-HC >1 69 4.4% PAF 0.5-1.0 59 3.7% PAF-LC 0.3-0.5 57 3.6% NAF <0.3 1398 88.3% Total 1583 100.0% Note: 1. See Table 24 Characterisation of mine lithology shows the weathered (oxidised) profile extends approximately 80 metres from surface. This indicates approximately 60% of mine waste in the open pit is in the oxidised zone. The general composition of mine waste is: 1. Mafic schist (mas) 60% by volume. 2. BIF/chert (bif/cht) 38 % 3. Fault contact/transition zone (TZ) 2% Samples of major waste types and profiles were analysed for potential to generate acid (Table 26). This comprised: • Mafic schist in the oxidised/weathered zone (ox). • Mafic schist in the less weathered/fresh rock zone (fr). • BIF/chert in the oxidised/weathered zone. • BIF/chert in the less weathered/fresh rock zone. • Fault and transition zone material Samples of fault/ transition zone material often have visible sulphides present. This material, while only representing a small proportion of total mine waste is regarded as the waste most likely to be highly acid forming. Its visual characteristics make it easily recognisable in a mining situation and therefore easy to separate for encapsulation.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 26: Acid base accounting of mine waste types Laboratory results Acid-base calculations

Hole Depth Waste type Total S SO4-S ANC NAG pH NAG ph 4.5 (net) MPA NAPP ANC/MPA Characterisation (m) (%) (%) (kg H2SO4/t) (pH) (kg H2SO4/t) (kg H2SO4/t) (kg H2SO4/t) result 50 78-80 mas-ox 0.03 0.012 7.1 6 < 0.1 0.5 -7 13 Non acid forming 43 32-34 mas-ox 0.08 0.040 3.3 5.2 < 0.1 1.2 -2 3 Non acid forming 40 72-74 mas-ox 0.06 0.038 6.8 6.9 < 0.1 0.7 -6 10 Non acid forming 40 78-80 mas-ox 0.03 0.026 4.3 6.7 < 0.1 0.1 -4 35 Non acid forming 51 104-106 mas-fr 0.36 0.049 13.0 4 1 9.5 -3 1 Non acid forming 51 116-118 mas-fr 0.34 0.041 19.7 4 1.1 9.1 -11 2 Non acid forming 41 74-76 mas-fr 0.05 0.025 5.0 8.2 < 0.1 0.8 -4 6 Non acid forming 41 104-106 mas-fr 0.02 0.006 4.6 6.6 < 0.1 0.4 -4 11 Non acid forming 52 28-30 bif/cht-ox 0.03 0.014 126 9.2 < 0.1 0.5 -126 257 Acid consuming 66 30-32 bif/cht-ox 0.03 0.009 65.5 8.7 < 0.1 0.7 -65 100 Acid consuming 45 14-16 bif/cht-ox 0.13 0.008 4.0 3 3.2 3.7 0 1 Non acid forming 84 110-112 bif/cht-ox 0.09 0.011 29.6 8.4 < 0.1 2.4 -27 12 Non acid forming 81 70-72 bif/cht-fr 0.03 0.003 4.5 8 < 0.1 0.8 -4 6 Non acid forming 79 58-60 bif/cht-fr 0.06 0.012 3.4 6.1 < 0.1 1.5 -2 2 Non acid forming 83 20-22 bif/cht-fr 0.12 0.066 1.3 4.2 0.3 1.7 0 1 Non acid forming 58 90-92 bif/cht-fr 0.01 0.010 2.6 5.3 < 0.1 0.0 -3 255 Non acid forming 167 116-118 fault/trans-TZ 13.0 0.547 28.4 2.2 179 381.1 353 0 PAF-HC 25 118-120 fault/trans- TZ 22.4 0.387 49.0 2 293 673.6 625 0 PAF-HC 43 120-122 fault/trans- TZ 0.10 0.017 4.0 6.3 < 0.1 2.6 -1 2 Non acid forming 34 100-102 fault/trans- TZ 5.12 0.128 2.0 2.1 114 152.8 151 0 PAF-HC

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

A number of conclusions can be made from the data in Table 26: • All the mafic schist and BIF/chert profiles tested are non acid forming. • All waste types tested have some ANC. This ANC results in all mafic schist and BIF/chert samples having a negative NAPP, or at most = 0. • The ANC/MPA ratio is frequently much greater than 2, indicating samples tested often have a significantly greater capacity to neutralise acid than they do to generate acid. • Two samples tested (holes 52 and 66) have significant AC potential, showing high ANC values, alkaline NAG pH of 9.2 and 8.7 respectively and ANC/MPA ratios >50. • The fault /transition zone samples contained the only material indicated as PAF-HC. • One fault / transition zone sample gave total S content, ANC, NAG pH and ANC/MPA ratio more similar to the mafic schist and BIF/chert samples, indicating this sample is most likely not representative of the fault / transition zone profile. The method selected to manage the relatively small volume of PAF mine waste from the fault /transition zone is to encapsulate it in the waste landform. An encapsulation cell will be constructed using high ANC or AC waste material. Details of the encapsulation cell design are provided in Section 9.7 and also the PEMP. Monitoring will be undertaken to detect any changes to groundwater as a result of the project. The monitoring programme is documented in the Water Monitoring Plan contained in the PEMP (Appendix 7).

Metaliferous drainage If AMD is produced in quantities above the neutralising capacity of surrounding material, the pH of affected water will decrease. The solubility of many metals increases in acidic conditions. The Australian and New Zealand Environmental Conservation Council (ANZECC) and the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ) (2000) guidelines for fresh and marine water quality document trigger values for toxicants in fresh and marine waters. The project’s groundwater quality is approximately that of seawater, yet surface water, when present from irregular rainfall events, is fresh. ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) trigger values for marine water are therefore considered more relevant for groundwater monitoring and fresh water for surface water monitoring. Table 27 provides initial trigger levels from this reference for metals in surface and ground water. Monitoring will be undertaken to detect any changes to groundwater as a result of the project. The monitoring programme is documented in the Water Monitoring Plan contained in the PEMP (Appendix 7).

Table 27: Trigger levels of metals in water Parameter Fresh water 1 (µg/L) Marine water 1 (µg/L) (Carina groundwater) pH 6.5-8.0 8.0-8.4 Aluminium (pH>6.5) 55 ID 2 -(0.5) 3 Arsenic III 24 ID 2 -(2.3) 4 Copper 1.4 1.3 Lead 3.4 4.4 Mercury (inorganic) 0.6 0.4

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Notes: 1 ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) Table 3.4.1 trigger values for 95% protection of species 2 ID = Insufficient data to derive a reliable trigger value. 3 There were limited marine data and procedures for calculating an Environmental Concern Level. A low reliability marine trigger value of 0.5 μg/L has been derived for aluminium using an AF of 200. This figure should only be used as an indicative interim working level but could be revisited as more data become available [ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) Section 8.3.7.1]. 4 The USEPA (1986) noted that acute toxicity for As (III) to marine animals ranged between 232 and 16,030 μg/L. An Environmental Concern Level of 2.3 μg/L was derived for As (III) in marine waters, using an AF of 100. This figure could be adopted as a marine low reliability trigger value, to be used only as an indicative interim working level [ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) Section 8.3.7.1].

Salinity. Existing salt concentration in groundwater is 30,000mg/L Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), which is approximately seawater. If mine waste containing high salt concentration is placed on the outer layer of the waste landform it can inhibit successful establishment of many species used in rehabilitation. Planning waste landform construction so that the outer layer of mine waste does not contain high saline soils will maximise the chance of successful rehabilitation. Waste landform construction planning is documented in the Rehabilitation Plan contained in the PEMP (Appendix 7).

Poor soil structure. Two main processes which contribute to soil structural decline are slaking and dispersion. Slaking is mainly a physical process where aggregates collapse into micro-aggregates or primary particles when wet. Slaking soils reduce infiltration because the smaller aggregates block soil pores. Dispersion is predominantly a chemical process and results from the breakdown of aggregates into primary particles of sand, silt and clay. A characteristic of dispersion is muddy or cloudy water, the cloudiness being dispersed clay in suspension. The Emerson aggregate test is used to broadly define the stability of soils and differentiating between the processes of slaking and dispersion. Needham. et.al (1998) uses the Emerson aggregate test to identify four soil groups:

1. Soils which are spontaneously dispersive Emerson classes 1, 2 2. Soils which can be dispersive if Emerson class 3 remoulded (worked) when wet 3. Soils which slake but are non dispersive Emerson class 4, 5, 6 4. Soils which have a high inherent stability Emerson class 7, 8 A number of mine waste types from Table 26 were also tested for Emerson class. The results are shown in Table 28. The results indicate that mine waste is almost totally not dispersive and so will not be highly susceptible to tunnelling. Armouring the final surface of the waste landform with a competent (rocky or gravel) material will provide significant resistance to slaking from rainfall impact.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 28: Emerson class results hole Depth (m) waste type description Emerson class 50 78-80 mas-ox clayey silt, pale brown 6 40 72-74:78-80 mas-ox silty clay, red brown 5 51 104-106:116-118 mas-fr gravelly clay, grey 6 41 74-76:104-106 mas-fr silty clay, red brown 6 52 28-30 bif/cht-ox gravelly clay, orange brown 6 45 14-16 bif/cht-ox gravelly clay, orange brown 6 79 58-60 bif/cht-fr gravelly clay, red brown 6 58 90-92 bif/cht-fr silty sand, pale brown 3

9.1.4.2 Other wastes As described in Section 3.8.12, the project will generate the following wastes. Domestic and solid waste. An on-site landfill will be located in the mine waste landform. The landfill site will conform to requirements of the Environmental Protection (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002. Mine waste will be used to bury domestic and solid industrial waste at least weekly, but usually on a daily basis. Waste oil. Waste oil will be stored in tanks inside bunded compounds and collected by licensed contractors for recycling or use. Domestic wastewater. The accommodation village will require a commercial scale wastewater treatment plant, to provide treatment and disposal of wastewater from the accommodation units, laundry and kitchen facilities. Wastewater will be treated and then disposed to either irrigation area or evaporation pond, depending on the treatment design selected. Smaller scale effluent disposal systems (such as conventional septic tanks, Biocycle units or similar) will be installed for ablution facilities in the infrastructure area workshop, supply and administration buildings. Recyclable material. Steel, aluminium and batteries will be separated and stored in a dedicated recycling area. These will be periodically sent to recycling facilities at Kalgoorlie.

9.1.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for mine waste as follows: EPA objective: Ensure that mine waste is contained and isolated so it does not result in long term impacts on the surrounding environment. Predicted outcome: Mine waste is contained in a waste landform. Potential acid forming waste is encapsulated in the landform. EPA objective: Ensure that other wastes are contained, treated or collected so there is no long-term impact on the environment. Predicted outcome: Other waste is buried in an on-site landfill. Recyclable materials are collected and removed from site.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

The residual risk level from the project on this factor is therefore considered to be low.

9.2 SURFACE WATER 9.2.1 Objectives The EPA objectives for management of surface water are to: Maintain the quantity of water so that existing and potential environmental values, including ecosystem maintenance are protected. Ensure emissions do not adversely affect environmental values or the health, welfare and amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards.

9.2.2 Relevant standards Applicable standards and guidelines include: • WRC, DME and DEP: Water Quality Protection Guidelines No 6. Mining and Mineral Processing: Minesite Stormwater, 2000. • Water Quality Protection Guideline 11 (2000). Mining and Mineral Processing: Mine Dewatering. • ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000). Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, 2000. • Department of Water (DoW) - Water Quality Protection Notes.

9.2.3 Potential impacts Disruption to surface flows from earthworks. Sediment release and turbidity. Contamination to surface waters from hydrocarbons from the wash down bay. Water shadow impacts on vegetation.

9.2.4 Management The Carina project is located on a low ridge. Mine components have been located to avoid disruption to surface flows. Modelling of the 1:100 year flood event indicates the southern extremity of the open pit and a significant portion of the infrastructure area could be impacted. The open pit location is fixed, so flood protection measures must be implemented, by constructing a levee bank to divert floodwaters around the open pit. As a levee bank must be constructed to at least protect the open pit, continuing the embankment to encompass the infrastructure area is also a practical management option (Figure 14). An alternative location for the infrastructure area to the north of the open pit has also been identified (Inf 2 in Figure 5) and discussed in Section 3.4.3. Construction of levee banks to protect mine components in a 1:100 year flood event is considered to cause only a minor and localised disruption to surface flows in the region. In

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW smaller rainfall events of greater frequency (eg: annual or 1:5 events), peak flows will be less than a major event and will likely not reach the flood protection embankment. Flood event flow paths take the form of wide sheet flows, in an area of relatively flat terrain. Even in major events, flood waters passing the embankment will dissipate into the wide floodway downstream of the project area. Chemicals and hydrocarbons will be stored in bunded facilities. Detention basins will be constructed in the infrastructure area, to contain sediment and pollutants, prior to discharge to the environment. Figure 14 shows that discharge from basins can be directed outside the 1:100 year flood zone, enabling basins to continue to function, even in a major rainfall event. Disruption of surface flow paths can lead to vegetation death in the drainage shadow caused by the disrupting activity. The most usual cause of such effects in flat terrain situations, as surround the Carina project, is roads and tracks. It is imperative that detailed drainage design of haul roads and access tracks account for natural flow paths. Management measures to reduce disruption to surface flow paths include culverts under roads or shallow flat floodways, which enable water to pass over the road in a low velocity sheet that minimises scouring. Figure 14: Flood pathways

Flood protection levee

Sediment basin discharge

Source: Rockwater (2009) Figure 2

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.2.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for surface water as follows: EPA objective: Maintain the quantity of water so that existing and potential environmental values, including ecosystem maintenance are protected. Predicted outcome: The project will not use surface water supplies and only implement localised water diversion around mine components in major flood events. EPA objective: Ensure emissions do not adversely affect environmental values or the health, welfare and amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards. Predicted outcome: Surface water containing sediment or contaminants will be contained or directed to detention basins before discharge. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

9.3 GROUNDWATER 9.3.1 Objectives The EPA objectives for management of groundwater are to: Maintain the quantity of groundwater so that existing and potential environmental values are protected. Ensure emissions do not adversely affect environmental values or the health, welfare and amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards.

9.3.2 Relevant standards Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914. WRC, DME and DEP: Water Quality Protection Guidelines No 11, Mining and Mineral Processing – Mine Dewatering, 2000. DoW - Water Quality Protection Notes.

9.3.3 Potential impacts Groundwater level drawdown beyond modelled extent. Vegetation loss through groundwater level drawdown. Vegetation loss from saline water along the haul road and other watering sites. Contamination of groundwater.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.3.4 Management The water balance for the mine and first (15km) stage of haul road is shown in Table 9 and for the remaining 30 km of haul road and rail siding in Table 10. Combined, total water usage is approximately 1,860 KL/day or 21.5L/sec. Rockwater (2009a) modelled peak pit dewatering requirements at 22 L/sec (1,901 KL/day) for the first 3 years of the open pit. However, usage detailed in Table 9 is only 13L/sec (1,210KL/day). The dewatering model suggests there is a significant water surplus for this period. The groundwater is saline, so unsuitable to discharge to local waterways without impact to surrounding vegetation. Two options have been considered and are summarised in Table 29. Option 1: Maintain usage as detailed in Table 9 and construct an evaporation basin in the footprint of the waste landform, to evaporate the surplus water. Option 2: Increase usage by using pit dewatering water on additional length of haul road. This reduces the net surplus and therefore the size of evaporation basin needed. Table 29 shows the net annual water surplus from Option 1 (252,142 KL) can be evaporated by a 15 hectare pond in the waste landform footprint and the water surplus from Option 2 (160,892 KL) can be evaporated by a 10 hectare pond. The total area of the waste landform is 120 hectares. The projected quantity of mine waste in each year is also shown in Table 29. This shows almost 3,500,000 cubic metres of mine waste will be produced in the last 2 years. This is more than sufficient to deeply bury the evaporation pond once all water has dried. The evaporation pond will therefore be encapsulated within the waste landform. The model shows dewatering rates in years 4 and 5 to more closely match usage. It is not anticipated there will be a water surplus in these years. Table 29: Pit dewatering options Option 1 Option 2 Dewatering rate Use Surplus Use Surplus year L/sec KL/day KL/day KL/day KL/day KL/day 1 22 1,901 1,210 691 1,460 441 2 22 1,901 1,210 691 1,460 441 3 22 1,901 1,210 691 1,460 441 4 16 1,382 1,210 172 1,460 -78 5 12 1,037 1,210 -173 1,460 -423

3 year KL/yr KL/yr KL/yr KL/yr KL/yr Mine waste (m ) 1 693,792 441,650 252,142 532,900 160,892 7,718,000 2 693,792 441,650 252,142 532,900 160,892 7,542,000 3 693,792 441,650 252,142 532,900 160,892 4,082,000 4 504,576 441,650 62,926 532,900 -28,324 2,244,000 5 378,432 441,650 -63,218 532,900 -154,468 1,252,000

At average net evaporation rate of 2m/yr, 10 ha pond will evaporate 200,000 At average net evaporation rate of 2m/yr, 15 ha pond will evaporate 300,000

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

The saline nature of groundwater and its significant depth (approximately 60 metres below ground level) indicates that the Eucalypt woodland communities in the region are exploiting fresher groundwater sources above this level. Short term drawdown in the zone around the open pit is not anticipated to cause vegetation death. Figure 16 shows that the most significant effect of lowered groundwater levels at the conclusion of 5 years of pit dewatering is confined to the open pit and immediate area (within 200 metres). Beyond approximately 500 metres from the open pit, drawdown of groundwater is restricted to 10 metres or less. The Water Monitoring Procedure and the Vegetation Management Procedure in the PEMP detail groundwater and vegetation monitoring and schedules respectively. Reporting of monitoring results will be undertaken in the Annual Environmental Review. Groundwater levels are predicted to recover once pit dewatering activity cease and a pit void lake will form. Due to the significant evaporation rate in the region, the pit void lake will function as a groundwater sink, with an equilibrium water level below that of the surrounding area. This ensures that salt accumulation or pH reduction (as a result of acidification of sulfides in the pit wall rock) will be confined to the pit void and immediate area. Detail design and operational planning of the waste landform has not yet occurred. An exact location of the evaporation pond has not yet been determined. Figure 15 shows an indicative area, indicating the scale of the evaporation pond relative to the waste landform.

Figure 15: Indicative evaporation pond location

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

As with other environmental factors, such as flora, SRE invertebrates and troglofauna, ongoing monitoring during operations establishes a dataset which improves knowledge and enables verification/refinement of surveys and assessments undertaken during the project approval phase. This ‘feedback loop’ is especially relevant at Carina where generally, there is a paucity of regional information for many of these factors. This data is normally reported in Annual Environmental Report and Operating Strategy Review. Polaris intends to construct at least one large diameter production bore and pump test this bore to provide data to verify and refine the abstraction model. The model is based on water abstraction from three production bores along the 1,500 metre length of the open pit. The groundwater consultants (Rockwater) have also undertaken groundwater investigations for Portman (now Cliffs) Koolyanobbing, Jackson and Windarling project sites for many years. They have extensive experience in the hydrogeology in this region. Modelling, bore pump tests and years of monitoring data from these other projects provide an excellent comparative dataset for Carina. The Carina model abstraction rates are consistent with actual rates from other mines in the region (section 3.7), so the basic assumptions in the model are considered to be correct. Pump testing and abstraction monitoring is intended to verify and refine the Carina model through the life of mine. Polaris obtained approval from the Department of Mines and Petroleum on 28 July 2009, for the Programme of Work to drill the bore and construct a containment dam for the saline water abstracted during the test pumping. Polaris obtained approval from the Department of Water on 6/8/2009, for Groundwater Well Licence (GWL) 169652(1). The licence is for an abstraction limit of 12,500 kL per year. Now that appropriate approvals have been obtained, it is Polaris’s intention to construct the bore when exploration work recommences on site in early 2010. The bore will be constructed and pump tested. The abstraction limit is sufficient for operational requirements at this time (exploration drilling and dust suppression). An increase in the abstraction limit, to rates required for pit dewatering, will be applied for during the mine construction phase.

9.3.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for groundwater as follows: EPA objective: Maintain the quantity of groundwater so that existing and potential environmental values are protected. Predicted outcome: Groundwater levels will recover to near pre mining levels at the conclusion of dewatering. The saline nature of existing groundwater has limited other beneficial uses. EPA objective: Ensure emissions do not adversely affect environmental values or the health, welfare and amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards. Predicted outcome: Surplus saline groundwater will be contained and evaporated on site. Impacts to groundwater will be confined to the open pit and immediate area. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

786500.000000 787000.000000 787500.000000 788000.000000 788500.000000 789000.000000 789500.000000

16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 5 5 8 8 2 2 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 2 2 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 5 5 7 7 2 2 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 2 2 6 6 ) 6 6 A G M (

0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 5 5 6 6 2 2 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 2 2 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 5 2 2 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 0 0

5 1:20,000 5 2 2

6 Figure 16 6 6 6

Pit outline 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 Tracks 0 . . 0 0 0 0 5 5 4 4 2 2

6 .000000 .000000 .000000 .000000 .000000 .000000 .000000 6 6 786500 787000 787500 788000 788500 789000 789500 6 mE (MGA)

CLIENT: Polaris Metals NL CARINA PIT PROJECT: Carina Pit Dewatering MODELLED DRAWDOWN (m) DATE: Oct. 2009 AFTER 5 YEARS OF DEWATERING  (END OF MINING) Dwg No: 349.0/09/2-02 Rockwater Pty Ltd POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.4 VEGETATION AND FLORA 9.4.1 Objectives The EPA objectives for management of flora and vegetation are to: • Avoid adverse impacts on biological diversity, comprising plants and animals and the ecosystems they form, at the levels of genetic diversity, species diversity and ecosystem diversity. • Maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of vegetation communities. • Maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of flora at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge. • Protect declared rare and priority flora, that occur within the proposal area. • Protect other flora species of particular conservation significance (e.g. undescribed taxa, range extensions). • Avoid introduction of invasive weeds which may have a negative impact on native vegetation communities.

9.4.2 Relevant standards Applicable standards and guidelines include: • Position Statement No. 2 Environmental Protection of Native Vegetation in WA (EPA, 2000); • Guidance Statement No. 51. Terrestrial Flora and Vegetation Surveys Environmental Impact • Assessment in WA (EPA, 2004); and Policy Statement No 9, Conserving Threatened Species and Ecological Communities (CALM, 2003). • DEC (2005). Recommended Interim Protocol for Flora Surveys of Banded Ironstone Formations (BIF) of the Yilgarn Craton • Environmental Weed Strategy for Western Australia (CALM, 1999).

9.4.3 Potential impacts The project involves clearing native vegetation. Potential impacts as a result of implementing the project are: • Direct impact (clearing) on vegetation. • Direct impact on individuals of significant flora species. • Indirect impact on surrounding vegetation and flora by activities from mining (eg dust deposition, salt water overspray and dewatering impacts).

9.4.4 Management

9.4.4.1 Clearing Clearing of vegetation in WA is assessed against 10 principles outlined in Schedule 5 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The principles address four main environmental areas of

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW biodiversity significance, land degradation, conservation estate and water quality (both surface and groundwater). Table 30 details how Polaris has considered these principles and developed measures to ensure potential impacts from removal of native vegetation can be managed to avoid serious degradation to vegetation systems or habitats.

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 30: Clearing principles No. Principle Existing Environment Potential Impact Management Action Outcome Native vegetation should not be cleared if- Biodiversity Significance 1. it comprises a high level of biological Vegetation communities and flora species are The project will result in only minor local Seed collection in advance of clearing to Project is not at variance diversity. well represented in the wider region. biodiversity loss (by reduction in the gene return local provenance genetic material with this principle pool of individuals cleared). in mine rehabilitation. 2. it comprises the whole or part of, or is Fauna surveys have not identified significant The project will result in only minor local Rehabilitation will return habitat to the Project is not at variance necessary for the maintenance of, a fauna habitat unique to the project area. habitat loss in the region. majority of the project area. with this principle significant habitat for fauna indigenous to The most significant fauna habitat (BIF WA. outcrop) corresponds to vegetation unit S2. The project will impact only 1.7% of this unit mapped in exploration tenements to date. 3. it includes, or is necessary for the No Declared Rare Flora (DRF) has been No impact to DRF No specific management measures Project is not at variance continued existence of, rare flora. located in the project area necessary for this principle with this principle 4. it comprises the whole or a part of, or is No Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) No impact to TEC No specific management measures Project is not at variance necessary for the maintenance of a is located in the project area necessary for this principle with this principle threatened ecological community. 5. it is significant as a remnant of native The region is predominantly covered by native No remnant vegetation communities in the No specific management measures Project is not at variance vegetation in an area that has been vegetation. project area necessary for this principle with this principle extensively cleared. 6. it is growing in, or in association with, an There are no permanent watercourses or The project has been designed to avoid No specific management measures Project is not at variance environment associated with a wetlands in the region. local drainage lines and watercourses. necessary for this principle with this principle watercourse or wetland. Land Degradation 7. the clearing of vegetation is likely to The region is predominantly covered by native The 500 hectares of clearing associated Clearing procedures are to be Project is not at variance cause appreciable land degradation. vegetation. with the project, in a region extensively implemented as routine controls with this principle covered by native vegetation, is unlikely to cause appreciable land degradation. Conservation Estate 8. the clearing of vegetation is likely to have The nearest gazetted conservation area (Mt The project is not located adjacent or near Clearing procedures are to be Project is not at variance an impact on the environmental values of Manning Nature Reserve) is approximately 18 to a conservation area. implemented as routine controls with this principle any adjacent or nearby conservation area. km to the northwest and will not be impacted by the project.

Ground and Surface Water Quality 9. the clearing of vegetation is likely to There are no permanent surface water bodies Turbid water from intense rainfall events Detention basins containing sediment off Project is not at variance cause deterioration in the quality of in the vicinity. Short duration surface water may enter local watercourses. disturbed areas prior to discharge to local with this principle surface or underground water. flows follow intermittent heavy rainfall. waterways Groundwater is naturally saline, with salt Saline groundwater will not be discharged Management of groundwater use as levels approximately that of seawater. to local watercourses detailed in the water management plan Groundwater is approximately 60 m below ground level. 10. clearing the vegetation is likely to cause, The project is located in an arid climate, on a The project is unlikely to cause or Stormwater control measures as detailed Project is not at variance or exacerbate, the incidence of flooding. local topographic high. exacerbate the incidence of flooding. in the water management plan with this principle

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

100

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

As described in Section 3.2, Polaris has an internal clearing procedure, to ensure clearing is kept to the minimum required to undertake site operations. This procedure is included in the Vegetation Management Procedure.

9.4.4.2 Mine disturbance area The mine disturbance area includes normal mine activities (open pit, waste landform, infrastructure areas) as well as ancillary use areas (haul road, rail siding, accommodation village and airstrip). The initial mine layout plan shown in the project referral and scoping documents indicated a single waste landform located east of the open pit and 3 separate mine infrastructure areas. Subsequent botanical surveys (Section 4.6.5) identified a population of 300 Grevillea georgeana (P3) plants inside this waste landform footprint. The proposed eastern waste landform also impacts a local drainage line, which would require diversion. By implementing mine redesign, to locate the waste landform on the west side of the pit (Figure 5), the following benefits are achieved. • Totally avoid impact to the Grevillea georgeana population. • Totally avoid the minor drainage line. These design changes implement the first step in the mitigation sequence (avoid). The redesigned mine layout results in the following vegetation and flora impacts:

• Effect on local drainage line / watercourse nil

• Number of G. georgeana (P3) affected nil

• Number of D. purpurascens (P4) affected – up to 31 depending on final minor mine design. Removal of plants from the edge of the open pit and infrastructure area. A total of 87 individuals were recorded in the mining tenement and 856 individuals in other surveys (Table 18), confirming a wide regional distribution. The data shows the project will affect only 3.6% of plants currently identified in the region.

9.4.4.3 Haul road and rail siding The haul road and rail siding are estimated to occupy 150 and 50 hectares respectively. The haul road area is based on an approximate 50 kilometre by 30 metre wide road. Flora and vegetation survey of the haul road and rail siding identified 10 Priority plant taxa (Appendix 4 and section 4.6.5). Not all Priority plants identified in the survey will be disturbed. The haul road survey covered a corridor of 60 metres wide, however the road itself will be approximately 30 metres wide. At construction, flexibility exists to move the road alignment within the corridor, to avoid or minimise impact to Priority species at particular locations. In consultation with the DEC on 8 September 2009, it was presented that DEC were considering nominating Spartothamnella sp. Helena &Aurora Range (P.G. Armstrong 155- 109), now a P3, for possible listing as declared rare flora (DRF) at the next Threatened Species Scientific Committee meeting. This is anticipated in the first quarter of 2010. While

101

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW this action is a future action with unknown outcome at this time, Polaris recognises that avoiding the species currently recorded on the haul road route, via minor realignment of the route at this early planning stage, is easy. The haul road alignment has been changed to avoid this taxa. In the southern-most section, an alternative haul road alignment, 100 metres to the east of the original route was surveyed, to confirm if the 2 undescribed Lepidosperma species (Lepidosperma sp. Aurora Sandplain (R.L. Barrett 2809B) and Lepidosperma sp. Mt. Finnerty (S. McNee LCS 9486) were more widely dispersed. In addition to greater numbers of the 2 Lepidosperma species, the second survey also found more Stylidium choreanthum P2, Acacia formidabilis P3 and Mirbelia sp. Helena & Aurora Range (BJ Lepschi 2003) P3. The survey indicated it is likely more of all these species will occur on the S12 vegetation community and the original haul road route is likely to have a lesser impact on numbers than alternative alignments. This conforms to the second step in the mitigation sequence, minimise.

9.4.4.4 Accommodation village and rail siding extension The decision to relocate some project components from close to the mine to close to the rail siding is considered minor in context of the overall project. These components only occupy small areas and can be located within their larger tenement areas to avoid or minimise impact to significant flora. For example, the accommodation village tenement is 500m x 500m, but the actual village is approximately 150m x 150m. A vegetation and flora survey was undertaken of the accommodation village tenement, access road and amendments to the rail siding area. Six of the priority species identified in the haul road survey were also recorded in this survey, confirming these species are more widespread in the yellow sandplain vegetation type and likely to be present over a considerable area. The likelihood that these species are more widespread and not confined to the proposed development footprint is high. Therefore, the risk of significant impact to significant flora from the small areas of proposed disturbance, in the very large extent of sandplain vegetation type, is considered low. However, given the time the survey was undertaken (the height of summer), follow-up surveys are proposed in more optimal times of the year, to quantify significant flora in the wider area. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 4: to undertake further botanical surveys in the sandplain vegetation type, to improve knowledge of significant flora populations in the region. Results of surveys conducted will be included in the Annual Environmental Report.

9.4.4.5 Use of saline water Local groundwater is saline, approximating sea water salinity level. Use of this water for dust suppression has potential to effect surrounding vegetation, either through salt water over-spray or surface runoff transporting salt from sprayed areas. Indirect impacts on vegetation from use of saline water or dust are difficult to predict. They are: • not universal to all projects, • not anticipated to occur, • their extent and effect can rarely be accurately modelled or predicted in advance,

102

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• their impact (where present) are almost always a result of site specific factors. EPA Report 1303 (pg 5, 6) provides the following information which demonstrates this. R. brevis is located approximately 50m north of the W2. One mortality in the population of 1020 has been recorded since mining. Dust and drought are two factors that may have contributed to this mortality. Annual health condition monitoring of the health of R. brevis located near the W2 pit has confirmed that dust from mining the W2 pit reaches the population. The health of the R. brevis in this population demonstrates some plants having produced a large number of female flowers during the first half of 2008, while other plants have suffered leaf loss over a period of years, and have produced no female flowers during 2008. The factors leading to leaf loss and no flowering are believed to be connected to the drought of 2004/2005, as well as some individual plants having better access to water and shorter periods of sun exposure (Portman Iron 2008). R. brevis is also located within 15m of the Windarling W3/5 pit where it continues to flower. Polaris has committed to a vegetation health monitoring programme (Commitment 9). The programme will assess vegetation health, in locations around the active operational area, for indirect impacts from dust and use of saline water. Site specific triggers for management action will be established as a result of monitoring results. This will be reported in the Annual Environmental Report.

9.4.4.6 Weeds Mattiske (Sept 2008) recorded only two weed species in the exploration tenement, Erodium cicutarium and Erodium botrys. These species are common on farmlands, pastures and along roadsides, especially in loamy soils. Surveys to date have not confirmed the presence of either of these weeds in the project area. CALM (1999) Environmental weed strategy for WA Appendix 3 rates E. cicutarium as ‘moderate’. The project’s PEMP includes wash down of earthmoving equipment coming to site and periodic site inspection for weed infestations as routine control procedures. It is considered these measures provide sufficient control to ensure the residual risk from this factor is low

9.4.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for vegetation and flora as follows: EPA objective: Avoid adverse impacts on biological diversity, comprising plants and animals and the ecosystems they form, at the levels of genetic diversity, species diversity and ecosystem diversity. Predicted outcome: Project has been designed to avoid significance locations. Clearing of native vegetation will be kept to a practical minimum. Progressive rehabilitation will reduce exposed areas and restore habitat for native fauna and flora. Control programs for weed and feral animals will be implemented. EPA objective: Maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of vegetation communities.

103

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Predicted outcome: Vegetation communities impacted by the project are widely distributed in the region. The regional extent of these communities will not be significantly affected by the small proportion of disturbance from the project. The project implements measures to identify and control invasive species (weeds). EPA objective: Maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of flora at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge. Predicted outcome: Flora species impacted by the project are widely distributed in the region. The project has been designed to avoid populations of significant species where possible. Botanical surveys conducted for the project has improved knowledge of vegetation and flora in the region. EPA objective: Protect declared rare and priority flora, that occur within the proposal area. Predicted outcome: A small number of individuals of a P4 species will be impacted by the project. This represents only a small proportion of those recorded in the region. Other priority flora have been identified, their locations recorded and project components relocated to avoid disturbance to these individuals. EPA objective: Protect other flora species of particular conservation significance (e.g. undescribed taxa, range extensions). Predicted outcome: The project has been designed to avoid populations of Lepidosperma sp. Aurora Sandplain (R.L Barrett 2809B) on the haul road alignment. This is currently an undescribed taxa and identification of it at this location represents a significant range extension. EPA objective: Avoid introduction of invasive weeds which may have a negative impact on native vegetation communities. Predicted outcome: Control programs for weeds will be implemented as a routine control procedure. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

9.5 TERRESTRIAL FAUNA 9.5.1 Objectives The EPA objectives for the management of fauna are to: • Maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of fauna at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge. • Protect Specially Protected (Threatened) fauna consistent with the provisions of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. • Protect other fauna species of particular conservation significance (e.g., short range endemic species, range extensions).

9.5.2 Relevant standards Applicable standards and guidelines include:

104

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• Guidance Statement No. 56. Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in WA (EPA, 2004); and • Position Statement No. 3. Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an Element of Biodiversity Protection (EPA, 2002). • Draft Policy Statement Number 9. Conserving Threatened Species and Ecological Communities (CALM, 2003).

9.5.3 Potential impacts The principle impact on fauna will be direct loss and degradation of habitat through clearing native vegetation, mining and dewatering. Indirect habitat degradation has the potential to occur through the mining process and increased human activity in the area. These include introduction of weed and feral fauna species, dust generation and changes to drainage patterns. While most mobile species (birds, larger mammals and reptiles) will be able to avoid direct impact from clearing, most small mammals, reptiles, burrowing frogs and invertebrates will not. While the local impact on these animals is high, the regional effect will be small on the species overall. Road deaths are likely to increase with increased traffic in the project area.

9.5.4 Management Vegetation clearing and mine activities will impact fauna populations in the mine footprint area, but is not anticipated to have significant impacts at a regional level. Vegetation communities and habitat in the project area are well represented in the rest of the exploration tenement, and likely to also be represented beyond that boundary. The fauna present in the project area is mostly wide-ranging with no species recorded that is unique to the project site. One species of millipede recorded at Carina is considered to be a SRE species. It has also been collected at a comparison site 12 kilometres to the north and at another minesite in the Midwest region, approximately 300 kilometres to the west. The bird species recorded that are considered significant (Table 21) are mobile and have been recorded in other locations. Significant extent of preferred habitat for all these species remains at a regional level. Detailed survey for short range endemic fauna on the yellow sandplain landform, where the rail siding and accommodation village is located, is not considered warranted. This landform type covers a vast area. There are no unique landforms or structures (eg; exposed granite outcrops, ironstone ridges) that provide unique or restrictive habitat in this expansive area. The Boorabbin National Park, some 45 kilometres to the south, contains the same landform type. In order to minimise terrestrial fauna impacts, a number of measures, as listed below, will be implemented. Further details on these measures are provided in the Fauna Management Procedure, which is included in the PEMP (Appendix 7). • Avoid unnecessary clearing beyond that strictly required. • Retain cleared vegetation and topsoil for use in rehabilitation. • Progressively rehabilitate areas when they are completed.

105

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• Induct all personnel on important fauna constraints and factors at the site. • Exclude firearms and pets from the project area. • Manage rubbish disposal to discourage scavenging by native and feral animals. • Routine site inspections so problems can be identified and remedied at an early stage. • Create fauna egress points in water storage dams by constructing shallow sloped sides or install mats.

9.5.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina iron ore mine can meet the EPA’s objectives for terrestrial fauna as follows: EPA objective: Maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of fauna at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge. Predicted outcome: Localised impact to some fauna will occur in the mine footprint area, but this is not anticipated to have significant impact to the species at a regional level. Fauna surveys have improved knowledge at a local and regional level. EPA objective: Protect Specially Protected (Threatened) fauna consistent with the provisions of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. Predicted outcome: Specially protected species recorded at the site are migratory or highly mobile. The mine footprint area will have an insignificant effect on the extent of preferred habitat for these species at a local and regional level. EPA objective: Protect other fauna species of particular conservation significance (e.g., short range endemic species, range extensions). Predicted outcome: Only 1.7% of the habitat for one SRE millipede in the Carina and Chamaeleon tenements (BIF ridge, vegetation type S2) is to be impacted by the project. The species has also been recorded in another site locally and in another region of the State. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

9.6 SUBTERRANEAN FAUNA 9.6.1 Objectives The EPA objective for the management of subterranean fauna is to maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of subterranean fauna at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge.

9.6.2 Relevant standards • Guidance Statement No. 54. Consideration of Subterranean Fauna in Groundwater and Caves during EIA in WA (EPA, 2003). • Guidance Statement No. 54a. Sampling Methods and Survey Considerations for Subterranean Fauna in WA (EPA, 2007).

106

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.6.3 Potential impacts No stygofauna have been recorded in the project area. Directs impact to troglofauna species by open pit excavation. Indirect impact to troglofauna species by pit dewatering operations.

9.6.4 Management There has been very little subterranean fauna surveys conducted in the region. This paucity of local knowledge means it is highly likely any surveys undertaken will record new species, or range extensions of known species. No stygofauna and six troglofauna species were found at Carina. Five species were recorded at Chamaeleon (12 km north) and one species at a regional reference site 20 km south. In comparison surveys at the Jackson Range, found 14 species (Bennelongia 2008). These low numbers suggest the population at Carina does not appear to reflect a major subterranean fauna habitat. Analysis of lithology of drill holes where troglofauna were recorded clearly show species are not confined to the orebody, or the vuggy hematite / goethite geology (shown as IG, IH or IHG in Figure 18). Fractured zones in the surrounding host rock (mafic schist, MAS) also contain troglofauna. This means host rock around the ore body also provides habitat and is not a barrier to subterranean fauna. 1 species in pit. Parajapygidae sp B6 in Hole 5. H5 has MAS down to the water table, with only two separate one metre lenses of iron hematite (IH), at 44 and 46 metres. This bore was blocked by rockfall at 37 m, so sampling stopped about 7 m above the first layer of hematite. 2 species outside pit. Both found in Hole 63, which is about 110 metres from the edge of the pit. Hole 63 is entirely mafic schist (MAS). These 2 species (i) live in fractured rock in the surrounding host rock and (ii) are considered a safe distance from the disturbance area and can be avoided. 3 common species. Species found at both Carina (C) and Chamaeleon (CH). These two sites are 12 kilometres apart. This confirms common species in populations in the local area. It is considered further sampling will add to the number of common species. Results from all sites surveyed found six of the species collected were singletons, which provide no information about the extent of a species’ range. However, three of the four species represented by more than one animal were found to be wide-ranging, with linear ranges of at least 12 km. Their occurrence at both Carina and Chamaeleon suggest there is considerable habitat connectivity between the two deposits. It is considered this connectivity is likely to extend more widely along the Mt Dimmer Shear Zone. Modelling of groundwater depression as a result of pit dewatering shows significant groundwater drawdown at the end of 5 years of pumping to be confined to with a few hundred

107

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW metres from the open pit (Section 9.3). This localised effect is not anticipated to have a significant effect to troglofauna populations in the wider area. Further sampling will add to knowledge of troglofauna populations in the region, given the existing database is extremely limited. Exploration drill holes are required to conduct subterranean fauna surveys. To date, Polaris has only undertaken drilling at the Carina and Chamaeleon project areas. Other exploration targets, between these two sites have been identified, and will be drilled over the next 12 months. This will enable additional sampling to be undertaken, along the strike length, in similar geology to the Carina and Chamaeleon deposits. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 5: to undertake further troglofauna surveys in the region, to improve knowledge of troglofauna populations in the region and those found at Carina. Results of surveys conducted will be included in the Annual Environmental Report. This commitment implements the second step in the mitigation hierarchy (minimise). In order to provide information on additional likely habitat for the singleton species collected, specifically Parajapygidae sp B6, a habitat assessment has been conducted in the zone north of Carina. A map illustrating the extent of prospective troglofauna habitat is shown in Figure 2.1 of the Subterranean Fauna Assessment (Bennelongia 2009) – PER Appendix 6 and reproduced below in Figure 17. Figure 17 depicts the 12 kilometre Mt Dimer shear zone length between Carina and Chamaeleon, showing significant faulting throughout the region. Additional geological prospect targets are Carina Extended and Carina North. Both these targets have surface ironstone expression that indicates a possible repetition of the Carina deposit. It also shows significant faulting through the mafic schist host rock. This confirms the geology in and around the Carina deposit also occurs in the surrounding area and contains repetitions of the Carina deposit and identical habitat that the singleton of Parajapygidae sp. B6 was found in. Bennelongia 2009, section 6.1.3 states “Six of the species collected were singletons and singleton records provide no information about the extent of a species’ range. However, three of the four species represented by more than one animal were found to be wide-ranging at the mine–pit scale, with linear ranges of at least 12 km. Their occurrence at both Carina and Chamaeleon suggests there is considerable habitat connectivity between the two deposits and this connectivity is likely to extend more widely along the Mount Dimer Shear Zone (Figure 2.1).” This demonstrates there is habitat connectivity in the target area shown in Figure 17.

9.6.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for subterranean fauna as follows: EPA objective: Maintain the abundance, diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of subterranean fauna at species and ecosystem levels through the avoidance or management of adverse impacts and improvement in knowledge. Predicted outcome: One singleton troglofauna species found at Carina is restricted to the open pit. All other species found are either represented elsewhere or are outside the open pit boundary. Current knowledge indicates a high level of habitat connectivity within the Mt

108

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Dimmer Sheer Zone. Further surveys will improve knowledge of troglofauna in this region, which until now has been poorly studied. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

109

Figure 17 Figure 18: Drill hole lithology inside pit outside pit control mFrom mTo CA 0002 CA0005 CA0039 CA0047 CA0063 CH0004 CH0038 0 1 IG MAS BIF MAS ALV BIF NRY 1 2 IG MAS BIF MAS ALV IG MAS 2 3 IG MAS BIF MAS ALV IG MAS 3 4 IG MAS MAS MAS CLY IHG MAS 4 5 IG IM MAS MAS MAS IHG MAS 5 6 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS IHG MAS 6 7 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS IHG MAS 7 8 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS IHG MAS 8 9 IG MAS MAS IHG MAS IHG MAS 9 10 IG MAS IG IHG MAS IHG MAS 10 11 BIF MAS IG IHG MAS MAS MAS 11 12 BIF MAS IG IHG MAS IG MAS 12 13 MAS MAS IG IHG MAS MAS MAS 13 14 MAS MAS IG MAS MAS MAS MAS 14 15 MAS MAS IG MAS MAS MAS MAS 15 16 MAS MAS IG MAS MAS MAS MAS 16 17 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 17 18 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 18 19 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 19 20 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 20 21 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 21 22 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 22 23 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 23 24 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 24 25 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 25 26 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 26 27 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS BIM 27 28 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS BIG 28 29 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS BIG 29 30 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 30 31 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 31 32 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 32 33 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 33 34 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 34 35 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 35 36 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 36 37 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS IG 37 38 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 38 39 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 39 40 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 40 41 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 41 42 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 42 43 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 43 44 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 44 45 BIF IH MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 45 46 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 46 47 BIF IH MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 47 48 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 48 49 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 49 50 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 50 51 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 51 52 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 52 53 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 53 54 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 54 55 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 55 56 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 56 57 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 57 58 BIF MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 58 59 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 59 60 IH MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 60 61 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 61 62 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 62 63 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 63 64 IG MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 64 65 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 65 66 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 66 67 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 67 68 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 68 69 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS 69 70 MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS MAS

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.7 REHABILITATION 9.7.1 Objectives The EPA objectives for rehabilitation are to: • Ensure that the post mining landform is safe, stable and is compatible with the intended sequential land use and surrounding environment. • Ensure that waste is contained and isolated so it does not result in long term impacts on the surrounding environment.

9.7.2 Relevant standards • Mine Closure Guideline for Minerals Operations in WA. (DoIR ,2000) • Draft Criteria for Mine Closure (Department of Minerals and Energy, 2001). • Strategic Framework for Mine Closure (ANZMECC/MCA, 2000); • Mine Void Water Issues in WA (WRC, 2003). • Guidance Statement No.6: Rehabilitation of Terrestrial Ecosystems (EPA 2006).

9.7.3 Potential impacts • Rehabilitation will take time to establish before it reaches a standard that meets regulatory, company and community objectives. • Long term impacts from the pit lake after mine closure

9.7.4 Management In addition to this PER, other documents have been prepared with specific relevance to rehabilitation and mine closure. These are the Rehabilitation Plan, Project Environmental Management Plan (Appendix 7) and the Conceptual Mine Closure Plan (Appendix 8).

9.7.4.1 Waste landform design Polaris intends to encapsulate the small quantity of PAF material anticipated to be extracted, in the waste landform. Results in Table 26 show that most mine waste is non acid forming and contains some acid neutralising capacity. Some profiles have high acid consuming properties. This mine waste is to be utilised to construct the floor and roof of the encapsulation cell, providing buffering capacity against any acidity generated from encapsulated material. Approximately 31 million lcm of mine waste will be excavated over the life of the Carina project. Waste will either be placed in a waste landform located adjacent to the pit or used to construct mine infrastructure. A waste landform with a total approximate area of 120 ha will be located adjacent to the open pit. It will be 30-35 m high, which is the height of the Yendilberin Hills, immediately to the south. Design of the waste landform is therefore consistent with the current surrounding landscape and topography. Detailed design of the mine waste landform and the initial rehabilitation prescription is provided in the PEMP. A summary of key points on waste landform design is provided below.

112

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

• The waste landform will be shaped to form stable structures. • The maximum height will be 35 metres, constructed in two 15 metre high lifts. • Construct final batter slopes to less than 20 degrees, separated by a back sloping 10 metre wide berm between the lifts, to maximise retention of water. • Construct 1 metre high bunds on the crown and leading edge of the berm to prevent water flowing down the batter slopes. • Infrequent cyclonic or very intense rainfall events have the potential to exceed the design capacity of retention structures. This results in overtopping/breakout, which can cause considerable erosion in locations where access to undertake remedial work is often difficult. The stormwater design is to include an ‘overflow’ option, by directing peak storm flows off the crown and berm using the landform ramps, which channel this water to the open pit. In this way, very intense rainfall is shed off the landform and fully contained in the open pit. Any subsequent remedial/maintenance work on the ramps is easily implemented. The pulse of fresh water provided to the pit lake from these events has the additional benefit of reversing the gradual salinisation due to evaporative concentration. • The PAF encapsulation cell floor is to be a minimum of 3 metres above natural ground level, to ensure no water ingress from underneath the waste landform. • The encapsulation cell floor is to be 1 metre thick, sourced from AC or high ANC mine waste. • Encapsulation cell walls are to be sourced from ANC or NAF mine waste. • The encapsulation cell roof is to be 1 metre thick, sourced from AC or high ANC mine waste. The roof is to extend 3 metres past the walls of the encapsulation cell. • Shape a convex surface on top of the encapsulation cell roof using NAF mine waste, to shed water away from this portion of the waste landform. • Shape a concave surface on the remainder of the waste landform to promote water retention and infiltration rather than water shedding. • Spread stockpiled vegetation on reshaped surfaces to provide erosion protection and fauna habitat. • Spread available topsoil on reshaped surfaces to provide seed source and microbial innoculum. • Deep rip surfaces on contour to assist with water infiltration and provide a seed bed (with the exception of the encapsulation cell). • Apply seed and fertiliser to the newly ripped surfaces. A conceptual design for the final waste landform is provided in Figure 19.

113

Figure 19: Waste landform design

160 slope overall

1m high bund

180

10m wide 20 back sloping berm

15m lift

180 POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.7.4.2 Rehabilitation plan A separate detailed rehabilitation plan has been prepared and included as an appendix to the PEMP. Key sections of the plan are listed below. 1. Design of specific rehabilitation earthwork components: a. PAF encapsulation cell b. Landfill c. Abandonment bund. 2. Waste landform cover material and revegetation 3. Water management 4. Research trials 5. Monitoring 6. Performance targets 7. Remedial actions 8. Bond review 9. Reporting Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 6: to undertake progressive rehabilitation during the life of mine. This commitment implements the third step in the mitigation sequence (rectify). The use of local provenance seed, collected from the mine area and immediate surrounds, will implement the second step in the mitigation hierarchy (minimise) and also the fourth step (reduce).

9.7.4.3 Open pit void Johnson and Wright (2003) produced a report on mine void water resource issues in Western Australia. A summary of some key points in the report, which are relevant to the Carina iron ore project are provided below. 1. Most mine voids are abandoned as ‘open voids’ as it is the easiest and most practical option, particularly where there is a possibility of further mining. 2. The low annual rainfall and high evaporation experienced over much of the State produces a rainfall deficit, which contributes to the development of hypersaline water bodies. 3. There are also potential problems with the generation of acidic conditions in pit lakes. 4. The extent of impact on the surrounding groundwater environment is largely dependent on the local hydrogeology, as to whether the mine void will act as a; i. groundwater sink or ii. groundwater throughflow cell. 5. In the groundwater sink regime, evaporation exceeds the rate of groundwater inflow into the void and is typical of most hard-rock mines throughout Western Australia. 6. Saline plumes from throughflow mine voids may extend large distances down-gradient and affect other groundwater resources. The lateral extent of a saline plume is dependent on the presence and hydraulic connection of permeable aquifers, such as palaeochannels, specific weathering profiles, or structural features. It is possible for a saline plume to extend for tens of kilometres from the mine void. 7. The magnitude of the impact may range from insignificant in low permeability rocks and saline groundwater systems, through to considerable in high-permeability rocks and low- salinity groundwater environments.

115

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

8. Backfilling of final voids with waste may be considered. However, this is only possible where the volume of ore is small compared with the volume of material extracted, and/or the long term environmental benefits outweigh the capital cost. 9. The natural flooding of mine voids from intense rainfall events and diversion of surface runoff demonstrates the viability of final voids as potential surface-water reservoirs on an opportunistic basis. Water storage also has the advantage that should further mining ever be considered, the mine void only requires dewatering.

In examining final mine void closure options, the following possibilities exist: A. Leave the mine void as an open void (as currently occurs in most open pit mines). B. Partial backfill with mine waste or water. C. Complete backfill with mine waste or water.

At Carina, mine void closure options need to consider the following factors: • The geology of the deposit is that the orebody is open at depth. That is, ore continues beyond the currently planned final pit floor. Future increases in iron ore price may allow further mining of the open pit. Backfilling with mine waste would effectively sterilise this resource from future extraction. • The likely non significant magnitude of environmental impact, given that existing groundwater is; o saline - well above stock drinking water quality and toxic to most vegetation, so not naturally attractive to animals or suited to other beneficial uses; and o at depth - there are no wetlands or groundwater dependent ecosystems in close proximity to the project area which are connected to local groundwater. • The project site is not located in a Critical Asset area (National Park or A class Reserve), where an open void may affect known significant fauna or vegetation. • There are other open voids in the local area. The Carina mine will therefore not establish a precedent of open void pit lakes in a region where none currently exist. • The large volume of ore removed means the remaining volume of waste is insufficient to completely backfill the mine void. • The significant cost to double handle mine waste to return it to the pit void is prohibitive. • Natural groundwater levels are deep, at approximately 60 metres below ground level. If water is used to backfill the pit, it will eventually equilibrate with natural groundwater levels. It is expected the mine void will act as a groundwater sink, so levels will equilibrate to a level lower than 60 metres. For the above reasons, backfilling the pit void with mine waste is not proposed at this time. However, Polaris will continue to review this option during the life of mine, to determine if partial backfilling the open pit with mine waste becomes a viable exercise. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 7: during the life of mine, review the possibility of partial backfilling the open pit with mine waste.

116

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Given the history of mining and its economic contribution to the State of Western Australia, mine closure and the resulting landforms are issues of considerable importance, which need to be address. The report Mine void water resource issues in Western Australia (Johnson and Wright. 2003) states “Mine void-related impacts are a long-term concern for Western Australia, as there are currently about 1800 existing mine voids and more than 150 mines operating below the watertable”. This estimate was made some 6 years ago, so the number of mine voids now may well be over 2,000. These mine voids are distributed over the entire State and cover a whole spectrum of climate zones, natural vegetation types, groundwater quality and presence of native and introduced animals. As such, many ‘case examples’ exist of biodiversity and fauna interaction around mines. Polaris recognises that there will be a pit void left after mining. Commitment 7 states that Polaris will continue to review the possibility of partially backfilling the open pit void, however, even with partially backfilling, some void will remain. Polaris considers there are three key factors in considering the possible long term impacts on biodiversity and feral animal management for the Carina project. These are: 1. Groundwater quality. Local groundwater at Carina is currently saline, approximating that of sea water. Groundwater modelling predicts the final pit void to act as a groundwater sink, which will increase in salinity over time as a result of evapo- concentration. Such poor quality water is not naturally attractive to animals (native or introduced). If such water quality was a significant fauna attractant, evidence of concentrated grazing pressure would be present in similar situations in the region, such as around the many salt lakes, where water collects and remains for extended periods. This does not appear to be the case. 2. Precedent. There are historic open pit mine voids in the local area (within 20 kilometres). Water quality in these voids is unknown. Again, there does not appear to be evidence of concentrated grazing around these existing open pits as a result of sustained population increase of grazing animals in the local area. 3. Absence of significant populations of feral animals. There are few large introduced grazing animals in the local area. Carina is located in the former Jaurdi pastoral lease, which was purchased by CALM in 1989. The station was originally over 320,000 hectares in area. It has been destocked now for 20 years. There are no ‘active’ pastoral stations abutting the former Jaurdi station area that could be a source of migrating stock. The fauna surveys conducted noted the presence of only two introduced grazing animals; camel and rabbit, with the rabbit being quite numerous and suggested as having a significant grazing effect on ground-level vegetation. There are few, if any, sheep, cattle or goats. With DEC management in the wider area, it is unlikely populations of these animals will migrate the substantial distance to establish a presence in the area and then build up sufficient numbers in specific locations to damage vegetation by heavy grazing. On the information available, Polaris considers the future possible risk of local significant grazing pressure, as a result of sustained concentration of feral animals, is not significant. Polaris has considered the EPA’s Report on the Koolyanobbing Iron Ore Project, Windarling W2 Pit Mining below the Groundwater Table (Report 1303) and subsequent Ministerial Statement 802, in the preparation of the Carina PER. While the Windarling W2 project and

117

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Carina are in the same geographical region of the State, there are a number of key project specific factors that indicate the projects are substantially different. These are: i. Windarling W2 has one DRF species located immediately around (50 metres) the open pit. EPA Report 1303. (pg 8) states “The EPA considers that the level of impact from the existing operation does not pose a significant threat to flora and vegetation but that there is a need to closely monitor the situation due to the proximity of DRF species”. Carina has no DRF in its entire project area. ii. EPA Report 1303. (pg 11) states “…that there would be limited groundwater inflow to the W2 pit water body and periodic cyclonic rainfall events would cause the water to be fresher than the surrounding groundwater (which is around 20,000 mg/l total dissolved solids) for a long period of time (50-100 years) and possibly in perpetuity (Portman 2008)”. Carina has a higher initial salt concentration and predictions are that this concentration will increase over time. iii. EPA Report 1303. (pg 11) states “…that the long term management of the W2 pit to ensure that it would be consistent with the objectives of an A Class Nature Reserve is a matter that needs to be addressed as part of the decision as to whether this proposal is to be implemented. … However it is recognised that there is only limited knowledge of the potential impacts on conservation areas of leaving mining pit voids. In the first instance a research program would assist in providing clarity on the potential impacts on fauna and flora from which some informed decisions could be made about the type of measures that are necessary to maintain important environmental values where they coincide with mining operations, and the cost of implementing them in the long term”. Carina in not in an existing or proposed A Class Nature Reserve. iv. Ministerial Statement 802 – Condition 7-5. If backfilling of the Windarling W2 Pit void to the requirements of condition 7-1 is not undertaken, the proponent shall: 1. take measures, as agreed with the CEO of the Department of Environment and Conservation, to ensure that surface water within the Windarling W2 pit does not result in an increase in introduced fauna to a level that may have a measurable impact on native fauna or native flora on the Windarling Range as compared to monitoring results obtained during mining of the WindarlingW2 pit. 2. monitor and record feral animal populations on the Windarling Range at least once each calendar year for the duration of mining at the Windarling Range approved under this Statement and Statement 627 or for seven years following the cessation of mining of the WindarlingW2 pit, whichever is greater; 3. monitor and record the health and condition of Declared Rare Flora and Priority Flora species and vegetation condition as defined by Keighery (1994) on the Windarling Range at least once each calendar year for the duration of mining at the Windarling Range approved under this Statement and Statement 627 or for seven years following the cessation of mining of the Windarling W2 pit, whichever is greater; 4. report the results of the measures taken required by condition 7-5-1 and the results of monitoring required by 7-5(2) and 7-5(3) to the CEO of the

118

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Department of Environment and Conservation as part of the annual compliance reporting under condition 4; and 5. within seven years of determining that backfilling of the Windarling W2 Pit void to the requirements of condition 7-1 is not undertaken, provide a report detailing the long term management of the Windarling W2 pit lake to the requirements of the Department of Environment and Conservation. The Ministerial Statement provides for an outcome other than backfilling the open void. In summary, Polaris’ position is that the Carina pit void will be left open and allowed to naturally equilibrate with groundwater. It is expected this will have only a localised effect on the surrounding environment. Post closure monitoring will provide data on the pit void lake. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 8: to continue to revise and implement the Mine Closure Plan.

9.7.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for rehabilitation as follows: EPA objective: Ensure that the post mining landform is safe, stable and is compatible with the intended post mining land use and surrounding environment. Predicted outcome: Management measures are proposed in the PER and the PEMP to implement this action. Monitoring will be undertaken to assess success of these plans EPA objective: Ensure that waste is contained and isolated so it does not result in long term impacts on the surrounding environment. Predicted outcome: The small amount of PAF mine waste will be encapsulated in the waste landform. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

9.8 NOISE 9.8.1 Objectives The EPA objective for noise is to protect the amenity of nearby residents from noise impacts resulting from activities associated with the proposal by ensuring that noise levels meet statutory requirements and acceptable standards.

9.8.2 Relevant standards Noise emissions from the proposal are required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

9.8.3 Potential impacts There is a low risk of noise impact as the project site is remote from any nearby sensitive premises.

119

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.8.4 Management Southern Cross, the nearest town site, is located approximately 100 kilometres to the south west of Carina. The former Jaurdi Station homestead, is sometimes used for short periods by visitors to the area. This site is approximately 35 kilometres south of Carina. The rail siding at the Mt Walton road crossing and the haul road from the mine to the siding is similarly remote from any residential premises. The Mt Walton rail siding is 14km from Jaurdi homestead and also approximately 100 kilometres from Southern Cross. Due to the significant distance from noise generating activities to any noise sensitive premises, it is not considered likely mine activities will have a significant noise impact. Given the low risk of impact to this factor, it is not considered quantitative assessment or modelling of noise impact is required.

9.8.5 Predicted outcomes The information provided above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for noise as follows: EPA objective: Protect the amenity of nearby residents from noise impacts resulting from activities associated with the proposal by ensuring that noise levels meet statutory requirements and acceptable standards. Predicted outcome: Due to the significant distance from noise generating activities to any noise sensitive premises, it is not considered mine activities will have a noise impact on neighbouring residents. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

9.9 AIR EMISSIONS 9.9.1 Objectives The EPA objective for the management of air emissions is to ensure that emissions (particulates, greenhouse gases) do not adversely affect environmental values or the health, welfare and amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards.

9.9.2 Relevant standards There is no single regulatory standard for ambient dust levels for residential areas in Western Australia. There is also no statutory standard for dust deposition levels on vegetation. Regulation of dust level is normally focussed on human health, measuring as either inhalable particulate matter less than 10 micrometres in size (PM10) or amenity value, as total suspended particles (TSP). A review of a range of standards is provided below. 1. The Environmental Protection (Kwinana Atmospheric Wastes) Policy 1992 (Kwinana EPP) has specified levels of pollutants (including particulates) in defined zones around the Kwinana industrial area are shown in Table 31.

120

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Table 31: Kwinana EPP Atmospheric Wastes Policy Standard Limit (TSP Averaging Area Description (TSP ug/m3) ug/m3) Period A Central industrial area 150 260 1 day B ‘Transition area’. Some residential 90 260 1 day C Residential areas 90 150 1 day

2. The National Environment Protection Council (NEPC), in 1998, set health-based ambient air quality standards for six pollutants, including particles as Particulate Matter (PM10). The standards and goal are shown in Table 32.

Table 32: NEPC Air Quality Standard Goal within 10 years – Averaging Maximum Pollutant Maximum Allowable Period Concentration Exceedences Particles as PM10 1 day 50ug/m3 5 days per year

3. In 1996, the DoE established an interim PM10 target of 150 micrograms per cubic metre for Port Hedland.

4. The DEP (1996) published a guideline for land development sites and impacts on air quality. Although directed primarily at the urban development industry, it contains information for all projects that have the potential to generate dust. The limit stated in the guideline is 1000 micrograms per cubic metre (as TSP), measured over 15 minutes.

The National Pollution Inventory (NPI) emission estimation techniques provide a relationship between TSP and PM10 for fugitive dust emissions as shown in Table 33.

Table 33: NPI Conversion factors Factor NPI EET Reference

Blasting A1.1.1.9 PM10 = 52% of TSP

Drilling A1.1.1.8 PM10 = 0.31/0.59 (52.5%) of TSP

Wind erosion A1.1.15 PM10 = 50% of TSP

Using a conversion factor of PM10 = 50% of TSP, TSP values can be converted to PM10 as shown below.

• Area B & C standard: TSP 90 micrograms per cubic metre equates to PM10 45 micrograms per cubic metre.

• Area A standard & Area C limit: 150 micrograms per cubic metre equates to PM10 75 micrograms per cubic metre.

• Area A & B limit: 260 micrograms per cubic metre equates to PM10 130 micrograms per cubic metre. • 1,000 micrograms per cubic metre TSP over 15 minutes equates to 500 micrograms per cubic metre PM10.

121

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.9.3 Potential impacts Potential impacts include: • Risk to human health. • Smothering of surrounding vegetation. • Nuisance (amenity).

9.9.4 Management

9.9.4.1 Dust As with noise (Section 9.8), the project’s remote location in relation to sensitive residential receptors indicates dust is considered not likely to cause human health or amenity issues to neighbouring communities or residents. The nearest climate recording station to the project area is located at Southern Cross, 100 kilometres to the southwest. Wind roses available from the Bureau of Meteorology indicate that the prevailing morning winds are from the east (Figure 20) and afternoon winds are from the west (Figure 21). Wind speeds in the region are generally mild. Table 34 describes the Beaufort wind scale, which indicates wind speeds below 30 km/h are generally not considered erosive. Wind speeds in Table 34 have been colour coded to approximately match wind rose speeds shown in Figure 20 and Figure 21. The wind roses show the majority of wind speed experienced (all directions) is less than 30km/h, with a significant proportion less than 20km/h. This data indicates the project area is not in a region that regularly experiences strong prevailing winds, so the risk of significant dust generation from erosive winds is considered low. The wind roses show northerly winds, blowing from the mine to the accommodation village are light, mostly less than 10km/h. Common dust suppression measures and management practises used in the mining industry in WA are expected to be sufficient to control environmental impacts to acceptable levels. These measures include: • Disturbed areas progressively rehabilitated, to reduce exposed area for dust generation. • Water trucks fitted with sprays/dribble bars water unsealed, regularly trafficked, areas such as access tracks, work areas and haul roads. • Spray systems fitted to dump hoppers, crushing and screening plants and stackers. • Routine housekeeping practices collect spillages around conveyors, loading areas and sediment traps that could contribute to dust generation. • Limit vehicle speeds and restrict access to some areas. Employee exposure to dust is routinely assessed as part of occupational health requirements. This is especially relevant for employees in dusty locations such as the crushing plant, who may be exposed to higher levels of dust than employees in other locations. Site specific information is required to quantify effect on vegetation exposure to dust. Globe Environments (2009) reported on dust monitoring at Cliffs Koolyanobbing project area. Monitoring on a specific DRF species Ricinocarpos brevis has not shown mortality or reduced growth from exposure to dust. The report does state that flora mortalities (unspecified species) have been recorded, with dust, drought and exposure (landscape position) all considered to be

122

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW contributory factors. The report does not provide direct quantitative correlation of dust deposition levels against negative effect on any species or vegetation in general. Polaris intends to develop interim dust deposition targets from a monitoring program over the first 12 months of operation, using deposition gauges and assessing vegetation health in permanent plots adjacent to operational areas. Interim targets will be reviewed during the life of mine against ongoing monitoring results and reported through the annual environmental report process. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 9: to implement a vegetation health monitoring program to quantify indirect effects to adjacent vegetation from dust and the use of saline water. This commitment implements the second step in the mitigation hierarchy (minimise), to limit the severity of impact.

Figure 20: Southern Cross 9am wind rose

km/h 10-20 30-40

0-10 20-30 >=40

123

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Figure 21: Southern Cross 3pm wind rose

Table 34: Beaufort wind scale Beaufort Level Wind speed Description No. (km/h) 0 Calm <1 Calm, smoke rises vertically 1 Light air 1-5 Direction of wind shown by smoke drift but not by wind vanes 2 Light 6-11 Wind felt on face, leaves rustle, ordinary vane breeze moved by wind 3 Gentle 12-19 Leaves and small twigs in constant motion, breeze wind extends light flag 4 Moderate 20-28 Raises dust and loose paper, small branches breeze move Erosive 5 Fresh 29-38 Small trees in leaf begin to sway, crested winds breeze wavelets form on inland waters 6 Strong 39-49 Large branches in motion, whistling heard in breeze telegraph wires, umbrellas used with difficulty 7 Near gale 50-61 Whole trees in motion, inconvenience felt when walking against the wind 8 Gale 62-74 Twigs break off trees, generally impedes progress 9 Strong 75-88 Slight structural damage occurs (chimney pots gale and slates removed) 10 Storm 89-102 Seldom experienced inland, trees uprooted, considerable structural damage occurs 11 Violent 103-117 Very rarely experienced. Accompanied by storm widespread damage 12 Hurricane >118 Severe and extensive damage Source: Moore, G (1998) Table 7.1.2 pg 214

124

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.9.4.2 Greenhouse gas emissions Greenhouse gas emissions will be produced from burning diesel fuel for power generation, mine equipment and ore haulage. Estimates of fuel usage from similar mining operations are: 4MW power generation (mine): 6,000kL pa. Mining equipment: 5,000kL pa Siding; power and equipment: 2,000kL pa Ore haulage: 2,000kL pa Total 15,000Kl pa

Using formula from the Department of Climate Change National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) Factors (Australian Government June 2009), the carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions from the project is estimated at 40,000 tonnes CO2-e /yr. Approximately half the total fuel usage is for power generation and the other half for mine equipment and transport purposes. This emission level is less than half the 100,000 tonnes per year emissions trigger used by EPA for determining significant emission levels (Globe Environments 2009) and consistent with similar scale mining operations in the region. Accordingly, greenhouse gas emission is not considered to be a significant environmental factor. Management practices commonly used in the mining industry include regular maintenance and servicing of all diesel engines. This reduces excessive emissions from machinery not operating at optimum levels. No other specific management measures are proposed for this factor.

9.9.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina project can meet the EPA’s objectives for air emissions as follows: EPA objective: Ensure that air emissions (particulates, greenhouse gases) do not adversely affect environmental values or the health, welfare and amenity of people and land uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards. Predicted outcome: Conventional dust suppression measures used in the mining industry in WA are expected to be sufficient to control environmental impacts to within the mine area and immediate surrounds. Employee exposure to dust is routinely assessed as part of occupational health requirements. Polaris commits to implementing a dust monitoring program on vegetation health. Conventional maintenance measures used in the mining industry in WA are expected to be sufficient to control greenhouse gas emissions to efficient operating levels.

The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

125

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

9.10 SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

9.10.1 Objectives The EPA objectives for rehabilitation are to: • Ensure that the proposal complies with the requirements of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972; • Ensure that aesthetic values are considered and measures are adopted to reduce visual impacts on the landscape where practicable.

9.10.2 Relevant standards The Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. EPA Guidance Statement 41: Guidance for the assessment of environmental factors – assessment of Aboriginal Heritage.

9.10.3 Potential impacts Impact to Aboriginal sites of significance. Visual impact on the landscape from the proposal.

9.10.4 Management

9.10.4.1 Aboriginal heritage Surveys of the Carina project area have identified one archaeological site within the open pit boundary. This site cannot be avoided so permission to impact the site must be obtained from the Minister for Indigenous Affairs. Polaris will submit an application under Section 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 to disturb this site. Polaris will implement the following commitment - Commitment 10: Prior to construction, submit a Section 18 application to disturb the archaeological site and obtain permission from the Minister for Indigenous Affairs.

9.10.4.2 Visual amenity Appendix 9 shows photographs taken from a number of vantage points. These show the low ridge on which Carina is located is not visible from the surrounding plain from even short distances from the proposed mine. Even viewing the Carina ridge from elevated positions with 10 kms requires getting above the vegetation line abutting local tracks. The Carina ridge is not visible from more distant vantage points. These views confirm the open pit will not be visible from nearby vantage points.

126

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

The proposed final height of the waste landform is about the same as the Yendilberin hills. This means the second lift of the waste landform will be visible from vantage points where the Yendilberin hills are visible. As rehabilitation establishes over the waste landform, it will blend into the landscape and be a feature similar to the Yendilberin hills.

9.10.5 Predicted outcomes The management measures described above show that the Carina iron ore mine can meet the EPA’s objectives for social environment as follows: EPA objective: Ensure that the proposal complies with the requirements of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972; Predicted outcome: Polaris will undertake the process described in the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 to obtain permission to disturb the one archaeological site identified in the open pit boundary. No other sites of significance have been identified in the project area. EPA objective: Ensure that aesthetic values are considered and measures are adopted to reduce visual impacts on the landscape where practicable. Predicted outcome: The project is in an isolated area of the State. Visual assessment confirms the open pit will not be visible from nearby vantage points. The second lift of the waste landform will be visible from vantage points where the Yendilberin hills are now visible. As rehabilitation establishes over the waste landform, it will reduce visual impact on the landscape. The residual risk level from the project to this factor is therefore considered to be low.

127

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

10. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMITMENTS

A consolidated list of environmental commitments made through the document is provided in Table 35. Table 35: Environmental Commitments

Commitment Action Page No. Timing Commitment 1 Prior to construction, make a decision 24 Prior to between infrastructure areas 1 and 2 for the construction. final location of the mine infrastructure area. Commitment 2 implement an ‘employ local - source local’ 68 Ongoing. policy where possible, to maximise employment opportunity and flow on benefits to local towns in the region. Commitment 3 to implement the Project Environmental 82 Ongoing. Management Plan. Commitment 4 to undertake further botanical surveys in the 102 First 12 months of sandplain vegetation type, to improve operation. knowledge of significant flora populations in the region. Results of surveys conducted will be included in the Annual Environmental Report. Commitment 5 to undertake further troglofauna surveys in 108 During the first two the region, to improve knowledge of years of operation. troglofauna populations in the region and those found at Carina. Results of surveys conducted will be included in the Annual Environmental Report. Commitment 6 to undertake progressive rehabilitation during 115 Ongoing. the life of mine. Commitment 7 during the life of mine, review the possibility 116 Annually during the of partial backfilling the open pit with mine life of mine. waste. Commitment 8 to continue to revise and implement the Mine 119 Ongoing. Closure Plan. Commitment 9 to implement a vegetation health monitoring 123 First 12 months of program to quantify indirect effects to operation. adjacent vegetation from dust and the use of saline water. Commitment 10 Prior to construction, submit a Section 18 126 Prior to application to disturb the archaeological site construction. and obtain permission from the Minister for Indigenous Affairs.

128

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

11. ABBREVIATIONS

AC Acid Consuming AER Annual Environmental Report AHD Australian Height Datum AMD Acid Mine Drainage ANC Acid Neutralising Capacity ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council ARD Acid Rock Drainage AS Australian Standard av average bcm bank cubic metres BIF Banded Iron Formation °C Degrees Celsius CALM Department of Conservation and Land Management cht chert CO2-e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent DEC Department of Environment and Conservation DEWHA Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts DIA Department of Indigenous Affairs DIDO Drive-in-drive-out DMP Department of Mines and Petroleum DoIR Department of Industry and Resources (now DMP) DoW Department of Water DPI Department of Planning and Infrastructure DRF Declared Rare Flora EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPA Environmental Protection Authority EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 EsPA Esperance Port Authority FIFO Fly-in-fly-out FPA Fremantle Port Authority fr fresh rock Ga gigayear

129

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ha hectare IBRA Interim Biogeographical Regions for Australia km kilometre KL kilolitre lcm loose cubic metres m metre mas mafic schist ML megalitre Mtpa million tonnes per annum NEPC National Environment Protection Council ox oxidised PAF Potential Acid Forming PEMP Project Environment Management Plan PER Public Environmental Review pH Potential Hydrogen (Measure of Acidity / Alkalinity)

PM10 Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter of 10 Microns or Less RL Reduced Level RO Reverse Osmosis ROM Run-of-Mine TDS Total Dissolved Solids TEC Threatened Ecological Community TSP Total Suspended Particulates ug microgram

130

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This page has been intentionally left blank

131

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

12. REFERENCES Beard, J.S. (1972) Vegetation Survey of Western Australia. The Vegetation of the Jackson Area. Explanatory Notes and Map Sheet, 1:250000 series. Vegetation Survey of Western Australia. Vegmap Publications, Sydney.: In Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Sep 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of the Carina exploration lease area. Prepared for Polaris Metals NL Beard, J.S. (1990) Plant Life of Western Australia. Kangaroo Press, Kenthurst NSW. : In Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Sep 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of the Carina exploration lease area. Prepared for Polaris Metals NL Bennelongia (2008). Troglofauna survey of Mount Jackson Range, Western Australia. Report prepared for Portman Limited. Bennelongia (2009). Troglofauna survey of Carina project area, Western Australia. Report prepared for Polaris Metals. BOM (2009). Climate statistics for Australian locations. Station Number 12074, Southern Cross. Bureau of Meteorology website, online data, monthly climate statistics http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_012074.shtml Bettenay E (1983). Chapter 13 – Western Region (II). In: Soils: an Australian viewpoint, CSIRO Division of Soils, CSIRO, Melbourne. : In Tille. P (2006). Soil-landscapes of Western Australia’s Rangelands and Arid Interior. Resource Management Technical Report 313. Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia. Buridge, A.A., Fuller, P.J. & McKenzie, N.L. (1995). Vertebrate Fauna. In: The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 12. Barlee – Menzies Study Area. Rec. West. Aust. Mus. Suppl. No. 49. : In Ninox Wildlife Consulting (April 2008) Fauna desktop review: Yilgarn iron ore project. Prepared for Coffey Natural Systems. Chapman, A. & Pronk, G. (1997). Part 3 Vertebrate Fauna In: Lyons, M.N. & Chapman, A. (eds.) (1997). A Biological Survey of the Helena and Aurora Range, Eastern Goldfields Western Australia. Unpublished Report for Environment Australia, Canberra. In: Ninox Wildlife Consulting (July 2009) A fauna survey of the Carina Prospect: Yilgarn iron ore project. Prepared for Polaris Metals NL. Conservation and Land Management (1999) Environmental weed strategy for WA. Coffey Natural Systems (CNS) 2008. Environmental prefeasibility study: Yilgarn iron ore project: KBT option. : In Prodemas July 2008. Prefeasibility study report. Yilgarn iron ore project. 2.5Mtpa KBT Proposal Appendix J1. Report prepared for Polaris Metals NL, Perth. Dell, J. & How, R.A. (1985). Vertebrate fauna. In: The biological survey of the eastern Goldfields of Western Australia. Part 3. Jackson - Kalgoorlie Study Area. Rec. West. Aust. Mus. Suppl. No.23. In: Ninox Wildlife Consulting (July 2009) A fauna survey of the Carina Prospect: Yilgarn iron ore project. Prepared for Polaris Metals NL. Department of Conservation and Land Management (1994) Regional Management Plan 1994 – 2004: Goldfields Region. Website accessed August 2009 from http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/landmanagementplanning. Department of Environment and Conservation. (2007). Banded iron formation ranges of the Midwest and Goldfields. Interim status report, biodiversity values and conservation requirement. Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, Western Australia.: In Ninox Wildlife Consulting (April 2008) Fauna desktop review: Yilgarn iron ore project. Prepared for Coffey Natural Systems.

132

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

DITR (2007) Managing acid and Metaliferous drainage: Leading Practice sustainable development program for the mining industry. Australian Government. Department of Industry Tourism and Resources DoW (2009). Geographic data atlas. A www publication accessed on 12/2/2009 at: http://portal.water.wa.gov.au/portal/page/portal/MapsDataAtlases/GeographicDataAtlas. EPA (Jan 2006) Position Statement 9: Environmental Offsets EPA (June 2007) Guidance Statement No.19: Environmental Offsets. Globe Environments (2009) Koolyanobbing Iron Ore Project: Mt Jackson J1 Deposit. PER document for Cliffs Gibson, N., Lyons, M.J. and Lepschi, B.J. (1997) Flora and vegetation of the eastern goldfield ranges, Part I: Helena and Aurora Range. CALM Science, Vol. 2, 231-246): In Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Sep 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of the Carina exploration lease area. Prepared for Polaris Metals NL Jennings JN and Mabbutt JA (1977). Physiographic outlines and regions. In: ‘Australia – A geography’ (ed. D.N. Jeans). Sydney University Press. : In Tille. P (2006). Soil-landscapes of Western Australia’s Rangelands and Arid Interior. Resource Management Technical Report 313. Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia. Johnson, S.L and Wright, A.H, (2003). Mine void water resource issues in Western Australia: Water and Rivers Commission, Hydrogeological Record Series, Report HG 9, 93p Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Oct 2007) Flora and vegetation survey of drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/1097-I: Musca and J4 extension prospects. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Oct 2007) Flora and vegetation survey of drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/1076-I: Vela prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Dec 2007) Flora and vegetation survey of drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/842-I. Bungalbin eastern prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Mar 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of existing tracks in exploration tenement E77/842-I: Bungalbin eastern prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Apr 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of proposed drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/842-I: Jackson 5 prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (May 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of infill drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/842-I. Bungalbin eastern prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Jun 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/842-I: Bungalbin central prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Jun 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of infill drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/1097-I: Musca prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Jul 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of infill drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/1097-I: Jackson 4 prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Sept 2008) Flora and vegetation survey of the Carina exploration lease area. Report for Polaris Metals

133

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Nov 2008) Flora survey of drill holes in exploration tenement E77/842-I: Bungalbin eastern prospect, Bungalbin central prospect, Bungalbin west prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Mar 2009) Flora and vegetation survey of infill drill hole sites in exploration tenement E77/1076-I: Vela prospect. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (April 2009) Carina mine tenement M/1244A declared rare and priority flora survey. Report for Polaris Metals Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (July 2009) Flora and vegetation survey of the Chamaeleon exploration lease area. Exploration tenement E77/946-1. Prepared for Polaris Metals NL Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (Oct 2009) Flora and vegetation survey of the proposed Carina transport route Carina mine to Mount Walton road siding. Report for Polaris Metals Needham, P. Moore, G. Scholz, G. (1998) Soil Structure Decline. In: A handbook for Understanding and Managing Agricultural Soils. (Moore G ed) The Department of Agriculture, Western Australia. Bulletin 4343. Pg 64-79 Moore G ed. (1998). Soil Guide: A handbook for Understanding and Managing Agricultural Soils. The Department of Agriculture, Western Australia. Bulletin 4343. Ninox Wildlife Consulting (April 2008) Fauna desktop review: Yilgarn iron ore project. Prepared for Coffey Natural Systems. Ninox Wildlife Consulting (July 2009) A fauna survey of the Carina Prospect: Yilgarn iron ore project. Prepared for Polaris Metals NL. O’Connor. R. (2009). Aboriginal heritage survey of the Carina project area. O’Reilly. T. (2009). Archaeological survey of the Carina project area. Recon Environmental (Feb 2010) Carina iron ore project: Mt Walton siding vegetation. Report for Polaris Metals NL. Rockwater (2008) Bungalbin-Aurora iron ore project: Groundwater appraisal. Report for Prodemas International Ltd. : In Prodemas July 2008. Prefeasibility study report. Yilgarn iron ore project. 2.5Mtpa KBT Proposal Appendix J1. Report prepared for Polaris Metals NL, Perth. Rockwater (2009) Carina mine flood management and flood protection report. Report prepared for Polaris Metals NL, Perth. Shire of Coolgardie (2009). Website accessed August 2009 from http://www.coolgardie.wa.gov.au/ Shire of Yilgarn (2009). Website accessed August 2009 from http://www.yilgarn.wa.gov.au/ Tille. P (2006). Soil-landscapes of Western Australia’s Rangelands and Arid Interior. Resource Management Technical Report 313. Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia. Tyler IM and Hocking RM (2001). A revision of the tectonic units of Western Australia: Western Australian Geological Survey, Annual Review 2000-2001, p 33-44. : In Tille. P (2006). Soil-landscapes of Western Australia’s Rangelands and Arid Interior. Resource Management Technical Report 313. Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia. Western Botanical (Oct/Nov 2008) Significant Flora Survey at Mt Finnerty Range. Report for Reed Resources

134

POLARIS METALS CARINA IRON ORE MINE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Wilderness Society (2009) Website accessed August 2009 from http://www.wilderness.org.au/campaigns/great-western-woodland