Application for a Works Approval: South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Supporting Documentation (Including Information relating to Attachments 1 to 10)

October 2019

Jimblebar L5415/1988/9 Licence Amendment Supporting Documentation (Including Information relating to Attachments 1 to 10)

October 2017 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Contents 1. Introduction ...... 3 2. Existing Environment ...... 6 3. Environmental Management ...... 12 4. Proposed Amendments ...... 13 5. Heritage ...... 21 6. Community Consultation ...... 21 7. Conclusion ...... 21 8. References ...... 22

List of Tables Table 1: Vegetation Associations within the Packsaddle Infiltration Trial Area ...... 9 Table 2: South Flank MAR Injection Bores and Associated Monitoring Bores ...... 13 Table 3: South Flank MAR Regional Monitoring Locations, Parameters, Thresholds and Limits (Commissioning and Operation) ...... 14 Table 4: Construction of the South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Environmental Impact Assessment and Associated Management Strategies ...... 16 Table 5: Commissioning of the South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Environmental Impact Assessment and Associated Management Strategies ...... 17 Table 6: Time Limited Operation / Ongoing Operation of the South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Environmental Impact Assessment and Associated Management Strategies ...... 19 Table 7: Works Approval Fee Calculation

List of Figures Figure 1: See Attachment 2A: Premises, Facilities and Location (Figure 1: South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Infrastructure and Monitoring locations MAC_003LA_001_RevC_0) Figure 2: See Attachment 2B: Current Groundwater Levels (A963_002_E) Figure 3: See Attachment 2C: Predicted Groundwater Levels (A963_003_E) Figure 4: See Attachment 2D: Injection Headwork’s Design Drawing Figure 5: See Attachment 2E: Surface Discharge Point Design Drawing

i South Flank MAR Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachments Attachment 1A: Proof of occupier status Attachment 1B: ASIC company extracts Attachment 1C Authorisation to act as representative of the occupier Attachment 2A: Premises, Facilities and Location (Figure 1: South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Infrastructure and Monitoring locations MAC_003LA_001_RevB_1) Attachment 2B: Figure 2 – Current Groundwater Levels (A963_002_E) Attachment 2C: Figure 3 – Predicted Groundwater Levels (A963_003_E) Attachment 2D: Injection Headwork’s Design Drawing Attachment 2E: Surface Discharge Point Design Drawing Attachment 2F: Prescribed Premises Map Coordinates L7851/2002/6 Attachment 3A: Proposed Activities Attachment 3B: Map of Area Proposed to be cleared Attachment 3C: Additional information for clearing assessment Attachment 4: Biodiversity surveys Attachment 5A: Other Approvals: Ministerial Statement 1072 (Mining Area C / Southern Flank) Attachment 5B: Other Approvals: Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6 Attachment 5C: Other Approvals: Central Water Resource Management Plan Revision 3.4 Attachment 5D: South Flank Valley MAR Numerical Modelling (BHP, 2018) Attachment 5E: Pebble Mouse Creek Surface Discharge Hydraulic Modelling (Surface Water Solutions, 2019). Attachment 6A: Emissions and discharges Attachment 6B: Waste acceptance Attachment 7: Siting and location Attachment 8: Supporting Document Attachment 9: Fees Attachment 10: Submission of application

ii South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

1. Introduction

1.1. Background BHP Billiton Pty Ltd (BHP) currently operates a number of iron ore mines and associated rail and port infrastructure within the Pilbara region of (WA). Current mining operations include the: · Newman Operations consisting of the: o Whaleback Hub (consisting of Whaleback Pit and Orebodies 29, 30 and 35) hub located approximately two kilometres (km) west of Newman Township; and o Eastern Ridge Hub (consisting of Orebodies 23, 24, 25 and 32) located approximately 5 km east of Newman Township; · Mining Area C (MAC) Hub (consisting of the MAC and Southern Flank mining operations) located approximately 90 km north west of Newman Township (Attachment 2A); · Jimblebar Hub (consisting of Wheelarra Hill (Jimblebar) Mine, Orebody 18 and Orebody 31) located approximately 35 km east of Newman Township; and · located approximately 100 km north west of Newman Township. Ore from the Newman Operations, Mining Area C, Jimblebar Hub and Yandi mine is transported to Port Hedland via the BHP Newman to Port Hedland Mainline (and associated spur lines). Ore is then shipped out through Port Hedland at the BHP facilities at Nelson Point and Finucane Island. 1.2. Purpose of this Document MAC is currently approved under Ministerial Statement 1072 (MS 1072) (Attachment 5A) and Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6 (Attachment 5B). BHP is seeking a works approval to construct a new surplus water scheme at South Flank (the Project). The works approval application for the Project seeks to: · Construct a new managed aquifer recharge (MAR) scheme at South Flank consisting nominally of 10 reinjection bores1 (Attachment 2A) to dispose of up to 12.76 giga litres per annum (GL/a) of surplus mine dewater; and · Construct a surface water discharge scheme in Pebble Mouse Creek to dispose of up to 12.76 GL/a; Prior to environmental commissioning of each scheme a compliance report will be submitted to the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER). Depending on the timing of construction activities a separate report may be submitted for the MAR and discharge schemes. Following the completion of environmental commissioning of each scheme a report will be submitted to DWER detailing any issues identified and corrective actions undertaken. Following submission on this report BHP will: · Submit an application to amend Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6 to include the commissioned scheme; and · Commence the time limited operation of the commissioned scheme. This supporting document has been prepared to provide supplementary information to the “Application form: Works Approval / Licence / Renewal Amendment / Registration” for the proposed Project as required under Section 53 of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986 (EP Act).

1.3. Premises 1.3.1. Location The Project is located approximately 90 km north west of Newman in the Pilbara Region of Western Australia (Attachment 2A). 1.3.2. Tenement Details The Project is currently situated within Mineral Leases 249SA and 281SA and Exploration Lease E47/1540 (wetting front only) and is operated in accordance with the Iron Ore (Mount Goldsworthy) Agreement Act 1964. 1.3.3. Local Government The Project is located within the Shire of East Pilbara.

1 Note that additional reinjection bores may be required to meet the 12.76 GL/annum reinjection rate. If additional bores are required they will constructed within the MAR Bore Construction Zone (Attachment 2A) and as per the design specifications (Attachment 2D). DWER will be notified of any additional bores to be installed one month prior to construction. Following commissioning any new bores will be operated under Time Limited Operations (under the works approval) or the L7851/2002/6. Page | 3 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document 1.4. Proponent This licence amendment application has been submitted by BHP as the manager for the Mount Goldsworthy Mining Associates Joint Venture, who owns MAC Hub. The split between the partners of the Joint Venture is as follows: · BHP Billiton Minerals Pty Ltd 85% · Itochu Minerals and Energy Australia Pty Ltd 8% · Mitsui Iron Ore Corporation Pty Ltd 7% The key contact for this proposal is: Chris Hopkins Principal Environment A&I BHP Billiton Iron Ore Phone: 0429 157 241 Email: [email protected] Level 41, 125 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000 Australia PO Box 7642 Cloisters Square Perth WA 6850 Australia

1.5. Existing Approvals The Project Are lies within the boundary of the MAC / Southern Flank Ministerial Statement 1072 (MS 1072) (Attachment 5A), the associated Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan (Version 3.4) (Attachment 5C) and Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6 (Attachment 5B). A section 45C (s45C) application for MS 1072 is currently under assessment to include the Project. Approval of this application is anticipated in December 2019. Groundwater abstraction at MAC / Southern Flank is undertaken in accordance with Groundwater Licence GWL 110044(10). Any other approvals will be sourced as required.

1.6. Project Commitments BHP commits to undertake the Project in accordance with the details set out in Table 1. Table 1: Project Characteristics and Commitments Infrastructure Characteristics Authorising Agency: DWER Category: Category 6 Facility maximum 12.76 GL/annum managed aquifer recharge capacity 12.76 GL/annum surface water discharge Purpose of the permit Construction, commissioning and operation of a surplus water management scheme at South Flank. Location of all The Project is located adjacent within the South Flank Valley, approximately 90 km infrastructure north of Newman in the Pilbara Region of Western Australia. associated with the Map References: Licence Amendment · Figure 1: MAC_003LA_001_RevC_0. · Figure 2: A963_002_E · Figure 3: A963_003_E · Figure 4: 840-M-12557_C; and · Figure 5: 910-M-00006/0 BHP Billiton Iron Ore 1 Doc Reference: http://io1doc/webtop/drl/objectId/0b03c41a8389db55 Commissioning period 2 months for each discharge point Time Limited 6 months post commissioning Operations Tenure The Project is located on the following tenement: · Mineral Lease 249SA; · Mineral Lease 281SA; and · Exploration Lease E47/1540 (wetting front only)

4 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Infrastructure Characteristics Relevant The following environmental factors associated with the Project are considered to require Environmental Factors specific management measures as detailed below: 1. Noise and dust (construction only); 2. Groundwater 3. Surface water. 4. Subterranean fauna; and 5. Vegetation. Application Commitments Section Construction Dust will be managed via water carts. Table 5 All clearing will be in accordance with the approved MS 1072. Table 5 Prior to environmental commissioning of each scheme a compliance report will be submitted to the 1.2 Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER). Depending on the timing of construction activities a separate report may be submitted for the MAR and discharge schemes. Commissioning The MAR scheme will monitored (Table 4) to confirm that groundwater mounding does not intersect Table 6 with the root zones of vegetation or significant troglofauna habitat The water quality of abstracted groundwater will be tested monthly at the South Flank Turkeys Nest Table 6 (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during commissioning. Monthly water quality testing will also occur at the four monitoring bores (Attachment 2A). Reinjection and surface water discharge will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Table 6 Turkeys Nest are reached. The Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point will be inspected regularly during commissioning to Table 6 identify any erosion that may have occurred. In the event that erosion is identified additional erosion control measures will be implemented (e.g. extending rip rap) and if necessary repairs undertaken. Discharge into Pebble Mouse Creek will be managed to ensure it does not extend beyond the Table 6 Wetting Front Limit (Attachment 2A). Time Limited Operation / Operation The MAR scheme will managed (Table 4) to ensure groundwater mounding does not intersect with Table 7 the root zones of vegetation or result in a significant loss of troglofauna habitat in the Project Area. The water quality will be tested quarterly at the South Flank Turkeys Nest and the four monitoring Table 7 bores (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during Time Limited Operations / Ongoing Operations. Reinjection and surface water discharge will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Table 7 Turkeys Nest are reached The Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point will continued to be regularly inspected and additional Table 7 erosion control measures will be implemented if required.

5 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document 2. Existing Environment

2.1. Climate Newman Aero meteorological site (007176) is the closest Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) station to the Project Area. Average annual rainfall at Newman Aero is 329.5 mm (BOM, 2019a). This is mainly derived from tropical storms and cyclones during summer, producing sporadic, heavy rains over the area. Mean monthly rainfall varies from 3.8 mm in September to 70.4 mm in February (BoM, 2019a). Daily rainfall is highly variable; the highest maximum daily rainfall ranges from 34.8 mm in October, to 305.6 mm in February (BoM, 2019a). The mean maximum temperature in summer months (October to March) is 35.2°C to 39.2°C, and mean maximum temperature in winter (April to September) is between 23°C and 32.1°C (BoM, 2019a). Wittenoom meteorological site (005026) is the closest station to the Project Area that records daily evaporation. Wittenoom is located approximately 110 km south south west of the Project Area. Mean daily evaporation at Wittenoom throughout the year is 8.6 mm/day (BoM, 2019b), which equates to 3.1 metres per year. Evaporation greatly exceeds rainfall in the region throughout the year and on a month-by-month basis (BoM, 2019b).

2.2. Nearby Land Uses and Sensitive Receptors The land use of the surrounding area is mining operations and exploration activities. The closest BHP sensitive receptors to the Project Area is BHP’s Mulla Mulla (5.7 km) and Packsaddle (9.5 km) Villages which are located within the Prescribed Premises. The Prescribed Premises is situated in a remote location, approximately 90 km north west of Newman. The closest potentially sensitive non-BHP owned receptors in the vicinity is the Hope Downs accommodation camp located 2.6 km south of the eastern end of the Project Area.

2.3. Soils and Landform The Project Area is located within the Boolgeeda, Newman, Platform, Pindering and Wannamunna Land systems as mapped by van Vreeswyk et al. (2004): · The Boolgeeda Land system is described as: “Stony lower slopes, level stony plains and narrow sub- parallel drainage floors, relief up to 20 m. A common system in shallow valleys below hill systems such as Newman and Rocklea.” · The Newman Land system is described as: “Rugged high mountains, ridges and plateaux with near vertical escarpments of jaspilite, chert and shale, the second largest system in the survey area and prominent in southern parts (e.g. Ophthalmia Range, Hamersley Range), relief up to 450 m.” · The Platform Land system is described as: “Narrow, raised plains and highly dissected slopes on partly consolidated colluvium below the footslopes of hill systems such as Newman, relief mostly up to about 30 m but occasionally considerably greater.” · The Pindering Land system is described as: “Level to gently undulating hardpan wash plains with surface mantles of ironstone pebbles and gravel, some patterns of small groves and minor tracts receiving more concentrated through flow; relief up to 10 m.” · The Wannamunna Land system is described as: “Level alluvial plains with prominent grove patterns of vegetation and shallow loamy soils over hardpan and broad internal drainage plains with deeper more clayey soils, relief up to 5 m. The system is found in south central parts of the survey area as broad flats within the Hamersley Ranges (Newman land system).” Soils of the Pilbara region have been defined and mapped at a scale of 1:2,000,000 by Bettenay et al. (1967). Four soil units occur within the Project Area: Fa13, Fab 14 and Fb3. · Soil Unit Fa13 is described as: “Ranges of banded jaspilite and chert along with shales, dolomites, and iron ore formations; some areas of ferruginous duricrust as well as occasional narrow winding valley plains and steeply dissected pediments. This unit is largely associated with the Hamersley and Ophthalmia Ranges. The soils are frequently stony and shallow and there are extensive areas without soil cover: chief soils are shallow stony earthy loams (Um5.51) along with some (Uc5.11) soils on the steeper slopes. Associated are (Dr2.33, Dr2.32) soils on the limited areas of dissected pediments, while (Um5.52) and (Uf6.71) soils occur on the valley plains.” · Soil Unit Fa14 is described as: “Steep hills and steeply dissected pediments on areas of banded jaspilite and chert along with shales, dolomite, and iron ore formations; some narrow winding valley plains: chief soils are shallow stony earthy loams (Um5.51) along with some (Uc5.11) soils on the steeper slopes. (Dr2.33 and Dr2.32) soils which occur on the pediments are more extensive than in unit Fa13. (Um5.52) and (Uf6.71) soils occur on the valley plains." · Soil Unit Fb3 is described as: "High-level valley plains set in extensive areas of unit Fa13. There are extensive areas of pisolitic limonite deposits: principal soils are deep earthy loams (Um5.52) along with small areas of (Gn2.12) soils."

6 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document 2.4. Groundwater The Project Area lies within the following two regional aquifers: 1. Hamersley – Fractured Rock Aquifer: The Precambrian rocks of the Hamersley Basin are principally volcanics, shales and iron formations. Groundwater is contained within fractures within these rocks. The groundwater level may be deep below the surface, and is generally fresh. The main use of this aquifer is for mining and mine dewatering from iron ore mines. Bores have also been drilled for road and railway construction. There will be increasing dewatering from the fractured rocks around iron ore mines as the pits become deeper (DoW, 2015a). 2. Hamersley – Wittenoom Aquifer: The Wittenoom aquifer is distinguished as a separate aquifer system because the Wittenoom Dolomite is distinct from the other fractured rock aquifers in the Hamersley Basin, having karst development (solution cavities) and being overlain by a thick sequence of valley filled sediments consisting of pisolite, calcrete and alluvium. The Wittenoom Dolomite is the most important aquifer in the province and underlies the main valleys in the Hamersley Range; it is highly transmissive and high yielding where there is karst development. Water levels may be fairly deep. The groundwater is generally fresh. The aquifer has been developed for Tom Price and Marandoo water supply and has been investigated at other localities. There is likely to be significant development pressure on this aquifer for supply to iron ore operations (DoW, 2015b) Reinjection activities will occur in the Hamersley – Wittenoom Aquifer. Groundwater levels within South Flank Valley vary between 35 metres below ground level (mbgl) and 100 mbgl (Attachments 2B and 2C; Plates 1 and 2). The groundwater gradient is relatively flat throughout the valley with the majority of the variation in depth to groundwater due to changes in surface elevation. Generally, depth to groundwater is lowest in the areas of Coondewanna Flats and Weeli Wolli Spring where surface water and groundwater flow concentrates. Groundwater in the catchment typically has a low salinity with a typical total dissolved solids range between 600 and 700 mg/L. There are no public drinking water source areas within or adjacent to the Project Area.

Plate 1: South Flank Valley Northern Cross Section2

2 Note: The cross section represents information from drill holes up to 300 m from the Northern cross section line (annotated on Attachments 2B and 2C). Groundwater levels are approximate only and are not representative of the current or predicted water levels at any particular bore location. Estimated depth to groundwater levels are provided in Attachments 2B and 2C. 7 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Plate 2: South Flank Valley Southern Cross Section3

2.5. Surface water One named perennial watercourses (Pebble Mouse Creek) and a number of unnamed perennial watercourses flow across the Project Area. Pebble Mouse Creek is located within the Upper Weeli Wolli Creek sub catchment (Attachment 2A) and exhibits high inter-annual variability of streamflow, with long periods of low or no flow. Southern Flank valley receives drainage from the higher ground north of the main valley and from the north- eastern slopes of Mount Robinson. Drainage from the Southern Flank ridgeline generally passes through narrow valleys or gorges before reaching the valley floor. The valley floor drains into Pebble Mouse Creek which enters Southern Flank valley from the south and continues on to the east into Weeli Wolli Creek. Water quality in the catchment is considered to be good, with total dissolved solids up to 100 mg/L in Pebble Mouse Creek.

2.6. Flora and Vegetation The Project Area lies within the following two Beard (1975) Vegetation Associations: · 18: Low woodland; mulga (Acacia aneura) · 82: Hummock grasslands, low tree steppe; snappy gum over Triodia wiseana No significant flora species listed under the Environmental Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999 (EPBC Act) or the Biodiversity Conservation Act, 2016 (BC Act) have been identified within the Project Area. Two DBCA listed Priority Flora species have been recorded within the Project Area: · Aristida jerichoensis var. subspinulifera: Priority 3; · Rhagodia sp. Hamersley (M. Trudgen 17794): Priority 3; These species are wide spread in the local and broader region. All priority flora species will be avoided where practicable. In the event that a priority flora species need to be disturbed it will be undertaken in accordance with Ministerial Statement 1072. All clearing associated with the project will be undertaken in accordance with MS 1072. The Project Area intersects seven broad floristic communities with twelve vegetation associations (Table 2). None of these are representative of a Threatened Ecological Community (TEC or Priority Ecological Community

3 Note: The cross section represents information from drill holes up to 600 m from the Southern cross section line Attachments 2B and 2C). Groundwater levels are approximate only and are not representative of the current or predicted water levels at any particular bore location. Estimated depth to groundwater levels are provided in Attachments 2B and 2C. 8 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document (PEC). Table 2: Vegetation Associations within the Packsaddle Infiltration Trial Area

Broad Floristic Vegetation Vegetation Association Community Association Code Acacia Low SP AaApr Low Open Forest of Acacia aptaneura and Acacia pruinocarpa over Open Open Forest TmTwTp Hummock Grassland of Triodia melvillei, Triodia wiseana and Triodia pungens TtChfAri over Tussock Grassland of Themeda triandra, Chrysopogon fallax and Aristida inaequiglumis on red brown loam on stony plains . SP AcaoAa Low Open Forest of Acacia catenulata subsp. occidentalis and Acacia aptaneura ArobDiaChf over Very Open Tussock Grassland of Aristida obscura, Digitaria ammophila and Chrysopogon fallax on red brown clay loam on lower stony plains. Acacia Open MI AtpPlAm Open Scrub of Acacia tumida var. pilbarensis, Petalostylis labicheoides and Scrub TpTs ChEll Acacia monticola over Open Hummock Grassland of Triodia pungens and Triodia sp. Shovelanna Hill (S.van Leeuwen 3835) with Low Open Woodland of Corymbia hamerselyana and Eucalyptus leucophloia subsp. leucophloia on red brown sandy loam on minor drainage lines. Corymbia Low GG CfEllFib Low Woodland of Corymbia ferriticola, Eucalyptus leucophloia subsp. leucophloia Woodland AhDovmAsha and Ficus brachypodaover Open Shrubland of Acacia hamersleyensis, Dodonaea CyaErmuThmb viscosa subsp. mucronata and Astrotricha hamptonii over Open Tussock Grassland of Cymbopogon ambiguus, Eriachne mucronata and Themeda sp. Mt Barricade on red brown loam along clifflines and gorge walls. Eucalyptus Low MA EcrEvEx Low Open Forest of Eucalyptus camaldulensis subsp. refulgens, Eucalyptus Open Forest ApypAtpGoro victrix and Eucalyptus xerothermica over High Shrubland of Acacia pyrifolia var. TtEuaCyp pyrifolia, Acacia tumida var. pilbarensis and Gossypium robinsonii over Open Tussock Grassland of Themeda triandra, Eulalia aurea and Cymbopogon procerus on red brown clay loam on major drainage lines. Themeda FP TtEua ExAa Tussock Grassland of Themeda triandra and Eulalia aurea with Low Woodland of Tussock AprAtpErlo Eucalyptus xerothermica and Acacia aptaneura over Open Shrubland of Acacia Grassland pruinocarpa, Acacia tumida var. pilbarensis and Eremophila longifolia on red brown clay loam on unincised drainage lines. Triodia CP TwTa Ese Hummock Grassland of Triodia wiseana and Triodia angusta with Open Mallee of Hummock AbPlApyp Eucalyptus socialis subsp. eucentrica and Open Shrubland of Acacia bivenosa, Grassland Petalostylis labicheoides and Acacia pyrifolia var. pyrifolia on light brown clay loam on calcrete plains and rises. FS Ts CdHc Hummock Grassland of Triodia sp. Shovelanna Hill (S. van Leeuwen 3835) with AancAiGrwh Low Open Woodland of Corymbia deserticola subsp. deserticola and Hakea chordophylla over Open Shrubland of Acacia ancistrocarpa, Acacia inaequilatera and Grevillea wickhamii subsp. hispidula on red brown sandy loam on footslopes and stony plains. HS TsTwTp Hummock Grassland of Triodia sp. Shovelanna Hill (S. van Leeuwen 3835), EllCh AhiAaa Triodia wiseana and Triodia pungens with Low Open Woodland of Eucalyptus leucophloia subsp. leucophloia and Corymbia hamersleyana over Low Open Shrubland of Acacia hilliana and Acacia adoxa var. adoxa on red brown sandy loam on hill slopes. ME TpTlo Hummock Grassland of Triodia pungens and Triodia longiceps with Low ExAciCh Woodland of Eucalyptus xerothermica, Acacia citrinoviridis and Corymbia PlApypGoro hamerselyana over High Shrubland of Petalostylis labicheoides, Acacia pyrifolia var. pyrifolia and Gossypium robinsonii on red brown clay loam on medium drainage lines and surrounding floodplains. SP TsTwTp Hummock Grassland of Triodia sp. Shovelanna Hill (S. van Leeuwen 3835), EgEt AbApaApr Triodia wiseana and Triodia pungens with Very Open Mallee of Eucalyptus gamophylla and Eucalyptus trivalva over Open Shrubland of Acacia bivenosa, Acacia pachyacra and Acacia pruinocarpa on red brown sandy loam and clay loam on stony plains. Triodia Open SP TpTm Hummock Grassland of Triodia pungens and Triodia melvillei with Low Open Hummock AaExAcao Woodland of Acacia aptaneura, Eucalyptus xerothermica and Acacia catenulate Grassland ApaErffAads subsp. occidentalis and Open Shrubland of Acacia pachyacra, Eremophila forrestii subsp. forrestii and Acacia adsurgens on red brown clay loam or silty loam on stony plains and floodplains. Predicted groundwater mounding associated with the surplus water scheme will not intersect the root zones of vegetation within the region (Attachment 2C).

9 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document 2.7. Vertebrate Fauna Biologic (2014) identified eight habitat types within the Project Area: · Crest / Slope; · Drainage Area; · Gorge / Gully; · Major Drainage Line; · Minor Drainage Line; · Mulga; · Sand Plain; and · Stony Plain. Two significant fauna species has been identified within the Project Area: · Falco hypoleucos (Grey Falcon): Schedule 3; and · Pseudomys chapmani (Western Pebble-mound Mouse): DBCA Priority 4. Active pebble mounds will be avoided where practicable. Any clearing associated with the Project Area will be within the existing prescribed premises and will be undertaken in accordance with MS 1072.

2.8. Subterranean Fauna 2.8.1. Troglofauna The geology of the MS 1072 Development Envelope comprises four habitat types relevant to troglofauna. These are ‘hardcap zone’, detritals, mineralised rock and BIF host rock. The South Flank MAR occurs within the detritals of the South Flank valley. Detritals can be divided into recent quaternary detritals and three classes of tertiary detritals. Quaternary detritals usually comprise a mix of ore and shale in a silty matrix and are regarded by BHP Billiton Iron Ore, (2016) as suitable for troglofauna, although there is relatively little sampling evidence that this is the case. They can also comprise alluvium and colluvium, from which troglofauna are increasingly often being collected (Biota, 2015). The deeper tertiary detritals consist of haematite conglomerate of silt and clay, with limited capacity to support troglofauna. The middle tertiary detrital layer consists of vuggy breccia, sand and calcrete that are suitable for troglofauna, together with lenses of clay that are not. The upper tertiary detrital layer consists of gravelly siltstone and siltstone that are likely to provide troglofauna habitat. Detritals are extensive in South Flank Valley, filling a broad valley north of Mount Robinson. Generally it is considered that subterranean species in detritals tend to be at least moderately widespread owing to more extensive habitat connectivity than in other subterranean environments (Bennelongia, 2019). One hundred and twenty six species of trogolofauna from 19 orders have been collected from the MS 1072 Development Envelope. Eighty-eight of these species have only been recorded from within the Development Envelope to date, although a number of these have a wide distribution within it. Most species occurred at very low abundance. The four singletons (species only ever recorded from one sample) recorded in the South Flank Impact Assessment Area will not be impacted by the Project as they occur outside of the groundwater mounding extent: · Prethopalpus sp. B15: recorded 1.2 km west of the western most extent of the Project mounding; · Prethopalpus julianneae: : recorded 2.2 km west of the western most extent of the Project mounding; · nr Andricophiloscia sp. B16: recorded 2.1 km east of the eastern most extent of the Project mounding; and · Parajapyidae ‘DPL024’: recorded 3.4 km east of the eastern most extent of the Project mounding; The seven other Troglofauna species recorded in the South Flank Impact Assessment Area will not be impacted by the Project: · Draculoides sp.B59-DNA: recorded approximately 9.5 km to the east of the easternmost extent of the proposed mounding area; · Prethopalpus maini: recorded approximately 0.6 km to the north and the furthest records are 3 km to the north west and 4.2 km to the east of the proposed mounding area. In addition all available habitat is outside of the proposed area of mounding; · Australoschendyla sp. B06: one record of this species is within the proposed mounding area. The other record is outside approximately 3.8 km to the east of the proposed mounding easternmost extent. · Chilenophilidae sp. B07: recorded approximately 3.8 km to the east of the easternmost extent of the proposed mounding area.

10 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document · Japygidae sp. DPL007: recorded approximately 4 km to the east and 8.8 km to the north east of the easternmost extent of the proposed mounding area. · Parajapygidae sp. B25: recorded approximately 4 km to the east of the easternmost extent of the proposed mounding area. · Japygidae sp. DPL005: recorded 2.2 km west of the westernmost, and 1.5 km to the east of the easternmost edge of the proposed mounding area. 2.8.2. Stygofauna The considerable extent and habitat connectivity of the alluvial aquifers (and to a lesser extent the calcrete deposits) of the Tertiary detrital valley-fill successions in the Weeli Wolli and Coondewanna sub-catchments provide for easy dispersal of stygofauna species between areas of groundwater drawdown and surrounding aquifers (Bennelongia, 2019). A number of taxa (amphipods and isopods) occur both in the Mining Area C and in surrounding catchments. This suggests there are few, if any, physical barriers to restrict the wider ranges of species occurring in the cumulative groundwater drawdown areas (Bennelongia, 2016). Measurements taken during previous subterranean fauna survey demonstrate that the water table is relatively deep throughout the MS 1072 Development Envelope and surrounds, ranging from 26 to 127 metres below top of collar (mbtc) throughout South Flank and the groundwater is fresh, with conductivities at the water table rarely exceeding 1,000 µS cm-1 (Bennelongia, 2019). Sampling for stygofauna within the vicinity of MS 1072 has been considerable with at least 2,058 samples from 1,199 holes collected within 100 km by 100 km surrounding the Project Area (Bennelongia, 2019). Seven species of stygofauna have been recorded in the mounding area although six of these are known or considered to have ranges extending beyond the expected disturbance (Bennelongia 2019). The remaining species, the syncarid Bathynella sp. 2 (South Flank), is known from a single hole (SF3016R) east of the Project Area but within the mounding area. This occurrence of this species outside the mounding area cannot be confirmed based on current data (Bennelongia, 2019).

2.9. Contaminated Sites There are a number of contaminated sites within the boundary of Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6. None of these occur within the Project Area. The closest site is a suspected minor hydrocarbon spill associated with the now decommissioned South Flank Exploration Camp. This site is approximately 250m north of the north western edge of the Project Area. The proposed activities associated with this works approval will not impact on this site.

11 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document 3. Environmental Management

3.1. Corporate Level Plans and Procedures The management of the environmental aspects of BHP’s MAC operations are managed under the company’s AS/NZS ISO 14001:2016 certified Environmental Management System (EMS). The EMS describes the organisational structure, responsibilities, practices, processes and resources for implementing and maintaining environmental objectives at all BHP sites. Additionally, operational controls for environmental management for the Project are guided by BHP’s Charter values. The Charter Values outline a commitment to develop, implement and maintain management systems for sustainable development that drive continual improvement and set and achieve targets that promote efficient use of resources. In order to give effect to the Charter Values, a series of “Our Requirements” documents have been developed. BHP has also developed a Sustainable Development Policy for its Iron Ore operations. The Sustainable Development Policy outlines a commitment to setting objective and targets to achieve sustainable outcomes and to continually improve our performance. To support these documents BHP has an internal Project Environmental and Aboriginal Heritage Review (PEAHR) system. The purpose of the system is to manage implementation of environmental, Aboriginal heritage, land tenure and legal commitments prior to and during land disturbance. All ground disturbance activities will meet the requirements of the PEAHR system.

3.2. Premises Level Plans and Procedures At MAC all environmental management is currently governed by MS 1072, the associated Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan (Version 3.4) and Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6. All personnel carrying out works associated with the Project are required to comply with the Sustainable Development Policy, MS 1072, the Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan, Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6, the PEAHR system and any other relevant legislative and licensing requirements.

12 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document 4. Proposed Amendments BHP is seeking a works approval to construct a new surplus water scheme at South Flank (the Project). The works approval application for the Project seeks to: · Construct a new managed aquifer recharge (MAR) scheme at South Flank consisting of nominally 10 reinjection bores (although additional reinjection bores may be required) to dispose of up to 12.76 GL/a of surplus mine dewater; and · Construct a surface water discharge scheme in Pebble Mouse Creek to dispose of up to 12.76 GL/a; 4.1.1. Project Description To manage surplus water from Mining Area C, BHP is proposing to construct a new surplus water scheme at South Flank. The Project (Attachment 2A) consists of: · Approximately 14 km of pipeline; · 1,100 kL balance tank; · A new MAR scheme at South Flank which will consist of: o Nominally 10 reinjection bores (Table 3; Attachment 2D). Note that additional reinjection bores may be required to meet the 12.76 GL/annum reinjection rate. If additional bores are required they will be constructed within the MAR Bore Construction Zone and as per the design specifications (Attachment 2D). DWER will be notified of any additional bores to be installed one month prior to construction. Following commissioning any new bores will be operated under Time Limited Operations (under the works approval) or the L7851/2002/6; o four regional monitoring bores (Table 3); and · A new surplus water discharge point into Pebble Mouse Creek (Attachment 2E). Based on the pump capacity, the system can operate at a maximum capacity of 12.76 GL/annum (a nominal 35 ML/day). Table 3: South Flank MAR Injection Bores and Associated Monitoring (Commissioning and Operation)

Discharge Discharge Point Status Cumulative Flow Rate (L/s) Vegetation Monitoring Type Name Volume (kL) Creek Pebble Mouse Creek To be Monthly Monthly (when Vegetation will be monitored Discharge Discharge Point constructed (when reinjecting) every six months and reinjecting) evaluated to identify any plant stress along the discharge flow path. Injection bore HSF5462P Drilled N/A Injection bore HSF5461P Drilled Injection bore HSF5464P Drilled Injection bore HSF0063P Drilled Injection bore HSF5463P Drilled Injection bore HSF5467P Drilled Injection bore HSF5466P Drilled Injection bore HSF5465P Drilled Injection bore HSF5468P To be drilled Injection bore HSF5469P To be drilled

13 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Table 4: South Flank MAR Regional Monitoring Locations, Parameters, Thresholds and Limits (Commissioning and Operation) Monitoring Status Parameter Unit Averaging Frequency Frequency Threshold Action Limit Action Point4 period during during Commissioning Operation HSF0055M Drilled Depth to mbgl Spot Weekly Monthly 35 mbgl Manage injection rates to ensure 30 mbgl Cease injection at HSF5472M To be drilled groundwater Sample that the groundwater depth limit bore(s) associated HSF5475M To be drilled is not reached. with the breach of HSF5471M To be drilled the limit. EC5 µS/cm Monthly Quarterly – – – – pH2 pH Units Monthly Quarterly – – – – South Flank Constructed EC2 µS/cm Monthly Quarterly – – – – Turkeys Nest pH2 pH Units Monthly Quarterly – – – – South Flank Constructed Aluminum mg/L Monthly Quarterly – – – – Turkeys Nest Arsenic HSF0055M Drilled Barium HSF5472M To be drilled Boron HSF5475M To be drilled Calcium HSF5471M To be drilled Carbonate Cadmium Calcium Chloride Chromium Copper Fluoride Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Nitrate Potassium Selenium Sodium Sulfate TDS Zinc

4 pH, electrical conductivity and hydrochemistry samples are only required to be taken from one emission point during each quarterly monitoring event and only emission points that are active in the monitoring period are required to be sampled. 5 In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted Page | 14 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

4.1.2. Environmental Impact Assessment and Associated Management Strategies BHP has assessed the potential emissions and discharges associated with the construction, commissioning and operation of the Project has been determined that the following potential impacts are relevant to this application: · Construction: o Noise and dust associated with the construction of the balance tank, pipeline, drill pads and Pebble Mouse Creek discharge Point; and o Discharge of groundwater from bore pump testing resulting in erosion. · Commissioning: o Groundwater mounding from reinjection resulting in a decline in vegetation health; o Groundwater mounding from reinjection resulting in a loss of subterranean fauna (troglofauna) habitat; and o Changes to groundwater quality from reinjection resulting in a loss of subterranean fauna (stygofauna) habitat; o Groundwater discharge resulting in erosion at the Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point; and o Discharge resulting in impacts to vegetation health downstream of the Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point · Operation: o Groundwater mounding from reinjection resulting in a decline in vegetation health; o Groundwater mounding from reinjection resulting in a loss of subterranean fauna (troglofauna) habitat; and o Changes to groundwater quality from reinjection resulting in a loss of subterranean fauna (stygofauna) habitat; o Groundwater discharge resulting in erosion at the Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point; o Discharge resulting in impacts to vegetation health downstream of the Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point; and o Groundwater discharge resulting in changes to surface water quality within Pebble Mouse Creek downstream of the discharge point. Note that the impacts of vegetation clearing have not been included in this risk assessment as all clearing will be undertaken in accordance with the approved MS 1072. Tables 5 to 7 provide a description of the proposed activities and the associated potential discharges/emissions, potential impacts, sensitive receptors, management measures, and residual risk ranking in accordance with Guidance Statement: Risk Assessments (DER, 2017) for the construction, commissioning and time limited operation of the Project.

Page | 15 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Table 5: Construction of the South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Environmental Impact Assessment and Associated Management Strategies

Risk Event Background Management Measures Residual Risk Ranking Sources / Activities Potential Potential Potential Potential (Consequence / Likelihood) emissions receptors pathway adverse impacts

Category 6 Construction, Dust (PM10) The closest non- Air / wind Amenity and The purpose of the Project is to provide additional The closest dust and noise receptors to the proposed pipeline will be the Low (Slight, Unlikely) Mine of the South Noise BHP sensitive dispersion Health impacts strategies to manage surplus water at MAC by inhabitants of BHP’s Mulla Mulla Village and ’s Hope Downs Minimal clearing is required for the Dewatering Flank Surplus receptor is the adding new management options and capacity accommodation camp located more than 5 km and 7.5 km respectively construction of the tank, pipeline, Water Scheme Hope Downs (12.76 GL/a) for surplus water disposal, but not from the closest area of clearing associated with the Project. and associated bores. Clearing will (a reinjection accommodation increasing the overall site disposal limit above the No impacts on sensitive receptors are expected due to the nature of be short term in nature and dust will bore field and camp located 2.6 licenced limit of 34,931,000 tonnes per annum. construction and operation of the proposed facility and the distance to be managed via water carts. All a creek km south of the Construction of the Project will involve: these receptors. clearing will be in accordance with discharge eastern end of the · Clearing of drill pads for the two new injection Site preparation works including earthworks and vehicle movement will the approved MS 1072. point). Project Area and bores (HSF5468P, HSF5469P) and three generate a minor amount of dust and noise emissions in the local area. more than 7.5km monitoring bores (HSF5472M, HSF5475M This will be managed via the use of water carts and minimising clearing to from the closest and HSF5471M) (Attachment 2A); the smallest area practicable. area of clearing associated with the · Clearing for, and construction of, a pipeline Project. from the South Flank turkeys nest to the eight existing bores, two new bores and the Pebble Discharge of Direct Native vegetation Direct Inundation of Mouse Creek discharge point Pump testing requires small short term discharges from a newly Low (Slight, Unlikely) pump testing discharge of discharge of vegetation, (Attachment 2A). constructed bore to confirm bore yield and integrity. Water from each pump The short term nature of the pump water to the groundwater groundwater impacts to plant tested bore will be directed to nearby drainage lines via a lay flat pipe. The · Drilling and pump testing of two remaining test combined with water quality surrounding adjacent to health and water quality of the discharged groundwater is tested to confirm that it will bores (HSF5468P, HSF5469P); testing and inspections for erosion environment. the bores via erosion. not pose a risk to the receiving environment and the location is regularly means it is unlikely that the lay flat pipes. · Installation of reinjection head works as per inspected for potential erosion. Given the short term nature of the groundwater discharge will have any BHP design criteria (Attachment 2D) at discharge health impacts to vegetation as a result of the discharge are adverse impact on the receiving reinjection bore locations (Attachment 2A); unlikely. environment. and · Construction of the Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point (Attachment 2A) and associated erosion control measures as per BHP design criteria (Attachment 2E).

Page | 16 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Table 6: Commissioning of the South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Environmental Impact Assessment and Associated Management Strategies

Risk Event Background Management Measures Residual Risk Ranking Sources / Activities Potential Potential Potential Potential (Consequence / Likelihood) emissions receptors pathway adverse impacts Category 6 Groundwater Direct Groundwater Direct Mounding from Commissioning of the MAR scheme will involve Mounding during commission is expected to be localised around each Low (Rare, Minor) Mine reinjection at discharge of reinjection of reinjection running the system at less than the planned injection bore (Attachment 2A; Attachment 5D). Key broad floristic The short term nature of the Dewatering South Flank mine dewater mine resulting in a operational levels to equalise the system, communities that could be impacted by groundwater mounding of the MAR commissioning period and low water via dewater decline in calibrate all of the equipment, then at incremental scheme are located east (Eucalyptus Low Open Forest) and south (Acacia volumes are likely to only result in designated vegetation health injection rates to determine how the infrastructure Low Open Forest and Acacia Open Scrub). localised mounding. groundwater and the receiving aquifer handles the pressure of Potential impacts of groundwater mounding occur at the following depths for Given the location of key broad emission the system. the identified key broad floristic communities: floristic communities this means it points Commissioning of each bore is expected to take · Eucalyptus Low Open Forest): 15 mbgl; and would be a very rare event for the up to two months. Following commissioning BHP · Acacia Low Open Forest / Acacia Open Scrub: 7 mbgl. injection to have any adverse impact will: on the receiving environment. While these locations are unlikely to experience mounding during the Submit a Commissioning Report; · commissioning period four groundwater monitoring bores (Table 3; The MAR scheme will monitored · Submit an application to amend the site Attachment 2A) will be used to identify any mounding that occurs close to (Table 4) to confirm that environmental licence L7851/2002/6; and these broad floristic communities. The proposed limits associated with the groundwater mounding does not · Commence time limited operations for a monitoring bores (Table 4) are sufficient to prevent any impacts to intersect with the root zones of period of up to 6 months. vegetation. vegetation. Monitoring of the depth to groundwater for the injection bores (Attachment 2A) is not proposed as these bores: · Do not occur in significant broad floristic communities; · Are located significantly higher in the landscape (creating a greater depth to water) than the monitoring bores meaning that the trigger limits will be reached at the monitoring bores before any significant impact would occur at the injection bores (Attachment 2C); and · Can operate with significantly higher heads inside the bore casing due to well efficiency issues, which aren’t reflective of water levels in the wider aquifer unit. Mounding from Mounding during commission in expected to be localised around each Low (Possible, Slight) reinjection injection bore (Attachment 2A). Key troglofauna habitat is located in the The short term nature of the resulting in a loss valley east and west of the MAR scheme and are unlikely to experience commissioning period and low water of subterranean mounding during the commissioning period. volumes are likely to only result in fauna Four groundwater monitoring bores (Table 4; Attachment 2A) will be used localised mounding. (troglofauna) to identify any mounding that occurs within key subterranean habitat. The Given the location of significant habitat proposed limits will prevent a significant loss of habitat for troglofauna troglofauna habitat any minor species. mounding associated with the Monitoring of the depth to groundwater for the injection bores commissioning will not significantly (Attachment 2A) is not proposed as these bores: alter the amount of troglofauna · Do not occur where significant troglofauna have been recorded or within habitat resulting in a low risk of an significant troglofauna habitat; adverse impact on the receiving environment. · Are located significantly higher in the landscape (creating a greater depth to water) than the monitoring bores meaning that the trigger limits will be The MAR scheme will monitored reached at the monitoring bores before any significant impact would (Table 4) to confirm that occur at the injection bores (Attachment 2C); and groundwater mounding does not significantly impact on significant · Can operate with significantly higher heads inside the bore casing due troglofauna habitat. to well efficiency issues, which aren’t reflective of water levels in the wider aquifer unit. Changes to The water quality of the source and receiving aquifers is similar. The MAR Low (Rare, Slight) groundwater scheme at A Deposit used the same source and receiving aquifers as the Existing similar MAR schemes have quality from South Flank MAR and has shown that the reinjection does not significantly not shown any significant changes to reinjection alter the chemistry of the receiving aquifer groundwater that could impact on resulting in a loss The water quality of abstracted groundwater will be tested monthly at the stygofauna habitat. of subterranean South Flank Turkeys Nest (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during The water quality of abstracted fauna commissioning. Monthly water quality testing will also occur at the four groundwater will be tested monthly at (stygofauna) monitoring bores (Table 4; Attachment 2A). the South Flank Turkeys Nest habitat Reinjection will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Turkeys (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during Nest are reached. commissioning. Monthly water quality testing will also occur at the four monitoring bores (Attachment 2A). Reinjection will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Turkeys Nest are reached.

17 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Risk Event Background Management Measures Residual Risk Ranking Sources / Activities Potential Potential Potential Potential (Consequence / Likelihood) emissions receptors pathway adverse impacts Groundwater Direct Surface water Direct Discharge Commissioning of the Pebble Mouse Creek Erosion controls will be built as part of the discharge point design Low (Slight, Possible) discharge to discharge of discharge of resulting in discharge point will involve running the system at (Attachment 2E). The Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point will be The short term nature of the Pebble Mouse mine dewater mine erosion at the less than the planned operational levels to inspected regularly during commissioning to identify any erosion that may commissioning period, combined Creek. via the dewater Pebble Mouse equalise the system, calibrate all of the have occurred. with the initial low water volumes and designated Creek discharge equipment, then at incrementally increased Discharges will commence with low volumes allowing the risk of significant inspections to identify any erosion surface water point discharge rates to determine how the erosion at higher volumes to be identified early. In the event that erosion is means that any potential erosion emission infrastructure and Pebble Mouse Creek handles identified additional erosion control measures will be implemented (e.g. would be localised and addressed point the volume of discharge (i.e. how rapidly the extending rip rap) and if necessary repairs undertaken. quickly to prevent the discharge from wetting front extends and recedes; and an having any adverse impact on the indication as to the likely maximum discharge rate receiving environment. that can be achieved without exceeding the Discharge wetting front limit). Given the short term nature of the discharge during commissioning (two Low (Slight, Unlikely) resulting in months) health impacts to vegetation as a result of the discharge are Commissioning of the discharge point is expected The short term nature of the impacts to unlikely. to take up to two months. Following commissioning period, combined vegetation health commissioning BHP will: Discharge into Pebble Mouse Creek will be managed to ensure it does not with water quality testing and downstream of the extend beyond the Wetting Front Limit (Attachment 2A). This limit and the inspections to ensure that the wetting Pebble Mouse · Submit a Commissioning Report; associated Wetting Front Early Warning Point are designed to ensure that front does not travel beyond the Creek discharge · Submit an application to amend the site the discharge remains within the boundary of the Prescribed Premises Wetting Front Limit means it is point environmental licence L7851/2002/6; and (Attachment 2A). unlikely that the discharge will have · Commence time limited operations for a The water quality of abstracted groundwater will be tested monthly at the any adverse impact on the receiving period of up to 6 months. South Flank Turkeys Nest (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during environment. commissioning. Discharge will cease if the water quality limits are reached.

18 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Table 7: Time Limited Operation / Ongoing Operation of the South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Environmental Impact Assessment and Associated Management Strategies

Risk Event Background Management Measures Residual Risk Ranking Sources / Activities Potential Potential Potential Potential (Consequence / Likelihood) emissions receptors pathway adverse impacts Category 6 Groundwater Direct Groundwater Direct Mounding from Time Limited Operation / Ongoing Operation of Mounding during Time Limited Operations / Ongoing Operations will extend Low (Unlikely, Slight) Mine reinjection at discharge of reinjection of reinjection the MAR scheme will consist of the reinjection across the Project Area (Attachment 5D). Mounding associated with the Dewatering South Flank mine dewater mine resulting in a bores (Attachment 2A) running at a rate of up to Key broad floristic communities that could be impacted by groundwater operation of the MAR scheme will via dewater decline in 12.76 GL/a (a nominal 35 ML/day). mounding of the MAR scheme are located east (Eucalyptus Low Open occur across the Project Area. designated vegetation health The MAR scheme is anticipated to run tor the life Forest) and south (Acacia Low Open Forest and Acacia Open Scrub). Impacts on key broad floristic groundwater of the MAC / South Flank Project and forms part Potential impacts of groundwater mounding occur at the following depths for communities during Time Limited emission of the overall surplus water management options the identified key broad floristic communities: Operations / Ongoing Operations is points for the Prescribed Premises. · Eucalyptus Low Open Forest): 15 mbgl; and unlikely as the MAR scheme will Continued operation of the scheme will result in · Acacia Low Open Forest / Acacia Open Scrub: 7 mbgl. managed (Table 4) to ensure mounding of the regional groundwater table groundwater mounding does not Four groundwater monitoring bores (Tables 3 and 4; Attachment 2A) will (Attachment 5D), which if not managed intersect with the root zones of be used to identify any mounding that occurs close to these broad floristic appropriately could result in impacts to the vegetation. communities. The proposed limits associated with the monitoring bores surrounding environment. (Table 4) are sufficient to prevent any impacts to vegetation associated with Four groundwater monitoring bores (Tables 3 the operation of the MAR scheme. and 4; Attachment 2A) will be used to identify Monitoring of the depth to groundwater for the injection bores the extent of mounding associated with the MAR (Attachment 2A) is not proposed as these bores: scheme. · Do not occur in significant broad floristic communities; Injection volumes, monitoring results and any environmental events will be reported in the · Are located significantly higher in the landscape (creating a greater depth annual report for L7851/2002/6. to water) than the monitoring bores meaning that the trigger limits will be reached at the monitoring bores before any significant impact would occur at the injection bores (Attachment 2C); and · Can operate with significantly higher heads inside the bore casing due to well efficiency issues, which aren’t reflective of water levels in the wider aquifer unit. Mounding from Mounding during Time Limited Operations / Ongoing Operations will extend Medium (Unlikely, Moderate) reinjection across the Project Area (Attachment 5D). Mounding associated with the resulting in a loss Key troglofauna habitat is located in the valley east and west of the MAR operation of the MAR scheme will of subterranean scheme. This area will experience mounding and some loss of troglofauna occur across the Project Area. fauna habitat in the operation phase of the project. Impacts on significant troglofauna (troglofauna) Four groundwater monitoring bores (Tables 3 and 4; Attachment 2A) will habitat during Time Limited habitat be used to identify any mounding that occurs within key subterranean Operations / Ongoing Operations is habitat. The proposed limits associated with the monitoring bores (Table 4) unlikely as the MAR scheme will are sufficient to prevent any significant loss of habitat for troglofauna species. managed (Table 4) to ensure Monitoring of the depth to groundwater for the injection bores groundwater mounding does not (Attachment 2A) is not proposed as these bores: result in a significant loss of · Do not occur in significant broad floristic communities; troglofauna habitat in the Project Area. · Are located significantly higher in the landscape (creating a greater depth to water) than the monitoring bores meaning that the trigger limits will be reached at the monitoring bores before any significant impact would occur at the injection bores (Attachment 2C); and · Can operate with significantly higher heads inside the bore casing due to well efficiency issues, which aren’t reflective of water levels in the wider aquifer unit. Changes to The water quality of the source and receiving aquifers is similar. The MAR Low (Rare, Slight) groundwater scheme at A Deposit used the same source and receiving aquifers as the Existing similar MAR schemes have quality from South Flank MAR and has shown that the reinjection does not significantly not shown any significant changes to reinjection alter the chemistry of the receiving aquifer groundwater that could impact on resulting in a loss The water quality of abstracted groundwater will be tested quarterly at the stygofauna habitat. of subterranean South Flank Turkeys Nest (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during Time Limited The water quality will be tested fauna Operations / Ongoing Operations. Quarterly water quality testing will also quarterly at the South Flank Turkeys (stygofauna) occur at the four monitoring bores (Tables 3 and 4; Attachment 2A). Nest and the four monitoring bores habitat Reinjection will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Turkeys (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during Nest are reached. Time Limited Operations / Ongoing Operations. Reinjection will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Turkeys Nest are reached.

19 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Risk Event Background Management Measures Residual Risk Ranking Sources / Activities Potential Potential Potential Potential (Consequence / Likelihood) emissions receptors pathway adverse impacts Groundwater Direct Surface water Direct Discharge Time Limited Operation / Ongoing Operation of Erosion controls will be built as part of the discharge point design Low (Slight, Unlikely) discharge to discharge of discharge of resulting in the Pebble Mouse Creek discharge point will (Attachment 2E) and confirmed to be effective during the commissioning Testing of the effectiveness of Pebble Mouse mine dewater mine erosion at the involve discharge into Pebble Mouse Creek. period. The discharge point will continued to be regularly inspected during erosion control measures and the Creek. via the dewater Pebble Mouse Discharge periods may range from a few days to Time Limited Operation / Ongoing Operation to identify any erosion that implementation of any remediation designated Creek discharge a constant flow at differing discharge volumes. may have occurred. works during the commissioning surface water point The key restriction to the time periods and In the event that erosion is identified additional erosion control measures period makes it unlikely that erosion emission discharge volumes at which the system will be will be implemented (e.g. extending rip rap) and if necessary repairs will occur during Time Limited point operated is in preventing the wetting front from undertaken. Operation / Ongoing Operation reaching the Wetting Front Limit (Attachment The discharge point will continued to 2A). be regularly inspected and additional While the scheme has a capacity of 12.76 GL/a, erosion control measures will be it is highly unlikely that this volume (or even the implemented if required. Discharge daily average rate of 35 ML/day) can be achieved Time Limited Operation / Ongoing Operation may result in health impacts Medium (Minor, Possible) without exceeding the Wetting Front Limit. An resulting in to vegetation as a result of the discharge. These impacts would be indication of the likely maximum discharge rates It is possible that the discharge to impacts to restricted to the Prescribed Premises. that can be achieved will be determined as part Pebble Mouse Creek during Time vegetation health during the commissioning period. Discharge into Pebble Mouse Creek will be managed to ensure it does not Limited Operation / Ongoing downstream of the extend beyond the Wetting Front Limit (Attachment 2A). This limit (and the Operations may result in minor Pebble Mouse Discharge volumes, monitoring results and any associated Wetting Front Early Warning Point) will prevent impacts to impacts to vegetation within the Creek discharge environmental events will be reported in the vegetation health outside of the prescribed premises. 14 km wetting front. annual report for L7851/2002/6. point The water quality of abstracted groundwater will be tested quarterly at the These impacts would be more likely South Flank Turkeys Nest (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during Time Limited to occur closer to the discharge Operations / Ongoing Operations. point. Discharge will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Turkeys Any impacts will be restricted to the Nest are reached. Prescribed Premises as the wetting front will not extend beyond the Wetting Front Limit (Attachment 2A). Discharge The water quality of abstracted groundwater will be tested quarterly at the Low (Rare, Slight) resulting in South Flank Turkeys Nest (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during Time Limited Existing creek discharge schemes changes to Operations / Ongoing Operations. have not shown any significant surface water Discharge will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Turkeys changes to surface water quality. quality within Nest are reached. The water quality will be tested Pebble Mouse quarterly at the South Flank Turkeys Creek Nest and the four monitoring bores downstream of the (Table 4; Attachment 2A) during discharge point. Time Limited Operations / Ongoing Operations. Discharge will cease if the water quality limits for the South Flank Turkeys Nest are reached.

20 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

5. Heritage The Land Access Unit is the internal group within BHP that manages Aboriginal heritage matters. The Land Access Unit is responsible for ensuring that BHP complies with the Aboriginal Heritage Act, 1972, and all other state and federal heritage legislation. All land disturbance activities are subject to ethnographic and archaeological surveys as part of an internal PEAHR. The PEAHR process ensures that all heritage sites in the vicinity of the Project Area are identified and avoided where practicable. The Project Area falls within the Banjima Native Title Claim (WC 11/6) and the Nyiyaparli Native Title Claim (WC 13/3). Archaeological and ethnographic surveys of the Project Area have been undertaken by BHP. Heritage sites have been mapped should any heritage site need to be disturbed as part of the Project BHP will obtain the relevant Section 18 approval.

6. Community Consultation BHP will continue to consult with DWER, and representatives of the Banjima and Nyiyaparli Native Title Claims.

7. Conclusion The proposed new surplus water scheme at South Flank is unlikely to introduce unacceptable emissions or discharges to land, water and air at the Mining Area C / Southern Flank Hub. The level of risk associated with each type of impact is believed to be low enough not to cause impacts to nearby sensitive receptors (human or environmental).

Page | 21 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document 8. References Bennelongia (2016) Mining Area C Southern Flank Stygofauna Impact Assessment. Report for BHP Billiton Iron Ore, Perth, Western Australia. Bennelongia (2019) South Flank MAR Subterranean Fauna Desktop Assessment. Unpublished report for BHP Billiton Iron Ore Bettenay, E., Churchward, H.M. and McArthur, W.M. (1967) Atlas of Australian Soils, Sheet 6, Meekatharra- Hamersley Range area, CSIRO. BHP Billiton Iron Ore (2016) CONFIDENTIAL South Flank Troglofauna Habitat Assessment. BHP Billiton Iron Ore. Pty Ltd. Perth, Western Australia. BHP (2018) South Flank Valley MAR Numerical Modelling. Internal Report. Biologic (2014a) Consolidation of Regional Fauna Habitat Mapping BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pilbara Tenure. Unpublished Report for BHP. BoM (Bureau of Meteorology) (2018a) Climate statistics for Australian locations – Newman Aero. Website: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_007176_All.shtml. Accessed: 25 June 2019. BoM (Bureau of Meteorology) (2019b) Climate statistics for Australian locations – Wittenoom. Website: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_005026_All.shtml Accessed: 25 June 2019. Department of Environment Regulation (2017) Guidance Statement: Risk Assessments. Government of Western Australia Department of Water (2015a) Hydrogeological Atlas: Hamersley – Fractured Rock. http://www.water.wa.gov.au/idelve/hydroatlas/ioiQuery.jsp?ts=1421024384008&d=hydroatlas&bb=116.27104 62,-23.570724506092837,119.38272319999999,- 21.29263989390716&k=NONE&w=1034&h=757&z=1003199.8498259148&x=118.62436478220502&y=- 23.254741832011604&i=782&j=652 Accessed 12 January 15. Department of Water (2015b) Hydrogeological Atlas: Hamersley – Wittenoom. http://www.water.wa.gov.au/idelve/hydroatlas/ioiQuery.jsp?ts=1421024549210&d=hydroatlas&bb=115.97180 859999997,-24.198153414893632,121.48609540000001,- 20.161098185106376&k=NONE&w=1034&h=757&z=1777797.5315744795&x=119.20358597021277&y=- 22.950239380851073&i=606&j=523 Accessed 12 January 15. Onshore Environmental (2014) Consolidation of Regional Vegetation Mapping BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pilbara Tenure. Unpublished Report for BHP. Surface Water Solutions (2019) Pebble Mouse Creek Surface Discharge Hydraulic Modelling. Internal Report for BHP. van Vreeswyk, A.M.E., Payne, A.L., Leighton, K.A. and Hennig, P. (2004) An Inventory and Condition Survey of the Pilbara Region, Western Australia. Technical Bulletin No. 92, Department of Agriculture, Perth.

22 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document

Attachment 1A: Proof of occupier status

WESTERN AUSTRALIA

MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540

This Register Search issued pursuant to Section 103F(4) of Rick Rogerson the Mining Act, 1978 at: 14:07:16 28/02/2019 Executive Director Resource Tenure Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety

Tenement Summary Identifier : E 47/1540-I District : WEST PILBARA M.F. Current Area : 38 BL Status : Live Mark Out : Received : 03/08/2005 08:54:00 Term Granted : 5 Years (Extended) Lodging Office : KARRATHA Commence : 21/04/2007 Expiry : 20/04/2019 Purpose : Death : Rent Status Due for Year End 20/04/2019 : Previous Amount Outstanding : $0.00 Current Due : $0.00 Rent for Year End 20/04/2020 : $21,546.00 Expenditure Status Expended Year End 20/04/2018 : EXPENDED IN FULL Current Year (20/04/2019) Commitment : $114,000.00

OWNERSHIP DETAILS Current Holders Name and Address Shares ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 8 WAIO LAND TENURE, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474, CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850, [email protected] MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD 7 WAIO LAND TENURE, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850, [email protected] BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD 85

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 1 of 8 MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540 - Live WAIO LAND TENURE, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850, [email protected]

Total Shares: 100

Holder Changes Dealing Status Date From (Shares) To (Shares) Applicants on Receival Name and Address Shares BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD 85 C/- STATEWIDE TENEMENT & ADVISORY SERVICES PTY LTD, PO BOX 8095 PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE, PERTH, WA, 6849 ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 8 C/- STATEWIDE TENEMENT & ADVISORY SERVICES PTY LTD, PO BOX 8095 PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE, PERTH, WA, 6849 MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD 7 C/- STATEWIDE TENEMENT & ADVISORY SERVICES PTY LTD, PO BOX 8095 PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE, PERTH, WA, 6849 Total Shares: 100

DESCRIPTION DETAILS Description

Remaining Blocks Type Start Date No. of Blocks Graticules Million Plan Primary Blocks Granted 21/04/2007 38 HAMERSLEY 2652 klmnopqrstuv RANGE HAMERSLEY 2653 flq RANGE HAMERSLEY 2721 ghjk RANGE HAMERSLEY 2722 fghjkp RANGE HAMERSLEY 2723 fghjklmnop RANGE HAMERSLEY 2724 afl RANGE Applied For 03/08/2005 41 HAMERSLEY 2652 klmnopqrstuv RANGE HAMERSLEY 2653 fglmqr RANGE HAMERSLEY 2721 ghjk RANGE HAMERSLEY 2722 fghjkp RANGE HAMERSLEY 2723 fghjklmnop RANGE HAMERSLEY 2724 afl RANGE Description of Land NOT included in the grant of the Licence. Exploration Licences 47/13, 47/14, 47/308, 47/431, 47/541, 47/597 and 47797. General Purpose Leases 47/283 to 47/304, 47/579 to 47/581, 47/594 to 47/596, 47/1028 to 47/1044, 47/1061 to 47/1094 & 47/1100 to 47/1111 to a depth of 15 metres. Mining Leases 47/734, 47/743, 47/748, 47/756 & 47/760. Section 19/130. Any private land referred to in Section 29(2) of the Mining Act 1978 except that below 30 metres from the natural surface of the land.

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 2 of 8 MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540 - Live RELATIONSHIPS Relationships Relationship Dealing No Dealing Status Tenement ID Tenement Status State Agreement Conversions Applicable Legislation Effective Start Effective End

SURVEY DETAILS Survey Surveyed Area Surveyed Surveyor`s Name Field Book Instruction Project Date Date

Standard Plan Diagram

GENERAL DETAILS General Objection Closing Date : 07/09/2005 Application Fee : $950.00 File Reference : 3463/2005 Survey Fee : Receipt Number : 1102 Special Indicator Special Indicator Start End Authorised For Iron 21/04/2007

SHIRE DETAILS Shire Shire Shire No Start End Area EAST PILBARA SHIRE 3220 03/08/2005 38.00000 BL

NATIVE TITLE DETAILS Native Title Referrals DISCLAIMER: Complete Native Title Information is not available for this Tenement/Amalgamation

Date Referred Referral Type Procedure Current Status 05/06/2006 Tenement Application NT Cleared

GRANT DETAILS Recommendation Recommended for : Grant 14/10/2005 Grant Granted :21/04/2007 Holder Notified : Licence/Lease issued :

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 3 of 8 MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540 - Live Term Term : 5 Years (Extended) From : 21/04/2007 To : 20/04/2019

ENDORSEMENTS/CONDITIONS DETAILS Endorsements and Conditions # ENDORSEMENTS Start Date End Date 1 The licensee's attention is drawn to the provisions of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 and any 21/04/2007 Regulations thereunder. 2 The licensee's attention is drawn to the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and the 21/04/2007 Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004, which provides for the protection of all native vegetation from damage unless prior permission is obtained. 3 The grant of this licence does not include the land the subject of prior Exploration Licence 21/04/2007 47/797. If the prior licence expires, is surrendered or forfeited that land may be included in this licence, subject to the provisions of the Third Schedule of the Mining Regulations 1981 titled "Transitional provisions relating to Geocentric Datum of Australia". 4 Pursuant to the Savings and Transitional Provisions of the Mining Amendment Acts 1990 21/04/2007 and 1994 all land surrendered, forfeited (other than by plaint action) or expiring from a non- graticular exploration licence will either: • Automatically be included into a graticular exploration licence, provided the surrender, forfeiture or expiry occurred after the grant of the graticular exploration licence; or • Automatically be included into an application for a graticular exploration licence provided the surrender, forfeiture or expiry occurred after 14 October 1995 5 The Licensee pursuant to the approval of the Minister responsible for the Mining Act 1978 21/04/2007 under Section 111 of the Mining Act 1978 is authorised to explore for iron. # CONDITIONS Start Date End Date 1 All surface holes drilled for the purpose of exploration are to be capped, filled or otherwise 21/04/2007 made safe immediately after completion. 2 All costeans and other disturbances to the surface of the land made as a result of exploration, 21/04/2007 including drill pads, grid lines and access tracks, being backfilled and rehabilitated to the satisfaction of the Environmental Officer, Department of Industry and Resources (DoIR). Backfilling and rehabilitation being required no later than 6 months after excavation unless otherwise approved in writing by the Environmental Officer, DoIR. 3 All waste materials, rubbish, plastic sample bags, abandoned equipment and temporary 21/04/2007 buildings being removed from the mining tenement prior to or at the termination of exploration program. 4 Unless the written approval of the Environmental Officer, DoIR is first obtained, the use of 21/04/2007 drilling rigs, scrapers, graders, bulldozers, backhoes or other mechanised equipment for surface disturbance or the excavation of costeans is prohibited. Following approval, all topsoil being removed ahead of mining operations and separately stockpiled for replacement after backfilling and/or completion of operations. 5 No interference with Geodetic Survey Station Newman 16, NWM 101 and NWM 102 and 21/04/2007 mining within 15 metres thereof being confined to below a depth of 15 metres from the natural surface. 6 No interference with the use of the Aerial Landing Ground and mining thereon being confined 21/04/2007 16/05/2018 to below a depth of 15 metres from the natural surface.

DEALINGS DETAILS Dealings Encumbrances Exemption from Drop-off 344485 Lodged: 16:15 01 April 2010 For the relief from the provisions of Section 65(1)(a). RECORDED: 16:15 01 April 2010 GRANTED: 16 April 2010 Exemption from Drop-off 367805 Lodged: 12:34 18 March 2011 for relief from the provisions of Section 65(1)(b)

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 4 of 8 MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540 - Live RECORDED: 12:34 18 March 2011 GRANTED: 30 March 2011 Application to Amend 372552 Lodged: 14:20 12 May 2011 Amending: Address From: Residential : ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, SAME AS CORRESPONDENCE and Correspondence :ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, C/- STATEWIDE TENEMENT & ADVISORY SERVICES PTY LTD, PO BOX 8095 PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE, PERTH, WA, 6849 To: Residential : ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, ADDRESS NOT PROVIDED and Correspondence :ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474, CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850 From: Residential : MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD, SAME AS CORRESPONDENCE and Correspondence :MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD, C/- STATEWIDE TENEMENT & ADVISORY SERVICES PTY LTD, PO BOX 8095 PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE, PERTH, WA, 6849 To: Residential : MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD, ADDRESS NOT PROVIDED and Correspondence :MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD, LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850 From: Residential : BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD, SAME AS CORRESPONDENCE and Correspondence :BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD, C/- STATEWIDE TENEMENT & ADVISORY SERVICES PTY LTD, PO BOX 8095 PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE, PERTH, WA, 6849 To: Residential : BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD, ADDRESS NOT PROVIDED and Correspondence :BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850 RECORDED: 14:20 12 May 2011 Extension / Renewal of Term 392202 Lodged: 08:30 28 February 2012 Applied For 2 Years Period: RECORDED: 08:30 28 February 2012 GRANTED: 19 April 2012 Granted Period: 2 Years Term Extended 20/04/2014 To: Extension / Renewal of Term 440717 Lodged: 12:00 20 February 2014 Applied For 2 Years Period: RECORDED: 12:00 20 February 2014 GRANTED: 28 April 2014 Granted Period: 2 Years Term Extended 20/04/2016 To: Excess Tonnage 458136 Lodged: 10:48 20 November 2014 RECORDED: 10:48 20 November 2014

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 5 of 8 MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540 - Live GRANTED: 12:16:44 16 January 2015 An additional 2,588 tonnes Excess Tonnage 479035 Lodged: 13:49 16 December 2015 RECORDED: 13:49 16 December 2015 GRANTED: 16:27:41 08 January 2016 An additional 1,637 tonnes Excess Tonnage 482660 Lodged: 12:56 01 March 2016 RECORDED: 12:56 01 March 2016 GRANTED: 13:08:41 22 March 2016 An additional 2,199 tonnes Extension / Renewal of Term 483815 Lodged: 11:45 24 March 2016 Applied For 1 Years Period: RECORDED: 11:45 24 March 2016 GRANTED: 21 June 2016 Granted Period: 1 Years Term Extended 20/04/2017 To: Application to Amend 495706 Lodged: 08:30 18 October 2016 Amending: Address (Including DTC Details) From: ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474, CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850 To: ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, WAIO LAND TENURE, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474, CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850, [email protected] RECORDED: 08:30 18 October 2016 Application to Amend 495703 Lodged: 08:30 18 October 2016 Amending: Address (Including DTC Details) From: MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850 To: MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY LTD, WAIO LAND TENURE, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850, [email protected] RECORDED: 08:30 18 October 2016 Application to Amend 495704 Lodged: 08:30 18 October 2016 Amending: Address (Including DTC Details) From: BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850 To: BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD, WAIO LAND TENURE, C/- LAND TENURE TEAM, PO BOX 7474 CLOISTERS SQUARE, PERTH, WA, 6850, [email protected] RECORDED: 08:30 18 October 2016 Extension / Renewal of Term 502255 Lodged: 11:11:01 08 March 2017 Applied For 1 Years Period: RECORDED: 11:11:01 08 March 2017 GRANTED: 13 June 2017 Granted Period: 1 Years Term Extended 20/04/2018 To: Excess Tonnage 523829 Lodged: 13:15:25 16 February 2018

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 6 of 8 MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540 - Live RECORDED: 13:15:25 16 February 2018 GRANTED: 09:30:55 22 February 2018 Additional 4,719 tonnes Extension / Renewal of Term 526067 Lodged: 13:51:54 20 March 2018 Applied For 1 Years Period: RECORDED: 13:51:54 20 March 2018 GRANTED: 30 April 2018 Granted Period: 1 Years Term Extended 20/04/2019 To:

BOND DETAILS

Bond Surety Amount Bond date Bond status Bond status date

RENT DETAILS Rent Payments Type Year Receipt Payment No Receipt No MR Amount Rental Area Effective Amount Discrepancy Date Lodged Date Due Payment 2019 28/03/2018 1757686579 06-165001 PE $20,330.00 38 BL 21/04/2007 $20,330.00 $0.00 Payment 2018 09/03/2017 06-159079 PE $19,668.80 38 BL 21/04/2007 $19,668.80 $0.00 Payment 2017 24/03/2016 06-152765 PE $19,022.80 38 BL 21/04/2007 $19,022.80 $0.00 Payment 2016 20/02/2015 06-143092 PE $18,540.20 38 BL 21/04/2007 $18,540.20 $0.00 Payment 2015 20/02/2014 06-133055 PE $18,069.00 38 BL 21/04/2007 $18,069.00 $0.00 Payment 2014 01/03/2013 06-121189 PE $9,355.60 38 BL 21/04/2007 $9,355.60 $0.00 Payment 2013 20/02/2012 06-106263 PE $9,101.00 38 BL 21/04/2007 $9,101.00 $0.00 Payment 2012 04/04/2011 92053 PE $7,160.34 38 BL 21/04/2007 $7,160.34 $0.00 Payment 2011 15/03/2010 76687 PE $7,014.04 38 BL 21/04/2007 $7,014.04 $0.00 Payment 2010 18/03/2009 62611 PE $4,326.30 38 BL 21/04/2007 $4,326.30 $0.00 Payment 2009 17/03/2008 49171 PE $4,184.18 38 BL 21/04/2007 $4,184.18 $0.00 Refund 2008 14/06/2007 (REFUND) PE $304.26 38 BL 21/04/2007 $3,853.96 $0.00 1102 Payment 2008 29/03/2007 35782 PE $378.02 Payment 2008 03/08/2005 1102 KR $3,780.20

EXPENDITURE/EXEMPTION DETAILS Expenditure/Exemptions Year Minimum Expenditure Total Exemption Exemption Exemption Exemption Outcome Expenditure Lodged Expenditure Amount Lodged Number Status Date 2019 $114,000.00 2018 $114,000.00 12/04/2018 $122,234.00 2017 $114,000.00 15/03/2017 $155,964.86 2016 $114,000.00 18/04/2016 $238,259.00 2015 $114,000.00 20/04/2015 $142,597.00 2014 $76,000.00 11/03/2014 $139,726.00 2013 $76,000.00 26/03/2013 $168,776.00 2012 $57,000.00 26/04/2012 $110,116.00 2011 $57,000.00 08/04/2011 $160,547.00 2010 $38,000.00 01/04/2010 $160,496.00 $38,000.00 26/03/2010 $135,496.00 2009 $38,000.00 16/03/2009 $350,854.00 2008 $38,000.00 18/04/2008 $123,344.00

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 7 of 8 MINING TENEMENT REGISTER SEARCH EXPLORATION LICENCE 47/1540 - Live Expenditure Details Year Lodged Exploration Mining Aboriginal Rent/Rates Admin. Prospecting Total Activities Activities Survey Expenditure 2018 12/04/2018 $99,933.00 $0.00 $0.00 $21,801.00 $500.00 $0.00 $122,234.00 2017 15/03/2017 $134,391.62 $0.00 $0.00 $21,073.24 $500.00 $0.00 $155,964.86 2016 18/04/2016 $216,343.00 $0.00 $0.00 $21,416.00 $500.00 $0.00 $238,259.00 2015 20/04/2015 $128,650.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13,447.00 $500.00 $0.00 $142,597.00 2014 11/03/2014 $128,194.00 $0.00 $0.00 $11,032.00 $500.00 $0.00 $139,726.00 2013 26/03/2013 $157,607.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,669.00 $500.00 $0.00 $168,776.00 2012 26/04/2012 $100,863.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,753.00 $500.00 $0.00 $110,116.00 2011 08/04/2011 $120,868.00 $0.00 $30,639.00 $8,540.00 $500.00 $0.00 $160,547.00 2010 01/04/2010 $129,272.00 $0.00 $25,000.00 $5,724.00 $500.00 $0.00 $160,496.00 2010 26/03/2010 $129,272.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,724.00 $500.00 $0.00 $135,496.00 2009 16/03/2009 $344,857.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,497.00 $500.00 $0.00 $350,854.00 2008 18/04/2008 $117,713.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,131.00 $500.00 $0.00 $123,344.00

COMBINED REPORTING DETAILS

C Number : 417/1995 Reporting Date : 04/12 Project : Mudlark Well Affecting 04/10 - 03/10 Period : Active Tenements: E 47/13-I (13/02/1996) E 47/14-I (13/02/1996) E 47/15-I (13/02/1996) E 47/17-I (13/02/1996) E 47/1540-I (23/11/2007) P 47/1611-I (15/05/2012)

End of Search

Created 28/02/2019 14:07:16 Requested By: Tanya Champion/Page 8 of 8 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 1B: ASIC company extracts Current Company Extract

Name: BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD ACN: 008 694 782

Date/Time: 07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:08 AM

This extract contains information derived from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC) database under section 1274A of the Corporations Act 2001.

Please advise ASIC of any error or omission which you may identify. Current Company Extract BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 008 694 782

Organisation Details Document Number

Current Organisation Details Name: BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD 017398762 ACN: 008 694 782 ABN: 93008694782 Registered in: Western Australia Registration date: 22/04/1965 Next review date: 01/07/2018 Name start date: 12/10/2001 Previous state number: C0650130X Status: Registered Company type: Australian Proprietary Company Class: Limited By Shares Subclass: Proprietary Company

Address Details Document Number

Current Registered address: '' Level 37, 125 St Georges Terrace, 7E6349372 PERTH WA 6000 Start date: 15/09/2014

Principal Place Of 'Brookfield Place' Level 37, 125 St Georges Terrace, 7E6349372 Business address: PERTH WA 6000 Start date: 25/08/2014

Contact Address Section 146A of the Corporations Act 2001 states 'A contact address is the address to which communications and notices are sent from ASIC to the company'. Address: Level 14, 480 Queen Street, BRISBANE QLD 4000

Start date: 24/02/2017

Officeholders and Other Roles Document Number Director Name: EDGAR BAEZ BASTO 7E7767971 Address: 77 Waterford Avenue, WATERFORD WA 6152 Born: 05/01/1967, MALAGA, COLOMBIA Appointment date: 02/03/2016 Name: MARGARET MCMAHON BECK 7E8201837 Address: Unit 3, 461 Adelaide Street, BRISBANE QLD 4000 Born: 30/12/1962, TUSCON, ARIZONA, UNITED STATES Appointment date: 01/10/2013 Secretary Name: JILL MARGARET BUCKLE 7E8840780 Address: 44 Dell Road, ST LUCIA QLD 4067 Born: 05/03/1959, LISMORE, NSW Appointment date: 01/03/2017

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:08 AM 1 Current Company Extract BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 008 694 782

Name: TONI ANGELA WILTSHIRE 7E8840780 Address: 38 Maisie Place, EIGHT MILE PLAINS QLD 4113 Born: 15/06/1967, BRISBANE, QLD Appointment date: 01/03/2017 Name: NICOLE DE VILLIERS 7E9018449 Address: 14 Aston Court, CARINE WA 6020 Born: 09/07/1982, DURBAN, SOUTH AFRICA Appointment date: 19/04/2017 Appointed Auditor Name: KPMG 026147489 Address: 235 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000 Start date: 20/05/2003 Ultimate Holding Company Name: BHP BILLITON LIMITED 00869478K ACN: 004 028 077 ABN: 49004028077

Share Information

Share Structure

Class Description Number Total amount Total amount Document issued paid unpaid number

ORD ORDINARY 3271645 5799999959.46 0.00 7E3137789 18

PREF PREFERENCE 73200 146400.00 0.00 0E8543006

Members

Note: For each class of shares issued by a proprietary company, ASIC records the details of the top twenty members of the class (based on shareholdings). The details of any other members holding the same number of shares as the twentieth ranked member will also be recorded by ASIC on the database. Where available, historical records show that a member has ceased to be ranked amongst the top twenty members. This may, but does not necessarily mean, that they have ceased to be a member of the company.

Name: BHP BILLITON LIMITED ACN: 004 028 077 Address: Level 18, 171 Collins Street, MELBOURNE VIC 3000

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

ORD 327164518 yes FULLY 7E7755111

Name: BHP COAL PTY LTD ACN: 010 595 721 Address: 'Waterfront Place' Level 20, 1 Eagle Street, BRISBANE QLD 4000

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:08 AM 2 Current Company Extract BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 008 694 782

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

PREF 73200 yes FULLY 7E2654766

Financial Reports

Balance Report due AGM due Extended AGM held Outstanding Document date date date AGM due date number

31/05/1996 no 011317417

31/05/1997 no 008619715

31/05/1998 30/09/1998 01/09/1998 no 012581715

31/05/1999 30/09/1999 no 015641738

30/06/2000 31/10/2000 no 016676757

30/06/2000 31/10/2000 no 016654622

30/06/2001 31/10/2001 no 017686163

30/06/2002 31/10/2002 no 019119577

30/06/2003 31/10/2003 no 019768965

30/06/2004 31/10/2004 no 020831747

30/06/2005 31/10/2005 no 022426698

30/06/2006 30/11/2006 no 023665718

30/06/2007 31/10/2007 no 024326019

30/06/2008 31/10/2008 no 024945397

30/06/2009 31/10/2009 no 026147489

30/06/2010 31/10/2010 no 7E3265197

30/06/2011 31/10/2011 no 7E4057136

30/06/2012 31/10/2012 no 7E4816440

30/06/2013 31/10/2013 no 7E5613263

30/06/2014 31/10/2014 no 7E6488872

30/06/2015 31/10/2015 no 7E7427517

30/06/2016 31/10/2016 no 7E8482745

Documents

Note: Where no Date Processed is shown, the document in question has not been processed. In these instances care should be taken in using information that may be updated by the document when it is processed. Where the Date Processed is shown but there is a zero under No Pages, the document has been processed but a copy is not yet available.

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:08 AM 3 Current Company Extract BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 008 694 782

Date received Form type Date Number of Effective Document processed pages date number

08/09/2014 484E Change To Company 08/09/2014 2 22/08/2014 2E0974586 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

08/09/2014 484 Change To Company 08/09/2014 2 08/09/2014 7E6349372 Details 484B Change Of Registered Address 484C Change Of Principal Place Of Business (Address)

31/10/2014 388H (FR 2014) Financial 31/10/2014 37 30/06/2014 7E6488872 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

10/04/2015 484E Change To Company 10/04/2015 2 10/04/2015 7E6865006 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

08/05/2015 484E Change To Company 08/05/2015 2 07/05/2015 2E1809006 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

11/08/2015 484E Change To Company 11/08/2015 2 11/08/2015 2E2266826 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

30/09/2015 484E Change To Company 30/09/2015 2 30/09/2015 2E2506625 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

29/10/2015 388H (FR 2015) Financial 29/10/2015 33 30/06/2015 7E7427517 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

04/11/2015 488N Application To Change 09/11/2015 8 04/11/2015 028818891 Review Date Of A Company Or Scheme Synchronise Review Date By Office Holder - No Fee

03/03/2016 484A2 Change To Company 03/03/2016 2 03/03/2016 7E7755111 Details Change Member Name Or Address

08/03/2016 484E Change To Company 08/03/2016 2 08/03/2016 7E7767971 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:08 AM 4 Current Company Extract BHP BILLITON MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 008 694 782

21/07/2016 484E Change To Company 25/07/2016 2 21/07/2016 7E8179268 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

22/07/2016 492 Request For Correction 25/07/2016 4 22/07/2016 7E8180920

29/07/2016 484A1 Change To Company 29/07/2016 2 29/07/2016 7E8201837 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

27/09/2016 484E Change To Company 27/09/2016 2 27/09/2016 7E8385166 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

31/10/2016 388H (FR 2016) Financial 31/10/2016 33 30/06/2016 7E8482745 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

08/03/2017 484E Change To Company 08/03/2017 2 08/03/2017 7E8840780 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

03/05/2017 484E Change To Company 03/05/2017 2 03/05/2017 7E9018449 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

29/06/2017 352 Assumption Deed 03/07/2017 12 29/06/2017 030043809 Relating To Class Order

***End of Extract of 5 Pages***

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:08 AM 5 Current Company Extract

Name: ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN: 009 256 259

Date/Time: 07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:07 AM

This extract contains information derived from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC) database under section 1274A of the Corporations Act 2001.

Please advise ASIC of any error or omission which you may identify. Current Company Extract ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 009 256 259

Organisation Details Document Number

Current Organisation Details Name: ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA 020193914 PTY LTD ACN: 009 256 259 ABN: 44009256259 Registered in: Western Australia Registration date: 30/06/1987 Next review date: 30/06/2018 Name start date: 01/04/2004 Previous state number: C0824353U Status: Registered Company type: Australian Proprietary Company Class: Limited By Shares Subclass: Proprietary Company

Address Details Document Number

Current Registered address: 'Forrest Centre' Level 22, 221 St Georges Terrace, 7E1438661 PERTH WA 6000 Start date: 23/01/2008

Principal Place Of 'Grosvenor Place' Level 31, 225 George Street, 7E5077974 Business address: SYDNEY NSW 2000 Start date: 25/03/2013

Officeholders and Other Roles Document Number Director Name: AKIHIKO OKADA 7E6000798 Address: 299-4 Kamaya-cyo, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama-chi, Kanagawa-ken 240-0063, Japan Born: 28/02/1960, FUKUOKA, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2014 Name: KENJI SETO 7E6879228 Address: 2-39-13 Eda-nishi, Aoba-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan Born: 27/09/1964, OSAKA, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2015 Name: YASUSHI FUKUMURA 7E7031878 Address: 122 Harborne Street, WEMBLEY WA 6014 Born: 13/10/1971, HOKKAIDO, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2015 Name: YUJI TACHIKAWA 7E7922026 Address: Unit 12, 20-22 Tryon Road, LINDFIELD NSW 2070 Born: 24/10/1967, NINOMIYA, KANAGAWA, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2016

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:07 AM 1 Current Company Extract ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 009 256 259

Name: NORIO MATSUI 7E7944415 Address: Eifuku 2-16-44, Suginami-ku, Tokyo, Japan Born: 28/11/1963, TOKYO, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/05/2016 Name: HIRONOBU NII 7E8807868 Address: Unit 20B, 161 Kent Street, SYDNEY NSW 2000 Born: 04/03/1970, YOKOHAMA, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/02/2017 Name: SHUZABURO TSUCHIHASHI 7E8961101 Address: '2103 Highgate Building', 127-153 Kent Street, MILLERS POINT NSW 2000 Born: 28/03/1962, WAKAYAMA, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2012 Name: JUN INOMATA 7E8963477 Address: 6-2-47 Miyazahi,, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 216-0033, Japan Born: 12/09/1965, KANAGAWA, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2017 Name: YOSHIHIKO OGURA 7E9031376 Address: Unit 37, 82 Boundary Street, BRISBANE CITY QLD 4000 Born: 15/05/1969, TOKYO, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2017 Secretary Name: HIRONOBU NII 7E8807868 Address: Unit 20B, 161 Kent Street, SYDNEY NSW 2000 Born: 04/03/1970, YOKOHAMA, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/02/2017 Appointed Auditor Name: DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMATSU 023408301 Address: Grosvenor Place 225 George Street SYDNEY NSW 2000 Start date: 31/03/2004 Ultimate Holding Company Name: ITOCHU CORPORATION 007336721 ARBN: 010 144 895 ABN: 66010144895

Share Information

Share Structure

Class Description Number Total amount Total amount Document issued paid unpaid number

ORD ORDINARY SHARES 2887384 164174518.00 0.00 025545750 6

REDP REDEEMABLE 2547692 112790308.00 0.00 025545750 PREFERENCE 3

Members 07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:07 AM 2 Current Company Extract ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 009 256 259

Note: For each class of shares issued by a proprietary company, ASIC records the details of the top twenty members of the class (based on shareholdings). The details of any other members holding the same number of shares as the twentieth ranked member will also be recorded by ASIC on the database. Where available, historical records show that a member has ceased to be ranked amongst the top twenty members. This may, but does not necessarily mean, that they have ceased to be a member of the company.

Name: ITOCHU CORPORATION ARBN: 010 144 895 Address: 5-1 Kita-aoyama 2-chome Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

ORD 27805897 yes FULLY 021090268

Name: ITOCHU AUSTRALIA LTD. ACN: 000 192 790 Address: 'Grosvenor Place' Level 31, 225 George Street, SYDNEY NSW 2000

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

ORD 1067949 yes FULLY 7E5323451

Name: ITOCHU CORPORATION ARBN: 010 144 895 Address: 5-1 Kita-aoyama 2-chome Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

REDP 24534615 yes FULLY 021090268

Name: ITOCHU AUSTRALIA LTD. ACN: 000 192 790 Address: 'Grosvenor Place' Level 31, 225 George Street, SYDNEY NSW 2000

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

REDP 942308 yes FULLY 7E5323451

Financial Reports

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:07 AM 3 Current Company Extract ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 009 256 259

Balance Report due AGM due Extended AGM held Outstanding Document date date date AGM due date number

31/03/1998 31/07/1998 03/07/1998 no 014651538

31/03/1999 31/07/1999 07/07/1999 no 015588128

31/03/2000 31/07/2000 no 016553986

31/03/2001 31/07/2001 11/07/2001 no 017240374

31/03/2002 31/07/2002 no 018422280

31/03/2003 31/07/2003 no 019460441

31/03/2004 31/07/2004 no 020694011

31/03/2005 31/07/2005 14/12/2005 no 022692806

31/03/2006 31/08/2006 no 023408301

31/03/2007 31/07/2007 no 024338010

31/03/2008 31/07/2008 no 7E1952629

31/03/2009 31/07/2009 no 7E2661210

31/03/2010 31/07/2010 no 7E3422077

31/03/2011 31/07/2011 no 7E4070343

31/03/2012 31/07/2012 no 7E4824057

31/03/2013 31/07/2013 no 7E5617744

31/03/2014 31/07/2014 no 7E6476591

31/03/2015 31/07/2015 no 7E7412192

31/03/2016 31/07/2016 no 7E8571941

Documents

Note: Where no Date Processed is shown, the document in question has not been processed. In these instances care should be taken in using information that may be updated by the document when it is processed. Where the Date Processed is shown but there is a zero under No Pages, the document has been processed but a copy is not yet available.

Date received Form type Date Number of Effective Document processed pages date number

02/10/2014 484A1 Change To Company 02/10/2014 2 02/10/2014 7E6414857 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

28/10/2014 388H (FR 2014) Financial 28/10/2014 62 31/03/2014 7E6476591 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

16/04/2015 484E Change To Company 16/04/2015 3 16/04/2015 7E6879228 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:07 AM 4 Current Company Extract ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 009 256 259

12/06/2015 484A1 Change To Company 12/06/2015 2 12/06/2015 7E7031878 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

24/06/2015 484A1 Change To Company 24/06/2015 2 24/06/2015 7E7068171 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

17/07/2015 484A1 Change To Company 17/07/2015 2 17/07/2015 7E7140480 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

14/08/2015 484A1 Change To Company 14/08/2015 2 14/08/2015 7E7215606 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

26/10/2015 388H (FR 2015) Financial 26/10/2015 62 31/03/2015 7E7412192 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

04/04/2016 484E Change To Company 04/04/2016 2 04/04/2016 7E7843078 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

04/04/2016 484E Change To Company 04/04/2016 2 04/04/2016 7E7843093 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

04/04/2016 484A1 Change To Company 04/04/2016 2 04/04/2016 7E7843105 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

02/05/2016 484A1 Change To Company 02/05/2016 2 02/05/2016 7E7922026 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

02/05/2016 484E Change To Company 02/05/2016 2 02/05/2016 7E7922035 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

10/05/2016 484E Change To Company 10/05/2016 2 10/05/2016 7E7944415 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

29/11/2016 388H (FR 2016) Financial 29/11/2016 65 31/03/2016 7E8571941 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

08/12/2016 484A1 Change To Company 08/12/2016 2 08/12/2016 7E8600142 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

08/12/2016 484A1 Change To Company 08/12/2016 2 08/12/2016 7E8600192 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

08/12/2016 484A1 Change To Company 08/12/2016 2 08/12/2016 7E8600216

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:07 AM 5 Current Company Extract ITOCHU MINERALS & ENERGY OF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 009 256 259

Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

10/02/2017 484E Change To Company 10/02/2017 2 10/02/2017 7E8758217 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

10/02/2017 484E Change To Company 10/02/2017 2 10/02/2017 7E8758362 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

10/02/2017 484A1 Change To Company 10/02/2017 2 10/02/2017 7E8758501 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

10/02/2017 484E Change To Company 10/02/2017 2 10/02/2017 7E8758855 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

27/02/2017 484A1 Change To Company 27/02/2017 2 27/02/2017 7E8807868 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

22/03/2017 484A1 Change To Company 22/03/2017 2 22/03/2017 7E8896895 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

11/04/2017 484E Change To Company 11/04/2017 3 11/04/2017 7E8961057 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

11/04/2017 484A1 Change To Company 11/04/2017 2 11/04/2017 7E8961101 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

12/04/2017 484A1 Change To Company 12/04/2017 2 12/04/2017 7E8963477 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

08/05/2017 484A1 Change To Company 08/05/2017 2 08/05/2017 7E9031376 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

***End of Extract of 6 Pages***

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:07 AM 6 Current Company Extract

Name: MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. ACN: 050 157 456

Date/Time: 07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:05 AM

This extract contains information derived from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC) database under section 1274A of the Corporations Act 2001.

Please advise ASIC of any error or omission which you may identify. Current Company Extract MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. ACN 050 157 456

Organisation Details Document Number

Current Organisation Details Name: MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. 002682319 ACN: 050 157 456 ABN: 16050157456 Registered in: Western Australia Registration date: 21/09/1990 Next review date: 21/09/2017 Name start date: 21/09/1990 Previous state number: C1004629X Status: Registered Company type: Australian Proprietary Company Class: Limited By Shares Subclass: Proprietary Company

Address Details Document Number

Current Registered address: 'Exchange Tower' Level 25, 2 The Esplanade, PERTH 7E6807982 WA 6000 Start date: 25/03/2015

Principal Place Of 'Exchange Tower' Level 25, 2 The Esplanade, PERTH 7E6807982 Business address: WA 6000 Start date: 01/03/2015

Officeholders and Other Roles Document Number Director Name: SHIGERU ARAKI 7E4798486 Address: Unit 165, 181 Adelaide Terrace, EAST PERTH WA 6004 Born: 21/02/1961, KYOTO, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/07/2012 Name: MASARU KOBAYASHI 7E6912212 Address: 15A Windsor Avenue, BENTLEIGH VIC 3204 Born: 04/09/1973, NAGASAKI, JAPAN Appointment date: 01/04/2015 Name: TAKAYUKI TSUCHIDA 7E7844715 Address: 1-18-1-507 Gohongi, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-0053, Japan Born: 07/05/1974, TOKYO, JAPAN Appointment date: 02/04/2016 Alternate Director Name: GAVIN PETER PATTERSON 7E4639047 Address: 30 Sandgate Street, SOUTH PERTH WA 6151 Born: 31/10/1966, SUBIACO, WA Appointment date: 01/08/2012

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:05 AM 1 Current Company Extract MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. ACN 050 157 456

Name: SHINSUKE SATO 7E8991741 Address: Unit 54, 98 Terrace Road, EAST PERTH WA 6004 Born: 29/06/1980, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, UNITED STATES Appointment date: 01/04/2015 Name: SHU TANAKA 7E9110684 Address: 4-2-16 Shin-ishikawa Aobaku, Yokohama City, Kanagawa 225-0003, Japan Born: 11/06/1965, TOTTORI, JAPAN Appointment date: 22/05/2017 Secretary Name: GAVIN PETER PATTERSON 020677802 Address: 30 Sandgate Street, SOUTH PERTH WA 6151 Born: 31/10/1966, SUBIACO, WA Appointment date: 29/10/2004 Appointed Auditor Name: DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMATSU 7E8158202 Address: 'Brookfield Place Tower 2' 123 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000 Start date: 01/04/1995

Name: DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMATSU 7E8158202 Address: 'Brookfield Place Tower 2' 123 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000 Start date: 24/10/1995 Ultimate Holding Company Name: MITSUI & CO LTD 002682319 ARBN: 001 855 465 ABN: 88001855465

Share Information

Share Structure

Class Description Number Total amount Total amount Document issued paid unpaid number

ORD ORDINARY SHARES 8000000 8000000.00 0.00 002682319

Members

Note: For each class of shares issued by a proprietary company, ASIC records the details of the top twenty members of the class (based on shareholdings). The details of any other members holding the same number of shares as the twentieth ranked member will also be recorded by ASIC on the database. Where available, historical records show that a member has ceased to be ranked amongst the top twenty members. This may, but does not necessarily mean, that they have ceased to be a member of the company.

Name: MITSUI & CO. MINERAL RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD ACN: 160 296 462 Address: C/- MITSUI IRON ORE DEVELOPMENT P/L EXCHANGE TOWER, Level 26, 2 The Esplanade, PERTH WA 6000

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:05 AM 2 Current Company Extract MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. ACN 050 157 456

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

ORD 6400000 yes FULLY 7E6808451

Name: MITSUI & CO. (AUSTRALIA) LTD. ACN: 004 349 795 Address: Level 15, 120 Collins Street, MELBOURNE VIC 3000

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

ORD 1600000 yes FULLY 7E7203416

Financial Reports

Balance Report due AGM due Extended AGM held Outstanding Document date date date AGM due date number

31/03/1997 no 012109072

31/03/1998 31/07/1998 no 013897314

31/03/1999 31/07/1999 29/06/1999 no 012110722

31/03/2000 31/07/2000 07/07/2000 no 016646288

31/03/2001 31/07/2001 05/07/2001 no 017122473

31/03/2002 31/07/2002 no 018381095

31/03/2003 31/07/2003 no 019799258

31/03/2004 31/07/2004 13/12/2004 no 020855966

31/03/2005 31/07/2005 14/11/2005 no 022449627

31/03/2006 31/08/2006 no 023501204

31/03/2007 31/07/2007 no 024137309

31/03/2008 31/07/2008 no 7E1821124

31/03/2009 31/07/2009 no 7E2723431

31/03/2010 31/07/2010 no 7E3155001

31/03/2011 31/07/2011 no 7E3925653

31/03/2012 31/07/2012 no 7E4690038

31/03/2013 31/07/2013 no 7E5513387

31/03/2014 31/07/2014 no 7E6384461

31/03/2015 31/07/2015 no 7E7288468

31/03/2016 31/07/2016 no 7E8158202

31/03/2017 31/07/2017 no 7E9245398

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:05 AM 3 Current Company Extract MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. ACN 050 157 456

Documents

Note: Where no Date Processed is shown, the document in question has not been processed. In these instances care should be taken in using information that may be updated by the document when it is processed. Where the Date Processed is shown but there is a zero under No Pages, the document has been processed but a copy is not yet available.

Date received Form type Date Number of Effective Document processed pages date number

22/09/2014 388H (FR 2014) Financial 22/09/2014 39 31/03/2014 7E6384461 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

17/12/2014 484E Change To Company 17/12/2014 3 17/12/2014 7E6605548 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

08/01/2015 484E Change To Company 08/01/2015 2 08/01/2015 7E6638406 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

18/03/2015 484 Change To Company 18/03/2015 2 18/03/2015 7E6807982 Details 484B Change Of Registered Address 484C Change Of Principal Place Of Business (Address)

18/03/2015 484A2 Change To Company 18/03/2015 2 18/03/2015 7E6808267 Details Change Member Name Or Address

18/03/2015 484A2 Change To Company 18/03/2015 2 18/03/2015 7E6808451 Details Change Member Name Or Address

16/04/2015 484E Change To Company 16/04/2015 2 16/04/2015 7E6879781 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

16/04/2015 484A1 Change To Company 16/04/2015 2 16/04/2015 7E6881069 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

16/04/2015 484E Change To Company 17/04/2015 2 16/04/2015 7E6881319 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

16/04/2015 484E Change To Company 16/04/2015 2 16/04/2015 7E6881329 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

16/04/2015 484E Change To Company 16/04/2015 3 16/04/2015 7E6881337 Details Appointment Or

07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:05 AM 4 Current Company Extract MITSUI IRON ORE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. ACN 050 157 456

Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

29/04/2015 484A1 Change To Company 29/04/2015 2 29/04/2015 7E6912212 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

10/08/2015 484A2 Change To Company 10/08/2015 2 10/08/2015 7E7203416 Details Change Member Name Or Address

09/09/2015 388H (FR 2015) Financial 09/09/2015 37 31/03/2015 7E7288468 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

23/12/2015 484E Change To Company 23/12/2015 2 23/12/2015 7E7584379 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

04/01/2016 484E Change To Company 04/01/2016 2 04/01/2016 7E7592407 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

05/04/2016 484E Change To Company 05/04/2016 3 05/04/2016 7E7844715 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

14/07/2016 388H (FR 2016) Financial 14/07/2016 36 31/03/2016 7E8158202 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

22/09/2016 484A1 Change To Company 22/09/2016 2 22/09/2016 7E8371043 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

24/04/2017 484E Change To Company 24/04/2017 2 24/04/2017 7E8991507 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

24/04/2017 484A1 Change To Company 24/04/2017 2 24/04/2017 7E8991741 Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address

01/06/2017 484E Change To Company 01/06/2017 3 01/06/2017 7E9110684 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

11/07/2017 388H (FR 2017) Financial 11/07/2017 36 31/03/2017 7E9245398 Report Financial Report - Large Proprietary Company That Is Not A Disclosing Entity

***End of Extract of 5 Pages*** 07 September 2017 AEST 08:31:05 AM 5 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 1C Authorisation to act as representative of the occupier Not required. South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 2A: Premises, Facilities and Location (Figure 1: South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Infrastructure and Monitoring locations MAC_003LA_001_RevB_1) 688000 692000 696000 700000 704000

South Flank Turkeys Nest

0 !( 0 0 0 0 0 6 6

5 HSF0055M HSF5461P 5 4 4 7 Balance Tank Pebble Mouse Creek 7 HSF5472M Discharge Point (! HSF0063P HSF5467P HSF5462P HSF5466P HSF5475M Wetting Front !( !( Early Warning Point HSF5471M (! ^_ !( (! (! (! (! (! (! (! (! !( (! ^_

0 HSF5464P 0

0 HSF5463P 0 0 ^_ 0

2 HSF5465P 2 5 5 4 4 7 7 HSF5469P HSF5468P Wetting Front Limit

Legend MAC / Southern Flank Prescribed Premises Boundary (L7851) Coondewanna Flats PEC Pebble Mouse Creek Project Area 0 0 0 0

0 MAR Bore Construction Zone 0 8 8 4 4 4 4

7 Predicted Mounding Area 7

Project Water Pipeline ENVIRONMENT A&I !( South Flank MAR Injection Bores !( South Flank MAR Monitoring Bores SOUTH FLANK !( South Flank Turkeys Nest SURPLUS WATER SCHEME !( Balance Tank 0 1 2 3 4 INFRASTRUCTURE AND ^_ Pebble Mouse Creek Discharge Point Kilometers ± MONITOIRNG LOCATIONS ^_ Pebble Mouse Creek Discharge Early Warning Point SCALE (A3): 1:54,000 DATUM: GDA94/MGA 50 FIGURE 1 ^_ Pebble Mouse Creek Discharge Limit Prepared: Chris Hopkins Revision: FINAL Centre: Perth Date: 15 October 2019 Dwg: MAC_003LA_001_RevC_0

688000 692000 696000 700000 704000 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 2B: Figure 2 – Current Groundwater Levels (A963_002_E) 685,000 690,000 695,000 700,000 705,000

5 5 1 0 95 5 0 85 0 6 7 5

5 80 90 95 95 80 1 95 85 9 00 5 0 0 9 0 0 00 0 0 1 0 , Discharge Point 9 80 , 0 5 SF0154R 90 85 90 5 5 5

4 HSF0055 HSF5473M 00 4

, 1 , ! GLR002 0 7 ! 90 ! 7 7 N ! SF0095R 1 ! N' 0 60 5 0 Coondewanna SF0119R 6 ! 75 HSF5461 95 5 8 0 Flats PEC ! HSF5463 8 ! 95 90 HSF5475 6 ! HSF5462 HSF5466 0 ! S ! ! HSF5467 HSF5471 S' HSF5464 ! 6 0 75 80 ! HSF5465 5 0 6 ! 100 Dr 2 70 ain 5 age 3 30 85 L 4 5 9 6 ine 5 5 le 10 0 Pe bb 0 4 k 0 Mo ee 5 us e Cr 40 65 65 6 50 85 0 95 90 100 6M5 aximum Wetting 70 ek 80 Front Extent7 514 km re 90 85 5 C 95 10 5 e 0 90 us Mo le 0 b 0 0 eb 0

0 P 0 , ,

0 5 0 5 Gr 7 5 4 e 4 , at N , 7 o 7 rthe rn H wy

5 0 6 0 60 1 0 6 60 70 685,000 690,000 695,000 700,000 705,000

Spatial Data - Studies Planning & Access LEGEND BHP IRON ORE ! Drill holes Watercourses Wetting Front Extent Rio Tinto Rail CURRENT GROUNDWATER LEVELS Current Groundwater Levels (mbgl) Priority Ecological Community ± MS1072 Development Envelope 2 1 0 2 Kilometres Predicted Mounding Area Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50Projection: Transverse Mercator, Datum: GDA 1994, Units: Meter South Flank Valley MAR Area Date: 10/10/2019 Project No: A963 Figure: Prepared: M. English Checked: ENV A&I 2

Document Path: Y:\Jobs\A501_A1000\A963\3Project\A963_002_E_South_Flank_groundwater_level_current_RevA.mxd South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 2C: Figure 3 – Predicted Groundwater Levels (A963_003_E) HGA0040P

HGSL0031 HGA0002P

HGA0001P

685,000 690,000 695,000 700,000 705,000

5 5 1 0 95 5 0 85 0 6 7 5

5 80 90 95 95 80 100 95 85 0 0

0 100 0

0 85 8 0 , 5 9 , 90 0 5 Discharge Point 5 SF0154R 100 90 80 5 95 GLR002 5 4 HSF0055 HSF5473M 4 , ! , SF0095R 0 7 ! ! 6 0 7 ! 5 N ! N' 1 75 ! 20 50 60 55 70 Coondewanna SF0119R 5 0 25 1 1 HSF5475 65 Flats PEC HSF5461 ! 5 HSF5462 ! HSF5463 ! 80 S ! ! 55 S' ! HSF5471 4 HSF5464 HSF5467 ! 0 30 ! HSF5466 0 45 5 35 35 ! HSF5465 5 Dr 5 2 ain 4 0 ag 4 40 45 8 e L 50 45 0 ine P le 55 65 e bb 10 3 M ek 0 0 9 o 65 5 0 us re 7 e C 7 75 5 65 60 0 80 7 80 5 5 70 5 0 85 75 Maximum Wetting 90 80 6 100 95 1 5 0 65 Front Extent 14 km 0 70 85 80 75 0 k 95 90 6 e 5 re 00 0 7 C 1 9 0 se 7 ou 0 M 0 0 ble 0 0 0 , eb ,

0 P 0 Gr 5 5 eat 7 5 4 N 4

, o , rt 0

7 h 7 ern 9 H 0 wy 8

5 8 5 9

5 0 6 0 60 1 0 6 60 70 685,000 690,000 695,000 700,000 705,000

Spatial Data - Studies Planning & Access LEGEND BHP IRON ORE ! Drill holes South Flank Valley MAR Area Wetting Front Extent Watercourses PREDICTED GROUNDWATER LEVELS Predicted Groundwater Levels (mbgl) Rio Tinto Rail Groundwater Level Threshold 30 mbgl ± MS1072 Development Envelope 2 1 0 2 Kilometres Priority Ecological Community Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50Projection: Transverse Mercator, Datum: GDA 1994, Units: Meter Predicted Mounding Area Date: 10/10/2019 Project No: A963 Figure: Prepared: M. English Checked: ENV A&I 3

Document Path: Y:\Jobs\A501_A1000\A963\3Project\A963_003_E_South_Flank_groundwater_level_predicted_RevA.mxd South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 2D: Injection Headwork’s Design Drawing

8007 REF. NOTES:

2

1. REFER TO DRAWING 840-M-12556

FOR GENERAL PIPE INSTALLATION

STRAINER

NOTES.

250 OD. DN150

PIPE

) 6 1 (

Q

C

E DN250

FOR BORE FOOTING DETAILS P

HEADWORKS SKID S REFER TO DRAWING LIGHTNING PROTECTION

840-C-12573 I

FINIAL C E . P F S 250x200 E TELEMETRY SYSTEM R

REDUCER ON 3m ANTENNA POLE 3 6 1 5 PLAN

REFER TO DRAWING 840-C-12573 SOLAR FOR CONCRETE DETAILS REFER TO DRAWING 840-M-12558 PANEL FOR HEAD SPOOL DETAILS

DN200 PRESSURE PRESSURE 1 CONTROL VALVE GAUGE SOLAR PANEL

200BFL1 SKID CONTROL 25BAS1 CABINET

STRAINER

REFER TO DRAWING 840-C-12573 FOR ACTUATED LOW POWER DN50 BALL VALVE PIPE SUPPORT BUTTERFLY VALVE DETAILS DN50 AIR RELEASE TO REINJECTION VALVE CONTROL UNIT PRESSURE GAUGE PRESSURE GAUGE SOLAR PANEL DN40 SUPER FILTER SPEC I SPEC Q(10) SPEC I SPEC Q(16) C/W 200um DN25 BALL VALVE SCREEN

DN50 AIR RELEASE SOLAR PANEL SKID VALVE CONTROL CABINET STRAINER DN50 BALL VALVE DN25 SAMPLE POINT

VIEW 2 -

FOR BORE HEAD SPOOL DETAILS EXPANSION JOINT REFER TO DRAWING 840-M-12558

CASING ADAPTOR

DN150 MAGNETIC REINJECTION BORE GROUND SLAB 840-C-12573 FLOW METER FRP RISER PIPE REINJECTION BORE HEAD SPOOLS 840-M-12558 32 BAS1 BALL VALVE

SF MAR REINJECTION BORES PID SHEET 3 840-PI-00246

SF MAR REINJECTION BORES PID SHEET 2 840-PI-00245 SPEC I SPEC Q DOWNHOLE FCV SF MAR REINJECTION BORES PID SHEET 1 840-PI-00244

PRESSURE TRANSMITTER OVERALL SITE PLAN 840-C-12548 SECTION 1

- CONTRACT NUMBER 1/4" MBSP 10mm FX00.C.24838 PRELIMINARY OR PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER SS CONNECTOR TT-PROTEUS DRG No. 220590-DM-007 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS DOC NO

BHPIO TO COMPLETE BHPIO/REVIEWER TO COMPLETE DESIGNER/CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE A.B.N. 46 008 700 981

BHP TT PROTEUS DRAWING STATUS APPROVAL SIGNED DATE REV COMPANY COMPANY PROTEUS INDUSTRIAL FACILTITIES - AREA C CHECKED AGAINST: 05 Jun 19 C 05.06.19 APPROVED FOR TENDER RMS JNM PlantDesign: v8.1

PRELIMINARY ONLY NAME DESIGNED BY SERVICES - SOUTH FLANK J.MULLIGAN B 29.04.19 ISSUED FOR HAZOP RMS JNM QUOTATION ONLY SIGNED DRAWN BY REINJECTION BORE CONSTRUCTION MAY PROCEED / 0 DATE CHECKED BY AS BUILT A 20.03.19 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW RMS JNM DESIGN & HSEC CONSTRUCTION MAY PROCEED TYPICAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENT APPROVED BY EXCEPT AS NOTED THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN APPROVED/ REVISION REVISION REVIEWED FOR GENERAL COMPLIANCE DATE APPROVED DES DRN CHK DES/ DES DRN CHK DES/ NO DATE Revision Approvals by Designer/Contractor confirms designs BHPIO DATE NO DATE Revision Approvals by Designer/Contractor confirms designs BHPIO DATE REVISE AND RESUBMIT AS PER SEP-57 SCALE 1:25 DRG. NO. BY BY BY HSEC BY BY BY HSEC A1 are in accordance with BHPIO SEP-57 procedures are in accordance with BHPIO SEP-57 procedures 840 M 12557 /C

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 2E: Surface Discharge Point Design Drawing

South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 2F: Prescribed Premises Map Coordinates L7851/2002/6 Coordinates are in GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50.

Easting Northing 712590.75 7462459.17 712508.77 7456687.54 710277.01 7456486.03 710266.38 7455758.41 710266.85 7455758.31 710233.5 7453369.93 710131.29 7453371.36 709606.48 7453378.7 708981.44 7453387.44 708845.48 7453389.34 707633.79 7453406.28 707633.68 7453406.28 707627.14 7452936.3 706810.11 7452947.55 706793.6 7451750.11 706787.56 7451311.81 706695.85 7451312.18 706661.53 7451314.13 705967.68 7451358.75 705926.52 7451361.51 705912.81 7451362.54 705779.31 7451377.49 705772.06 7451378.8 703027.69 7451416.05 702358.68 7451425.13 699432.63 7451464.85 699188.67 7451468.16 697194.25 7451495.23 697051.47 7451497.17 697051.49 7451498.75 697059.42 7452132.49 696747.51 7452217.17 696775.04 7452363.13 696686.95 7452476.88 696686.55 7452477.33 696686.11 7452477.73 696685.63 7452478.08 696563.9 7452554.6 696549.47 7452563.67 696365.32 7452679.43 696364.7 7452679.76 696364.03 7452680.01 696363.34 7452680.16 696362.63 7452680.21 695962.41 7452682.11 695778 7452567.98 695766.91 7452561.12 695758.02 7452555.62 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Easting Northing 695730.83 7452538.79 695710.59 7452546.66 695708.91 7452547.35 695708.16 7452547.6 695707.39 7452547.72 695706.6 7452547.73 695705.83 7452547.61 695705.08 7452547.38 695704.37 7452547.03 695704.36 7452547.03 695700.71 7452544.86 695700.01 7452544.36 695699.4 7452543.74 695698.9 7452543.03 695698.53 7452542.25 695698.3 7452541.42 695698.21 7452540.55 695698.27 7452539.69 695698.48 7452538.85 695698.82 7452538.06 695700.08 7452535.72 695700.47 7452535.11 695700.93 7452534.56 695701.47 7452534.09 695702.07 7452533.69 695702.72 7452533.38 695705.62 7452532.26 695590.8 7452531.2 694742.89 7452761.4 694624.43 7452812.15 694624.1 7452812.28 694623.6 7452812.41 694424.69 7452847.79 693884.84 7452994.36 693490.56 7452994.36 693468.82 7453012.39 693468.1 7453012.89 693462.82 7453013.73 693308.07 7453022.24 693307.23 7453022.22 693306.41 7453022.06 693305.62 7453021.76 693247.16 7452994.36 692389.27 7452994.36 692389.16 7452994.36 692051.79 7452994.36 691678.6 7452994.36 691678.49 7452994.36 689141.18 7452553.09 687873.63 7451752.53 687886.3 7451953.19 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Easting Northing 687973.24 7452284.16 688060.18 7452615.14 688147.12 7452946.11 688171.97 7453224.82 688196.82 7453503.54 688139.32 7453752.82 688081.82 7454002.09 687934.07 7454244.89 687786.31 7454487.68 687592.86 7454652.41 687399.4 7454817.13 687041.72 7455065.43 686684.03 7455313.73 686326.34 7455562.03 685994.09 7455841.7 685711.5 7456159.77 685428.91 7456477.84 685146.32 7456795.91 684863.73 7457113.98 684678.33 7457516.87 684492.93 7457919.76 684547.1 7458245.75 684564.94 7458353.1 684636.94 7458786.45 681700.48 7458410.64 681703.32 7457531.9 680959.64 7456484.47 680029.15 7457832.15 679290.33 7461373.59 679925.47 7462328.07 683543.16 7462844.76 686786.67 7463107.01 686730.83 7463492.26 686674.99 7463877.51 686201.76 7464834.08 686617.78 7464879.93 687766.85 7465005.95 696589.23 7465975.99 699036.86 7466238.26 703440.24 7466719.9 703578.71 7466735.04 711429.57 7467594.83 712664.28 7467728.85 712661.83 7467553.17 712632.05 7465417.6 712617.15 7464350.4 712605.83 7463539.25 712590.75 7462459.17 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 3A: Proposed Activities See Sections 1 to 8. South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 3B: Map of Area Proposed to be cleared Not required South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 3C: Additional information for clearing assessment Not required South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 4: Biodiversity surveys Not Required South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 5A: Other Approvals: Ministerial Statement 1072 (Mining Area C / Southern Flank)

South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 5B: Other Approvals: Environmental Licence L7851/2002/6

Amendment Notice 2

Licence Number L7851/2002/6

Licence Holder BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd

ACN 008 700 981

File Number DER2013/000925

Premises Mining Area C

Mining Tenement ML281SA and ML249SA NEWMAN WA 6753

Date of Amendment 16/10/2018

Amendment The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) has amended the above Licence in accordance with section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) as set out in this Amendment Notice. This Amendment Notice constitutes written notice of the amendment in accordance with section 59B(9) of the EP Act.

Alana Kidd Manager, Resource Industries an officer delegated under section 20 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA)

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 1

Definitions and interpretation

Definitions In this Amendment Notice, the terms in Table 1 have the meanings defined. Table 1: Definitions

Term Definition

AACR Annual Audit Compliance Report

ACN Australian Company Number

AER Annual Environment Report

Category/ Categories/ categories of Prescribed Premises as set out in Schedule 1 of the Cat. EP Regulations

CEO means Chief Executive Officer. CEO for the purposes of notification means: Director General Department Administering the Environmental Protection Act 1986 Locked Bag 33 Cloisters Square PERTH WA 6850 [email protected]

Delegated Officer an officer under section 20 of the EP Act

Department means the department established under section 35 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and designated as responsible for the administration of Part V, Division 3 of the EP Act.

DWER Department of Water and Environmental Regulation

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA)

EP Regulations Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 (WA)

Existing Licence The Licence issued under Part V, Division 3 of the EP Act and in force prior to the commencement of and during this Review

GL/a gigalitre per annum

ha hectare

kL/year kilolitres per year

km kilometre

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 2

Licence Holder BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd Licensee

LV Light vehicle

mᶟ cubic metres

MAC Mining Area C

MAR Managed Aquifer Recharge

ML/day Megalitres per day

MS Ministerial Statement

mtpa million tonnes per annum

Noise Regulations Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 (WA)

Occupier has the same meaning given to that term under the EP Act.

Prescribed Premises has the same meaning given to that term under the EP Act.

Premises refers to the premises to which this Decision Report applies, as specified at the front of this Decision Report.

Risk Event as described in Guidance Statement: Risk Assessment

TRH Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons

UDR Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004 (WA)

µg/m3 micrograms per cubic metre

µS/cm micro Siemens per centimetre

WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 3

Amendment Notice This amendment is made pursuant to section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) to amend the Licence issued under the EP Act for a prescribed premises as set out below. This notice of amendment is given under section 59B(9) of the EP Act. This notice is limited only to an amendment for Category 5, 6, 12, 54, 63, 73 and 89. The following guidance statements have informed the decision made on this amendment:  Guidance Statement: Regulatory Principles (July 2015)  Guidance Statement: Setting Conditions (October 2015)  Guidance Statement: Land Use Planning (February 2017)  Guidance Statement: Licence Duration (August 2016)  Guidance Statement: Decision Making (February 2017)  Guidance Statement: Risk Assessment (February 2017)  Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting (November 2016) Amendment description An amendment application was received on 31 January 2018 and updated information for the same application received from BHP on 13 February, 2 March 2018, 20 March 2018 and 19 July 2018. The amendments are:  Update to the Premises legal description to include new (approved) tenure.  Expansion of the approved L7851/2002/6 prescribed premises boundary to include the area subject to the future South Flank development.  Installation of a second screening plant to increase the capacity of the existing relocatable (ore) crushers.  An increase to Category 5 processing rate of 6Mtpa (from 65 Mtpa to 71 Mtpa).  Inclusion of the Juna Downs Managed Aquifer Recharge bores on the relevant Figure (Map) and updates to bore names.  Addition of two new discharge locations to the Central Sediment Basin D, to allow for the western infiltration zone of the Central Sediment Basin to dry out so that construction works can commence on the MAC rail loop duplication.  Addition of two new discharge locations the Western Sediment Basin, and increase the volume of mine dewater discharged to the Western Sediment Basin from 2,081,000 tpa to 10,950,000 tpa.  Addition of a new Premises Category (12) to allow for the operation of two 1 million tonne per annum capacity mobile crushing screening units to undertake South Flank early works. Operation of these plants is anticipated to commence in November 2018 and operate for a period between 18 months and three years, as required for the South Flank construction works.  A separate crushing and screening plant will also be operated under Category 12 to produce up to 130,000 tonnes per annum of stemming material used for blasting activities. A maximum of 2 Mtpa of material will be processed by the three mobile plants under Category 12.  Increase Category 63 inert waste disposal volume by 5,000tpa (from 9,000 tonnes to 14,000 tonnes) to account for an increase in inert waste resulting from the construction

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 4

of the Southern Flank mining hub.  Increase in Category 73 fuel storage volume by 2,500m3 (3,500 m3 to 6,000 m3) to allow for the installation of additional 15 fuel bullets within the revised Premise boundary.  Construction and operation of a new Category 89 putrescible landfill, and increase Category 89 putrescible waste volume by 2,000tpa (from 3,000 tpa to 5,000 tpa) to account for an increase in putrescible waste resulting from the expansion of Mulla Mulla Village. A subsequent new licence amendment application was received on 2 May 2018 to add the following scope to the licence amendment assessment:  Incorporate construction requirements for the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP (W6092/2017/1) into L7851/2002/6.  Increase Category 54 approved throughput from 480 m3/day to 1,110 m3/day (increase of 630 m3/day) to include the throughput associated with the expanded Mulla Mulla Village WWTP throughput.  Addition of new effluent emission (reference points) for the two spray field locations associated with the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP.  Updates to Figures 1 and 3 for the inclusion of the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP location and effluent emission location (reference points). On 18 September 2018, BHP submitted compliance documentation for construction of the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP and irrigation areas, as required under Works Approval W6092/2017/1. According to the information provided, compliance with the construction requirements has been achieved. Noting that the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP and irrigation fields have been constructed, construction requirements are not required to be addressed under the Licence. However, conditions relating to the commissioning of the plant and operation at the cessation of commissioning will be included. Table 2 outlines the proposed changes to the Licence.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 5

Table 2: Proposed design or throughput capacity changes requested in amendment

Category Current Design Capacity Proposed Design Description of proposed Capacity amendment 65,000,000 tonnes per annual 71,000,000 tonnes per 5 period annual period Increase in ore processing

34,931,000 tonnes per annual 6 period - Maximum permissible discharge to Western Sediment Basin increased, however there is no change to the current overall design capacity.

12 - 2,000,000 tonnes per New category added to allow annum for the operation of two mobile crushing screening units for South Flank construction and one mobile plant for the production of stemming material.

54 480 m3/day 1,110 m3/day Increase of +630 m3/day throughout to allow for the operation of the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP under this licence

63 9,000 tonnes per annual 14,000 tonnes per annual To account for an increase in period period inert waste resulting from the construction of the Southern Flank mining hub

73 3,500 cubic metres in 6,000 cubic metres in To allow for the installation of aggregate aggregate an additional 15 fuel bullets within the revised Premise boundary

89 3,000 tonnes per annual 5,000 tonnes per annual To account for an increase in period period putrescible waste resulting from the expansion of Mulla Mulla Village

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 6

Other approvals The Licence Holder has provided the following information relating to other approvals as outlined in Table 3. Table 3: Relevant approvals Legislation Approval and Reference Number Aspects Iron Ore (Mount ML281SA and ML249SA Tenure (State Agreement) Goldsworthy) Agreement Act 1964 State Agreement Project Proposals Detailed Proposals describing the proposed - in preparation at the time of this infrastructure and mining operations. assessment. Environment Strategic Environmental Matters of National Significance: Protection and Assessment Approval Notice Biodiversity dated 19 June 2017  Northern Quoll (Dasyrurus hallucatus); Conservation  Greater Bilby (Macrotis lagotis); Act 1999 (Cth)  Pilbara Leaf-nosed Bat (Rhinoicteris aurantia);  Pilbara Olive Python (Liasis olivaceus barroni); and  Ghost Bat (Macroderma gigas). Part IV of the Ministerial Statement - MS1072 Approval to implement revised proposal to mine the EP Act (WA) dated 20 February 2018 Mining Area C Northern Flank and Southern Flank orebodies.

Replaces former MS 491 which was for ‘Multiple Iron Ore Mine Development, Mining Area C – Northern Flank, 100 km north-west of Newman (Note: ‘Water usage and dewatering requirements’ was removed as a Part IV Key Characteristic in March 2014 as ‘conservation values are managed under the Life of Mine Environmental Management Plan; dewatering and discharge can be managed under other legislation’).’ Port. Rights in Water Groundwater Licence (GWL) Mining Area C- Up to 15,330,000 kilolitres per annum and Irrigation 110044(10) (kL/a) from Pilbara, Hamersley Fractured Rock aquifer Act 1914 (RIWI GWL178477(2) Juna Downs Borefield allocation of 750,000kL/a from Act) Wittenoom Aquifer GWL174613(1) Mulla Mulla Camp Borefield 50,000kL/a from Pilbara, Hamersley Fractured Rock aquifer

GWL166477(5) Up to 1,500,000 kL/a from Pilbara, Hamersley Fractured Rock aquifer GWL166389(1) Up to 1,500,000 kL/a from the Pilbara, Wittenoon – Wittenoom aquifer Dangerous Dangerous Goods Licence Facilities added to the manifest as required. Goods Safety DGS017237 Act 2004 Health Act 1914 Permit to install apparatus for the To construct a waste water treatment plant (WWTP). treatment of sewage to be submitted, in preparation as determined by schedule/site requirements. Permit to install apparatus for the treatment of sewage – Mulla Mulla Village WWTP – under assessment submitted 12 February 2018 Permit to operate apparatus for the To operate a WWTP. treatment of sewage – submission following construction, as required.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 7

Amendment history Table 4 provides the amendment history for L7851/2002/6. Table 4: Licence amendments

Instrument Issued Amendment

L7851/2002/6 17/11/2014 Licence reissue and amendment to new format template

L7851/2002/6 22/01/2014 Minor amendment

L7851/2002/6 7/04/2016 Licence amendment to update to template version 2.9

L7851/2002/6 29/09/2016 Licence amendment initiated by Licensee to increase Category 6 production capacity, approve construction of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and MAC WTP, include Category 85B and include the Western and Central Sediment Basins as emission points to land

L7851/2002/6 5/10/2017 Amendment Notice 1 Licence amendment initiated by Licensee to increase Category 6 and Category 63 production capacity, approve construction of the Juna Downs MAR Scheme, approve construction and operation of a new WWTP spray field for the Mulla Mulla Camp and include associated monitoring conditions, include the light vehicle washdown bay as emission point to land along with associated monitoring conditions and expand the premises boundary

L7851/2002/6 16/10/2018 Amendment Notice 2 (this notice) Licence amendment initiated by Licensee to update to the Premises legal description to include new (approved) tenure, expand the approved L7851/2002/6 boundary, install a second screening plant to increase the capacity of the existing relocatable (ore) crushers, increase to Category 5 processing rate of 6Mtpa, amend reinjection bore nomenclature and amend associated figures, add four new dewatering discharge locations, add a new Premises Category (12) to allow for the operation of two 1 million tonne capacity mobile crushing screening units, increase Category 54 throughput from 480 m3/day to 1,110 m3/day (increase of +630 m3/day) in line with the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP throughput, incorporate construction requirements for the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP (W6092/2017/1) into L7851/2002/6, add new effluent emission (reference) points for the two spray field locations associated with the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP, increase Category 63 inert waste disposal volume by 5,000tpa to account for an increase in inert waste resulting from the construction of the Southern Flank mining hub, increase Category 73 fuel storage volume by 2,500m3 to allow for the installation of an additional 15 fuel bullets within the revised Premise boundary, increase Category 89 putrescible waste volume by 2,000tpa to account for an increase in putrescible waste resulting from the expansion of Mulla Mulla Village, approve the construction and operation of a new putrescible landfill, assess the increased discharge of mine dewater to the western sediment basin and increased the maximum discharge volume accordingly.

Location and receptors The Premise boundary of MAC (including the Southern Flank area) is located approximately 100 kilometres (km) north-west of the town of Newman in the Pilbara region of Western Australia. Tables 5 and 6 list the relevant sensitive land uses and specified ecosystems/environmental receptors in the vicinity of the Prescribed Premises which may be receptors relevant to the proposed amendment. This is in accordance with DWER’s Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 8

Table 5: Receptors and distance from prescribed premises Sensitive Land Uses Approximate distance from the Approximate distance from the prescribed premises boundary nearest Category 5, Category 12, Category 54, Category 73 or Category 89 activities Great Northern Highway 100 m 5.5. km

Rio Tinto Iron Ore’s Hope Downs 1.5 km 6.5 km One Mining Operation and village Juna Downs Pastoral Station 28 km 42 km Homestead Marillana Pastoral Station 44 km 53 km

Town of Newman 100km 85 km

Figure 1: Indicative Category 12 mobile screening plant operating locations.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 9

Table 6: Specified ecosystems Specified ecosystems Distance from the proposed Approximate distance from the Premises boundary closest proposed Category 5, Category 12, Category 54, Category 73 or Category 89 activities PEC - Priority 3: Coondewanna 200 m Flats ((Coondewanna Flats and 5.5 km Wanna Munna Flats)* - Priority 3(i)) PEC - Priority 1: Weeli Wolli Spring 9 km Community 19 km PEC – Priority 1: West Angelas 11 km Cracking-Clays 17 km Threatened flora No species listed under the EPBC Act or the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 are within the prescribed premises. Twelve flora species listed as priority flora by the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions occur within the premises boundary:  Acacia bromilowiana (Priority 4)  Aristida jerichoensis supsp. spinulifera (Priority 3).  Aristida lazaridis (Priority 2).  Eremophila magnifica subsp. magnifica (Priority 4).  Goodenia nuda: Priority 4.  Grevillea saxicola (Priority 3).  Nicotiana umbratica (Priority 3).  Rhagodia sp. Hamersley (M. Trudgen 17794) (Priority 3).  Rostellularia adscendens var. latifolia (Priority 3).  Sida sp. Barlee Range (S. van Leeuwen 1642) (Priority 3).  Themeda sp. Hamersley Station (M.E. Trudgen 11431): Priority 3.  Triodia sp. Mt Ella (M.E. Trudgen 12739) (Priority 3). Threatened fauna The development envelope contains large areas of suitable habitat for four species listed as vulnerable or endangered under both the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 and the EPBC Act. These species are the Dasyurus hallucatus (Northern quoll), the Liasis olivaceus barroni (Pilbara olive python), the Rhinonicterus aurantia (Pilbara leafnosed bat), and the Macroderma gigas (Ghost Bat). The following significant fauna species have also been identified within the proposed prescribed premises boundary:  Anilios ganei, (Pilbara Flat-headed Blind-snake): DPaW Priority 1;  Apus pacificus (Fork-tailed Swift):EPBC Act Migratory, WC Act Schedule 5;  Falco hypoleucos (Grey Falcon): Schedule 3;  Falco peregrinus (Peregrine Falcon): WC Act Schedule 7;  Merops ornatus (Rainbow Bee-eater): EPBC Act Migratory, WC Act Schedule 5;  Pseudomys chapmani (Western Pebble-mound Mouse): DPaW Priority 4; and  Underwoodisaurus seorsus (Pilbara Barking Gecko): DPaW Priority 2. Nine major fauna habitats occur within the proposed prescribed premises. In addition to the major fauna habitats, significant habitat features, such as caves and waterholes have been recorded. Parks and Wildlife (now Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and The Juna Downs MAR scheme is located on Unallocated Crown Land Attractions) tenure (excluded from the Juna Downs Pastoral Lease in July 2015) and proposed to be added to the conservation reserve system, due to the occurrence of the Coondewanna Flats (Priority 3(i)) and Lake Robinson (Priority 1) Priority Ecological Communities (PEC) (Parks and Wildlife, 2017).

Other values

The majority of vegetation within the premises is considered to be good or better condition. Vegetation in areas

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 10

of higher relief with restricted access to stock ranged from Excellent to Pristine. Vegetation on drainage lines and flood plains and areas where exploration activities have occurred or impacted by stock declines to very good to good.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 11

Risk assessment Tables 7 and 8 below describe the Risk Events associated with the amendment consistent with the Guidance Statement: Risk Assessments. Both tables identify whether the emissions present a material risk to public health or the environment, requiring regulatory controls. Table 7: Risk assessment for proposed amendments during construction and commissioning Risk Event Consequence Likelihood Potential Risk Reasoning Potential Potential Potential rating rating Source/Activities adverse emissions receptors pathway impacts

The nearest potential receptor is Hope Downs Village (mining camp), located approximately 6.5 km from the Category 5 and 12 prescribed activities.

The Licence Holder has committed to the watering of roads and cleared areas during site Category 5- Construction, preparation works for the installation of the Processing or mobilization and crushers, to minimize dust. Dust equipment will beneficiation positioning of be maintained in efficient operating condition, of metallic or additional Hope Downs routine maintenance and housekeeping will be non-metallic Dust Slight Unlikely Low screening plant Ore Mining Health and undertaken to avoid accumulation of waste ore for relocatable Operation and Air/wind Amenity materials that could lead to dust generation and

crusher; and village dispersion impacts employees and contractors will continue to be Category 12- three mobile inducted regarding importance of minimizing Screening, crushing and dust levels. etc. of screening plants material The Delegated Officer considers that the

separation distance between the source and

potential receptor is sufficient and adequate controls will be implemented to minimize dust emissions during construction.

The Delegated Officer considers that the separation distance between the source and Noise Slight Rare Low potential receptor is sufficient, the risk of noise impacts is low.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 12

Construction, mobilization and positioning of Dust Slight Rare Low the Mulla Mulla The Delegated Officer considers that the Hope Downs WWTP and separation distance between the source and Ore Mining Amenity construction of Air/wind potential receptor is sufficient. Construction Operation and impacts irrigation dispersion timeframes will be relatively short and any village 6.5 km sprayfields for emissions localized to the surrounding area. from premises disposal of Noise Slight Rare Low The risk of noise and dust impacts is low. treated wastewater

Prior to commissioning, the WWTP and delivery pipework will receive running raw water to detect leaks. An earthern bund will be constructed around the plant to contain any potential discharges during commissioning. Overtopping of Nutrient load Pipelines outside of WWTP will run tanks and impacts aboveground. Overflow piping will be installed discharging to native Category 54- on tanks, and connected to a common overflow untreated Soil, direct vegetation Sewage Soil and native drain pipe, which is directed to the overflow Commissioning sewage discharge and health, Slight Unlikely Low facility vegetation pond. A tank high level alarm will be installed of WWTP; (nutrient rich overland flows reduction is and tested for activation efficiency during untreated effluent) to soil quality commissioning. sewage land during resulting in

transferred via commissioning plants death These controls are adequate to manage the pipeline from risks associated with overtopping tanks Camp to WWTP discharging untreated sewage to ground, for treatment. impacting soil and vegetation. Treated waste

discharged to irrigation area. Wind/air dispersion Hope Downs The Delegated Officer considers that the

Human Ore Mining Impact to separation distance between the source and Physical exposure to Operation and human Slight Rare Low potential receptor is sufficient to prevent contact with contaminants village 6.5 km health impacts, the risk has been determined as low. exposed from premises wastewater

Treated Soil, direct Nutrient load The WWTP is designed and will be operated to Soil and native sewage discharge and and impacts Slight Unlikely Low ensure plant achieves expected treatment vegetation (nutrient rich overland flows to native quality. Monitoring and recording of system

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 13

effluent) to vegetation flow rates using an automatic flow meter. land (irrigation health, Monthly water samples to confirm water quality. areas) during reduction in Pipelines from the WWTP to the irrigation area commissioning soil quality will run above ground to detect leaks/blockages resulting in and Mag/flow meter will be used to measure plants death volumes discharged to each irrigation area.

Wind/air Hope Downs dispersion The Delegated Officer considers that the Ore Mining separation distance between the source and Amenity Odour Operation and Physical Slight Rare Low potential receptor is sufficient to prevent odour impacts village 6.5 km contact with impacts occurring. from premises exposed wastewater Construction, The Delegated Officer considers that the mobilization and Hope Downs separation distance between the source and Category 73- positioning of 15 Ore Mining Amenity potential receptor is sufficient to prevent dust Bulk storage Air/wind fuel bullets with Dust Operation and impacts Slight Rare Low impacts occurring. of chemicals, dispersion combined village 6.5 km etc storage capacity from premises of 2,500m3 The Delegated Officer considers that the Construction of Hope Downs separation distance between the source and Category 89- a new 5,000 tpa Ore Mining Amenity potential receptor is sufficient to prevent dust Air/wind Putrescible putrescible Dust Operation and impacts Slight Rare Low impacts occurring. Clearing will be minimized dispersion landfill site landfill to replace village 6.5 km and water carts will be used to minimize dust as existing facility from premises appropriate.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 14

Table 8: Risk assessment for proposed amendments during operation Risk Event Consequence Likelihood Potential Risk Reasoning Potential Potential Potential rating rating Source/Activities adverse emissions receptors pathway impacts Category 5 premises production capacity increased to 71 Mtpa and the new Category 12 premises production capacity of 2 Mtpa – dust emissions from the premises may increase.

The Delegated Officer notes the Department’s Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments (DWER, 2016a) stipulates that in identifying potential receptors, the Department will exclude employees, visitors, or contractors of the Licence Holder, as protection of these parties often Category 5- involves different exposure risks and Processing Hope Downs prevention strategies, and is provided for or Operation of Ore Mining under other State legislation. The Dust, beneficiation additional Operation Delegated Officer has identified Hope predominantly of metallic or screening plant and village Amenity and Downs Village and the Great Northern particulates non-metallic for relocatable 6.5 km Air/wind health Highway road users as sensitive receptors PM10 and TSP Slight Unlikely Low ore crusher; and dispersion impacts most at risk of being impacted by associated with three mobile Great operational dust emissions from the ore additional ore Category 12- crushing and Northern processing (Category 5) and crushing and handling Screening, screening plants Highway screening (Category 12). etc. of road users material The proposed Category 12 screening plants will operate from within five indicative locations (Figure 1) on the Premises, although if operated outside of these areas will remain at least 1 km of the premises boundary at all times. Figure 1 indicates there is approximately 5.5 km between the closest screening plant location and the Great Northern Highway. The separation distance between the Category 5 and 12 activities and Hope Downs Village is approximately 6.5 km.

On 13 July 2018 Works Approval

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 15

W6142/2018/1 for the Mining Area C – Southern Flank project was approved by DWER. Construction of Southern Flank will increase the Category 5 production capacity at MAC to 150 Mtpa. As part of the application for Southern Flank and increase to 150 Mtpa, BHP Billiton commissioned Pacific Environment Limited (PEL) to conduct air quality modelling to determine potential impacts to Hope Downs village and users of the Great Northern Highway from dust at the increased rate of production.

The study included the assessment of dust particles as particulate matter smaller than 10 microns (µm) in diameter (PM10) and Total Suspended Particles (TSP). The modelling was conducted for a number of scenarios to assess the ground-level impact of the emissions from existing MAC operations and South Flank. The modelled scenarios utilized the year of mining with the highest movement of tonnes of ore and waste in the closest proximity to the sensitive receptors, as a worst case scenario.

The model predicted (PEL, 2016) that a 15 km section of the Great Northern Highway is at high risk of reduced visibility (visibility up to 1 km) for up to 12 % of the time. Vehicle closing speeds are 220 km per hour.

With respect to Hope Downs village, the model predicted a highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration at Hope Downs village of 77 µg/m3, with two exceedances over 50 µg/m3 for the year.

The standard and goal for particles as PM10 as outlined in Schedule 1 of the National Environment Protection (Ambient

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 16

Air Quality) Measure (NEPM) is 50 µg/m3 averaged over 1 day, with no exceedances.

The Delegated Officer notes that NEPM provides a national framework for all Australian jurisdictions to monitor and publicly report on common ambient air pollutants.

The NEPM guidance publications including the Explanatory Statement clearly outline the application of the NEPM and identify that the imposition of NEPM ambient air quality standards as boundary or compliance limits is not consistent with the aims and intent of the NEPM. The NEPM sets national air quality standards and goals for six common ambient air pollutants, including PM10. They are based on health evidence of the impacts of air pollutants available at the time the standards are set; and are designed to provide protection to people from the pollutants’ adverse human health effects. The standards are also designed to be realistically achievable in the different Australian jurisdictions with a focus on large urban areas, where the majority of Australia’s population resides.

The NEPM aims to guide policy formulation that allows for the adequate protection of human health and wellbeing. It does not compel or direct pollution control measures, or set penalties for non- compliance. (Department of Environment and Energy, 2018). DWER supports the implementation of the NEPM in Western Australia by maintaining an air quality monitoring network and providing air quality data and reporting. Where appropriate, DWER uses NEPM

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 17

goals to assess risks to public health and set emission limits. The NEPM requires participating jurisdictions to undertake nationally consistent monitoring and reporting activities that support the formulation of air quality management policies. NEPM monitoring protocols provide guidance to jurisdictions on monitoring population exposure to air pollution.

NEPM standards are health based. The standards in the NEPM are not intended to be applied as an environmental standard by jurisdictional environmental regulators without consideration of regulatory impacts. Section 7 of the National Environment Protection Council Act 1994 allow jurisdictions to implement the NEPM by such laws and other arrangements as are necessary. The implementation of the NEPM does not preclude jurisdictions from adopting tighter or complementary standards or goals for their own policy or regulatory purposes. In doing this, jurisdictions may utilise a risk-based approach in determining environmental standards appropriate for their own circumstances or conditions, along with improvement strategies for regulated and non-regulated sources and exposure reduction strategies.

The NEPM provides for DWER; the responsibility to manage, and where appropriate to regulate, air quality to achieve protection of human health. It does not obligate DWER to ensure that PM10 emissions do not at any time or in any location, exceed the criteria intended to protect population health.

NEPM implementation guidance is

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 18

understood and implemented by experts in air quality management within DWER. This guidance provides for regulation of individual premises in order to meet the measure in populated areas but specifically states that the measure is not suitable for use as a boundary or compliance limit in regard to those individual premises.

The Delegated Officer notes that the dust modelling for South Flank has predicted an exceedance of the NEPM for PM10. It is acknowledged however, that the dust modelling for South Flank was undertaken for a significantly higher production rate (150 mtpa) than what is being assessed via this Licence amendment (6 Mtpa increase).

The Delegated Officer considers that the increase in production from 65 Mtpa to 71 Mtpa, and the addition of the two 1 Mtpa mobile crushing and screening plants approved under this Licence amendment, is unlikely to result in a significant increase in dust experienced at Hope Downs Village, or result in a reduction of visibility for the users of the Great Northern Highway.

The Licence Holder will also be implementing dust controls to minimize emissions. Licence Holder controls on the relocatable crusher include the use of water sprays on the feed hopper, conveyor transfers and stackers; and use of water sprays at stockpile reclamation and train load out operations.

Dust equipment will be maintained in efficient operating condition, routine maintenance and housekeeping will be undertaken to avoid accumulation of waste

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 19

materials that could lead to dust generation and employees and contractors will be inducted regarding importance of minimizing dust levels.

The two mobile category 12 crushing plants will be fitted with spray nozzles to control dust emissions and water carts will be used to control dust from mobile plant movements and stockpile handling.

The separation distances of the Category 5 and 12 activities from the sensitive receptors, in addition to the proposed controls are deemed sufficient to manage the risk from dust.

Consequence: There will be minimal impacts to amenity at a local scale and minimal on-site environmental impact. The consequence of dust has been determined to be slight.

Likelihood: The risk will probably not occur in most circumstances. The likelihood of the consequence has been determined as unlikely.

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of health and amenity impacts to be low.

The Delegated Officer considers that the separation distance between the source and potential receptor is sufficient to Noise Slight Unlikely Low prevent noise impacts occurring.

The Licence Holder will install silenced crushing equipment and power packs,

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 20

where possible and maintain exhaust silencers on stationary and mobile equipment.

The separation discharge, in addition to the proposed controls are deemed sufficient to manage the risk from noise.

Consequence: Given the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor, there will be minimal impacts to amenity. The consequence has been determined as slight.

Likelihood: The risk will probably not occur in most circumstances. The likelihood of the consequence has been determined as unlikely.

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of health and amenity impacts to be low. Increase in mine Direct Native Direct Inundation of Slight Unlikely Low Western Sediment Basin dewater discharge of vegetation discharge of vegetation, Trials carried out indicate that discharged discharge to the mine dewater mine impacts to water is infiltrating through the surface Western via designated dewater plant health sediments downstream of the F Deposit Sediment Basin emission points Discharge Point, and within a few days, and operation of making its way to the water table two additional approximately 60 mbgl. These trials also discharge points demonstrated that the wetting footprint will Category 6- to the same. not extend beyond the Western Sediment Mine Basin, thereby minimizing impacts to dewatering Two additional vegetation in the area. Based on the mine dewater outcome of these trials, detrimental discharge points impacts to vegetation are unlikely to be to the Central observed. Sediment Basin D. Central Sediment Basin Areas within the discharge locations have been cleared, and new discharge points

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 21

will be within an existing drainage line/sediment basin. The volume of water discharged to the area will not increase.

It is unlikely that the discharge of mine dewater to these locations will impact on vegetation health. In the case of the Western Sediment Basin, the wetting footprint will be maintained within the basin area. The Central Sediment Basin area has been cleared, and discharge will occur within an existing drainage line.

Consequence: Onsite impacts to native vegetation at a local scale will be minimal, therefore the consequence has been determined as slight.

Likelihood: The risk of vegetation being effected by dewatering discharge, particularly by increasing discharge to the Western Sediment Basin, could occur at some time. The likelihood has been determined as possible.

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of environmental impacts to be low.

Groundwater Infiltration Alteration of Minor Possible Medium As described above, the trials for increased into groundwater discharge to the Western Sediment Basin groundwater quality and indicate that discharge water rapidly groundwater infiltrates, reaching groundwater within a levels, few days. It is conducted away from the potentially discharge area within the regional aquifer impacting system. Groundwater quality is vegetation reasonable, with total dissolved solids concentration of 500-1,000mg/L. Mine

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 22

dewater will be infiltrating back into the regional aquifer system from which it was sourced and contamination of mine dewater following abstraction is unlikely. The Licence Holder will monitor groundwater levels in the area, and have alternative mine dewater disposal options (reinjection, infiltration ponds etc) which can be used if required. Based on the anticipated water quality and mine dewater management at MAC, risks to groundwater from increased discharge to the Western Sediment Basin can be sufficiently managed.

Consequence: Low level onsite impacts to groundwater are expected as a result of the increase of mine dewater discharge to the Western Sediment Basin, and additional discharge points to the Central Sediment Basin. The consequence is determined to be minor.

Likelihood: The risk of groundwater being effected by dewatering discharge, particularly by increasing discharge to the Western Sediment Basin, could occur at some time. The likelihood has been determined as possible.

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of environmental impacts to be medium.

Pipeline failure Native Direct Inundation of Slight Possible Low Leaks are detected by reconciling mass vegetation discharge of vegetation, balance between input and outputs. mine impacts to Flowmeters are located on input and dewater plant health output locations and used to identify depending potential losses from the system. The

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 23

on quality of Delegated Officer notes the pipelines will water and be conveying excess mine dewater with an volume anticipated total dissolved solid discharged. concentration of 500-1,000 mg/L. Based on the anticipated water quality and operator controls, the risks from unplanned discharges are sufficiently managed.

Consequence: Minimal onsite impacts to vegetation could occur. The consequence is therefore determined to be slight.

Likelihood: The risk of vegetation being effected by an unplanned release of mine dewater will probably not occur in most circumstances. The likelihood has been determined as unlikely.

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of environmental impacts to be low.

Discharge to Treated Soil and Direct Nutrient load Slight Possible Low The WWTP is designed and will be land: treated sewage native discharge to and impacts operated to ensure plant achieves sewage applied (nutrient rich vegetation land and on native expected treatment quality. Monitoring to native effluent) to land overland vegetation and recording of system flow rates using an vegetation using flows health, automatic flow meter. Monthly water reticulated reduction in samples to confirm water quality. Pipelines Category 54- sprinklers soil quality from the WWTP to the irrigation area will Sewage resulting in run above ground to detect facility plant death leaks/blockages and Mag/flow meter will be used to measure volumes discharged to each irrigation area.

Consequence: Minimal onsite impacts to vegetation are likely to occur. The consequence is determined to be slight.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 24

Likelihood: Vegetation and soil health effects could occur at some time. The likelihood has been determined as possible.

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of environmental impacts to be low. Odour Hope Downs Air/wind Amenity Slight Rare Low The Delegated Officer considers that the Ore Mining dispersion separation distance between the source Operation and potential receptor is sufficient to and village prevent odour impacts occurring. 6.5 km Infrastructure and Nutrient rich Soil and Direct Contaminatio Slight Unlikely Low The WWTP tanks are equipped with Top of influent pipework: influent native discharge to n of soil and Water and Below Water Levels vegetation land impact on transducers and sensors, alarms and WWTP vegetation forward pumps to transfer water from one (containing health and tank to another should there be a risk of untreated growth overflow. Also, the proposed new WWTP influent) tanks resulting in will be installed on an earthen pad and will overtopping/overf plant death. be surrounded by an earthen bund to low from tanks contain potential overflows from the and rupture or WWTP tanks. failure on pipeline route Consequence: Minimal onsite impacts to soil and native vegetation would occur as a result of an unplanned release of effluent. The consequence is determined to be slight.

Likelihood: The risk is considered that it will not occur in most circumstances. The likelihood has been determined as unlikely

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement,

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 25

Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of environmental impacts to be low.

Chemical Chemicals Soil and Direct Contaminatio Slight Rare Low Chemicals used for treatment are in small storage: chlorine, discharged to native discharge to n of soil and volumes and will be stored in fully enclosed phosphorus land vegetation land soil microbes internally bunded steel enclosures with precipitant agent and impact restricted access and lockable doors, and polymers on located within the WWTP compound. vegetation health and General provisions of the Act and growth Environmental Protection (Unauthorised resulting in Discharges) Regulations 2004 are plant death applicable.

Consequence: Minimal onsite impacts would occur as a result of a chemical spill at the WWTP due to small volumes stored and containment. The consequence is determined to be slight.

Likelihood: The risk is considered that it would only occur in exceptional circumstances. The likelihood has been determined as rare.

Overall risk rating: Comparison of the consequence and likelihood ratings described above with the Risk Rating Matrix (Guidance Statement, Risk Assessments 2017) determines the overall rating of risk of environmental impacts to be low.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 26

Vehicle Dust Hope Downs Air/wind Amenity Slight Rare Low The Delegated Officer considers that the movements on Ore Mining dispersion impacts separation distance between the source unsealed roads Operation and potential receptor is sufficient to and village prevent dust impacts occurring. 6.5 km Intermittent use of the landfill reduces the Category 63- likelihood of dust emissions impacting Class I inert receptor. landfill site Increase in inert Windblown Terrestrial Direct Visual Slight Rare Low Existing licence condition required wind- waste disposal waste entering environment, discharge to amenity, blown waste to be contained within the the including land impacts to boundary of the premises, and for wind- environment fauna habitat flora and blown waste to be returned to the tipping fauna area on at least a monthly basis.

Operation of 12 Contaminated Slight Possible Low The Licence Holder is required to store new fuel bullets, stormwater hydrocarbons in accordance with increasing total runoff Australian Standard 1940-2004 The combined Hydrocarbon Contaminatio Slight Possible Low storage and handling of flammable and premises storage spills to ground n of soil and combustible liquids. Category 73- capacity to Soil and surface Direct Bulk storage 6,000m3 minor water The Licence Holder is responsible for discharge to of chemicals, watercourse drainage ensuring compliance with the land etc s with abovementioned standard, which includes hydrocarbon provisions for ensuring spills are attended s to immediately. The provisions of the Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004 also apply.

Operation of Leachate Soil and Infiltration of Contaminatio Slight Rare Low Depth to groundwater at the proposed putrescible groundwater leachate n of soil and landfill site is approximately 40m and the landfill with an through soil groundwater nearest drainage line is approximately 250 increased design profile and from m away. Depth to groundwater and capacity of into elevated distance to surface water drainage is 5,000tpa groundwater nutrients and adequate to prevent impacts to ground Category 89- other water and surface water. Putrescible contaminant landfill site s. Licence L7851/2002/6 requires at least 2m between the base of landfill and the highest groundwater level, and for putrescible waste to be covered as soon as practicable, but not longer than a week after waste is deposited. These licence

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 27

controls are considered adequate to prevent impacts to groundwater and surface water.

Odour Hope Downs Air/wind Amenity Slight Rare Low The Delegated Officer considers that the Ore Mining dispersion impacts separation distance between the source Operation and potential receptor is sufficient to and village prevent odour impacts occurring. 6.5 km

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 28

Decision Condition 1.2.2 has been amended to increase the waste acceptance quantity limits for inert waste, putrescible waste and sewage. Condition 1.2.10, which specifies the premises production or design capacity limits, and the prescribed premises category table (page 1 of Licence) have been amended as follows:  The approved premises production capacity for Category 5 has been increased from 65 Mtpa to 71 Mtpa to allow for the operation of the additional screen on the existing 6 Mtpa crusher, once installed.  Category 12 has been included as a prescribed activity with a design capacity of 2 Mtpa to allow for the operation of three mobile crushing and screening units to produce coarse aggregate during site upgrade works and stemming material for blasting activities.  The approved premises design capacity for Category 54 has been increased from 480 m3/day to 1,110 m3/day (increase of 630 m3/day) to include the throughput associated with the Mulla Mulla Village WWTP, once constructed.  The approved premises design capacity for Category 63 inert waste disposal volume from 9,000 tpa to 14,000 tpa to account for an increase in inert waste resulting from the construction of the Southern Flank mining hub.  The approved premises design capacity for Category 73 has been increased from 3,500 m3 to 6,000 m3 to allow for the operation of fifteen additional fuel bullets across the site, once installed.  The approved premises design capacity for Category 89 has been increased from 3,000 tpa to 5,000 tpa to allow for the operation of the new putrescible landfill once constructed, which will receive increased waste from the operation of the expanded Mulla Mulla camp. Condition 1.2.13 has been amended to include infrastructure specification requirements for the new Metso TS5.2 screen on the existing 6 Mtpa crusher, two new relocatable crushing and screening plants, the new putrescible landfill, the four additional mine dewater discharge points (Central and Western Sediment Basins), and to update the Juna Downs reinjection bore names. Conditions 1.2.17, 1.2.18, 1.2.19. 1.2.20 and 1.2.21 have been included in the Licence to allow for the operation of the new screening plant, the new discharge points to the Central and Western Sediment Basins, putrescible landfill and three mobile crushing and screening plants, following the submission of compliance documentation required under Condition 4.3.1. Condition 1.2.22 and 1.2.23 have been included in the Licence to require a three month commissioning period for the Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP and specify the process monitoring requirements during the commissioning period. Conditions 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.3 and 3.2.1 have been amended to reflect changes to the Juna Downs MAR reinjection bore names. Condition 2.3.1 has been amended to include the additional discharge points to the Central and Western Sediment Basin, and to make updates to emission points L4 and L5 to allow for discharge of treated wastewater from overflow of evaporation ponds, outside of extreme rainfall events. Condition 3.3.1 has been amended to include the Central and Western Sediment Basin

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 29

emission points as monitoring locations under this condition. Condition 4.2.1 has been amended to require the reporting of monitoring results from the Central and Western Sediment Basins in the Annual Environmental Report. Condition 4.2.3 has been amended to require the submission of the commissioning report for the Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP. Consistent with the requirements of Works Approval W6092/2017/1, the commissioning report shall be submitted within 30 days of the completion of commissioning. Requirements for the commissioning report have been included in amended Table 4.3.2 of the Licence. Condition 4.3.1 has been amended to require the submission of a compliance document for each of the proposed new works (screening plant, three mobile crushing and screening plants, mine dewater discharge points and putrescible landfill). Licence Holder’s comments The Licence Holder was provided with the draft Amendment Notice on 21 September 2018. Comments received from the Licence Holder have been considered by the Delegated Officer as shown in Appendix 2.

Amendment

1. The prescribed premises category table on Page 1 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

Category Approved Premises Category Category description production or production or number design capacity design capacity 5 Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non- 50,000 tonnes or 65,000,000 metallic ore: premises on which – more per year 71,000,000 tonnes (a) Metallic or non-metallic ore is per Annual Period crushed, ground, milled or otherwise processed; (b) Tailings from metallic or non-metallic ore are reprocessed; or Tailings or residue from metallic or non-metallic ore are discharged into a containment cell or dam. 6 Mine dewatering: premises on which water is 50,000 tonnes or 34,931,000 tonnes extracted and discharged into the environment more per year per Annual Period to allow mining of ore. 12 Screening, etc. of material: premises (other 50,000 tonnes 2,000,000 tonnes than premises within category 5 or 8) on or more per per Annual Period which material extracted from the ground is year screened, washed, crushed, ground, milled, sized or separated 54 Sewage facility: premises – 100 m3 or more 480 1,110 m3 per day (a) on which sewage is treated (excluding per day septic tanks); or (b) From which treated sewage is discharged onto land or into waters. 63 Class I inert landfill site: premises on which 500 tonnes or 9,000 14,000 tonnes waste (as determined by reference to the more per year per Annual Period waste type set out in the document entitled “Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996” published by the Chief Executive Officer and as amended from time to time) is accepted for burial. 73 Bulk storage of chemicals etc.: premises on 1 000 m3 in 3 500 6,000 m3 in which acids, alkalis or chemicals that – aggregate aggregate

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 30

(a) contain at least one carbon to carbon bond; and (b) Are liquid at STP (standard temperature and pressure), are stored. 85B Water desalinisation plant: premises at which 0.50 gigalitres or 0.9125 gigalitres per salt is extracted from water if waste water is more per year Annual Period discharged onto land or into waters (other than marine waters) 89 Putrescible landfill site: premises on which More than 20 but 3 000 5,000 tonnes waste (as determined by reference to the less than 5 000 per Annual Period waste type set out in the document entitled tonnes per year “Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996” published by the Chief Executive Officer, as amended from time to time) is accepted for burial.

2. Condition 1.2.2 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall only accept waste onto the inert landfill, putrescible landfills, Rubber/Tyre Dump and sewage treatment plants, shown on the maps in Schedule 1, if: (a) it is of a type listed in Table 1.2.1; (b) the quantity accepted is below any quantity limit listed in Table 1.2.1; and (c) it meets any specification listed in Table 1.2.1.

Table 1.2.1: Waste acceptance Waste type Quantity limit Specification 1 Inert Waste Type 1 9 000 14,000 None specified Inert Waste Type 2 tonnes/year Tyres, rubber and plastic only Putrescible Waste 3 000 5,000 None specified Clean Fill tonnes/year None specified Accepted through sewer inflow(s) only.

Packsaddle WWTP Pond System, flow Sewage 480 1,110 m3/day recorded as inflow

All Biomax WWTPs, flow recorded at outflow Note 1: Additional requirements for the acceptance of controlled waste (including asbestos and tyres) are set out in the Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004.

3. Condition 1.2.10 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall ensure the limits specified in Table 1.2.4 are not exceeded.

Table 1.2.4 Production or design capacity limits Category1 Category description1 Premises production or design capacity limit Processing or beneficiation of 65,000,000 71,000,000 tonnes of ore 5 metallic or non-metallic ore per annual period 34,931,000 tonnes per Annual Period total, being: 6 Mine dewatering  5,840,000 tonnes per Annual Period reinjection – Deposit A

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 31

 2,081,000 10,950,000 tonnes per Annual Period (discharged to the Western Sediment Basin)  8,760,000 tonnes per Annual Period (discharged to the Central Sediment Basin)  10,950,000 tonnes per Annual Period (discharged to the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds)  7,300,000 tonnes per Annual Period (reinjection – Juna Downs) 2,000,000 tonnes per Annual 12 Screening, etc. of material Period

3,500 6,000 cubic metres in 73 Bulk storage of chemicals, etc aggregate

85B Water desalinisation plant 0.9125 gigalitres per Annual Period

Note 1: Environmental Protection Regulations 1987, Schedule 1.

4. Condition 1.2.13 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee must not depart from the specifications in Column 1 and 2 for the infrastructure in each row of Table 1.2.7 except: a) where such departure is minor in nature and does not materially change or affect the infrastructure; or b) where such departure improves the functionality of the infrastructure and does not increase risks to public health, public amenity or the environment; and is in accordance with all other conditions of this Licence.

Table 1.2.7: Infrastructure to be constructed Infrastructure Specifications (design and construction)

Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds 1) Pond construction  Three infiltration ponds, 80 metres wide, 500 metres long, 0.5 metres in depth, each pond comprising of four basins  High level alarms installed on each pond  Stock proof fencing erected around perimeter of each pond 2) Water conveyance Polyethylene pipeline approximately 7 kilometres in length from the E Deposit Turkey’s Nest to convey excess mine dewater to the infiltration ponds, using diesel pumps 3) Groundwater Installation of groundwater monitoring bore MB1 monitoring Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant 1) Water treatment plant Installation of a nano-filtration water treatment plant, in two stages:  Stage1: Construction of a 0.584 gigalitre per annum water treatment plant; and  Stage 2: Expansion of the Stage 1 facility to a 0.9125 gigalitre per annum water treatment plant.

Water treatment plant to comprise of:  Two raw water tanks, Tank A and Tank B;  Two Waste tanks, TK1000A and TK10000B;  Two chlorination buildings;

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 32

 Five nano-filtration trains;  Multimedia filters;  Building to contain sulphuric acid, antiscalant, sodium metasulphate, ferric chloride and sodium hydroxide;  One chlorine contact tank, CCT100000;  Two product water tanks, TK10005A and TK10005B;  Control room and laboratory. 2) Irrigation area  Construction of a 7.4 hectare irrigation area, comprising of Wobbler xcel 4.76 millimetres sprays.  Stock proof fencing erected around perimeter of irrigation area  Juna Downs MAR scheme  Reinjection bores  Construction of injection bores with flow meters installed; HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014 and HGSL0015 as per location on Attachment 1 of this Amendment Notice 1;  Construction of two additional bores named HGSL0016 and HGSL0017 (including flowmeters) located within the green area demarcated ‘Indicative Area for New Bore’ as per Attachment 1 of this Amendment Notice 1

 Water conveyance Approximately 22 km of polyethylene pipe

 Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP sprayfield  Spray irrigation heads: 24 sprinklers at ~34m spacing  Perimeter fencing for an area of 3.047ha  110dia HDPE, PE100 PN12.5 pipework, protected and buried in a trench with sand bedding with a depth of cover of 900mm in areas subject to vehicular traffic and 750mm in areas not subject to vehicular traffic.  New screening plant to expand the 6 million tonne per annum relocatable crusher  Installation of one additional Metso TS5.2 screen at the 6 million tonnes per annum crusher to increase its capacity to 12 million tonnes per annum, with the following dust control infrastructure to be installed and maintained:  Dust hoods on bins;  Sprays on all transfer points and conveyors; and  Sprinkler system on plant infrastructure. Central Sediment Basin Construction of two new discharge points (L16 & L17) for the Central New discharge points Sediment Basin Western Sediment Basin Construction of two new discharge points (L15 & L19) for the Western New discharge points Sediment Basin  Putrescible landfill  Construction of four (4) landfill trenches measuring 200 metres in length, 25 metres in width and 2.5 metres in depth;  Windrows constructed along the southern and eastern boundary of the landfill facility to direct stormwater away from the trenches; and  Perimeter fencing erected and maintained around active landfill trenches.

Two mobile crushing and  Construction, mobilization and installation of two, one million screening plants for tonne per annum capacity mobile crushing and screening South Flank construction plants;  Fitted with spray nozzles to minimize dust emissions at the head drum, discharge point of the main conveyor and at the feed point;  Stormwater infrastructure (earthen bunds) constructed as required to prevent stormwater ingress into the mobile crushing and screening plants operational areas;  Located at least 50 metres from drainage lines. 

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 33

One mobile crushing and  Construction, mobilization and installation of one mobile screening plant for crushing and screening plant with a maximum annual stemming material throughput of 130,000 tonnes; production  Fitted with dust sprays and dust covers at the head drum and discharge point of the main conveyor and at the feed point;  Stormwater infrastructure (earthen bunds) constructed as required to prevent stormwater ingress into the mobile crushing and screening plants operational areas; and  Located at least 50 metres from drainage lines.

5. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the following Condition 1.2.17:

The Licensee shall operate the new screening plant and associated relocatable crusher at the new 12 million tonne per annum capacity in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under Condition 4.3.1.

6. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the following Condition 1.2.18:

The Licensee shall operate the two new discharge points (L16 and L17) for the Central Sediment Basin in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under Condition 4.3.1.

7. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the following Condition 1.2.19:

The Licensee shall operate the two new discharge points (L15 and L19) for the Western Sediment Basin in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under Condition 4.3.1.

8. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the following Condition 1.2.20:

The Licensee shall operate the new putrescible landfill in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under Condition 4.3.1.

9. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the following Condition 1.2.21:

The Licensee shall operate the three new mobile crushing and screening plants no closer than one (1) kilometer to the edge of the prescribed premises boundary as shown in the figure showing the prescribed premises in Schedule 2 of this Licence, in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under Condition 4.3.1.

10. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the following Condition 1.2.22:

The Licensee shall commission the Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP for a period of three months but not exceed a period of 12 months.

11. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the following Condition 1.2.23:

The Licensee must undertake process monitoring during Commissioning of the Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP to the following requirements: (a) at the locations specified in Column 1;

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 34

(b) for the parameters specified in Column 2; (c) at the frequency specified in Column 4; (d) meet the limits specified in Column 5; and (e) using the methods specified in Column 7.

Table 1.2.23 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 Column 6 Column 7 Emission Parameter Units Frequency Limit Averaging Method point period reference Irrigation Volume kL/day Continuous <630 Cumulative Mag-flow meter areas L13 daily and L14 Final Biochemical mg/L Weekly <20 Spot AS/NZS 5667:10 effluent Oxygen sample tank Demand sampling Total mg/L Weekly <30 tap prior to Suspended discharge Solids to Total Cfu/100mL Weekly <10 irrigation Thermo- areas L13 tolerant and L14 Coliforms Total mg/L Weekly <15 Nitrogen Total mg/L Weekly <8 Phosphorus pH* pH units Weekly >6.5 and <8.5 *insitu sampling and recording permitted

12. Condition 2.2.1 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall ensure that where waste is emitted to groundwater from the emission points in Table 2.2.1 and identified on the map of emission points in Schedule 1 it is done so in accordance with the conditions of this Licence.

Table 2.2.1: Emission points to groundwater Emission point reference and Description Source including abatement location on Map of emission points HGA0001P Direct injection below Water from dewatering associated HGA0002P ground with the Managed Aquifer Recharge HGA0040P Trial HGA0041P HGSL0005 Direct injection below Water from surplus mine dewatering HGSL0006 ground HGSL0014 HGSL0015 HGSL0031 HGSL0032 Bores HGSL0016 and HGSL00171

13. Condition 2.2.2 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 35

strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall not cause or allow point source emissions to exceed the limits listed in Table 2.2.2.

Table 2.2.2: Point source emission limits to groundwater Emission point Parameter Limit Averaging period reference (including units) HGA0001P HGA0002P Not less than 10m HGA0040P below ground surface HGA0041P HGSL0005 HGSL0006 HGSL0014 Depth to groundwater Spot sample HGSL0015 HGSL0031 Not less than 7m HGSL0032 below ground surface Bores HGSL0016 and HGSL00171

14. Condition 2.2.3 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall take the specified management action in the case of an event in Table 2.2.3.

Table 2.2.3: Management actions Emission Event/ Event Management action point action reference reference HGA0001P EA1 Any time the The Licensee shall cease direct injection HGA0002P monitoring data at the emission point listed in Table 2.2.1 HGA0040P indicates an where the limit exceedance occurred HGA0041P exceedance of the limit specified in HGSL0005 condition 2.2.2 HGSL0006 HGSL0014 HGSL0015 HGSL0031 HGSL0032 Bores HGSL0016 and HGSL00171

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 36

15. Condition 2.3.1 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall ensure that where waste is emitted to land from the emission points in Table 2.3.1 and identified on the map of emission points in Schedule 1 it is done so in accordance with the conditions of this Licence.

Table 2.3.1: Emissions to land Emission point Description Source including abatement reference L1 Discharge of treated wastewater Treated wastewater from Packsaddle from Packsaddle Village C150K Village C150K WWTP WWTP to designated unlined evaporation/infiltration pond

L2 Discharge of treated wastewater Treated wastewater from Packsaddle from Packsaddle Village WWTP Village WWTP ponds to unlined evaporation/infiltration pond L3 Discharge of treated wastewater Treated wastewater pipeline from from Mulla Mulla Camp C300K Mulla Mulla Camp C300K WWTP WWTP to designated irrigation area L4 Discharge of treated wastewater from overflow of evaporation Treated wastewater from heavy vehicle washdown bays, workshop L5 ponds during extreme rainfall events oily water separators and untreated wastewater from the light vehicle L6 Discharge of treated wastewater washdown bay to undertake scheduled maintenance of ponds L7 Discharge of reject water from the Reject water from the Mining Area C Mining Area C Water Treatment Water Treatment Plant Plant to designated irrigation area L8

Discharge of excess mine L9 dewater to the Packsaddle Mine dewater Infiltration ponds L10

L11 Discharge of excess mine dewater to the Western Sediment Mine dewater Basin L12 Discharge of excess mine dewater to the Central Sediment Mine dewater Basin L13 Discharge of treated L14 wastewater from the Mulla Treated wastewater pipeline from Mulla Camp WWTP to Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP designated irrigation area L15 Discharge of excess mine dewater to the Western Mine dewater Sediment Basin L16 Discharge of excess mine Mine dewater L17 dewater to the Central L18 Sediment Basin Mine dewater L19 Discharge of excess mine dewater to the Western Mine dewater Sediment Basin

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 37

16. Condition 3.2.1 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.2.1 according to the specifications in that table.

Table 3.2.1: Monitoring of point source emissions to groundwater Emission point Parameter Units Averaging Frequency reference1 period Cumulative Volume m3/day Electrical Conductivity2 µS/cm Spot Sample Monthly pH2 pH Units Groundwater level mbgl Aluminium Arsenic Barium HGA0001P Boron HGA0002P Calcium Carbonate HGA0040P Cadmium HGA0041P Calcium HGSL0005 Chloride HGSL0006 Chromium HGSL0014 Copper HGSL0015 Fluoride HGSL0031 Iron HGSL0032 Lead mg/L Spot sample Quarterly Magnesium Bores HGSL0016 Manganese 3 and HGSL0017 Mercury Molybdenum

Nickel Nitrate Potassium Selenium Sodium Sulfate Total Dissolved Solids Zinc Note 1: pH, electrical conductivity and hydrochemistry samples are only required to be taken from one emission point during each quarterly monitoring event and only emission points that are active in the monitoring period are required to be sampled. Note 2: In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted.

17. Condition 3.3.1 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.3.1 according to the specifications in that table.

Table 3.3.1: Monitoring of emissions to land Emission Monitoring point Parameter Units Averaging Frequency point location Period reference Flow meter to irrigation Volumetric flow rate L1 – L3, area or evaporation / m3/day Monthly Continuous (cumulative) L13 and infiltration pond L14 1 Final storage tank - prior pH pH units Spot Quarterly

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 38

to discharge to emission 5-Day Biochemical sample points Oxygen Demand Total Suspended mg/L Solids Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus E.coli cfu/100 mL L4 Discharge overflow point from evaporation pond Quarterly

Total Recoverable Spot mg/L HV washdown discharge Hydrocarbons sample

overflow point L5 Quarterly Secondary HV washdown L6 discharge overflow point Volumetric flow rate m3/day Quarterly Continuous Flow meter to irrigation (cumulative) area L7 Final storage tank – prior Total Dissolved mg/L Spot Quarterly to discharge emission Solids sample point Volumetric flow rate Quarterly Continuous (cumulative) m3/day

pH1 Electrical µS/cm Conductivity1 Aluminium mg/L Arsenic mg/L Barium mg/L Boron mg/L L8 to L12 Calcium Carbonate mg/L Cadmium mg/L L8 Calcium mg/L L9 Chloride mg/L At the trunk line prior to L10 the infiltration/sediment Chromium mg/L L11 basin Copper mg/L L12 Fluoride mg/L Spot L15 Quarterly Iron mg/L sample L16 Lead mg/L L17 Magnesium mg/L L18 Manganese mg/L L19 Mercury mg/L Molybdenum mg/L Nickel mg/L Nitrate mg/L Potassium mg/L Selenium mg/L Sodium mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Dissolved mg/L Solids Zinc mg/L Note 1: In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 39

18. Condition 4.2.1 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall submit to the CEO an Annual Environmental Report by the 1 October each year. The report shall contain the information listed in Table 4.2.1 in the format or form specified in that table.

Table 4.2.1: Annual Environmental Report Condition or table Parameter Format or form1 (if relevant) - Summary of any failure or malfunction of any pollution None specified control equipment and any environmental incidents that have occurred during the annual period and any action taken - Summary of design capacity and throughputs for each None specified prescribed activity on the premises Tables 3.5.2 Groundwater level exceedances None specified Tables 1.2.1, 1.2.4, Limit exceedances None specified 2.2.2, 2.3.2, 3.5.1 3.2.1 Cumulative volume, standing water level, pH, electrical None specified conductivity, physicochemical parameters as listed in Table 3.2.1 and a comparison of results against established trigger values. Details of investigations conducted, including outcomes, environmental impacts and remedial actions, in relation to trigger exceedances and a discussion of any trends identified 3.3.1 L1-L3, L13 and L14 – Monitoring results and comparison None specified against the National Water Quality Management Strategy Australian Guidelines for Sewerage Systems – Effluent Management (Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, 1997)

L4-L7 – Monitoring results L8-L12 and L15-L19 – Monitoring results and comparison of results against established trigger values and previous monitoring results. Details of investigations conducted, including outcomes, environmental impacts and remedial actions, in relation to trigger exceedances and a discussion of any trends identified. 3.4.1 Inputs and outputs of waste on the premises None specified 3.5.2 Ambient groundwater monitoring results and a None specified comparison of results against established trigger values. Details of investigations conducted, including outcomes, environmental impacts and remedial actions, in relation to trigger exceedances and a discussion of any trends identified 4.1.2 Compliance None specified 4.1.3 Complaints summary None specified Note 1: Forms are in Schedule 2

19. Condition 4.2.3 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 40

The Licensee shall submit the information in Table 4.2.2 to the CEO according to the specifications in that table.

Table 4.2.2: Non-annual reporting requirements Condition Parameter Reporting Reporting date Format or form or table period (after end of (if the reporting relevant) period) - Copies of Not Within 14 days As received by the Licensee from original Applicable of the CEOs third parties monitoring request reports submitted to the Licensee by third parties 1.2.12 Commissioning Not Within one The report shall include: report for the applicable month of the (a) a summary of monitoring Mining Area C completion of results; Water Treatment commissioning (b) a list of any original Plant monitoring reports submitted to the Licensee from third parties for the commissioning period; (c) a summary of the environmental performance of the Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant as installed, against the design specification set out in the application; and (d) where they have not been met, measures proposed to meet the design specification and/or Licence conditions, together with timescales for implementing the proposed measures. 1.2.21 Commissioning Not Within one The report shall include: report for the applicable month of the (a) a summary of Mulla Mulla completion of monitoring results Camp WWTP commissioning recorded under Condition 7; (b) a list of any original monitoring reports submitted to the Works Approval Holder from third parties for the Commissioning Period; (c) a summary of the environmental performance of the WWTP as installed, against the design specification set out in Table 1.2.7; (d) a review of performance against the Works Approval Conditions; and (e) where they have not

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 41

been meet, proposed measures to meet the design specification and/or Works Approval Conditions, together with timescales for implementing the proposed measures. 3.5.3 Monitoring Not Within one None specified results following Applicable month of the groundwater completion of level the vegetation exceedance, monitoring including a specified in discussion of Table 3.5.3 results, environmental impacts and remedial actions

20. Condition 4.3.1 of the Licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

The Licensee shall ensure that the parameters listed in Table 4.3.1 are notified to the CEO in accordance with the notification requirements of the table.

Table 4.3.1: Notification requirements Condition Parameter Notification Format or table requirement1 or form2 (if relevant) 1.2.12 The Licensee shall, prior to commencing Four weeks prior to the None commissioning of the Mining Area C Water commencement of specified Treatment Plant, submit a commissioning commissioning. plan to the CEO. The commissioning plan shall include details relating to: (a) the commissioning stages and expected timescales for commissioning; (b) expected emissions and discharges during commissioning and the environmental implications of the emissions; (c) how emissions and discharges will be managed during commissioning; (d) the monitoring that will be undertaken during the commissioning period; (e) how accidents or malfunctions will be managed; (f) start up and shut down procedures; and (g) reporting proposals including accidents, malfunctions and reporting against the commissioning plan.

Commissioning shall be carried out in accordance with the commissioning plan.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 42

1.2.12 The Licensee shall submit a compliance Within 7 days of the None 1.2.13 document to the CEO, following completion of construction specified 1.2.14 construction of each of the Packsaddle 1.2.16 Infiltration Ponds, Mining Area C Water 1.2.17 Treatment Plant and the Juna Downs MAR 1.2.18 scheme, additional screening plant for 1.2.19 the relocatable crusher, two new Central 1.2.20 Sediment Basin discharge points, two new Western Sediment Basin discharge points, new putrescible landfill and three mobile crushing and screening plants, and prior to commissioning of the same.

The Licensee must ensure compliance documentation: a) is certified by a suitably qualified professional engineer or builder stating that each item of infrastructure specified in Table 1.2.7 has been constructed in accordance with the conditions of the Licence with no material defects; and b) be signed by a person authorised to represent the Licensee and contain the printed name and position of that person within the company 1.2.12 The Licensee shall submit to the CEO, as Within 7 days of the None 1.2.13 part of the compliance document for the 2 completion of construction specified 1.2.16 new Juna Downs MAR scheme bores HGSL0016 and HGSL0017: a) written GPS locations of the 2 bores confirming the bores are within the area specified in Attachment 1.

1.2.13 If condition 1.2.13 applies, then the Within 7 days of the None Licensee must provide the CEO with a list completion of construction specified of departures which are certified as complying with condition 1.2.12

Tables 1.2.1, Breach of any limit specified in the Licence Part A: As soon as N1 1.2.4, 2.2.2, practicable but no later 2.3.2, 3.5.1 than 5pm of the next usual working day.

Part B: As soon as practicable

3.5.2 Depth to groundwater level exceedance

3.1.4 Calibration report As soon as practicable. None specified Note 1: Notification requirements in the Licence shall not negate the requirement to comply with s72 of the Act Note 2: Forms are in Schedule 2

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 43

21. The Licence is amended by the deletion of the maps indicated below from Schedule 1 Maps of the Licence.

Deleted Maps

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 44

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 45

22. The Licence is amended by the insertion of the maps and figures below into Schedule 1 Maps of the Licence.

Prescribed premises boundary, emission points to land and monitoring locations Maps showing prescribed premises boundary, indicative general arrangement, Category 12 indicative operating locations, waste disposal locations defined in Table 1.2.2, location of containment infrastructure defined in Table 1.2.5, emission points defined in Tables 2.2.1 (emissions to groundwater), 2.3.1 (emissions to land) and the monitoring points defined in Tables 2.3.1 (groundwater monitoring), 3.3.1 (monitoring of emissions to land) 3.5.1 (ambient groundwater limits), 3.5.2 (ambient groundwater quality) and 3.5.3 (following groundwater level exceedance) are shown in the maps below.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 46

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 47

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 48

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 49

Location of Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP and Emission Points (Irrigation fields)

Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP general arrangement

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 50

Appendix 1: Key documents

Document title In text ref Availability 1 DER, July 2015. Guidance Statement: accessed at Regulatory principles. Department of DWER, 2015a http://www.der.wa.gov.au Environment Regulation, Perth. 2 DER, October 2015. Guidance Statement: Setting conditions. DWER, 2015b Department of Environment Regulation, Perth. 3 DER, November 2016. Guidance Statement: Risk Assessments. DWER, 2016a Department of Environment Regulation, Perth. 4 DER, November 2016. Guidance Statement: Decision Making. DWER, 2016b Department of Environment Regulation, Perth. 5 Landfill Waste Classification and Landfill accessed at Waste Definitions 1996 (As amended Waste http://www.der.wa.gov.au December 2009), Department of Classification Environment and Conservation and Waste Definitions 1996 6 Licence L7851/2002/6 – Mining Area accessed at L7851/2002/6 C Project http://www.der.wa.gov.au 7 Priority Ecological Communities for accessed at Western Australia Version 24, http://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au Parks and Species and Communities Branch, Wildlife, 2016 Department of Parks and Wildlife, 24 June 2016 8 Pacific Environment Limited, 22 DER records (A1655778) August 2016. Memorandum – PEL, 2016 Updated Air Quality Modelling for South Flank Proposal 9 Understanding-salinity – Salinity accessed at status classifications, by total salt DoW, Salinity http://www.water.wa.gov.au/water- status concentration table, Department of topics/water-quality/managing- classification Water water-quality/understanding-salinity 10 Works Approval W6142/2018/1 – accessed at W6142/2018/1 Mining Area C – South Flank http://www.der.wa.gov.au

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 51

Appendix 2: Summary of Licence Holder comments The Licence Holder was provided with the draft Amendment Notice on 21 September 2018 and 12 October 2018 for review and comment. The Licence Holder responded on 1 October 2018 and 15 October 2018, respectively. The following comments were received on the draft Amendment Notice. Condition Summary of Licence Holder comment DWER response Comments received 1 October 2018 - Confirmation that the Category 12 crushing plants would Noted. commence operation in November 2018. - Advised that two new Groundwater Licences had been Noted, and Table 3 updated with details of issued issued. groundwater licences. - Dust control during landfill construction – standard dust Risk Assessment Table updated with relevant control will be utilised, includes minimising clearing and the information. use of water carts as appropriate. Page 1 of Licence – Category 12 is missing from the prescribed premises The prescribed premises category table (Page 1 prescribed premises category table. of the Licence) has been updated to include category table Category 12. Condition 1.2.13 and Advised of dust control and stormwater management for Risk Assessment Table updated with relevant Risk Assessment Table mobile screening plants – water sprays and dust covers information. of Amendment Notice will be fitted to mobile crushing and screening plants to control dust. The exact locations will depend on the models used, however generally sprays are located at the head drum and discharge point of the main conveyor and at the feed point. Additional dust control may be installed as required. Mobile crushers will be situated to prevent storm water run-off from the crusher location (e.g. within an internally draining borrow pit). Where necessary earthen bunds will also be used. Condition 1.2.21 This condition requires mobile screening plants to only be Condition 1.2.21 has been updated to allow the used in the indicative locations. This will be quite two mobile crushing and screening plants to restrictive. BHP would prefer this is updated to: operate no closer than 1 km to the edge of the prescribed premises boundary. DWER has not “The Licensee shall operate the two new mobile updated the condition to refer to the stemming crushing and screening plants and new stemming

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 52

Condition Summary of Licence Holder comment DWER response Comments received 1 October 2018 plant no closer than 1 km to the edge of the plant as this will need to be subject to a separate prescribed premises boundary as shown in the Licence amendment application. relevant figure in Schedule 2 of this Licence. These mobile crushing facilities will be operated in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under Condition 4.3.1.”

Schedule 1 - Maps The Mulla Mulla Village WWTP and emission points map Map updated. in Schedule 2 needs to be replaced with the updated figure showing the revised location of the irrigation area. Comments received 15 October 2018 Table 6 The species of priority flora are listed as points under the Table 6 updated. fauna section.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 53 Your ref: L7851/2002/6 ~ Government of Western A ustralia Our ref: DER2013/000925 ~ Department of Water and Environmental Regulation Enquiries: Katrina Buri

Mr Chris Hopkins Principal - Environment A&I HSE - Minerals Australia Level39 125 St George's T ce Perth WA 6000

Via email: Chris. S. Hopkins@bhpbilliton. com

Dear Mr Hopkins

APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO LICENCE L7851/2002/6 UNDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT 1986 - NOTICE OF DECISION TO GRANT

I refer to your application for amendment to Mining Area C licence (L7851/2002/6) received on 29 November 2016 for the approval to construct the Juna Downs Managed Aquifer Recharge Project and the construction and operation of a new spray field for the Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP as received on 8 August 2017.

As set out in our letter to you dated 26 September 2017, the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation considered your application in detail, including undertaking a detailed risk assessment, and provided a preliminary recommendation that I grant the licence amendment sought under section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act). After considering the representations you provided on 3 October 2017, received 4 October 2017, I have decided to grant the licence amendment subject to the conditions in the attached instrument. The attached Amendment Notice sets out the reasons for my decision.

In accordance with section 102(2) of the EP Act, if you are aggrieved by my decision to amend the licence you may lodge an appeal with the Minister for Environment in writing, setting out the grounds of that appeal, within 21 days of this notification. Should you wish to lodge an appeal, please contact the Office of the Appeals Convenor on 6567 5190 or by email at [email protected].

If you have any queries regarding the above information, please contact Katrina Burke, Licensing Officer as listed above.

Youj/incerely ;J(f ~4id{ Alana Kidd Manager Licensing - Resource Industries Regulatory Services - Environment Officer delegated under Section 20 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986

5 October 2017

Att: L7851/2002/6 Amendment Notice 1, October 2017

168 St Georges Terrace Western Australia 6000 Locked Bag 33 Cloisters Square Perth WA 6850 Telephone: 08 6364 7000 Facsimile: 08 6364 7001 IR-L25 v2.0 www.dwer.wa.gov.au Licensee BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd

ACN 008 700 981

Licence Number L7851/2002/6

File Number DER2013/000925

Premises Mining Area C Mining Tenement ML281SA NEWMAN WA 6753

Date of amendment 5 October 2017

Amendment The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) has amended the above Licence in accordance with section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 as set out in this Amendment Notice. This Amendment Notice constitutes written notice of the amendment in accordance with section 598(9) of the EP Act.

/(u£d/ Alana Kidd Manager Licensing - Resource Industries an officer delegated under section 20 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA)

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) Definitions and interpretation

Definitions In this Amendment Notice, the terms in Table 1 have the meanings defined. Table 1: Definitions

Term Definition

AACR Annual Audit Compliance Report

ACN Australian Company Number

AER Annual Environment Report

Category/ Categories/ categories of Prescribed Premises as set out in Schedule 1 of the Cat. EP Regulations

CEO means Chief Executive Officer. CEO for the purposes of notification means: Director General Department Administering the Environmental Protection Act 1986 Locked Bag 33 Cloisters Square PERTH WA 6850 [email protected]

Delegated Officer an officer under section 20 of the EP Act

Department means the department established under section 35 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and designated as responsible for the administration of Part V, Division 3 of the EP Act.

DWER Department of Water and Environmental Regulation

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

EPAct Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA)

EP Regulations Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 (WA)

Existing Licence The Licence issued under Part V, Division 3 of the EP Act and in force prior to the commencement of and during this Review

GL/a gigalitre per annum

ha hectare

kl/year kilolitres per year

km kilometre

Licence: L785 1/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 2 Licence Holder BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd

LV Light vehicle

ma cubic metres

MAC Mining Area C

MAR Managed Aquifer Recharge

ML/day Megalitres per day

MS Ministerial Statement

mtpa million tonnes per annum

Noise Regulations Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 0JVA)

Occupier has the same meaning given to that term under the EP Act.

Prescribed Premises has the same meaning given to that term under the EP Act.

Premises refers to the premises to which this Decision Report applies, as specified at the front of this Decision Report.

Risk Event as described in Guidance Statement: Risk Assessment

TRH Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons

UDR Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004 0JVA)

µg/m3 micrograms per cubic metre

µSiem micro Siemens per centimetre

WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 3 Amendment Notice This amendment is made pursuant to section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) to amend the licence issued under the EP Act for a prescribed premises as set out below. This notice of amendment is given under section 598(9) of the EP Act. This notice is limited only to an amendment for Category 6 and 63. No changes to the aspects of the original licence relating to Category 5, 54, 73, 858 and 89 activities have been requested by the Licensee. The following DER Guidance Statements have informed the decision made on this amendment: • Guidance Statement: Regulatory Principles (July 2015); • Guidance Statement: Setting Conditions (October 2015); • Guidance Statement: Decision Making (February 2017); • Guidance Statement: Risk Assessment (February 2017); and • Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting (November 2016).

Amendment Description On 29 November 2016, BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd (Licensee) submitted an application to DER for an amendment to the Mining Area C (MAC) Project licence (L7851/2002/6). On 8 August 2017, BHP requested for inclusion in this amendment, the ability to construct and operate a new spray field to replace the existing Mulla Mulla Camp spray field. The new spray field will be located to the north east of the Mulla Mulla Camp, within the premise boundary. Additional amendment information on the new spray field was provided by BHP on 4 September 2017 to facilitate the inclusion of further information into this Amendment Notice. This Notice is the result of the Licensee applying for an amendment under section 598 of the EP Act. The Licensee has applied to make the following changes: 1. Include construction and operation of a new Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) scheme at Juna Downs and increase the capacity of Category 6 to include the 7.3 gigalitre per annum (GL/a) as shown in Table 1; 2. Increase the Category 63 capacity for the inert landfill to 9,000 tonnes per annual period as shown in Table 1; 3. Include a reference to the light vehicle washdown bay and associated monitoring points; 4. Increase the premises boundary to include the Juna Downs MAR scheme; and 5. Include construction of a new 3.047 ha spray field and -2 km of pipeline to service the existing Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 4 Table 2: Proposed design or throughput capacity changes requested in amendment

Category Current Design Capacity Proposed Design Capacity Description of proposed amendment

6 27,541 ,000 tonnes per annual 34,931 ,000 tonnes per Increase in capacity due to period annual period construction and operation of the Juna Downs MAR scheme and update of amount approved for disposal to the Central Sedimentation Basin

63 5,000 tonnes per annual 9,000 tonnes per annual Increase in capacity due to two period period once off disposals for the kitchen upgrade and site clean-up

Juna Downs MAR scheme Current mine dewatering not used in ore processing and dust suppression is disposed of via infiltration basins and MAR bores. Dewatering volumes at MAC are projected to increase significantly from 2017 - 2021 with peak volumes estimated to reach up to 32 megalitres per day (ML/day) in 2017 and more than 70 ML/day in 2021. Site water demand over the same period is projected to remain relatively constant at around 10 to 14 ML/day, which will result in estimated surplus water volumes of 22 ML/day in 2017, increasing to 60 ML/day during 2021. At present the following dewatering disposal options are approved: • 27,541 ,000 tonnes per annual period, being: 5,840,000 tonnes per annual period reinjected (at A Deposit); 2,081,000 tonnes per annual period (average of 1 ML/day) discharged to the Western Sediment Basin; 8,670,000 tonnes per annual period (average of 24 ML/day) discharged to the Central Sediment Basin. During this amendment the Licensee has stated that "there is an error in the addition of the current licence volume" (BHP, 2016). The average of 24 ML/day equates to 8,760,000 tonnes per annual period rather than 8,670,000 tonnes per annual period ; and 10,950,000 tonnes per annual period (average of 30 ML/day) discharged to the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds. Over the next 12 months as mining progresses to A Deposit, it will become necessary to cease reinjection of groundwater at A Deposit, and the Juna Downs MAR scheme will then manage the surplus mine dewatering. The Juna Downs MAR scheme will consist of: • six reinjection bores (four are currently drilled and two are yet to be determined); • 4 monitoring bores; • 22 km of pipeline; and • Pump with a 20 ML/day capacity. The existing A and E deposit lined transfer ponds will be used for the transfer of mine dewater to the Juna Downs MAR scheme reinjection bores. Reinjection is the preferred method of disposing of mine dewater at MAC, however the Licensee also has the option of disposing excess mine dewater to three infiltration ponds which are specified emission points on Licence L7851/2002/6. Multiple disposal options provides the Licensee with flexibility in surplus water management and enables a range of

Licence: L7851 /2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 5 contingencies to be employed should one system be unavailable. In the short to medium term, the Licensee has advised the infiltration options will be sufficient to manage surplus water at MAC should injection not be possible. The Licensee is also investigating additional MAR options at Camp Hill, which if progressed, would be subject to a separate application under Part V of the EP Act. The Licensee has requested that Condition 1.2.10 be updated for Category 6 to increase the design capacity limit from 27,541,000 tonnes per annual period to 34,931,000 tonnes per annual period. This includes reference to 7,300,000 tonnes per annual period being reinjected for the Juna Downs MAR scheme and the 90,000 tonnes per annual period difference for disposal at the Central Sediment Basin. Two additional bores; HGSL0016 and HGSL0017 have not been installed at the time of this assessment. These bores will be installed within the area demarcated 'Indicative Area for New Bores' within Schedule 1 (Premises map).

Increase in Category 63 capacity The Licensee has requested that Condition 1.2.2 be updated for Category 63 to increase the design capacity limit from 5,000 tonnes per annual period to 9,000 tonnes per annual period. There are currently two projects at MAC which require disposal to the Class I inert landfill: • Kitchen upgrade project at Packsaddle Camp, which has generated a once-off 1,000 tonnes of Inert Waste Type 1; and • Site clean-up, which is expected to generate a once-off 3,000 tonnes of Inert Waste Type 2 (rubber I tyres).

Include the light vehicle washdown bay and associated monitoring points The Licensee has requested that reference be made to the light vehicle washdown bay for emissions to land in Condition 2.3.1. The Licensee has advised that the light vehicle (LV) washdown bay is located adjacent to the workshops and the heavy vehicle washdown bay. Untreated washdown water from the LV area discharges directly to the Treated Oily Water Ponds (Condition 1.2.11 ).

Expansion of the premises boundary The Licensee has requested that the premises boundary be increased to include the Juna Downs MAR scheme.

Construction of a new 3.047ha spray field and -2km of pipeline The Licensee has requested that a new spray field be approved for construction and operation to service the existing Mulla Mulla camp WWTP. The removal of the existing spray field is required to accommodate the expansion of the existing camp. The existing spray field will be decommissioned when the new spray field has been commissioned and is in operation. There will be no changes to the existing camp WWTP. As part of the proposed (future) camp expansion BHP Billiton will be installing an additional WWTP. The new WWTP will be the subject of a separate works approval application and is not related to the current spray field relocation. The spray field is to be located approximately 1.5 km northeast of the WWTP on rocky ground containing sparse vegetation and little visible topsoil. The pipeline route to the spray field will be 2 km in length. This is to circumvent the Camp and to follow existing cleared corridors where practicable.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2 .0 (July 2017) 6 The pipework will be 11 Odia HOPE, PE100 PN12.5 and will be protected and buried in a trench with sand bedding with a depth of cover of 900mm in areas subject to vehicular traffic and 750mm in areas not subject to vehicular traffic. No automated leak detection mechanisms will be installed within the treated effluent pipeline conveying the effluent to the spray field. The spray field will be fenced using 4-strand fencing to prevent large fauna (e.g. livestock) entry.

Other approvals The Licensee has provided the following information relating to other approvals as outlined in Table 2. Table 3: Relevant approvals

Legislation Number Approval

Part IV of the EP Act 0/'/A) Ministerial Statement (MS) Number Multiple Iron Ore Mine 491 Development, Mining Area C - Northern Flank, 100 km north-west of Newman (Note: 'Water usage and dewatering requirements' was removed as a Part IV Key Characteristic in March 2014 as 'conservation values are managed under the Life of Mine EMP; dewatering and discharge can be managed under other legislation').

Life of Project Environmental Mining Area C Life of Project Management Plan Revision 6 Environmental Management Plan , (EMP, Rev 6) BHP Billiton Iron Ore Ply Ltd, Revision 6, 31 January 2016

Iron Ore (Mount Goldsworthy) 7 February 2014 State Agreement Agreement Act 1964

Rights in Water and Irrigation Act Groundwater Licence (GWL) Juna Downs Borefield with an 1914 178477(2) allocation of 750,000 kUyear from the Wittenoom Aquifer

Clearing The clearing of native vegetation is not approved under this Licence. BHP, 2016 states that the project will require the clearing of approximately 20 hectares (ha) of native vegetation for the construction of the Juna Downs MAR scheme pipelines and reinjection bores. All clearing for the Juna Downs MAR scheme will be undertaken in accordance with the approved Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (NVCP) CPS 7139/1 (or subsequent revisions). Any clearing required for the construction of a new 3.047 ha spray field and associated pipeline will be undertaken in accordance with Ministerial Statement 491 .

Consultation A letter of referral was sent to the Department of Water (DoW) and Department of Parks and Wildlife (Parks and Wildlife) on 28 December 2016. DER (now DWER) received the following comments from DoW on 16 January 2017:

Licence: L7851 /2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 7 • "DoW has recently reviewed the Juna Downs MAR Groundwater Modelling Report; and Juna Downs MAR Scheme Ecohydrological Monitoring Framework during the assessment of the EMP Rev 6, and provided feedback to the proponent - however the proponent will need to apply for an amendment to their current groundwater licence ". "The licence will need to be consistent with the Part V approval, DoW will ensure that the MAR is included as a licensed activity". • DoW "considers the proposed amendment to increase the total Facility design capacity to 34.9312 GUa by adding 7.3 GUa to the Juna Downs MAR scheme, is acceptable, provided the proponent ensures compliance with Condition 5 of MS 491. This will ensure groundwater dependent ecology is minimally impacted by the operations. The monitoring and management measures detailed in Table 5 are acceptable triggers and thresholds for this purpose". DER (now DWER) received the following comments from Parks and Wildlife on 18 January 2017: • "It is noted that the Mine has approval under Part IV of the EP Act 1986, MS 491, which includes conditions and proponent commitments for the protection of the surrounding environment. It appears that BHP has considered their requirements under Part IV of the EP Act 1986. Parks and Wildlife 's Pilbara Region has reviewed the licence amendment with the assumption that any environmental impacts do not differ from those detailed and managed under the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority's approved Environmental Management Plan (Revision 6, 31 January 2016) for Mining Area C operations". • "A portion of Juna Downs Station, where the proposed MAR project is located, was excluded from pastoral lease in July 2015. The land is currently Unallocated Crown Land (UCL), proposed to be added to the conservation reserve system. The area has been proposed for addition to the conservation reserve system due the occurrence of the Coondewanna flats [priority 3(i)] and Lake Robinson (priority 1) Priority Ecological Communities (PEG) which are not currently represented within the reserve system". • "Parks and Wildlife has requested that BHP Billiton provides further information to Parks and Wildlife primarily on the reasoning behind the proposed location of the managed aquifer recharge scheme, and the likely maximum extent of the activities, and potential impacts, specifically in relation to any potential implications for departmental management (i.e. fire, weeds, access etc.) for the former Juna Downs pastoral lease ". Provided that BHP Billiton is willing to work with the Department on these issues, this should not prevent DER from progressing the assessment of the current licence amendment. • "Monitoring proposed by BHP Billiton appears to be acceptable in detecting potential impacts of the MAR project on the Coondewanna flats. Parks and Wildlife is unable to verify the validity, or robustness of the hydrological modelling and its ability to predict impacts, given the Departments limited expertise in this area ". • ''Although impacts to priority flora species should be avoided where possible, it is unclear if CPS 7139/1 is able to manage potential impacts to these species".

Location, environmental siting and potential receptors MAC is located approximately 90 kilometres (km) north-west of the town of Newman in the Pi Ibara region of Western Australia. The Mulla Mulla Camp is located more than 2.5 km to the east of the Juna Downs MAR scheme area. As this Camp is operated by the Licensee, it is not considered a sensitive land use or receptor by DER for the purposes of assessing the risks associated with the emissions and discharges from the proposed scheme.

Licence: L7851 /2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2. 0 (July 2017) 8 Tables 3 and 4 list the relevant sensitive land uses and specified ecosystems in accordance with DER's Guidance Statement: Environmental Siting. Table 4: Receptors and distance from prescribed premises

Residential and sensitive premises Distance from Prescribed Premises

Rio Tinto Iron Ore's Hope Downs One Mining 10 km east. Operation

Table 5: Specified ecosystems

Specified ecosystems Distance from Prescribed Premises

Parks and Wildlife (now Department of The Juna Downs MAR scheme is located on Unallocated Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions) Crown Land (excluded from the Juna Downs Pastoral Lease tenure in July 2015) and proposed to be added to the conservation reserve system, due to the occurrence of the Coondewanna Flats (Priority 3(i)) and Lake Robinson (Priority 1) Priority Ecological Communities (PEG) (Parks and Wildlife, 2017).

Threatened Ecological Communities and Priority There are no Threatened Ecological Communities and PECs Ecological Communities within the Premises. PEC: Coolibah (Eucalyptus victrix) woodlands over lignum (Duma florulenta) over swamp wandiree (Lake Robinson)* - Priority 1 is located approximately 1.3 km from the proposed premises boundary. PEG : Coolibah (Eucalyptus victrix) and mulga (Acacia aneura) woodland over lignum and tussock grasses on clay plains (Coondewanna Flats and Wanna Munna Flats)* - Priority 3(i) is located approximately 1 km from the proposed premises boundary. 1 PEC: Weeli Wolli Spring community - Priority 1 is located approximately 20 km east of the premises boundary.

Declared Rare Flora There is no Declared Rare Flora within the Premises. Lepidium catapycnon (previously a Declared Rare Flora, now a Priority 4 Flora) is located within the Premises.

Note 1: Parks and Wildlife, 2016

The distances to groundwater and water sources are shown in Table 5. Table 5: Groundwater and water sources

Groundwater and Distance from Premises Environmental Value water sources

Regional BHP, 2016 states that the Juna The Wittenoom aquifer is distinguished as a groundwater Downs MAR scheme area lies within separate aquifer system because the Wittenoom the Hamersley - Fractured Rock Dolomite is distinct from the other fractured rock Aquifer; and Hamersley - Wittenoom aquifers in the Hamersley Basin, having karst Aquifer development (solution cavities) and being overlain by a thick sequence of valley filled Reinjection activities will occur in the sediments consisting of pisolite, calcrete and Hamersley - Wittenoom Aquifer alluvium. The Wittenoom Dolomite is the most Prior to the commencement of mining, important aquifer in the province and underlies groundwater at MAC was the main valleys in the Hamersley Range; it is aooroximately 75 m below Qround highly transmissive and high yielding where there

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 9 Groundwater and Distance from Premises Environmental Value water sources level (mbgl). is karst development. Groundwater salinity (Total Dissolved Solids) is 500 - 1,000 mg/L, which is considered marginal (Department of Water, Salinity status classifications)

Coondewanna Flats Coondewanna Flats is located south­ The hydrostratigraphy of Coondewanna Flats west of the Premises and is the includes low to moderate permeability Tertiary terminus of an internally draining detritals overlying an unconfined aquifer catchment, which extends to the west comprising calcrete and dolomite. The calcrete and has an overall catchment area of layer is extensive at a depth of about 16 to 20 approximately 86,000 ha mbgl. This is underlain by low to high permeability basement of the Wittenoom Formation. The northern border of the Coondewanna Flats PEC is located Groundwater level gradients across the Flats are more than 200 m from the project low, however aquifer connectivity across the area, with the closest bore surface water catchment divide enables (HGSL0014) more than 900 m from groundwater outflow into the Northern Flank the PEC (MAC) and Southern Flank valleys to the east Approximately 2,990 ha of Coondewanna Flats contains the listed PEC - Coolibah-lignum flats. The deep sediments of Coondewanna Flats are of key importance to this PEC as they provide significant inter-annual plant available water storage for the major tree species Eucalyptus victrix which adopts a drought avoidance strategy, by maintaining access to relatively moist soil throughout the year.

Rights in Water and The Premises is located within the N/A Irrigation Act 1914 Proclaimed Pilbara Groundwater Area and Proclaimed Pilbara Surface Water Area

Watercourses A number of unnamed perennial Creek systems in the area are ephemeral, flowing watercourses flow across the Juna after rainfall events Downs MAR scheme area

Risk assessment Tables 6 and 7 below describe the Risk Events associated with the construction and operation of the Juna Downs MAR Scheme consistent with the Guidance Statement: Risk Assessments. Both tables identify whether the emissions present a material risk to human health or the environment, requiring regulatory controls.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 10 Table 6: Risk assessment for proposed amendments during construction

Risk Event Potential Consequence Likelihood Potential Potential Potential Risk Reasoning Source/Activities Adverse rating rating Emissions Receptors Pathway Impacts As there are no receptors present, the Air: Delegated Officer considers that Transport impacts on human health will be No sensitive through air Human health impacts - slight and would occur only in rare receptors then transfer respiratory Slight Rare Low circumstances. within 10 km through illness respiratory The risk rating for dust impacts on system human health from construction Dust: activities is therefore low. associated The Delegated Officer considers the with natural dust tolerance of vegetation earthworks Smothering species and short-term nature of the Construction, and vehicle and the construction activities should prevent potential to be mobilization and movement Terrestrial Air: vegetation impacts. There are also no deposited on positioning of vegetation Transport Declared Rare or PECs within the Category 6 infrastructure near through air vegetation Premises. which may Slight Unlikely Low Mine associated with construction then prevent dewatering the Juna Downs area disposition The Delegated Officers considers the MAR reinjection photosynthesis impacts on vegetation will be slight bores and and plant and unlikely to occur. The risk rating pipework respiration for dust impact to vegetation is therefore low.

As there are no receptors present, the Delegated Officer considers that Noise: impacts on human health and amenity associated Air or other will be slight and would occur only in with No sensitive physical Human health rare circumstances. earthworks receptors medium: and amenity Slight Rare Low within 10 km and vehicle Vibration of impacts The risk rating for noise impacts on movement particles human health and amenity from construction activities is therefore low.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 11 The Delegated Officer considers the natural dust tolerance of vegetation Construction, Smothering species and short-term nature of the mobilization, and the Dust: construction activities should prevent positioning and potential to be associated Terrestrial Air: vegetation impacts. There are also no commissioning of deposited on Category54 with the laying vegetation in Transport Declared Rare or PECs within the irrigation vegetation Se.wage of pipework, and near through air Slight Rare Low Premises. infrastructure which may facility trenching and construction then associated with prevent vehicle area disposition The Delegated Officers considers the the disposal of photosynthesis movement impacts on vegetation will be slight treated effluent to and plant and rare to occur. The risk rating for the spray field respiration dust impact to vegetation is therefore low. As there are no receptors present, the Delegated Officer considers that impacts on human health and amenity Human health will be slight and would occur only in No sensitive impacts­ rare circumstances. receptors Land ingestion or Slight Rare Low within 10 km respiratory The risk rating for impacts of any illness spills on human health and amenity Treated from commissioning activities is wastewater: therefore low. associated 1------+------, with The Delegated Officer considers that commissioning due to the sparsity of the vegetation of the installed along the proposed pipeline corridor pipework Waterlogged and spray field, in addition to the between the soils, impacts output volumes through the VVWTP at VVWTP and Vegetation to vegetation the time of commissioning that the the spray field adjacent to health impacts to vegetation will be slight pipelines in Land depending on Slight Rare Low and would occur only in rare and near quality of circumstances. construction water and area volume The risk rating for impacts of any discharged spills on nearby vegetation from commissioning activities is therefore low.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 12 The Delegated Officer considers that because the pipe will be protected and buried in a trench with sand bedding, the likelihood of overland flow from the pipeline significantly dispersing in the creek line is rare. The volume of treated effluent form Surface water Nutrient the I/WI/TP during commissioning is (Drainage line Over land to enrichment of also anticipated to be low and not crossed by the surface waterways or Slight Rare Low significant enough to cause pipeline water creek line noticeable nutrient enrichment of the corridor) vegetation creek line vegetation. The consequence, should the spill occur is anticipated to be slight. Therefore, the risk rating for impacts of any spills on nearby vegetation from commissioning activities is therefore low.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 13 Table 7: Risk assessment for proposed amendments during operation Risk Event L------r------Consequence Likelihood Risk 1 1 -----:--r~otemtial-l Reasoning Potential Potential Potential rating rating Source/Activities Potential Adverse Emissions Receptors Pathway lmoacts BHP 2016 states that the injection of g(oundwater into the Wittenoom aquifer system at Juna Downs will lead to an increase in groundwater levels and development of a groundwater mound.

The Licensee has undertaken detailed studies of tree water use at Coondewanna Flats. Modelling of Increase in the impact of fluctuating groundwater groundwater levels at levels and Coondewanna Flats caused by the development Juna Downs MAR scheme of a concluded that: groundwater Surplus • Implementation of the Juna mound, water: Vegetation Downs MAR scheme is Category 6 Reinjection degradation of Reinjection reinjected into and predicted to progressively Mine to receiving Moderate Possible Medium the Hamersley subterranean increase groundwater levels bores groundwater aquifer dewatering fauna underlying stands of Eucalyptus -Wittenoom groundwater Aquifer victrix trees at Coondewanna quality Flats. impacting on Based on the predicted beneficial uses • maximum extent of of the aquifer, groundwater mounding, the vegetation lower portion of the root death systems of some mature Eucalyptus victrix trees could become exposed to groundwater for a period of time. In such cases tree water status (as measured by leaf water potential) may increase relative to unaffected trees, particularly during prolonged drv conditions. Where trees

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 14 Risk Event Consequence Likelihood Potential Potential Potential Potential Risk Reasoning Source/Activities Adverse rating rating Emissions Receptors Pathway Impacts have sustained access to groundwater leaf area, tree water use and growth rates may increase. • The majority of Eucalyptus victrix root systems will remain unaffected; however pruning of deeper roots may occur if they are exposed to frequently saturated soils. The trees may reconfigure their root systems to some extent to exploit the groundwater resource. • At the conclusion of the operational phase of the Juna Downs MAR scheme (nominally after 18 years) groundwater levels will progressively decline. • Trees with root systems that were brought into connection with the groundwater system will become disconnected from groundwater. In such cases tree water status may decline during prolonged dry conditions; potentially associated with decreases in leaf area, tree water use and growth rates. More extreme adjustments including canopy die back are unlikely but possible, however the trees will gradually re-adjust to the surface driven hydrological regime. • Acacia aptaneura trees and understorey species will not be affected by the predicted chanQes in _groundwater levels

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 15 Risk Event 1------,------~------,------.-P- o_t_e_n_t-ia- -- Consequence Likelihood 1 Risk Reasoning Source/Activities Potential Potential Potential Adverse rating rating Emissions Receptors Pathway Impacts associated with the Juna Downs MAR scheme.

An increase in groundwater levels as a result of reinjection may result in a loss of troglofauna habitat. The Licensee has stated that no restricted troglofauna species have been identified within the modelling zone.

BHP, 2016 states that one restricted stygofauna species has been recorded within the modelled mounding zone, however it is unlikely that the reinjection of the surplus water will impact on this species as the surplus water to be reinjected at Juna Downs is of a similar quality to that of the receiving aquifer.

The Delegated Officer has considered the location of the Juna Downs MAR scheme to the Coondewanna Flats, potential for increases in groundwater levels and the development of a groundwater mound from reinjection and determined that there will be low level off-site impacts on a local scale. Therefore, the Delegated Officer considers the consequence to be moderate.

The 6 reinjection bores (including the 2 yet to be installed and named) form the Juna Downs MAR scheme. As the Juna Downs MAR

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 16 Risk Event Consequence Likelihood Potential Potential Potential Potential Risk Reasoning Source/Activities Adverse rating rating Emissions Receptors Pathway Impacts scheme will also be reinjecting groundwater into the Wittenoom aquifer, this will subsequently result in an increase in groundwater levels. The Delegated Officer has determined that the likelihood of an environmental impact on the Coondewanna Flats, in particular Eucalyptus victrix, may occur at some time. Therefore, the Delegated Officer considers the consequence to be possible.

The Delegated Officer has determined that the overall rating for risk from the operation of the Juna Downs MAR scheme (reinjection of surplus water) to be medium. Groundwater salinity (total dissolved solids) is 500 - 1,000 mg/L, which is considered marginal (Department of Water, Salinity status classifications). Waterlogged soils, impacts The Licensee will detect leaks in Mine dewater: to vegetation pipelines by reconciling mass Category 6 discharged balance between input and outputs. Dewatering Vegetation Direct health Mine through Flowmeters are located on input pipelines adjacent to discharge to depending on Slight Unlikely Low de watering pipeline leaks pipelines land quality of and output locations and used to or ruptures water and identify potential losses from the volume system. The Licensee does not discharged consider the dewater pipelines to be high risk and will not be incorporating pressure sensors. The Delegated Officer notes that the pipelines will be conveying excess mine dewater with an anticioated total dissolved solid

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 17 Risk Event Consequence Likelihood Potential Risk Reasoning Potential Potent ial Potential rating rating Source/Activities Adverse Emissions Receptors Pathway Impacts concentration of 500 - 1,000 mg/L.

The Delegated Officer has considered the anticipated quality of mine dewater reinjected at the Jun a Downs MAR scheme and proposed leak detection system, and determined that there will be minimal on-site impacts to vegetation as a result of a pipeline leak/rupture. Therefore, the Delegated Officer considers the consequence to be slight.

The Delegated Officer has determined that the likelihood of an environmental impact as a result of a pipeline rupture/leak wi ll probably not occur in most circumstances. Therefore, the Delegated Officer considers the consequence to be unlikely.

The Delegated Officer has determined that the overall rating for risk from the operation of the Juna Downs MAR scheme pipelines to be low. Waterlogged The Delegated Officer considers soils, impacts that due to the sparsity of the to vegetation vegetation along the proposed Operation of the health pipeline corridor and spray field, Category54 WWTP spray Vegetation Direct depending on that the impacts to vegetation will Treated adjacent to discharge to quality of Slight Rare Low be slight and would occur only in Sewage field and wastewater facility associated pipe pipelines land water and rare circumstances. lines volume discharged, The risk rating for impacts of any weeds spills on nearby vegetation from operational activities is therefore

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 18 Risk Event Consequence Likelihood Potential Potential Risk Reasoning Source/Activities Potential Potential rating rating Emissions Receptors Pathway Adverse Impacts low.

The Delegated Officer considers that because the pipe work crossing the drainage line will be protected and buried in a trench with sand bedding, the likelihood of Surface water Nutrient overland flow from the pipeline (Drainage line Direct enrichment of significantly dispersing in the creek crossed by the discharge to waterways or Slight Rare Low line is rare. The consequence, pipeline water creek line should the spill occur is anticipated corridor) vegetation to be slight. Therefore, the risk rating for impacts of any spills on nearby vegetation from commissioning activities is therefore low.

The Delegated Officer considers that due to the effective operation of the existing landfill, the waste being inert only, and the existing conditions within the licence that Category 63 Inert waste, Visual any discharge should be rare. Increase in inert Adjacent Direct Inert waste windblown discharge to amenity, Further impacts from additional waste disposal vegetation Slight Rare Low disposal waste land impacts to waste deposited leaving the landfill flora and fauna would be slight due to the inert nature and management measures in the existing licence. The Delegated Officer therefore considers the subsequent risk ratinQ to be low.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 19 Decision

Juna Downs MAR Scheme The Licensee has current obligations under Part IV of the EP Act (MS 491 and EMP, Rev 6) . Condition 5 of MS 491 provides an outcome based condition that requires abstraction activities to be managed to ensure there are minimal adverse impacts on groundwater dependent ecology at Weeli Wolli Springs and Coondewanna Flats. EMP, Rev 6 is required in accordance with Condition 7 and Licensee commitments 1, 2 and 3 of MS 491. In March 2014, water usage and dewatering requirements were removed from MS 491 as conservation values are managed under the EMP, Rev 6; "dewatering and discharge can be managed under other legislation". Based on the application supporting documentation, the Delegated Officer has determined that the construction and operation of the Juna Downs MAR scheme will not result in emissions which are unacceptable to public health or the environment. Existing licence Condition 1.2.10 has been updated for Category 6 to include the Jun a Downs MAR scheme. The Licensee has committed to constructing the Juna Downs MAR scheme to the specifications provided in BHP, 2016. Conditions 1.2.12 and 1.2.13 have been amended to include the specific design and construction specifications for the Juna Downs MAR scheme and to allow for minor derivations from the design and construction specifications where appropriate. Condition 4.3.1 has been updated to ensure any departures from Conditions 1.2.12 and 1.2.13 are notified to the CEO of DWER. The inclusion of Condition 1.2.16 allows for the operation of the Juna Downs MAR scheme following submission of the compliance documentation. The requirement to submit compliance documentation to the CEO of DWER following construction of the Juna Downs MAR scheme has been implemented via Condition 4.3.1 . The Juna Downs MAR scheme will utilise four injection bores (HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014, HGSL0015), which have already been drilled and two additional injection bores (HGSL0016 and HGSL0017) which will require specific compliance reporting prior to operation. This Amendment Notice allows the construction of injection head works for these four bores HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014 and HGSL0015 (Condition 1.2.13). Condition 2.2.1 has also been updated to include HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014 and HGSL0015 as emission points to groundwater. Conditions 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 have been updated to include bores HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014 and HGSL0015. Condition 2.2.2 now includes a depth to groundwater level limit of "not less than 7 m below ground surface" for HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014 and HGSL0015. This limit is based on studies of tree water use at Coondewanna Flats undertaken by the Licensee, which suggests that at Coondewanna Flats, the roots systems of mature Eucalyptus victrix trees may extend up to approximately 15 m below the surface, whilst those of Acacia aptaneura and Duma f/orulenta are confined to the upper 5 m of the profile. The Delegated Officer considers that this limit will ensure groundwater at the injection borefield does not interact with the roots of Acacia species within Coondewanna Flats. Condition 3.2.1 has been updated to include bores HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014 and HGSL0015 for the monitoring of point source emissions to groundwater. This condition has existing monitoring requirements for the Deposit A MAR. As the Juna Downs MAR scheme will be reinjecting into the same aquifer as the Deposit A MAR (Wittenoom aquifer) the Delegated Officer considers that the same parameters are considered appropriate. The Licensee has developed an adaptive management approach to manage the potential

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2 .0 (July 2017) 20 impacts from the operation of the Juna Downs MAR scheme on the Coondewanna Flat PEC as shown in Table 8. Table 8: Proposed Adaptive Management Response (BHP, 2016)

Monitoring and Management Values

Receptor Aspect Investigate Action Mitigate (early warning (trigger) (threshold) trigger)

Coondewanna Groundwater Groundwater level Groundwater level Groundwater level rises to 7 Flats Level rises to 17 mbgl at rises to 15 mbgl at any mbgl (or other level to be monitoring bore of the following determined during Action Stage) GWB0039M monitoring bores: at any of the following monitoring bores: • GWB0039M • GWB0039M • HCF0032M • HCF0032M • HCF0044M • HCF0044M • HCF0045M • HCF0045M

Vegetation N/A N/A Sustained canopy decline Health (defined as Crown Condition Score below baseline for 3 or more consecutive measurement events, or as determined during Action Stage) or death of any monitored tree

Conditions 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 for ambient groundwater limits and groundwater quality have been updated to include monitoring points GWB0039M, HCF0032M, HCF0044M and HCF0045M, which are the four monitoring bores associated with the Juna Downs MAR scheme. Condition 3.5.1 has an existing groundwater limit for TDS of not less than 750 mg/L. This limit has been applied to GWB0039M, HCF0032M, HCF0044M and HCF0045M. A depth to groundwater level limit of "not less than 7 mbgl" for GWB0039M, HCF0032M, HCF0044M and HCF0045M has also been applied to Condition 3.5.1 as per Table 8 (mitigate - threshold). Condition 3.5.2 has been updated to include GWB0039M, HCF0032M, HCF0044M and HCF0045M and a depth to groundwater level trigger of "not less than 15 mbgl" (as per Table 8) . This trigger level corresponds to the point at which groundwater levels could interact with the roots of Eucalyptus victrix. Condition 3.5.3 has been updated to ensure that the measuring of groundwater level is undertaken daily for GWB0039M, HCF0032M, HCF0044M and HCF0045M. If the groundwater trigger level stipulated in Condition 3.5.2 is exceeded the Licensee is required to undertake six monthly measurements of Leaf Water Potential at monitoring sites 12, 15 and 20 (in addition to ongoing Crown Condition Score and Diameter at Breast Height) to determine response of tree water use to elevated groundwater levels. The Delegated Officer considers this acceptable as the Licensee has stated that the first three years of the Leaf Water Potential data will then be used to establish new Ecological Rehydration Index baseline. If the subsequent Ecological Rehydration Index data shows increasing plant available water, investigate potential factors to determine the cause and if the change is attributable to the reinjection activities, the Licensee's measures will be instigated to limit potential negative impacts on tree health based on conceptual model of ecosystem response.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 21 Increase in Category 63 capacity The Delegated Officer considers that the increase in capacity for Category 63 to allow additional Inert Waste Type 1 and Inert Waste Type 2 in accordance with the Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996 to be acceptable and disposal at the existing inert landfill presents a low risk to human health and the environment. Condition 1.2.2 of the Licence has been amended by this Notice. The Delegated Officer notes that Inert Waste Type 1 and Inert Waste Type 2 will be processed and covered as per Conditions 1.2.4 and 1.2.6 of the existing Licence.

Include the light vehicle washdown bay and associated monitoring points The Delegated Officer notes that existing Condition 2.3.1 (L4 to L6) for treated wastewater from heavy vehicle washdown bays and workshop oily water separators, allows for the discharge of treated wastewater from overflow of the evaporation ponds during extreme rainfall events and during scheduled maintenance. Condition 3.3.1 currently requires a quarterly sample to be taken from the discharge overflow point of the evaporation pond and L5/L6 sample point and have analysed for total recoverable hydrocarbons (TRH). The Delegated Officer considers the change to include the light vehicle washdown bay in Condition 2.3.1 presents a low risk to the environment. The Delegated Officer also notes that an emission limit of 15 mg/L for TRH (L4 to L6) is on the existing licence (Condition 2.3.2). Conditions 1.2.11 (containment infrastructure) and 2.3.1 have been amended via this Notice to include the light vehicle washdown bay.

Expansion of the premises boundary The Delegated Officer considers the update to the premises boundary to be required to ensure the licence is enforceable. The Premises map and Map of emission points and monitoring locations have been amended via this Notice.

Construction of a new 3.047ha spray field and -2km of pipeline As there will be no changes to the existing Mulla Mulla Camp WWTP or treated effluent sampling location, with the exception of some new tie-in pipelines and no surrounding environmental or public receptors present, the Delegated Officer considers the construction and proposed operation of the new spray field to present a low risk to human health and the environment. No additional regulatory controls have been added to the licence for the construction and operation of the new spray field and pipelines.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 22 Other amendments DWER is also implementing changes to update the Licence in accordance with recent administrative changes. During this amendment definitions for 'Anniversary Date', 'MAR' and 'six monthly' have been added and updates have been made to the definition of 'Annual Audit Compliance Report', 'Annual Period' and 'Department'. The following conditions have also been updated during this amendment: • Condition 3.1.2 to stipulate that six monthly monitoring should be undertaken at least 5 months apart. This is based on the inclusion in Table 3.5.3 - Monitoring following groundwater level exceedance; and • Condition 4.1 .2 updated to indicate when the Annual Audit Compliance Report is required to be submitted.

Amendment History Table 9 provides the amendment history for L7851/2002/6. Table 9: Licence amendments

Instrument Issued Amendment

L7851/2002/6 17/1 1/2014 Licence re issue and amendment to new format template

L7851/2002/6 22/01/2014 Minor amendment

L7851/2002/6 7/04/2016 Licence amendment to update to template version 2.9

L7851/2002/6 29/09/2016 Licence amendment initiated by Licensee to increase Category 6 production capacity, approve construction of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and MAC WTP, include Category 858 and include the Western and Central Sediment Basins as emission points to land

L7851/2002/6 5/10/2017 Amendment Notice 1 (this Notice) Licence amendment initiated by Licensee to increase Category 6 and Category 63 production capacity, approve construction of the Juna Downs MAR Scheme, approve construction and operation of a new WWTP spray field for the Mulla Mulla Camp and include associated monitoring conditions, include the light vehicle washdown bay as emission point to land along with associated monitoring conditions and expand the premises boundary

Licensee's Comments The Licensee was provided with an updated draft Amendment Notice on 26 September 2017. Comments received from the Licensee have been considered by the Delegated Officer as shown in Appendix 2.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2 .0 (July 2017) 23 Amendment 1. Page 1 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: Category Approved Premises Category Category description production or production or design number design capacity capacity 5 Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non- 50,000 tonnes or 65,000,000 tonnes per metallic ore: premises on which - more per year !J.annual EfJeriod (a) Metallic or non-metallic ore is crushed, ground, milled or otherwise processed; (b) Tailings from metallic or non-metallic ore are reprocessed; or Tailings or residue from metallic or non-metallic ore are discharged into a containment cell or dam. 6 Mine dewatering: premises on which water is 50,000 tonnes or 21-, a41, GGG 34,931,000 extracted and discharged into the environment to more per year tonnes per !J.annual allow mining of ore. PBeriod 54 Sewage facility: premises - 100 m" or more 480 m" per day (a) on which sewage is treated (excluding per day septic tanks); or (b) From which treated sewage is discharged onto land or into waters. 63 Class I inert landfill site: premises on which 500 tonnes or MOO 9,000 tonnes per waste (as determined by reference to the waste more per year !J.annual EfJeriod type set out in the document entitled "Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996" published by the Chief Executive Officer and as amended from time to time) is accepted for burial. 73 Bulk storage of chemicals etc.: premises on 1 000 m" in 3 500 m" in aggregate which acids, alkalis or chemicals that - aggregate (a) contain at least one carbon to carbon bond; and (b) Are liquid at STP (standard temperature and pressure}, are stored. 858 Water desalinisation plant: premises at which 0.50 gigalitres or 0.9125 gigalitres per salt is extracted from water if waste water is more per year !J.annual EfJeriod discharged onto land or into waters (other than marine waters) 89 Putrescible landfill site: premises on which waste More than 20 but 3 000 tonnes per !J.annual (as determined by reference to the waste type less than 5 000 EfJeriod set out in the document entitled "Landfill Waste tonnes per year Classification and Waste Definitions 1996" published by the Chief Executive Officer, as amended from time to time) is accepted for burial.

2. The licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below for section 1.1.2: 'Anniversary Date' means 1 July of each year; 'Compliance Report Annual Audit Compliance Report' means a report in a format approved by the CEO as presented by the Licensee or as specified by the CEO from time to time and published on the Department's website; 'Aannual [!period' means a 12 month the inc!usive period commencing from 1 July until 30 June in the following year; 'Department' means the department established under section 35 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and designated as responsible for the administration of Division

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 24 3 Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986; 'MAR' means Managed Aquifer Recharge; 'six monthly' means the 2 inclusive periods from 1 July to 31 December and 1 January to 30 June in the following year; 3. Condition 1.2.2 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 1. 2. 2 The Licensee shall only accept waste onto the inert landfill, putrescible landfills, Rubber/Tyre Dump and sewage treatment plants, shown on the maps in Schedule 1, if' (a) it is of a type listed in Table 1.2.1; (b) the quantity accepted is below any quantity limit listed in Table 1.2.1; and (c) it meets any specification listed in Table 1.2.1.

Table 1.2.1: Waste acceptance w.as t e type Quan, tt y I ,m, t Spee, f.tea t ton Inert Waste Type 1 .fH)()() 9 000 None specified Inert Waste Type 2 tonnes/year Tyres, rubber and plastic only Putrescible Waste None specified 3 000 tonnes/year Clean Fill None specified Accepted through sewer inflow(s) only.

Sewage 480 m3/day Packsaddle WWTP Pond System, flow recorded as inflow

All Biomax WWTPs, flow recorded at outflow Note 1: Additional requirements for the acceptance of controlled waste (including asbestos and tyres) are set out in the Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004. 4. Condition 1.2.10 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 1.2.10 The Licensee shall ensure the limits specified in Table 1.2.4 are not exceeded. Table 1.2.4 Production or design capacity limits Ca t egory Ca t egory d escnp tton p remtses prod uc t ion or d estgn capact t:y I,m, t Processing or beneficiation of 5 65,000,000 tonnes of ore per annual period metallic or non-metallic ore 27,541,000 34,931,000 tonnes per Annual Period 8flfWFA total, being: • 5,840,000 tonnes per !!annual {!period {reinjectionefi - Deposit A) • 2,081,000 tonnes per !!annual {!period {discharged to the Western Sediment Basinl 6 Mine dewatering • 8,670,000 8,760,000 tonnes per !!annual [!period {discharged to the Central Sediment Basinl • 10,950,000 tonnes per !!annual {!period {discharged to the Packsaddle Infiltration Pondsl • 7,300,000 tonnes per Annual Period (reinfection - Juna Downs)

73 Bulk storage of chemicals, etc 3,500 cubic metres in aggregate

858 Water desalinisation plant 0. 9125 gigalitres per !!annual {!period

Licence: L7851 /2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 25 Note 1: Environmental Protection Regulations 1987, Schedule 1.

5. Condition 1.2.11 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 1.2. 11 The Licensee shall ensure that waste material is only stored and/or treated within vessels or compounds listed in Table 1.2.5 and identified in Schedule 1 in accordance with the requirements specified within Table 1.2.5. Table 1.2.5: Containment Infrastructure Storage vessel or Material Requirements compound Packsaddle 250 m'!day of effluent from • minimum vertical freeboard of 300 evaporation/infiltration ponds the Packsaddle Village mm except during a 72 hour (L 1 and L2) Closed pond system (L 1) duration, ten year annual recurrence interval storm event 80 m3/day of effluent from the Packsaddle Biomax (L2)

Qil.y. v-1/ate," £9-f)ar:ate," +:,r:eatefi Treated wastewater from • 1.5 mm HOPE lined evaporation 111,'flstev,rater Ponds Treated heavy vehicle ./=Al pond to achieve a permeability of Oil'f.. Water Ponds washdown baysL workshop <10-9 mis oily water separators and untreated water from the lig_ht vehicle wash down bav Western Sediment Basin Mine dewater • minimum vertical freeboard of 300 mm except during a 72 hour duration, ten year annual recurrence interval storm event

Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds Mine dewater • minimum vertical freeboard of 300 (L8-L 10) mm except during a 72 hour duration, ten year annual recurrence interval storm event • high water level alarm installed and maintained on each pond

6. Condition 1.2.13 of the licence is amended by the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 1.2.13 The Licensee must not depart from the specifications in Column 1 and 2 for the infrastructure in each row of Table 1. 2. 7 except: a) where such departure is minor in nature and does not materially change or affect the infrastructure; or b) where such departure improves the functionality of the infrastructure and does not increase risks to public health, public amenity or the environment; and is in accordance with all other conditions of this Licence.

Infrastructure Specifications (design and construction)

Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds 1) Pond • Three infiltration ponds, 80 metres wide, 500 metres long, 0.5 metres in construction depth, each pond comprising of four basins • High level alarms installed on each ond

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 26 • Stock proof fencing erected around perimeter of each pond 2) Water Polyethylene pipeline approximately 7 kilometres in length from the E Deposit conveyance Turkey's Nest to convey excess mine dewater to the infiltration ponds, using diesel pumps 3) Groundwater Installation of groundwater monitoring bore MB1 monitoring Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant 1) Water treatment Installation of a nano-filtration water treatment plant, in two stages: plant • Stage1.· Construction of a 0.584 gigalitre per annum water treatment plant; and • Stage 2: Expansion of the Stage 1 facility to a 0. 9125 gigalitre per annum water treatment plant.

Water treatment plant to comprise of' • Two raw water tanks, Tank A and Tank B; • Two Waste tanks, TK1000A and TK100008; • Two chlorination buildings; • Five nano-filtration trains; • Multimedia filters; • Building to contain sulphuric acid, antiscalant, sodium metasulphate, ferric chloride and sodium hydroxide; • One chlorine contact tank, CCT100000; • Two product water tanks, TK10005A and TK100058; • Control room and laboratorv. 2) Irrigation area • Construction of a 7. 4 hectare irrigation area, comprising of Wobbler xcel 4. 76 millimetres sprays. • Stock proof fencing erected around perimeter of irrigation area Juna Downs MAR scheme 1) Reinfection • Construction of injection bores with flow meters installed; bores HGSL0005, HGSL0006, HGSL0014 and HGSL0015 as e.er location on Attachment 1 of this Amendment Notice; • Construction of two additional bores named HGSL0016 and HGSL0017 (including_ f/owmetersl located within the g_reen area demarcated 'Indicative Area for New Bore' as e.er Attachment 1 of this Amendment Notice

Water Ae.e.roximatel'I.. 22 km of e.olY..ethY..lene e.ie.e conve'l..ance

Mui/a Mui/a Camo WWTP soravfield 1) Sorav irriaation heads: 24 sorinklers at -34m soacinct 2) Perimeter fencina for an area of 3.047ha 3) 110dia HDPE, PE100 PN12.5 e.ie.ework, e.rotected and buried in a trench with sand bedding_ with a dee.th of cover of 900mm in areas subject to vehicular traffic and 750mm in areas not subject to vehicular traffic. 8. The licence is amended by the inclusion of Condition 1.2.16 shown in bold text with underline below. 1.2.16 The Licensee shall operate the Juna Downs MAR scheme in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under condition 4.3.1.

9. Condition 2.2.1 of the licence is amended by the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2 .0 (July 2017) 27 2.2.1 The Licensee shall ensure that where waste is emitted to groundwater from the emission points in Table 2.2.1 and identified on the map of emission points in Schedule 1 it is done so in accordance with the conditions of this Licence. Table 2.2.1: Emission points to groundwater Emission point reference and Description Source including abatement location on Map of emission points HGA0001P Direct injection below Water from dewatering associated HGA0002P ground with the Managed Aquifer HGA0040P Recharge Trial HGA0041P

HGSL0005 Direct in[ection below Water from surg}us mine HGSL0006 ground dewatering HGSL0014 HGSL0015 Bores HGSL0016 and HGSL0017'

Note 1: Following compliance provided as per condition 4. 3. 1

10. Condition 2.2.2 of the licence is amended by the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 2.2.2 The Licensee shall not cause or allow point source emissions to exceed the limits listed in Table 2.2.2. Table 2.2.2: Point source emission limits to groundwater Emission point reference Parameter Limit Averaging period (including units) HGA0001P HGA0002P Not Jess than 1Om HGA0040P below ground HGA0041P surface

HGSL0005 Depth to Spot sample HGSL0006 groundwater HGSL0014 Not less than 7m HGSL0015 below ground Bores HGSL0016 and surface HGSL0017'

Note 1: Following compliance provided as per condition 4.3.1 11. Condition 2.2.3 of the licence is amended by the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 2.2.3 The Licensee shall take the specified management action in the case of an event in Table 2.2.3.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 28 Table 2.2.3: Management actions Emission Event! Event Management action point action reference reference HGA0001P EA1 Any time the The Licensee shall cease direct injection HGA0002P monitoring data at the emission point listed in Table HGA0040P indicates an 2.2.1 where the limit exceedance HGA0041P exceedance of occurred HGSL0005 the limit specified HGSL0006 in condition 2.2.2 HGSL0014 HGSL0015 Bores HGSL0016 and HGSL00171

Note 1: Following compliance provided as per condition 4.3.1 12. Condition 2.3.1 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 2. 3. 1 The Licensee shall ensure that where waste is emitted to land from the emission points in Table 2.3.1 and identified on the map of emission points in Schedule 1 it is done so in accordance with the conditions of this Licence. Table 2.3.1: Emissions to land Emission point Description Source including abatement reference L1 Discharge of treated wastewater from Treated wastewater from Packsaddle Packsaddle Village C150K WWTP to Village C150K WWTP designated unlined evaporation/infiltration pond

L2 Discharge of treated wastewater from Treated wastewater from Packsaddle Packsaddle Village WWTP to unlined Village WWTP ponds evaporation/infiltration pond QisGRalf}e et t.ceatetl L3 Discharge of treated wastewater from Treated wastewater pipeline from Mui/a Mui/a Mui/a Camp C300K WWTP to Mui/a Camp C300K WWTP designated irrigation area L4 Discharge of treated wastewater from overflow of evaporation ponds during Treated wastewater from heavv vehicle L5 extreme rainfall events #JI' washdown bays, aRfi workshop oily water separators and untreated L6 Discharge of treated wastewater to wastewater from the light vehicle undertake scheduled maintenance of washdown bav ponds L7 Discharge of reject water from the Reject water from the Mining Area C Mining Area C Water Treatment Water Treatment Plant Plant to designated irrigation area LB L9 Discharge of excess mine dewater to Mine dewater the Packsaddle Infiltration ponds L10

L11 Discharge of excess mine dewater to Mine dewater the Western Sediment Basin L12 Discharge of excess mine dewater to Mine dewater the Central Sediment Basin

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 29 13. Condition 3.1.2 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 3. 1. 2 The Licensee shall ensure that: (a) monthly monitoring is undertaken at least 15 days apart;-a-Rfi (b) quarterly monitoring is undertaken at least 45 days apart; and (c) six monthly monitoring is undertaken at least 5 months apart.

14. Condition of the licence is amended by the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 3.2.1 The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.2.1 according to the specifications in that table.

Table 3.2. 1: Monitoring of point source emissions to groundwater Emission point Parameter Units Averaging Frequency reference period Cumulative Volume m,lday Electrical Conductivity µSiem Spot Sample Monthly pH.c pH Units Groundwater level mbgl Aluminium Arsenic Barium Boron HGA0001P Calcium Carbonate HGA0002P Cadmium HGA0040P Calcium HGA0041P Chloride HGSL0005 Chromium HGSL0006 Coooer HGSL0014 Fluoride HGSL0015 Iron Bores HGSL0016 Lead mg!L Spot sample Quarterly and HGSL001i1 Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Nitrate Potassium Selenium Sodium Sulfate Total Dissolved Solids Zinc Note 1: pH, electn·cal conductivity and hydrochemistry samples are only required to be taken from one emission point during each quarterly monitoring event and only emission points that are active in the monitoring period are required to be sampled. Note 2: In-field non-NA TA accredited analysis permitted. Note 3: Following compliance provided as per condition 4.3.1 15. Condition 3.3.1 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the strikethrough and insertion of the bold text shown in underline below:

Licence: L7851 /2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 30 3. 3. 1 The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3. 3. 1 according to the specifications in that table. Table 3.3.1: Monitoring of emissions to land Emission Monitoring point Parameter Units Averaging Frequency point location Period reference Flow meter to irrigation area or Volumetric flow rate m3/day Monthly Continuous evaporation I (cumulative) infiltration pond pH' pH units L1 - L3 5-Day Biochemical Final storage tank - Oxygen Demand Spot prior to discharge to Total Suspended Quarterly mg/L sample emission points Solids Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus E.coli cfu/100mL Quarterly Discharge overflow while L4 point from EJiSGAal'f}iflfj evaporation pond

L5/L6 sample poiAt Total Recoverable Spot HVwashdown mg/L L5 ttRfl-..l=6 Hydrocarbons sample discharge overflow Quarterly point Secondary HV washdown L6 discharge overflow point

Flow meter to Volumetric flow rate m3/day Quarterly Continuous irrigation area (cumulative) L7 Final storage tank - Total Dissolved Spot prior to discharge mg/L Quarterly Solids sample emission point

Volumetric flow rate m3/day Quarterly Continuous (cumulative) pH1 Electrical µSiem Conductivity1 Aluminium mg/L Arsenic mg!L At the trunk line prior Barium mg!L to the LB to L 12 Boron mg!L infiltration/sediment Calcium Carbonate mg!L Spot basin Quarterly Cadmium mg!L sample Calcium mg!L Chloride mg/L Chromium mg!L Copper mg!L Fluoride mg/L Iron mg/L Lead mg/L

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 31 Table 3.3.1: Monitoring of emissions to land Magnesium mg!L Manganese mg!L Mercury mg!L Molybdenum mg!L Nickel mg!L Nitrate mg!L Potassium mg!L Selenium mg!L Sodium mg!L Sulfate mg!L Total Dissolved mg!L Solids Zinc mg!L Note 1: In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 32 16. Condition 3.5.1 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 3. 5. 1 The Licensee shall not cause or allow exceedance of the ambient groundwater limits listed in Table 3.5.1. Table 3.5.1: Ambient groundwater limits Monitoring point Parameter Limit Averaging Frequency reference & location period GAOB07RM Total Dissolved 5150mg/L Spot Quarterly GWB0025M Solids Sample HGA0003P HGA0066M

(Mine dewater reinjection)

GWB0039M HCF0032M HCF0044M HCF0045M HPSA1633 (Packsaddle Standing water ::; Bmbgl metFe8 Spot Monthly Infiltration Ponds) level below ground sample le-vel GWB0039M Depth to :5 7mbgl HCF0032M groundwater HCF0044M HCF0045M 17. Condition 3.5.2 of the licence is amended by insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 3.5.2 The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.5.2 according to the specifications in that Table. Table 3.5.2: Monitoring of ambient groundwater quality Monitoring Parameter Trigger Units Averaging Frequency point reference period GAOB05RM Spot Sample Monthly Groundwater Level ::; 12 mbgl HGA0038M GAOB07RM GWB0025M HGA0003P $12 HGA0066M Depth to Groundwater GWB0039M mbgl Spot Sample Monthly HCF0032M Level :5 15 HCF0044M HCF0045M HPSA1633 ::; 13 Electrical Conductivity1 - µSiem pH' - pH Units Spot Sample Quarterly GAOB07RM GWB0025M Aluminium - HGA0003P Arsenic - HGA0066M Barium - HPSA1633 mg!L Spot sample Quarterly Boron - Calcium Carbonate - Cadmium -

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 33 Table 3.5.2: Monitoring of ambient groundwater quality Calcium - Chlorine - Chromium - Copper - Fluoride - Iron - Lead - Magnesium - Manganese - Mercury - Molvbdenum - Nickel - Nitrate - Potassium - Selenium - Sodium - Sulfate - Total Dissolved Solids - Zinc - Note 1: In-field non-NA TA accredited analysis permitted. 18. Condition 3.5.3 of the licence is amended by the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 3.5.3 The Licensee shall implement ambient environmental quality monitoring detailed in Table 3.5.3 if the depth to groundwater level specified in Table 3.5.2 in the relevant monitoring bores specified in Table 3. 5. 2 is exceeded. Table 3.5.3: Monitoring following groundwater level exceedance Emission point Parameter Units Frequency reference GWB0025M HGA0003P GAOB07RM HGA0066M Groundwater level mbgl Daily GWB0039M HCF0032M HCF0044M HCF0045M Visual assessment of surrounding - vegetation (GWB0025M, HGA0003P, GAOB07RM, HGA0066M) Vegetation Vegetation monitoring in the vicinity of the GWB0025M monitoring will event comprising 5 to 10 trees of a variety HGA0003P continue for two of species to be photographed and an GAOB07RM weeks after water assessment of each consisting of HGA0066M levels have receded 0 Tree moisture; to below target level 0 Foliage cover; 0 New growth; and 0 Flowering status. Measurement of Leaf Water Potential at GWB0039M monitoring_ sites 12, 15 and 20 (!n HCF0032M addition to ong_oing_ Crown Condition Six monthly HCF0044M Score and Diameter at Breast Heig_htl - HCF0045M to determine the rese.onse of tree water use to elevated aroundwater levels Note 1: IR fie!d non NATA aGG..-ed!ted analysis perm!tted. 19. Condition 4.1.2 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 34 strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 5.1.2 The Licensee must submit a to the CEO within 90 days a"fter the Anniversary Date, an Annual Audit Compliance Report indicating the extent to which the Licensee has complied with the conditions in this Licence for the Annual Period. 20. Condition 4.3.1 of the licence is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough and the insertion of the bold text shown in underline below: 4.3.1 The Licensee shall ensure that the parameters listed in Table 4.3.1 are notified to the CEO in accordance with the notification requirements of the table. Table 4.3.1: Notification requirements Condition Parameter Notification Format or or table requirement1 form2 (if relevant) 1.2.12 The Licensee shall, prior to commencing Four weeks prior to the None commissioning of the Mining Area C Water commencement of specified Treatment Plant, submit a commissioning commissioning. plan to the CEO. The commissioning plan shall include details relating to: (a) the commissioning stages and expected timescales for commissioning; (b) expected emissions and discharges during commissioning and the environmental implications of the emissions; (c) how emissions and discharges will be managed during commissioning; (d) the monitoring that will be undertaken during the commissioning period; (e) how accidents or malfunctions will be managed; (f) start up and shut down procedures; and (g) reporting proposals including accidents, ma/functions and reporting against the commissioning plan.

Commissioning shall be carried out in accordance with the commissioning plan. 1.2.12 The Licensee shall submit compliance Within 7 days of the None 1.2.13 documentation to the CEO, following completion of construction specified 1.2.14 construction of each of the Packsaddle

1.2.16 Infiltration Ponds1 a-Rt/ Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant and the Juna Downs MAR scheme, and prior to commissioning of the same.

The Licensee must ensure come.Jiance documentation r.tie G9fR-f)liaAGe eeGl:JmeAt shall: a) is certified.y b~ a suitabl~ gua/ified e_rofessional engineer or builder stating_ that each item of infrastructure soecified in Table

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 35 Table 4.3.1: Notification requirements 1.2.7 has been constructed in accordance with the conditions of the Licence with no material defects that the works 111ere G9RS~t:JJGteEI iR aGG9HiaRGe with the OOG/JfReRts f!AiRiRf} Area G '= 7-tJe 1!2QQ2le '=iGeRGe AmeRElmeRt &i:J-Pf)9Ffi-Rf} f)gr;ymeRtatieR f[Jl=IP Bi!liteR, April 2Q16); and b) be signed by a person authorised to represent the Licensee and contain the printed name and position of that person within the company 1.2.12 The Licensee shall submit to the CEO, Within 7 days of the None 1.2.13 as part of the compliance document for completion of specified 1.2.16 the 2 new Juna Downs MAR scheme construction bores HGSL0016 and HGSL0017: a) written GPS locations of the 2 bores confirming the bores are within the area specified in Attachment 1.

1.2.13 If condition 1.2.13 ae.e.Jies1 then the Within 7 day_s of the None Licensee must e_rovide the CEO with a come_letion of se_ecified list of dee_artures which are certified as construction come_ly_ing_ with condition 1.2.12

Tables Breach of any limit specified in the Licence Part A: As soon as N1 1.2.1, 1.2.4, practicable but no later 2.2.2, 2.3.2, than 5pm of the next 3.5.1 usual working day.

Part B: As soon as practicable

3.5.2 Depth to groundwater level exceedance

3. 1.4 Calibration report As soon as practicable. None specified .. Note 1: Not1flcatton reqwrements m the Licence shall not negate the reqwrement to comply with s72 of the Act Note 2: Fonns are in Schedule 2 21. The Premises map in Schedule 1 is deleted and replaced with the map in Attachment 1 of this Amendment Notice. 22. The Map of emission points and monitoring locations in Schedule 1 are deleted and replaced with the maps in Attachment 2 of this Amendment Notice.

Licence: L 7851 /2002/6 IR-TOS Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 36 Attachment 1

Premises map. The Premises is shown in the map below. The purple line depicts the Premises boundary. 680.000 68S000 690 ODO 695000 700.000 705000 710 ODO 715000 S g ~-

8 q

8 q 8 q s ;'::

680000 685000 69o,ooco'=c=-::.,..,-,,--~~~~~69~5~00....,o,__~~ ~~~~~~10~0~0~0~0=--~~~~~~~ 70=-=5~0~0~0~~~~~~~~7~1~0~.o~o~o~~~~~~~---'7~1~5~0~0=,o H•.alth. ~fety .and Environm.nt LEGEND .:l l BHP BILI.ITON IRON ORE bhpbilliton CD Indicative Prescribed Premises Area Licensed Infrastructure Locations + Re-injection bore '"°"'.. ct. -wl\n IC:l1ndicative Area for New Bores • Bulk Chemical Storage • Sewage Treatment Plant FIGURE 1 - MINING AREA C Mulla Mulla Camp spray field N * • Crusher • Waste Management Facility Indicative General Arrangement • Injection bore Licence Amendment L7851 /200216 .t. F Deposit Discharge Point • Water Treatment Plant A + Infiltration Basin + Water Treatment Plant Sprayfield No:t:o~. l"'--P.a..< )-P

Licence: L7851 /2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 37 Map of emission points and monitoring locations The locations of the emission points (waste processing locations) defined in Table 1.2.2 are shown below.

S8 000 685000 690 000 E9SOOO 700000 71)5 coo 710000

8 8 0. o .

8 0.

680.0CO 685.ooo ,....;;690~ .o~co"'-~~~~~~~695~ .oo~o~~~~~~---';c~o.~ooo=-~~~~~~~705c=::OO==o~~~~~~---=-7~10~.oo==-o ~~~~~~~ MN.... a.areei, """ £nv,,__nt LEGEND ~,, 8HP 8 tU.ff'ON tRON ORE bhpb ilUton ~ ... ""°"' Moni torin g Si te MINING AREA C N • Waste Man agem e nt Facility W.:aste M.:an.:agement F;acilities. l.i<:en oeAmendinen1 L785 tl2002/«s A c:::I In d icative Presaibed Premises Area 0 2 3 4 -

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major} template v2.0 (July 2017} 38 The locations of the emission points defined in Table 2.2.1 and the monitoring points defined in Tables 3.2.1, 3.5.1 , 3.5.2 and 3.5.3 are shown below.

680000 685000 690000 695000 700 000 705000 710000 715 000

§_ T S ltc20

HCF 0045M

T Sitc12

HCF 0044M . . ~L---,.~ --.-~ -r-~-r-~..-~-.--~-.--~.--~ .----,,----,,-----.-=""1'~--.-~--.-~-.-~-,-~ -.--~-.--~..-~.--~ .----,.-----.~--,.~--.-~--.-~ -r-~-r-~..-~..--~ ..--~.--~.----,,----,~ -,-J ~ 680.000 685.000 690.000 695.000 700.000 705.000 710.000 715000 H•:alth, s:ar.b' :and Environm•n1 LEGEND .,, BHP BILLITON IRON ORE c:l1ndicative Prescribed Premises Area MINING AREA C N X Tree Health Monitoring Site Manager Aquifer Recharge Trial Monitoring Program Regional Monitoring Sites Licence Amendment L785112002/6 A • Monitoring Bore • Production Bore 0 3

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 39 The location of the containment infrastructure defined in Table 1.2.5, emission points defined in Table 2.3.1 and the monitoring points defined in Table 3.3.1 are shown below.

0 8

8 8 0:. 0:.

8 8 0:. o .

H ...ltft.. $,afety and £.m,lr'Oft.mlfnt LEGEND ,...... , 8 HJ> Btu.ffO N tR.ON ORE bhp__b.ilti ton c:::IIndicative Pr esaibed Prem ises Are.a Uc,ensecl Monitor ing L oc•tJons • F Depos it Disch arge Point MINING AREA C N t lnfiltratMln Basin Emissions to ~ and Pr~ Monitoring t Oily Water Separator Licence Amendment L 785112002/6 A 0 Sewage Trea tme nt Plant NXD:.aie 1.... -P. OO,,, l~iraNo:;>=>SE Rn-0 t Water Treatment Plan t S prayfield Oatt:.&.O S:01: I OrO.r-:1: J.. ~:o(!C I • Trea~ed Oily Water 0 2 3 .. I 3 ~~5'"-'-' ~-· ~ C. Mo:1-& -

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 40 Appendix 1: Key Documents

Document Title In text ref Availability 1 DER, July 2015. Guidance Statement: accessed at Regulatory principles. Department of httQ://www.der.wa.gov.au Environment Regulation, Perth. 2 DER, October 2015. Guidance Statement: Setting conditions. Department of Environment Regulation, Perth. 3 DER, November 2016. Guidance Statement: Risk Assessments. Department of Environment Regulation, Perth. 4 DER, November 2016. Guidance Statement: Decision Making. Department of Environment Regulation, Perth. 5 Email "L7851 - Juna Downs MAR DER records (A 1377349) Updated Information", received from - Chris Hopkins (BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd), 14 February 2017 6 Email "RE: Revised Boundary for the DER records (A1381912) MAC Prescribed Premises", received - from Chris Hopkins (BHP Billiton Iron Ore Ptv Ltd), 22 February 2017 7 Landfill Waste Classification and Landfill Waste accessed at Waste Definitions 1996 (As amended Classification httQ://www.der.wa.gov.au December 2009), Department of and Waste Environment and Conservation Definitions 1996 8 Licence L7851/2002/6 - Mining Area accessed at L 7851 /2002/6 C Project httQ://www.der.wa.gov.au 9 Mining Area C L7854/2002/6 Licence DER records (A 1333071) Amendment Supporting Documentation - Juna Downs MAR (Including information relating to BHP, 2016 Attachments 2, 3A, 6, 9 and 10), BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd, November 2016 10 Ministerial Statement 491 accessed at MS 491 httQ://www.eQa.wa.gov.au/ 11 Priority Ecological Communities for accessed at Western Australia Version 24, Parks and httQ://www.dQaw.wa.gov.au Species and Communities Branch, Wildlife, 2016 Department of Parks and Wildlife, 24 June 2016 12 RE: Application for a Licence DER records (A 1360328) Amendment under the Environmental Parks and Protection Act 1986 - Mining Area C Wildlife, 2017 Licence L785112002/6, Department of Parks and Wildlife, 18 January 2017

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 41 13 Request for comments on Licence DER records (A 1360146) Amendment under the Environmental Protection Act 1986- Mining Area C - DoW, 2017 Juna Downs MAR L7851/2002/6, Department of Water, 16 January 2017 14 Understanding-salinity - Salinity accessed at status classifications, by total salt DoW, Salinity htt12://www.water.wa.gov.au/water- status concentration table, Department of to12ics/water-quality/managing- Water classification water-quality/understanding-salinity 15 Email: "RE: Additional request for DER records (A 1517849) information re: L7851 BHP MAC Juna Downs MAR Amendment Notice 1" . - From BHP regarding 2 additional re- injection bores. Email dated 1 August 2017 16 Email: "Updated Spray Field Location DER records (A 1501494) for Mui/a Mui/a Camp". From BHP regarding detail on the change in - spray field location. Email dated 8 August 2017 17 Email: "RE: APPLICANT DER records (A 1516834) NOT/FICA TION - L7851/2002/6 - APPL/CATION FOR AN AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ". From - BHP regarding the movement of the Mulla Mulla Camp spray field to new location on Premises. Email dated 4 September 2017 18 Email: "Comments on Draft Licence DER records (A 1534445) Amendment Notice for L7851 - Mining Area C 4 Oct 17". From BHP with - feedback on second AN#1 draft review. Email dated 3 October 2017, received 4 October 2017

Licence: L785 1/2002/6 IR-T08 Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 42 Appendix 2: Summary of Licensee comments The Licensee was provided with the draft Amendment Notice on 30 June 2017 for review and comment. The Licensee responded on 18 July 2017. The following comments were received on the draft Amendment Notice.

Comments received DER consideration of risk

Draft review 1 - July 2017 response

Amendment of text within Table 1.2.5 to clarify the Material DWER considers the risk associated with the entering the 'Treated Oily Water Ponds' and to remove the proposed re-wording of Material entering the requirement for the Light Vehicle wash down water to be treated Treated Oily Water Ponds, to remove the Light prior to reaching the lined waste water pond. Vehicle washdown water, is nil. The previous licence only provided for 'Material': 'Treated The Licensee advised that the light vehicle wash down bay was wastewater from HV Washdown bays and sampled for TRH and that testing of water from the light vehicle Workshops oily water separators' and the risk wash down bay has shown results of -1 mg/L TRH. of these facilities had been previously assessed. No changes to the licence are proposed as a result of adding untreated LV wash down water to the Treated Oily Water Ponds. The discharge overflow point from the Treated Oily Water Ponds will remain to be sampled quarterly while discharging. Given this monitoring measure, DWER considers the risk of untreated LV wash down water entering the lined containment infrastructure, is nil. It is noted that the TRH sampling conducted specifically at the light vehicle wash down bay is not currently required under L7851/2002/6, but is conducted by the Licensee (at the light vehicle wash down bay) for internal monitoring purposes.

The Licensee requested two unnamed bores to be added to DWER considers the addition of the two bores Table 1.2.7 for the purpose of construction under this Licence to the Licence as low risk to the environment amendment, to enable timely construction of the additional two and public health. bores within the MAR scheme. A notification period (top DWER) of one-month prior to construction was nominated by the Licensee. The Licensee also proposed that these two additional bores only be operational subsequent to a future licence amendment.

The Licensee requested update of Emission Point Reference DWER considers the update of the names of L4, L5 and L6 in Table 3.3.1 and amend the frequency of L4 the emission point references and amendment emission point sampling to be Quarterly. of L4 sampling frequency to be a low risk to the environment and public health.

Draft review 2 - October 2017 response

The Licensee requested a wording change to Table 2.3.1: DWER considers the update of the wording for 'Emissions to land: L4, L5 and L6 - Source including abatement' points L4, L5 and L6 within Table 2.3.1 to To reflect that the untreated LV water also contributing to the constitute a low risk to the environment and overflow: 'Treated wastewater from heavy vehicle washdown public health. bays, workshop oily water separators and untreated wastewater from the light vehicle washdown bay.'

Licence: L7851/2002/6 IR-TOB Amendment Notice (Major) template v2.0 (July 2017) 43

Licence

Environmental Protection Act 1986, Part V

Licensee: BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd

Licence: L7851/2002/6

Registered office: Level 1, City Square Brookfield Place 125 -137 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000

ACN: 008 700 981

Premises address: Mining Area C Project Mining Tenement ML281SA NEWMAN WA 6753 As depicted in Schedule 1

Issue date: Thursday, 13 November 2014

Commencement date: Monday, 17 November 2014

Expiry date: Tuesday, 16 November 2027

Prescribed premises category Schedule 1 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987

Category Approved Premises Category Category description production or production or design number design capacity capacity 5 Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non- 50,000 tonnes or 65,000,000 tonnes per metallic ore: premises on which – more per year annual period (a) Metallic or non-metallic ore is crushed, ground, milled or otherwise processed; (b) Tailings from metallic or non-metallic ore are reprocessed; or Tailings or residue from metallic or non-metallic ore are discharged into a containment cell or dam. 6 Mine dewatering: premises on which water is 50,000 tonnes or 27,541,000 tonnes extracted and discharged into the environment to more per year per annual period allow mining of ore. 54 Sewage facility: premises – 100 m3 or more 480 m3 per day (a) on which sewage is treated (excluding per day septic tanks); or (b) From which treated sewage is discharged onto land or into waters. 63 Class I inert landfill site: premises on which 500 tonnes or 5,000 tonnes per waste (as determined by reference to the waste more per year annual period type set out in the document entitled “Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996” published by the Chief Executive Officer and as amended from time to time) is accepted for burial.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 1 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

73 Bulk storage of chemicals etc.: premises on 1 000 m3 in 3 500 m3 in aggregate which acids, alkalis or chemicals that – aggregate (a) contain at least one carbon to carbon bond; and (b) Are liquid at STP (standard temperature and pressure), are stored. 85B Water desalinisation plant: premises at which 0.50 gigalitres or 0.9125 gigalitres per salt is extracted from water if waste water is more per year annual period discharged onto land or into waters (other than marine waters) 89 Putrescible landfill site: premises on which waste More than 20 but 3 000 tonnes per (as determined by reference to the waste type less than 5 000 annual period set out in the document entitled “Landfill Waste tonnes per year Classification and Waste Definitions 1996” published by the Chief Executive Officer, as amended from time to time) is accepted for burial.

Conditions This Licence is subject to the conditions set out in the attached pages.

Date signed: 29 September 2016 ...... Alana Kidd Manager Licensing – Resource Industries Officer delegated under section 20 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 2 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Contents

Licence 1 Contents 3 Introduction 3 Licence conditions 6 1 General 6 2 Emissions 12 3 Monitoring 14 4 Information 18 Schedule 1: Maps 22 Schedule 2: Reporting & notification forms 26

Introduction

This Introduction is not part of the Licence conditions.

DER’s industry licensing role The Department of Environment Regulation (DER) is a government department for the state of Western Australia in the portfolio of the Minister for Environment. DER’s purpose is to advise on and implement strategies for a healthy environment for the benefit of all current and future Western Australians.

DER has responsibilities under Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (the Act) for the licensing of prescribed premises. Through this process DER regulates to prevent, control and abate pollution and environmental harm to conserve and protect the environment. DER also monitors and audits compliance with works approvals and licence conditions, takes enforcement action as appropriate and develops and implements licensing and industry regulation policy.

Licence requirements This Licence is issued under Part V of the Act. Conditions contained within the Licence relate to the prevention, reduction or control of emissions and discharges to the environment and to the monitoring and reporting of them.

Where other statutory instruments impose obligations on the Premises/Licensee the intention is not to replicate them in the licence conditions. You should therefore ensure that you are aware of all your statutory obligations under the Act and any other statutory instrument. Legislation can be accessed through the State Law Publisher website using the following link: http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/default.html

For your Premises relevant statutory instruments include but are not limited to obligations under the:

 Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004 – these Regulations make it an offence to discharge certain materials such as contaminated stormwater into the environment other than in the circumstances set out in the Regulations.

 Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004 - these Regulations place obligations on you if you produce, accept, transport or dispose of controlled waste.

 Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 – these Regulations require noise emissions from the Premises to comply with the assigned noise levels set out in the Regulations.

You must comply with your licence. Non-compliance with your licence is an offence and strict penalties exist for those who do not comply.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 3 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Licence holders are also reminded of the requirements of section 53 of the Act which places restrictions on making certain changes to prescribed premises unless the changes are in accordance with a works approval, licence, closure notice or environmental protection notice.

Licence fees If you have a licence that is issued for more than one year, you are required to pay an annual licence fee prior to the anniversary date of issue of your licence. Non payment of annual licence fees will result in your licence ceasing to have effect meaning that it will no longer be valid and you will need to apply for a new licence for your Premises.

Ministerial conditions If your Premises has been assessed under Part IV of the Act you may have had conditions imposed by the Minister for Environment. You are required to comply with any conditions imposed by the Minister.

Premises description and Licence summary BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd (BHPBIO) operates Mining Area C (MAC) to produce iron ore for export via Port Hedland. MAC is located in the Pilbara region of Western Australia, within mining tenement ML281SA. The nearest township is Newman, which is approximately 120 kilometres (km) south-west of MAC. Rio Tinto Iron Ore’s Hope Downs operation, Weeli Wolli Springs and the Coondewanna Flats are located 10km east, 20km east and 20km south-west respectively of the MAC operation.

Conventional open cut mining methods are used at MAC to extract ore for processing through a two stage crushing and screening system to produce lump and fines products. Following blending into stockpiles, the ore is loaded onto trains and railed to Port Hedland for export.

MAC began dewatering operations in April 2010 to allow continued mining of the ore body, with all water abstracted being re-used on site for dust control. The MAC operation has now moved into a surplus mine water balance situation and BHPBIO are in the process of conducting a Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) trial to enable an assessment of the overall feasibility and long term sustainability of a MAR operation at MAC. This trial has been approved by the Office of the Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA), was approved under works approval W5079/2011/1 and is licensed under L7851/2002/6.

The objectives of the trial are to investigate the hydraulic properties of the receiving aquifer and intervening formations between the Paraburdoo Dolomite and the Marra Mamba ore body, at a local and regional scale. BHPBIO have completed Stage 1 of the MAR trial and are ready to commence stage 3 (stage 2 will no longer be completed). Over the course of the trial the total injection rate is not expected to exceed the current approved design capacity of 5.84GL/year.

This Licence is the result of an amendment sought by BHPBIO to:  Approve the construction and operation of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds to dispose of up to 10.95 GL/year of mine dewater;  Approve the construction and operation of the MAC Water Treatment Plant (WTP) and associated spray field required for disposal of reject water. The WTP will have a design capacity of 0.9125 GL/year;  Increase the Category 6 premises production limit from 5.84 GL/year to 27.541 GL/year, to account for the discharge of surplus mine dewater to the proposed Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and the existing Western and Central Sediment Basins;  Include Category 85B on the Licence to allow for the operation of the proposed WTP; and  Specify the Western and Central Sediment Basins as emission points to land and update monitoring requirements as required.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 4 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

The licences and works approvals issued for the Premises since 19/08/2002 are:

Instrument log Instrument Issued Description W3663/2002/1 19/08/2002 New works approval application for construction of prescribed premises W3687/2002/1 10/12/2002 Works approval application to construct category 54 sewage facility and category 63 and 64 landfills L7851/2002/1 05/05/2003 New licence application to allow ore processing operations to commence L7851/2002/2 05/05/2004 Licence re-issue L7851/2002/3 07/11/2004 Licence re-issue W4105/2002/1 05/09/2005 Works approval application to increase capacity of category 5 ore processing infrastructure W4162/2002/1 21/10/2005 Works approval application to construct category 54 sewage facility L7851/2002/4 07/11/2006 Licence re-issue L7851/2002/5 17/11/2009 Licence re-issue W4665/2010/1 31/05/2010 Works approval application to construct category 89 putrescible landfill W4939/2011/1 11/07/2011 Works approval application to increase capacity of category 5 ore processing infrastructure W5079/2011/1 05/03/2012 Works approval application relating to Managed Aquifer Recharge trial W5244/2012/1 10/09/2012 Works approval application – Category 5 additional crushing and screening plant (5mtpa). L7851/2002/6 17/11/2014 Licence re-issue and amendment to REFIRE format L7851/2002/6 22/01/2014 Minor amendment L7851/2002/6 07/04/2016 Amendment and update to template version 2.9. L7851/2002/6 29/09/2016 Amendment to increase Category 6 production capacity, approve construction of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and MAC WTP, include Category 85B and include the Western and Central Sediment Basins as emission points to land.

Severance It is the intent of these Licence conditions that they shall operate so that, if a condition or a part of a condition is beyond the power of this Licence to impose, or is otherwise ultra vires or invalid, that condition or part of a condition shall be severed and the remainder of these conditions shall nevertheless be valid to the extent that they are within the power of this Licence to impose and are not otherwise ultra vires or invalid.

END OF INTRODUCTION

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 5 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Licence conditions

1 General

1.1 Interpretation

1.1.1 In the Licence, definitions from the Environmental Protection Act 1986 apply unless the contrary intention appears.

1.1.2 For the purposes of this Licence, unless the contrary intention appears:

‘Act’ means the Environmental Protection Act 1986;

‘acceptance criteria’ has the meaning defined in Landfill Definitions;

‘annual period’ means the inclusive period from 1 July until 30 June in the following year;

‘AS/NZS 2031’ means the Australian Standard AS/NZS 2031 Selection of containers and preservation of water samples for microbiological analysis;

‘AS/NZS 5667.1’ means the Australian Standard AS/NZS 5667.1 Water Quality – Sampling – Guidance of the Design of sampling programs, sampling techniques and the preservation and handling of samples;

‘AS/NZS 5667.10’ means the Australian Standard AS/NZS 5667.10 Water Quality – Sampling – Guidance on sampling of waste waters;

‘AS/NZS 5667.11’ means the Australian Standard AS/NZS 5667.11 Water Quality – Sampling – Guidance on sampling of groundwaters;

‘AS/NZS 2031’ means the Australian Standard AS/NZ 2031:2001 Selection of containers and preservation of water samples for microbiological analysis;

‘averaging period’ means the time over which a monitoring result is obtained;

‘CEO’ means Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Environment Regulation;

‘CEO’ for the purpose of correspondence means; Chief Executive Officer Department Division 3 Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 Locked Bag 33 Cloisters Square PERTH WA 6850 Email: [email protected];

‘Clean Fill’ has the meaning defined in Landfill Definitions;

‘Compliance Report’ means a report in a format approved by the CEO as presented by the Licensee or as specified by the CEO from time to time and published on the Department’s website;

‘controlled waste’ has the definition in Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004;

‘Department’ means the department established under section 53 of the Public Sector Management Act and designated as responsible for the administration of Division 3 Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986;

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 6 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

‘freeboard’ means the distance between the maximum water surface elevations and the top of retaining banks or structures at their lowest point;

‘Inert Waste Type 1’ has the meaning defined in Landfill Definitions;

‘Inert Waste Type 2’ has the meaning defined in Landfill Definitions;

‘Landfill Definitions’ means the document titled “Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996” published by the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Environment as amended from time to time;

‘Licence’ means this Licence numbered L7851/2002/6 and issued under the Act;

‘Licensee’ means the person or organisation named as Licensee on page 1 of the Licence;

‘mbgl’ means metres below ground level;

‘NATA’ means the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia;

‘NATA accredited’ means in relation to the analysis of a sample that the laboratory is NATA accredited for the specified analysis at the time of the analysis;

‘normal operating conditions’ means any operation of a particular process (including abatement equipment) excluding start-up, shut-down and upset conditions, in relation to stack sampling or monitoring;

‘NTU’ means nephelometric turbidity units;

‘Putrescible’ has the meaning defined in Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996 (As amended December 2009), published by the CEO and as amended from time to time;

‘Premises’ means the area defined in the Premises Map in Schedule 1 and listed as the Premises address on page 1 of the Licence;

‘quarterly’ means the 4 inclusive periods from 1 April to 30 June, 1 July to 30 September, 1 October to 31 December and in the following year, 1 January to 31 March;

‘rehabilitation’ means the completion of the engineering of a landfill cell and includes capping and/or final cover;

‘Schedule 1’ means Schedule 1 of this Licence unless otherwise stated;

‘Schedule 2’ means Schedule 2 of this Licence unless otherwise stated;

‘Special Waste Type 1’ has the meaning defined in Landfill Definitions;

‘spot sample’ means a discrete sample representative at the time and place at which the sample is taken;

‘tipping area’ means the area of the landfill in which waste other than cover material is being deposited;

‘µS/cm’ means microsiemens per centimetre; and

‘Waste Code’ means the Waste Code assigned to a type of controlled waste for purposes of waste tracking and reporting as specified in the Department of Environment Regulation “Controlled Waste Category List” (July 2014), as amended from time to time.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 7 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

1.1.3 Any reference to an Australian or other standard in the Licence means the relevant parts of the standard in force from time to time during the term of this Licence.

1.1.4 Any reference to a guideline or code of practice in the Licence means the version of that guideline or code of practice in force from time to time, and shall include any amendments or replacements to that guideline or code of practice made during the term of this Licence.

1.2 Premises operation

1.2.1 The Licensee shall record and investigate the exceedance of any descriptive or numerical limit in this section.

1.2.2 The Licensee shall only accept waste onto the inert landfill, putrescible landfills, Rubber/Tyre Dump and sewage treatment plants, shown on the maps in Schedule 1, if: (a) it is of a type listed in Table 1.2.1; (b) the quantity accepted is below any quantity limit listed in Table 1.2.1; and (c) it meets any specification listed in Table 1.2.1.

Table 1.2.1: Waste acceptance Waste type Quantity limit Specification 1 Inert Waste Type 1 None specified 5 000 tonnes/year Inert Waste Type 2 Tyres, rubber and plastic only Putrescible Waste None specified 3 000 tonnes/year Clean Fill None specified Accepted through sewer inflow(s) only.

Packsaddle WWTP Pond System, flow Sewage 480 m3/day recorded as inflow

All Biomax WWTPs, flow recorded at outflow Note 1: Additional requirements for the acceptance of controlled waste (including asbestos and tyres) are set out in the Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004.

1.2.3 The Licensee shall ensure that where waste does not meet the waste acceptance criteria set out in condition 1.2.1 it is removed from the Premises, where that is not possible, stored in a segregated storage area or container and removed to an appropriately authorised facility as soon as practicable.

1.2.4 The Licensee shall ensure that wastes accepted onto the landfills, Rubber / Tyre Dump and sewage treatment plants are only subjected to the process(es) set out in Table 1.2.2 and in accordance with any process limits described in that Table.

Table 1.2.2: Waste processing Waste type(s) Process Process limits 1,2 All Disposal of waste by Shall only take place within the areas shown in landfilling Schedule 1.

No waste shall be temporarily stored or landfilled within 35 metres from the boundary of the premises.

The separation distance between the base of the landfill and the highest groundwater level shall not be less than 2m. Clean Fill Receipt, handling and disposal by landfilling None specified Inert Waste Type1 Inert Waste Type 2 – Receipt, handling, To be stored in piles of up to 100 units with a 6m 1 Tyres storage prior to disposal separation distance between piles.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 8 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

by landfilling Tyres/rubber shall only be landfilled in overburden storage areas located within the prescribed premises boundary shown in Schedule 1

Putrescible Waste Receipt, handling, Shall only be placed in the Putrescible Landfill sites storage prior to disposal shown in Schedule 1. by landfilling Sewage Biological, physical and chemical treatment None specified Sewage sludge Drying and storage None specified Note 1: Requirements for landfilling tyres are set out in Part 6 of the Environmental Protection Regulations1987. Note 2: Additional requirements for the acceptance and landfilling of controlled waste (including asbestos and tyres) are set out in the Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004.

1.2.5 The Licensee shall manage the landfilling activities to ensure: (a) waste is levelled and compacted as soon as practicable after it is discharged; (b) waste is placed and compacted to ensure all faces are stable and capable of retaining rehabilitation material; and (c) rehabilitation of a cell or phase takes place within 6 months after disposal in that cell or phase has been completed.

1.2.6 The Licensee shall ensure that cover is applied and maintained on landfilled wastes in accordance with Table 1.2.3 and that sufficient stockpiles of cover are maintained on site at all times.

Table 1.2.3: Cover requirements 1 Waste Type Material Depth Timescales Inert Waste type 1 N/A N/A No cover required As soon as practicable following the achievement of final process limits (as defined in Inert Waste Type 2 100mm Table 1.2.2) in the area(s) in which tyres are Type 1 Inert deposited waste, As soon as practicable and not later than weekly clean fill or 150mm

soil Putrescible Waste Within 3 months of achieving final waste 1 000mm contours

Note 1: Additional requirements for the covering of tyres are set out in Part 6 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987.

1.2.7 The Licensee shall prevent unauthorised access to the landfill(s).

1.2.8 The Licensee shall ensure that wind-blown waste is contained within the boundary of the Premises and that wind-blown waste is returned to the tipping area on at least a monthly basis.

1.2.9 The Licensee shall manage the wastewater treatment facilities, wastewater treatment evaporation ponds and irrigation areas such that: (a) stormwater runoff resulting from site drainage shall be prevented from entering the wastewater treatment ponds or causing erosion of the outer pond embankments; (b) overtopping of the ponds shall not occur, except as a result of a storm event of 10 years average recurrence interval and 72 hours duration; (c) vegetation and debris (emergent or otherwise) is prevented from growing or accumulating in the pond wastewaters or on the inner pond embankments; (d) no irrigation generated run-off, spray drift or discharge occurs beyond the boundary of the defined irrigation area(s).

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 9 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

1.2.10 The Licensee shall ensure the limits specified in Table 1.2.4 are not exceeded.

Table 1.2.4 Production or design capacity limits Category1 Category description1 Premises production or design capacity limit Processing or beneficiation of 5 65,000,000 tonnes of ore per annual period metallic or non-metallic ore 27,541,000 tonnes per annum total, being:  5,840,000 tonnes per annual period reinjected  2,081,000 tonnes per annual period discharged to the Western Sediment Basin 6 Mine dewatering  8,670,000 tonnes per annual period discharged to the Central Sediment Basin  10,950,000 tonnes per annual period discharged to the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds

73 Bulk storage of chemicals, etc 3,500 cubic metres in aggregate

85B Water desalinisation plant 0.9125 gigalitres per annual period

Note 1: Environmental Protection Regulations 1987, Schedule 1.

1.2.11 The Licensee shall ensure that waste material is only stored and/or treated within vessels or compounds listed in Table 1.2.5 and identified in Schedule 1 in accordance with the requirements specified within Table 1.2.5.

Table 1.2.5: Containment Infrastructure Storage vessel or compound Material Requirements 3 Packsaddle 250 m /day of effluent  minimum vertical freeboard of 300 mm evaporation/infiltration ponds (L1 from the Packsaddle except during a 72 hour duration, ten and L2) Village Closed pond year annual recurrence interval storm system (L1) event

80 m3/day of effluent from the Packsaddle Biomax (L2)

Oily Water Separator Treated Treated wastewater  1.5 mm HDPE lined evaporation pond Wastewater Ponds from HV Washdown to achieve a permeability of <10-9 m/s bays and Workshops oily water separators

Western Sediment Basin Mine dewater  minimum vertical freeboard of 300 mm except during a 72 hour duration, ten year annual recurrence interval storm event  Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds (L8- Mine dewater  minimum vertical freeboard of 300 mm L10) except during a 72 hour duration, ten year annual recurrence interval storm event  high water level alarm installed and maintained on each pond 

1.2.12 The Licensee shall construct the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant in accordance with the documentation detailed in Table 1.2.6.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 10 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Table 1.2.6: Construction requirements Document Parts Date of document Mining Area C L7851/2002/6 – All, including drawings and April 2016 Licence Amendment Supporting appendices Documentation Email correspondence, RE: Mining All, including Attachments 19 May 2016, 08:17 Area C Project – Licence L7851/2002/6 – amendment, Chris Hopkins, BHP Billiton Pty Ltd Email correspondence, RE: Mining All, including Attachments 24 May 2016, 13:45 Area C Project – Licence L7851/2002/6 – amendment, Chris Hopkins, BHP Billiton Pty Ltd

1.2.13 The Licensee must not depart from the specifications in Column 1 and 2 for the infrastructure in each row of Table 1.2.7 except: a) where such departure is minor in nature and does not materially change or affect the infrastructure; or b) where such departure improves the functionality of the infrastructure and does not increase risks to public health, public amenity or the environment; and is in accordance with all other conditions of this Licence.

Table 1.2.7: Infrastructure to be constructed Infrastructure Specifications (design and construction)

Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds 1) Pond  Three infiltration ponds, 80 metres wide, 500 metres long, 0.5 construction metres in depth, each pond comprising of four basins  High level alarms installed on each pond  Stock proof fencing erected around perimeter of each pond 2) Water Polyethylene pipeline approximately 7 kilometres in length from the E conveyance Deposit Turkey’s Nest to convey excess mine dewater to the infiltration ponds, using diesel pumps 3) Groundwater Installation of groundwater monitoring bore MB1 monitoring Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant 1) Water Installation of a nano-filtration water treatment plant, in two stages: treatment  Stage1: Construction of a 0.584 gigalitre per annum water plant treatment plant; and  Stage 2: Expansion of the Stage 1 facility to a 0.9125 gigalitre per annum water treatment plant.

Water treatment plant to comprise of:  Two raw water tanks, Tank A and Tank B;  Two Waste tanks, TK1000A and TK10000B;  Two chlorination buildings;  Five nano-filtration trains;  Multimedia filters;  Building to contain sulphuric acid, antiscalant, sodium metasulphate, ferric chloride and sodium hydroxide;  One chlorine contact tank, CCT100000;  Two product water tanks, TK10005A and TK10005B;  Control room and laboratory. 2) Irrigation area  Construction of a 7.4 hectare irrigation area, comprising of Wobbler xcel 4.76 millimetres sprays.  Stock proof fencing erected around perimeter of irrigation area

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 11 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

1.2.14 The Licensee shall operate the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the compliance document required under condition 4.3.1.

1.2.15 The Licensee shall operate the Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant in accordance with the conditions of this Licence, following submission of the commissioning report required under condition 4.2.3.

2 Emissions

2.1 General

2.1.1 The Licensee shall record and investigate the exceedance of any descriptive or numerical limit specified in any part of section 2 of this Licence.

2.2 Point source emissions to groundwater

2.2.1 The Licensee shall ensure that where waste is emitted to groundwater from the emission points in Table 2.2.1 and identified on the map of emission points in Schedule 1 it is done so in accordance with the conditions of this Licence.

Table 2.2.1: Emission points to groundwater Emission point reference Description Source including abatement and location on Map of emission points HGA0001P Direct injection below Water from dewatering HGA0002P ground associated with the Managed HGA0040P Aquifer Recharge Trial HGA0041P

2.2.2 The Licensee shall not cause or allow point source emissions to exceed the limits listed in Table 2.2.2.

Table 2.2.2: Point source emission limits to groundwater Emission point Parameter Limit Averaging period reference (including units) HGA0001P HGA0002P Not less than 10m Depth to groundwater Spot sample HGA0040P below ground surface HGA0041P

2.2.3 The Licensee shall take the specified management action in the case of an event in Table 2.2.3.

Table 2.2.3: Management actions Emission Event/ Event Management action point action reference reference HGA0001P EA1 Any time the The Licensee shall cease direct injection HGA0002P monitoring data at the emission point listed in Table 2.2.1 HGA0040P indicates an where the limit exceedance occurred HGA0041P exceedance of the limit specified in condition 2.2.2

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 12 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

2.3 Emissions to land

2.3.1 The Licensee shall ensure that where waste is emitted to land from the emission points in Table 2.3.1 and identified on the map of emission points in Schedule 1 it is done so in accordance with the conditions of this Licence.

Table 2.3.1: Emissions to land Emission point Description Source including abatement reference L1 Discharge of treated Treated wastewater from Packsaddle wastewater from Packsaddle Village C150K WWTP Village C150K WWTP to designated unlined evaporation/infiltration pond L2 Discharge of treated Treated wastewater from Packsaddle wastewater from Packsaddle Village WWTP ponds Village WWTP to unlined evaporation/infiltration pond Discharge of treated L3 Discharge of treated Treated wastewater pipeline from Mulla wastewater from Mulla Mulla Mulla Camp C300K WWTP Camp C300K WWTP to designated irrigation area L4 Discharge of treated wastewater from overflow of L5 evaporation ponds during Treated wastewater from HV Washdown extreme rainfall events bays and Workshops oily water L6 Discharge of treated separators wastewater to undertake scheduled maintenance of ponds L7 Discharge of reject water from the Mining Area C Water Reject water from the Mining Area C Treatment Plant to designated Water Treatment Plant irrigation area L8

Discharge of excess mine L9 dewater to the Packsaddle Mine dewater Infiltration ponds L10

L11 Discharge of excess mine dewater to the Western Mine dewater Sediment Basin L12 Discharge of excess mine dewater to the Central Mine dewater Sediment Basin

2.3.2 The Licensee shall not cause or allow emissions to land greater than the limits listed in Table 2.3.2.

Table 2.3.2: Emission limits to land Emission point Parameter Limit Averaging reference (including units) period L4, L5 and L6 Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons 15mg/L Spot sample L7 Total Dissolved Solids 1,800 mg/L Spot sample

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 13 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

3 Monitoring

3.1 General monitoring

3.1.1 The Licensee shall ensure that: (a) all water samples are collected and preserved in accordance with AS/NZS 5667.1; (b) all wastewater sampling is conducted in accordance with AS/NZS 5667.10; (c) all groundwater sampling is conducted in accordance with AS/NZS 5667.11; (d) all microbiological samples are collected and preserved in accordance with AS/NZS 2031; and (e) all laboratory samples are submitted to and tested by a laboratory with current NATA accreditation for the parameters being measured unless indicated otherwise in the relevant table.

3.1.2 The Licensee shall ensure that: (a) monthly monitoring is undertaken at least 15 days apart; and (b) quarterly monitoring is undertaken at least 45 days apart.

3.1.3 The Licensee shall ensure that all monitoring equipment used on the Premises to comply with the conditions of this Licence is calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.

3.1.4 The Licensee shall, where the requirements for calibration cannot be practicably met, or a discrepancy exists in the interpretation of the requirements, bring these issues to the attention of the CEO accompanied with a report comprising details of any modifications to the methods.

3.2 Monitoring of point source emissions to groundwater

3.2.1 The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.2.1 according to the specifications in that table.

Table 3.2.1: Monitoring of point source emissions to groundwater Emission point Parameter Units Averaging Frequency reference1 period Cumulative Volume m3/day Electrical Conductivity2 µS/cm 2 Spot Sample Monthly pH pH Units Groundwater level mbgl Aluminium Arsenic Barium Boron HGA0001P HGA0002P Calcium Carbonate HGA0040P Cadmium HGA0041P Calcium Chloride mg/L Spot sample Quarterly Chromium Copper Fluoride Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 14 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Molybdenum Nickel Nitrate Potassium Selenium Sodium Sulfate Total Dissolved Solids Zinc Note 1: pH, electrical conductivity and hydrochemistry samples are only required to be taken from one emission point during each quarterly monitoring event and only emission points that are active in the monitoring period are required to be sampled. Note 2: In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted.

3.3 Monitoring of emissions to land

3.3.1 The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.3.1 according to the specifications in that table.

Table 3.3.1: Monitoring of emissions to land Emission Monitoring point Parameter Units Averaging Frequency point location Period reference Flow meter to irrigation area or Volumetric flow rate 3 m /day Monthly Continuous evaporation / (cumulative) infiltration pond 1 pH pH units L1 – L3 5-Day Biochemical Final storage tank - Oxygen Demand Total Suspended prior to discharge to mg/L Spot sample Quarterly emission points Solids Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus E.coli cfu/100mL L4 Discharge overflow point from Quarterly evaporation pond while Total Recoverable mg/L Spot sample discharging Hydrocarbons

L5/L6 sample point Quarterly L5 and L6 Volumetric flow rate m3/day Quarterly Continuous Flow meter to (cumulative) irrigation area L7 Final storage tank – Total Dissolved mg/L Spot sample Quarterly prior to discharge Solids emission point At the trunk line Volumetric flow rate Quarterly Continuous 3 prior to the (cumulative) m /day infiltration/sediment basin 1 L8 to L12 pH Electrical 1 µS/cm Conductivity Spot sample Quarterly Aluminium mg/L Arsenic mg/L

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 15 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Barium mg/L Boron mg/L Calcium Carbonate mg/L Cadmium mg/L Calcium mg/L Chloride mg/L Chromium mg/L

Copper mg/L

Fluoride mg/L Iron mg/L Lead mg/L Magnesium mg/L Manganese mg/L Mercury mg/L Molybdenum mg/L Nickel mg/L Nitrate mg/L Potassium mg/L Selenium mg/L Sodium mg/L Sulfate mg/L Total Dissolved mg/L Solids Zinc mg/L Note 1: In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted.

3.4 Monitoring of inputs and outputs

3.4.1 The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.4.1 according to the specifications in that table.

Table 3.4.1: Monitoring of inputs and outputs Input/output Parameter Units Averaging Frequency period Inert Waste Type 1 Annual records of Inert Waste Type 2 total waste arriving at each waste Waste Inputs Putrescible Waste tonnes N/A management Clean Fill facility depicted in Schedule 1

3.5 Ambient environmental quality monitoring

3.5.1 The Licensee shall not cause or allow exceedance of the ambient groundwater limits listed in Table 3.5.1.

Table 3.5.1: Ambient groundwater limits Monitoring point Parameter Limit Averaging Frequency reference & location period GAOB07RM Total Dissolved ≤750mg/L Spot Quarterly GWB0025M Solids Sample HGA0003P HGA0066M (Mine dewater reinjection) HPSA1633 (Packsaddle Standing water ≤ 8 metres below Spot Monthly Infiltration Ponds) level ground level sample

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 16 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

3.5.2 The Licensee shall undertake the monitoring in Table 3.5.2 according to the specifications in that Table.

Table 3.5.2: Monitoring of ambient groundwater quality Monitoring point Parameter Trigger Units Averaging Frequency reference period GAOB05RM Spot Sample Monthly Groundwater Level ≤ 12 mbgl HGA0038M GAOB07RM ≤ 12 GWB0025M

HGA0003P Depth to Groundwater Spot Sample Monthly HGA0066M mbgl Level

HPSA1633 ≤ 13 Electrical Conductivity1 - µS/cm pH1 - GAOB07RM pH Units Spot Sample Quarterly GWB0025M HGA0003P Aluminium - HGA0066M Arsenic - HPSA1633 Barium - Boron - Calcium Carbonate - Cadmium - Calcium - Chlorine - Chromium - Copper - Fluoride - Iron - Lead - mg/L Spot sample Quarterly Magnesium - Manganese - Mercury - Molybdenum - Nickel - Nitrate - Potassium - Selenium - Sodium - Sulfate - Total Dissolved Solids - Zinc - Note 1: In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted.

3.5.3 The Licensee shall implement ambient environmental quality monitoring detailed in Table 3.5.3 if the depth to groundwater level specified in Table 3.5.2 in the relevant monitoring bores specified in Table 3.5.2 is exceeded.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 17 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Table 3.5.3: Monitoring following groundwater level exceedance Emission point Parameter Units Frequency reference

Groundwater level mbgl Daily

Visual assessment of surrounding - vegetation (GWB0025M, HGA0003P, GWB0025M HGA0003P GAOB07RM, HGA0066M) Vegetation GAOB07RM Vegetation monitoring in the vicinity of the monitoring will HGA0066M event comprising 5 to 10 trees of a variety continue for two of species to be photographed and an weeks after water assessment of each consisting of: levels have o Tree moisture; receded to below o Foliage cover; target level o New growth; and o Flowering status. Note 1: In-field non-NATA accredited analysis permitted.

4 Information

4.1 Records

4.1.1 All information and records required by the Licence shall: (a) be legible; (b) if amended, be amended in such a way that the original and subsequent amendments remain legible or are capable of retrieval; (c) except for records listed in 4.1.1(d) be retained for at least 6 years from the date the records were made or until the expiry of the Licence or any subsequent licence; and (d) for those following records, be retained until the expiry of the Licence and any subsequent licence: (i) off-site environmental effects; or (ii) matters which affect the condition of the land or waters.

4.1.2 The Licensee must submit a Compliance Report indicating the extent to which the Licensee has complied with the conditions in this Licence for the Annual Period.

4.1.3 The Licensee shall implement a complaints management system that as a minimum records the number and details of complaints received concerning the environmental impact of the activities undertaken at the Premises and any action taken in response to the complaint.

4.2 Reporting

4.2.1 The Licensee shall submit to the CEO an Annual Environmental Report by the 1 October each year. The report shall contain the information listed in Table 4.2.1 in the format or form specified in that table.

Table 4.2.1: Annual Environmental Report Condition or table Parameter Format or form1 (if relevant) - Summary of any failure or malfunction of any pollution None specified control equipment and any environmental incidents that have occurred during the annual period and any action taken - Summary of design capacity and throughputs for each None specified prescribed activity on the premises

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 18 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Tables 3.5.2 Groundwater level exceedances None specified Tables 1.2.1, 1.2.4, Limit exceedances None specified 2.2.2, 2.3.2, 3.5.1 3.2.1 Cumulative volume, standing water level, pH, electrical None specified conductivity, physicochemical parameters as listed in Table 3.2.1 and a comparison of results against established trigger values. Details of investigations conducted, including outcomes, environmental impacts and remedial actions, in relation to trigger exceedances and a discussion of any trends identified 3.3.1 L1-L3 – Monitoring results and comparison against the None specified National Water Quality Management Strategy Australian Guidelines for Sewerage Systems – Effluent Management (Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, 1997)

L4-L7 – Monitoring results L8-L12 – Monitoring results and comparison of results against established trigger values and previous monitoring results. Details of investigations conducted, including outcomes, environmental impacts and remedial actions, in relation to trigger exceedances and a discussion of any trends identified. 3.4.1 Inputs and outputs of waste on the premises None specified 3.5.2 Ambient groundwater monitoring results and a None specified comparison of results against established trigger values. Details of investigations conducted, including outcomes, environmental impacts and remedial actions, in relation to trigger exceedances and a discussion of any trends identified 4.1.2 Compliance None specified 4.1.3 Complaints summary None specified Note 1: Forms are in Schedule 2

4.2.2 The Licensee shall ensure that the Annual Environmental Report also contains an assessment of the information contained within the report against previous monitoring results and Licence limits and/or triggers.

4.2.3 The Licensee shall submit the information in Table 4.2.2 to the CEO according to the specifications in that table.

Table 4.2.2: Non-annual reporting requirements Condition Parameter Reporting Reporting date Format or form or table period (after end of (if the reporting relevant) period) - Copies of Not Within 14 days As received by the Licensee from original Applicable of the CEOs third parties monitoring request reports submitted to the Licensee by third parties 1.2.12 Commissioning Not Within one The report shall include: report for the applicable month of the (a) a summary of monitoring Mining Area C completion of results;

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 19 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Water commissioning (b) a list of any original Treatment Plant monitoring reports submitted to the Licensee from third parties for the commissioning period; (c) a summary of the environmental performance of the Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant as installed, against the design specification set out in the application; and (d) where they have not been met, measures proposed to meet the design specification and/or Licence conditions, together with timescales for implementing the proposed measures. 3.5.3 Monitoring Not Within one None specified results following Applicable month of the groundwater completion of level the vegetation exceedance, monitoring including a specified in discussion of Table 3.5.3 results, environmental impacts and remedial actions

4.3 Notification

4.3.1 The Licensee shall ensure that the parameters listed in Table 4.3.1 are notified to the CEO in accordance with the notification requirements of the table.

Table 4.3.1: Notification requirements Condition Parameter Notification Format or table requirement1 or form2 (if relevant) 1.2.12 The Licensee shall, prior to commencing Four weeks prior to the None commissioning of the Mining Area C Water commencement of specified Treatment Plant, submit a commissioning commissioning. plan to the CEO. The commissioning plan shall include details relating to: (a) the commissioning stages and expected timescales for commissioning; (b) expected emissions and discharges during commissioning and the environmental implications of the emissions; (c) how emissions and discharges will be managed during commissioning; (d) the monitoring that will be undertaken during the commissioning period; (e) how accidents or malfunctions will

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 20 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

be managed; (f) start up and shut down procedures; and (g) reporting proposals including accidents, malfunctions and reporting against the commissioning plan.

Commissioning shall be carried out in accordance with the commissioning plan. 1.2.12 The Licensee shall submit a compliance Within 7 days of the None 1.2.13 document to the CEO, following completion of construction specified 1.2.14 construction of each of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant and prior to commissioning of the same. The compliance document shall: a) certify that the works were constructed in accordance with the documents Mining Area C L7851/2002/6 – Licence Amendment Supporting Documentation (BHP Billiton, April 2016); and b) be signed by a person authorised to represent the Licensee and contain the printed name and position of that person within the company Tables 1.2.1, Breach of any limit specified in the Licence Part A: As soon as N1 1.2.4, 2.2.2, practicable but no later 2.3.2, 3.5.1 than 5pm of the next usual working day.

Part B: As soon as practicable

3.5.2 Depth to groundwater level exceedance

3.1.4 Calibration report As soon as practicable. None specified Note 1: Notification requirements in the Licence shall not negate the requirement to comply with s72 of the Act Note 2: Forms are in Schedule 2

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 21 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Schedule 1: Maps

Premises map

The Premises is shown in the map below. The purple line depicts the Premises boundary.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 22 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Government of Western Australia

Department of Environment Regulation

Map of emission points and monitoring locations

The locations of the emission points (waste processing locations) defined in Table 1.2.2 are shown below.

085000 000000 005000 700000 70~000 710000

HNith, S»ety ~ Envir"onrnn: LEGEND ;II BW BlLUTON IRON ORE bhpbilliton...... _ Pilbara Featu res Mo n it oring Site ~ Pilbara Rail Lin e Waste Management Facility MINING AREA C N I waste Management Fadlities - Hiohway ucence Amendment L78511200216 A P ri!:Kr lbed P rem i se~ Areas I:Jcurrent - Approved (L7851) ...... Aqtei:No: M6WX14 ERt'II'O D:H 4Wf20t6 Oedittt J III:OOifb... 2 4 ~ ... -.,.._---t-RftWwM ·L llllp tiCCI. km DoaunentPattl. Y.Vob1W01 AlOOO\A6~9\lPToject~659J01 4 MAc__Lk.enceAmendmentWastef adiUes Revo.mxd

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 23 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Map of emission points and monitoring locations

The locations of the emission points defined in Table 2.2.1 and the monitoring points defined in Tables 3.2.1, 3.5.1, 3.5.2, and 3.5.3 are shown below.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 24 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Government of Western Australia

Department of Environment Regulation

The locations of the containment infrastructure defined in Table 1.2.5, emission points defined in Table 2.3.1 and the monitoring points defined in Table 3.3.1 are shown below.

~.000 4110.000 ~~~~~. 000 700,000 70~ 000 710,000

Ht*h. ~ttty Mid Environment LEGEND :II B~ BUJTON IRON ORE Pilba ra Features Ucen sed Monitori ng LocatJons: bhpbtlllton -- Pilbara Rail Line e F Deposit Discharge Point ·- - Highway t Infiltration Basin MltiiNG AREA C N Prescribed Premises Areas t Oily Water Separator Emissions to Land and Process Monitomg Ucence Amendment L78St/200216 I:IOJrrent - Approved (L7851) 0 Sewage Treatment Plant A t Water Treatment Plant Sprayfoeld N

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 25 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Schedule 2: Reporting & notification forms

These forms are provided for the proponent to report monitoring and other data required by the Licence. They can be requested in an electronic format.

Licence: L7851/2002/6 Licensee: BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd Form: N1 Date of breach:

Notification of detection of the breach of a limit

These pages outline the information that the operator must provide. Units of measurement used in information supplied under Part A and B requirements shall be appropriate to the circumstances of the emission. Where appropriate, a comparison should be made of actual emissions and authorised emission limits.

Part A Licence Number Name of operator Location of Premises Time and date of the detection

Notification requirements for the breach of a limit Emission point reference/ source Parameter(s) Limit Measured value Date and time of monitoring Measures taken, or intended to be taken, to stop the emission Part B Any more accurate information on the matters for notification under Part A. Measures taken, or intended to be taken, to prevent a recurrence of the incident.

Measures taken, or intended to be taken, to rectify, limit or prevent any pollution of the environment which has been or may be caused by the emission.

The dates of any previous N1 notifications for the Premises in the preceding 24 months.

Name Post Signature on behalf of BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd Date

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 26 of 26 Licence: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0672 v2.9

Decision Document

Environmental Protection Act 1986, Part V

Proponent: BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd

Licence: L7851/2002/6

Registered office: Level 1, City Square Brookfield Place 125 -137 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000

ACN: 008 700 981

Premises address: Mining Area C Project Mining Tenement ML281SA NEWMAN WA 6753

Issue date: Thursday, 13 November 2014

Commencement date: Monday, 17 November 2014

Expiry date: Tuesday, 16 November 2027

Decision

Based on the assessment detailed in this document the Department of Environment Regulation (DER), has decided to issue an amended Licence. DER considers that in reaching this decision, it has taken into account all relevant considerations and that the Licence and its conditions will ensure that an appropriate level of environmental protection is provided.

Decision Document prepared by: Haley Brunel Licensing Officer

Decision Document authorised by: Alana Kidd Manager Licensing (Resource Industries)

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 1 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Contents

Decision Document 1 Contents 2 1 Purpose of this Document 2 2 Administrative summary 2 3 Executive summary of proposal and assessment 3 4 Decision table 4 5 Advertisement and consultation table 12 6 Risk Assessment 15

1 Purpose of this Document

This decision document explains how DER has assessed and determined the application and provides a record of DER’s decision-making process and how relevant factors have been taken into account. Stakeholders should note that this document is limited to DER’s assessment and decision making under Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. Other approvals may be required for the proposal, and it is the proponent’s responsibility to ensure they have all relevant approvals for their Premises.

2 Administrative summary

Administrative details

Works Approval Application type New Licence Licence amendment Works Approval amendment Assessed design Category number(s) capacity 65,000,000 tonnes per 5 annum 27,541,000 tonnes per 6 Activities that cause the premises to become annum prescribed premises 54 480 cubic metres per day 63 5,000 tonnes per annum 3,500 cubic metres in 73 aggregate 0.9125 gigalitres per 85B annum 89 3,000 tonnes per annum Application verified Date: N/A Application fee paid Date: N/A Yes No N/A Works Approval has been complied with

Compliance Certificate received Yes No N/A Commercial-in-confidence claim Yes No Commercial-in-confidence claim outcome N/A

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 2 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Is the proposal a Major Resource Project? Yes No

Was the proposal referred to the Environmental Referral decision No: 1108 Protection Authority (EPA) under Part IV of the Yes No Managed under Part V Environmental Protection Act 1986? Assessed under Part IV Ministerial statement No: 491 Is the proposal subject to Ministerial Conditions? Yes No EPA Report No: 913

Does the proposal involve a discharge of waste Yes No into a designated area (as defined in section 57 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986)? Department of Water consulted Yes No

Is the Premises within an Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) Area Yes No If Yes include details of which EPP(s) here.

Is the Premises subject to any EPP requirements? Yes No

If Yes, include details here, eg Site is subject to SO2 requirements of Kwinana EPP.

3 Executive summary of proposal and assessment

BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd (BHPBIO) operates Mining Area C (MAC) to produce iron ore for export via Port Hedland. MAC is located in the Pilbara region of Western Australia, within mining tenement ML281SA. The nearest township is Newman, which is approximately 120 kilometres (km) south-west of MAC. Rio Tinto Iron Ore’s Hope Downs operation, Weeli Wolli Springs and the Coondewanna Flats are located 10km east, 20km east and 20km south-west respectively of the MAC operation.

Conventional open cut mining methods are used at MAC to extract ore for processing through a two stage crushing and screening system to produce lump and fines products. Following blending into stockpiles, the ore is loaded onto trains and railed to Port Hedland for export.

BHPBIO has applied to amend the MAC operating licence L7851/2002/6. Under this amendment, BHPBIO is seeking approval to construct and operate three infiltration ponds to dispose of excess mine dewater; and increase the rate of mine dewater discharge from 5.8 gigaltires per annum to 27.54 gigalitres per annum. BHPBIO is also seeking approval for the construction and operation of a Water Treatment Plant (WTP) to produce potable water for the site’s accommodation villages. Reject water from the WTP will be disposed of to a 7.4 hectare (ha) irrigation area.

At the time of this amendment, existing sedimentation basins used as a disposal option for excess mine dewater are also being included in the Licence as specified emission points to land.

During this amendment, DER has assessed the emissions and discharges associated with construction and operation of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Water Treatment Plant; and the operation of the existing sediment ponds. The inclusion of new conditions and changes to existing conditions have been justified in Section 4.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 3 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

4 Decision table

All applications are assessed in line with the Environmental Protection Act 1986, the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 and DER’s Operational Procedure on Assessing Emissions and Discharges from Prescribed Premises. Where other references have been used in making the decision they are detailed in the decision document.

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence General Definitions In accordance with recent administrative changes implemented within the General provisions of the conditions Department, the definition of CEO has been updated; and definitions for Environmental Protection ‘Compliance Report’ and ‘Department’ included in the Licence to reflect Act 1986 changes to the reporting requirements for annual compliance reports. Guidance Statement Conditions 1.1.5, 1.1.6 Guidance Statement Setting conditions (DER, October 2015) states that Setting Conditions (DER, and 1.1.7 (removed) conditions imposed on Licences must be valid, enforceable and/or risk based. October 2015) Noting the requirements of this Guidance Statement, conditions 1.1.5, 1.1.6 and 1.1.7 have been removed from the Licence, explained further below.

Previous condition 1.1.5 specified: “Nothing in the Licence shall be taken to authorise any emission that is not mentioned in the Licence, where the emission amounts to: (a) pollution; (b) unreasonable emission; (c) discharge of waste in circumstances likely to cause pollution; or (d) being contrary to any written law.”

This condition is not valid, enforceable or risk based as it is an explanatory statement that attempts to provide clarification of the operation of the Licence; and has therefore been removed from the Licence.

Previous condition 1.1.6 specified:

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 4 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence “The Licensee shall operate and maintain all pollution control and monitoring equipment to the manufacturer’s specifications or any relevant and effective internal management system.”

This condition is not enforceable as it is not clear or certain in that the pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment required to be operated and maintained is not specified. The requirements to achieve compliance are not clear.

Previous condition 1.1.7 specified: “The Licensee shall immediately recover, or remove and dispose of spills of environmentally hazardous materials outside an engineered containment system.”

This condition is not valid as it inconsistently regulates activities below prescribed category thresholds. DER has assessed the risk associated with spills of environmentally hazardous materials to determine if specific regulatory controls are required on the Licence.

Emission description Emission: Spills of environmentally hazardous materials, including hydrocarbons, detergents and glues/paints, outside of engineered containment systems.

Impact: Soil contamination, impacts to groundwater and surface water quality, ecosystem disruption, depending on nature and volume of material released to the environment.

Controls: Operational personnel at MAC are trained in spill management and spill kits are located at various points around the premises. These

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 5 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence management measures were observed and confirmed during the DER compliance inspection undertaken on 7 May 2015.

Prior to the commencement of mining, groundwater at MAC was approximately 75 metres below ground level. Creek systems in the project area are ephemeral, flowing after rainfall events. Groundwater at this depth and ephemeral creek systems are unlikely to be impacted by spills of environmentally hazardous materials outside of containment areas, if attended to quickly, in accordance with site procedures.

It is also the responsibility of the Licensee to ensure compliance with other legislative requirements, including Australian Standard 1940-2004 – The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids, which specifies that clean up action needs to be initiated immediately following a leak or spill.

Risk Assessment Consequence: Minor Likelihood: Rare Risk rating: Low

Regulatory Controls: The risk associated with spills outside of engineered containment systems is low, therefore no further regulatory controls are being applied to the Licence at this time.

The general provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 with respect to the causing of pollution and environmental harm apply, as does subsidiary legislation including the Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004.

The site will also be subject to DER compliance inspections, during which

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 6 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence procedures and measures to manage spills and leaks will be inspected.

Residual Risk: Consequence: Minor Likelihood: Rare Risk rating: Low

Premises L1.2.2 The Licensee has indicated that the existing putrescible landfill is nearly at Application supporting operation capacity and is seeking to include a new putrescible landfill location on the documentation Licence. There is to be no increase to the design capacity of 3,000 tonnes of waste per annual period, and the relevant waste acceptance specifications and Landfill Waste process limits on the Licence will remain unchanged. Classification and Waste Definitions 1996 The land system, soil type and aquifer for the existing and proposed landfill locations are the same. However, depth to groundwater is approximately 80 Guidance Statement metres at the new location, as opposed to 100 m at the existing landfill site. Licensing and works The depth to groundwater at the new location is still sufficient and impacts from approval process (DER, leachate accessing groundwater are unlikely. The risk profile for the new September 2015) landfill is unchanged; therefore no further regulatory controls are required to be applied to the Licence. The maps in Schedule 1 have been updated to show Environmental Protection the location of the new putrescible landfill. (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations L1.2.4 The waste acceptance specifications in Table 1.2.1 have been updated to 2004 allow the outflow from the Biomax WWTPs to be measured. Inflow to the Packsaddle WWTP pond system will continue to be measured to determine General provisions of the effluent inputs to this facility. Environmental Protection Act 1986 L1.2.12 and L1.2.13 The tyre disposal requirements specified in Table 1.2.2 have been amended to remove duplication with Part 6 of the Environmental Protection Regulations 1987.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 7 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence

Construction and Operation - Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mining Area C WTP DER’s assessment and decision making with respect to the construction and operation of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds; and the Mining Area C WTP and irrigation area is detailed in Appendix A.

Condition 1.2.12 and 1.2.13 has been included in the Licence and requires the construction of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mining Area C Water Treatment Plant in accordance with the supporting documentation submitted with the Licence amendment application. Condition 1.2.14 and 1.2.15 allows the operation of these facilities in accordance with the conditions of the Licence following submission of compliance documentation for construction of the works. Emissions to L2.3.1 and L3.3.1 Operation – Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds General provisions of the land including The Licensee is proposing to operate three infiltration ponds to dispose of Environmental Protection monitoring excess mine dewater through Managed Aquifer Recharge. DER’s assessment Act 1986 and decision making with respect to this emission is detailed in Appendix A (Premises operation). Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Operation – Western and Central Sediment Basins Discharges) Regulations The Licensee currently disposes of excess mine dewater to the Western and 2004 Central Sediment Basins, which are being included on the Licence as emission points to land. Guidance Statement Licensing and works DER’s assessment and decision making with respect to the operation of these approval process (DER, infiltration basins is detailed in Appendix B. September 2015)

Fugitive N/A Construction and operation General provisions of the emissions Emission Description Environmental Protection

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 8 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence Emission: Fugitive dust and noise emissions from site preparation works, Act 1986 including earthworks and vehicle movement, for the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mining Area C WTP and irrigation area. There is not expected to Environmental Protection be any significant dust or noise emissions during operation of these facilities. (Noise) Regulations 1997

Impact: Dust emissions can be harmful to human health and the environment. Mining Area C Elevated total suspended particulates can impact ambient environmental Environmental quality resulting in amenity impacts and can smother vegetation. Particulate Management Plan matter that is less than 10 (PM10) or 2.5 (PM2.5) micrometres in diameter can (Revision 5, September be drawn deep into the lungs causing human health impacts. 2012)

Noise emissions can be a nuisance to nearby residents.

Controls: The closest receptor to the Mining Area C WTP construction site is the Mulla Mulla Camp, located approximately 1.5 km to the south east. The closest receptor to the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds construction site is Packsaddle camp, located approximately 1 km east of the closest infiltration basin.

During construction there is expected to be a minor increase in dust and noise. Due to the distance of the construction sites to the nearest on-site sensitive receptors and temporary nature of construction works, impacts will be negligible.

Risk Assessment Consequence: Insignificant Likelihood: Possible Risk Rating: Low

Regulatory Controls: The general provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 apply. Noise

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 9 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence emissions are subject to the provisions of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

The Mining Area C Life of Mine Environmental Management Plan (EMP), required under Ministerial Statement (MS) 491, includes provisions relating to the management of dust. Specifically the watering of haul roads, construction areas and unsealed roads, minimising land disturbance where practicable, maintenance of dust suppression equipment and control systems, and informing employees of the importance of minimising ambient dust levels.

No further regulatory controls are required to be applied to the Licence as the risk associated with fugitive noise and dust emissions from construction activities and the operation of the facilities has been assessed as low.

Residual Risk Consequence: Insignificant Likelihood: Possible Risk Rating: Low

Ambient L3.5.1 to L3.5.3 Conditions 3.5.1, 3.5.2 and 3.5.3 have been updated to include monitoring Application supporting quality requirements to determine impacts to groundwater and vegetation as a result documentation. monitoring of the operation of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds, which is discussed further in Appendix A. Information L4.2.1 and L4.3.1 Condition 4.2.1 has been updated to include reporting requirements for the monitoring results associated with the discharge of mine dewater to the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Western and Central Sedimentation Basins.

The notification requirements specified in condition 4.3.1 have been updated to require the submission of compliance documentation following completion of construction of the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mining Area C WTP. A

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 10 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

DECISION TABLE

Works Condition Justification (including risk description & decision methodology where Reference documents Approval / number relevant) Licence W = Works Approval section L= Licence commissioning plan for the Mining Area C WTP is also required under condition 4.3.1. The requirement to submit a commissioning report following the completion of commissioning has been included in the non-annual reporting requirements of the Licence, specified under condition 4.2.2

Licence N/A The existing expiry date aligns with the expiry of Mining Tenement ML281SA. Guidance Statement, duration Licence duration (DER, November 2014)

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 11 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

5 Advertisement and consultation table

Date Event Comments received/Notes How comments were taken into consideration 9 May 2016 Application referred to Department of Parks and Wildlife Comments noted. Department of Water and provided comments regarding potential Department of Parks and Wildlife impacts to Mulga Woodlands, the proposed groundwater and vegetation monitoring program and Priority flora identified in the indicative infiltration zone.

20 June 2016 Proponent sent a copy of draft LICENCE instrument (prior to 21 day Licence expiry date consultation period) Request that the expiry date remain Change implemented. unchanged, as it currently aligns with the expiry of Mining Tenement ML281SA.

Condition 1.2.12 and Table 1.2.6 - remove reference to Works Approval In accordance with recent administrative application form to avoid confusion and changes implemented within the correction to condition referenced in note. department, the reference to Applications form has been removed from the Licence and replaced with specific construction requirements for the infrastructure subject to approval under the amendment.

Condition 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 – Correct the Updated in line with comments. limits referenced in Table 3.5.1 and 3.5.2.

DECISION DOCUMENT  Comment regarding dust and that it Comment noted is not a key factory for Mining Area C and therefore it is managed

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 12 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Date Event Comments received/Notes How comments were taken into consideration under Part V via existing standard operating procedures. 21 July 2016 21 day consultation period LICENCE correspondence sent to Licensee, Licence expiry date including draft amended Licence Request to retain existing expiry date in Change implemented. highlighting changes and draft order to align with the expiry of Mining decision document Tenement ML281SA (ie. 4 August 2028).

Table 1.2.1 – amend waste acceptance Change implemented. Volume of treated specifications for the WWTP’s which wastewater from Biomax systems is to be discharge treated effluent to irrigation areas recorded at the outflow to the irrigation to require recording of outflow volume as areas, and inflow for the Packsaddle opposed to inflow volume. WWTP which is a pond treatment system.

Table 1.2.6 – amend the construction Change not implemented, however requirement table to remove specific condition has been updated to allow for infrastructure specifications. This will allow design variations provided they are: for minor modifications without the - minor in nature and do not requirement to apply for a separate Licence materially change or affect the amendment. infrastructure; or - where change improves the functionality of the infrastructure and does not increase risks to public health, public amenity or the environment; and is in accordance with all other conditions of the Licence.

Table 3.2.1 and Table 3.3.1 – change Change implemented. ‘chlorine’ to ‘chloride’.

Table 3.3.1 – as opposed to having a flow Change implemented to allow flow to be meter at each infiltration pond, allow flow to measured from one meter at the trunk line be measured from one meter at the trunk prior to discharge to the infiltration/sediment line prior to discharge to the basins. infiltration/sediment basins. With respect to

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 13 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Date Event Comments received/Notes How comments were taken into consideration the proposed Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds, the Licensee has indicated that the ‘high level alarm’ system implemented on each pond will ensure water is distributed appropriately.

Table 3.5.1 – monitoring bore MB1 has Change implemented. been constructed. Replace reference to MB1 with bore reference HPSA1633.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 14 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

~ Government of Western Australia ~ Department of Environment Regulation

6 Risk Assessment Note: This matrix is taken from the DER Corporate Policy Statement No. 07 - Operational Risk Management

Table 1: Emissions Risk Matrix

Ukellhood

Almost Certain Ukely High Possible Moderate Moderate High Unlikely Moderate Moderate Moderate

Rare

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 15 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Appendix A – Premises Operation

Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds – Construction and Operation Dewatering volumes at Mining Area C are projected to increase significantly over the FY2017-2021 period, with peak volumes estimated to reach up to 32 megalitres per day (ML/day) in FY2017 and more than 70 ML/day in FY2021. Site water demand over the same period is projected to remain relatively constant, at around 10 to 14 ML/day, which will result in estimated surplus water volumes of 22 ML/day in FY2017, increasing to 60 ML/day in FY2021.

In response to the increasing surplus mine dewater volumes, BHPBIO is proposing to develop and operate a number of distinct surplus water disposal options at Mining Area C to provide operational flexibility and enable the transition away from surplus water injection at A Deposit to allow below water table mining at that location.

The first surplus water disposal option proposed for development is a Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) scheme, comprising a series of three infiltration ponds (Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds) each with the capacity to dispose of up to 10ML/day of surplus mine dewater with a total scheme capacity of 30 ML/day. This is based on:  Nominal pond dimensions of 80 metres (m) wide by 500 m long by 0.5 m deep; and  Long term, conservative, infiltration rate of 250 millimetres per day (mm/day).

Each infiltration basin will comprise four individual basins, with three basins in use at any one time and the fourth acting as standby to enable maintenance (removal of algal/weed growth and sediment). The ponds will be fenced to restrict livestock access. Figure 1 depicts the indicative location of the infiltration ponds relative to the existing Mining Area C operations.

Figure 1. Location of proposed Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mining Area C WTP and irrigation area (highlighted yellow)

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 16 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

The ponds will be located within the Hamersley Range – Fractured Rock aquifer unit. The geological sequence beneath the infiltration ponds comprises 20 to 50 m of tertiary detrital and alluvial material, derived from erosion of the Brockman Iron Formation (BIF) ridges on either side of the valley, which is underlain by mineralised, weathered and fractured BIF and Shale of the BIF.

Groundwater elevations within the valley are relatively constant. Depth to groundwater is approximately 96 m in the area of the proposed infiltration ponds and 75 m beneath the Mulga woodland to the west. The groundwater table is situated within the fractured bedrock aquifer and the tertiary detritals are unsaturated.

No Threatened Flora species listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 or the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 have been identified within the indicative infiltration zone.

Two species listed as Priority flora by the Department of Parks and Wildlife have been recorded within the indicative infiltration zone.

The project will require up to 12 hectares (ha) of native vegetation to be cleared for the infiltration ponds and will involve some disturbance of vegetation along the approximately 7 km long pipeline route. All clearing will be undertaken in accordance with MS 491. The Licensee has indicated that clearing will be minimised and cleared areas that are no longer required will be revegetated.

Normal operation Emission Description Emission: Discharge of up to 30 ML/day of mine dewater from the Mining Area C Marra Mamba deposits into the three Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds. Water discharged will seep into the subsurface through the relatively thick unsaturated zone and continue to saturate it before it reaches the groundwater table.

Impact: Infiltration of mine dewater causing a rise in the groundwater level (mounding) beneath the Packsaddle Valley, potentially impacting on Mulga woodland located at the western end of the valley, should levels rise to less than 5 metres below ground level (mbgl) as soils become waterlogged.

Preliminary infiltration trials have been conducted in the indicative infiltration ponds zone and have proven the alluvial and detrital material to be highly permeable, exceeding 500 mm/day. Figure 2 depicts the location of the infiltration ponds and extent of the Mulga woodland potentially impacted by groundwater mounding.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 17 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Figure 2. Location of Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds and Mulga woodland

To assist in quantifying the likely response of groundwater levels within Packsaddle Valley, and hence the likelihood of impacts to the Mulga woodland, a simple 3D numerical groundwater model was used. The model was run for a period of ten years with an initial infiltration rate of 30 ML/day (nominally 10 ML/day at each of the indicative pond locations). As the hydraulic properties of the alluvium/detrital deposits are uncertain, two scenarios were run with the hydraulic conductivity and storage settings for these deposits at the low (Case A) and high (Case B) end of what is expected (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Hydrogeological units of the Aquifer Model

Key findings from the modelling, presented in the MAC Discharge Disposal Study (MWH, 23 May 2016) are:  Operation of the infiltration ponds leads to an increase in groundwater levels directly beneath them which propagates westwards;  At monitoring bore , groundwater levels start to rise in response to operation of the ponds after less than a year, and continue rising throughout the modelled period;  Wide-scale development of the groundwater mound occurs in about two years and by ten years most of the valley detritals will experience some mounding;

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 18 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

 The modelled low case indicates that groundwater levels rise to a maximum of 16 mbgl, which would not be expected to impact the Mulga woodland;  The modelled high case indicates that groundwater levels rise to within 5 m of surface after approximately 7 years and almost to the surface at the Mulga woodland after 10 years. This shows the potential for the Mulga woodland to be impacted if large volumes of water are discharged to the infiltration ponds over an extended period.

The MAC Discharge Disposal Study report indicates that an infiltration rate of 30 ML/day is feasible, although this may reduce over time as the detritals underlying the ponds become fully saturated.

Deterioration of groundwater quality and potential impacts to ecosystems receiving groundwater in the area may also occur as a result of the infiltration of mine dewater.

Controls: A large network of monitoring bores has been installed within Packsaddle Valley and along the adjacent Packsaddle Range (within the P1W and P1E deposits). These bores will be monitored throughout the operation of the infiltration ponds to determine how the valley aquifer system responds to the influx of water. The frequency of data collection will be greatest during the initial years of operation of the ponds, and will reduce as the response of the aquifer system to infiltration is understood. This data collected will be reviewed on an ongoing basis and any trends which show a likely impact on the environment or future mining activities will trigger mitigating action, most likely involving a reduction of water discharge to the ponds before an impact occurs. A water level trigger and limit will be implemented for HPSA1633, as described further below.

Groundwater levels The groundwater modelling undertaken indicated that groundwater levels at HPSA1633 responded gradually to the cessation of operation of the ponds in both modelled cases. The Licensee has indicated that potential impacts to the Mulga woodland could be effectively managed by monitoring groundwater levels between the ponds and the Mulga woodland, and adjusting the rate of water discharge to the ponds as required.

In order to prevent impacts to the Mulga woodland, the Licensee has indicated that groundwater levels will be monitored on a monthly basis at monitoring bore HPSA1633. Changes in groundwater levels at HPSA1633 will trigger management actions to prevent impacts to the Mulga woodland.

In the event that groundwater levels at HPSA1633 reach the trigger level of 13 mbgl (corresponds to 10 mbgl at the Mulga woodland), the volume of water discharged to the infiltration ponds will need to be reduced to prevent further increases in groundwater levels at HPSA1633 and the Licensee will notify DER of the trigger exceedance. In the event that the groundwater level limit of 8 mbgl is exceeded at HPSA1633 (corresponds to 5 mbgl at the Mulga woodland), discharge will cease until such a time as groundwater levels recede past 13 mbgl at HPSA1633. Th e Licensee has indicated that during such events surplus water will be disposed of via one or more of the existing surplus water management options, being the Western and Central Sedimentation Basins and the A deposit MAR. The Licensee is also investigating two new MAR schemes at Juna Downs and Camp Hill which will be subject to separate approval. It is currently anticipated that the Juna Downs MAR borefield will commence operation during FY18 and Camp Hill will follow in FY2020.

Ground water quality Groundwater quality is generally fresh. A groundwater sample taken from the centre of the Packsaddle Valley returned a concentration of 434 mg/L of total dissolved solids (TDS). This is comparable to samples taken from the Mining Area C dewatering borefield which range from 254 mg/L to 408 mg/L TDS, as reported in the Mining Area C FY2015 Annual Aquifer Review.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 19 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

As the quality of surplus water from mine dewatering is very similar to the quality of groundwater within Packsaddle Valley, impacts to the quality of the groundwater resource are not expected as a result of this discharge.

If monitoring data show that changes to the groundwater table are greater than predicted by the model, the Licensee has indicated that the groundwater model may be re-calibrated an additional scenarios run to predict the capacity of the surplus management scheme and refine the assessment of potential environmental impacts.

Risk Assessment Consequence: Moderate Likelihood: Unlikely Risk Rating: Moderate

Regulatory Controls: The Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds have been specified as emission points to land under condition 2.3.1 of the Licence. Under condition 3.3.1 the Licensee is required to monitor the volume and quality of water discharged to the infiltration ponds. Monitoring results will be reported to DER annually for assessment.

In order to prevent impacts to the Mulga woodland as a result of groundwater mounding caused by operation of the infiltration ponds, groundwater levels at HPSA1633 will be monitored on a monthly basis and a limit for groundwater level has been specified under Conditions 3.5.1.

Under condition 4.3.1 the Licensee will be required to notify DER in the event of a limit exceedance.

In March 2014, MS491 was amended to remove the water usage and dewatering requirements from the Key Characteristics Table; which now states, “dewatering and discharge can be managed under other legislation”. The Licensee has advised and it is noted that the drawdown extent at MAC is being realised at an earlier date than initially planned, however does not represent a material change in the groundwater drawdown footprint and the associated impacts presented in the EMP required under MS 491.

The disposal of surplus mine dewater forms a part of the adaptive management approach adopted under MS 491, acknowledging that:  dewatering rate is dependent upon the rate of below water table mining, the mining sequence and the deposit being mined at any one time; and  the indicative mine schedule could change and as a result the maximum dewatering rates and period of dewatering may vary accordingly.

Residual Risk Consequence: Moderate Likelihood: Rare Risk Rating: Low

Emergency situations Emission: Overtopping of infiltration ponds, discharging mine dewater to land.

Impact: Infiltration of potentially sediment laden water to land, impacting on vegetation. Infiltration of water, impacting groundwater quality and levels in the receiving aquifer.

Controls: The Licensee manages the infiltration ponds such that overtopping does not occur, except during high rainfall events. Upstream watercourses will be directed around the ponds; therefore the

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 20 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

only rainfall entering the ponds will be that which is incident on the ponds or the surrounding bunds. Spillways have not been incorporated into the design.

The lowest pond in each infiltration basin will be equipped with a ‘high water level’ alarm, which will trigger operational personnel to attend the ponds and resolve the issue. There is significant redundant capacity designed into the ponds, primarily to enable maintenance activities without affecting scheme capacity, and this will further reduce the likelihood of the ponds overtopping.

In the event that ponds overflow, excess mine dewater will be directed to one or more of the existing surplus water management options, being the Western and Central Sedimentation Basins and the A deposit MAR. Inundation of vegetation near the ponds would be short term in nature and occur only while the ponds are overtopping. Such an event would be managed so that the duration of the overtopping event does not result in inundation that results in a loss of vegetation.

The quality of groundwater within the source and receiving aquifer are the same, therefore groundwater quality is unlikely to be affected as a result of overtopping of the ponds.

An operational freeboard of 300mm will be maintained. Initially inspections will be undertaken daily to confirm performance of the ponds. Currently, it is anticipated that inspections will be reduced to weekly on a long-term basis.

Risk Assessment Consequence: Insignificant Likelihood: Unlikely Risk Rating: Low

Regulatory Controls: The risk associated with the overflow of mine dewater from the ponds has been assessed as low. No regulatory controls are required to be applied to the Licence. Section 49 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 applies and discharges may also be subject to the Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004.

Residual Risk Consequence: Insignificant Likelihood: Unlikely Risk Rating: Low

Mining Area C WTP – Construction, Commissioning and Operation BHPBIO is proposing to construct a new nano-filtration WTP at Mining Area C to supply potable water to the Packsaddle and Mulla Mulla Camps. The project will be undertaken in two stages:  Stage 1: Construction of a 0.584 gigalitre per annum (GL/a) (average of 1.6 MG/day) WTP; and  Stage 2: Expansion of the Stage 1 facility to a 0.9125 GL/a (average of 2.5 ML/day WTP.

The WTP will operate by using a high pressure nano-filtration pump which pushes the pre-treated feedwater through a dual train nano-filtration membrane system, with 87% passing through as permeate (potable water) and 13% rejected as brine. The proposed locations of the WTP and irrigation area are shown in Figure 1 (above). The general layout of the WTP and irrigation areas are depicted in Figures 4 and 5, below.

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 21 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Figure 4. Layout of the proposed Mining Area C WTP

Figure 5. Mining Area C WTP reject water irrigation area

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 22 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Permeate is mixed with some of the filtered feed water to achieve reject water with a targeted average TDS of 1,500 mg/L, which will be disposed of at an adjacent 7.4 ha spray field. Following completion of Stage 2 the WTP will produce up to 228.5 ML/a (626 kL/day) of reject water.

The project will require the clearing of approximately 1 ha of native vegetation for the WTP and will involve some disturbance of vegetation within the 7.4 ha spray field. All clearing will be undertaken in accordance with the approved Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (NVCP) CPS 4337/1.

Commissioning and Normal operation Emission Description Emission: Discharge of up to 626 kL/day of reject water, with a TDS concentration of approximately 1,500 mg/L, to a 7.4 ha spray field.

Impact: Impacts to native vegetation as a result of irrigation of reject water, impacts to groundwater quality and levels due to infiltration of reject water, impacts to surface water quality resulting from runoff of water from the irrigation area.

Controls: The Licensee will monitor the volume and quality of the reject water and has proposed a limit of 1,800 mg/L TDS.

In the event that the TDS of the reject water exceeds 1,500 mg/L but is less than the 1,800 mg/L limit, the following actions will be undertaken:  TDS will be measured daily for one week to determine if there is an increasing trend;  If the TDS continues to exceed 1,500 mg/L but does not show an increasing trend monitoring will continue on a weekly basis for one month; and  If the TDS continues to exceed 1,500 mg/L but still does not show an increasing trend monitoring will return to a quarterly basis.

In the event that the TDS of the reject water exceeds 1,500 mg/L, is less than the 1,800 mg/L limit, but shows an increasing trend the following actions will be undertaken:  The reject water will be monitored on a weekly basis;  An investigation into potential causes of the high TDS will be undertaken; and  The appropriate actions identified in the investigation will be implemented.

In the event that the TDS of the reject water exceeds the limit of 1,800 mg/L the following actions will be undertaken:  Reject water will be blended (with either raw or treated water) to ensure that water discharged to the spray field has a TDS below 1,800 mg/L; and  An investigation into the cause of the exceedance will be undertaken and appropriate actions taken to correct the problem.

The Licensee has undertaken a similar project at the Mooka Camp, which operates under Part V of the EP Act Licence L8679/2012/1. A TDS discharge limit of 1,876 mg/L was specified under the Mooka Camp operating Licence and vegetation monitoring was conducted six monthly to identify if there has been any degradation in vegetation quality as a result of the TDS in discharge water. The Licensee has reviewed the past 2.5 years of monitoring data and determined that there has been no detrimental effect on the vegetation of the Mooka Camp spray field.

The proposed discharge from the proposed Mining Area C WTP is unlikely to impact on the vegetation of the spray field as:  There has been no adverse impact on vegetation as a result of the TDS of the irrigated water at the Mooka spray field (licence limit of 1,876 mg/L);

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 23 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

 The proposed Mining Area C spray field has the same floristic community (Triodia Open Hummock Grassland) as the existing Mooka spray field;  The proposed Mining Area C spray field has the same soil type as the existing Mooka spray field; and  The target TDS of the reject water from the Mining Area C will be an average of 1,500 mg/L TDS, with a limit of 1,800 mg/L which is less than that of the Mooka irrigation field.

There are no surface water features in or adjacent to the proposed WTP and sprayfield. The nearest drainage line lies more than one kilometre to the south of the proposed irrigation field. Depth to groundwater is 80 m and is used mainly for mining and mine dewatering from the iron ore mines.

Mean daily evaporation recorded at the closest meteorological site (Wittenoom located 90 km away) is 8.6 mm/day, which equates to 3.1 m per year. Negligible impacts to groundwater and surface water are expected, due to the distance between the sprayfield and these receptors, and the regions high evaporation rates.

It is also noted that no Threatened Flora species listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 or species listed as Priority flora by the Department of Parks and Wildlife have been identified within the area.

The Licensee has indicated that a Commissioning Plan for the WTP is currently being developed, however it is unlikely to be finalised until after construction has commenced. The final commissioning plan will detail the monitoring frequency and limits of the discharges associated with the WTP and the contingencies to be undertaken should the water quality be unacceptable for irrigation.

Risk Assessment Consequence: Minor Likelihood: Unlikely Risk Rating: Moderate

Regulatory Controls: Condition 2.3.1 specifies the discharge of reject water to the sprayfield as a Licensed emission point. A limit for TDS concentration in water discharged to the irrigation is specified under condition 2.3.2. In the event that the limit is exceeded, discharge will need to cease and DER notified. Monitoring requirements for volume discharged and water quality are specified under condition 3.3.1.

The requirement to submit a commissioning plan to DER has been included under condition 4.3.1.

Residual Risk Consequence: Minor Likelihood: Rare Risk Rating: Low

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 24 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

Appendix B – Emissions to land including monitoring

Normal operation Emission: Discharge of 2.08 gigalitres per year (GL/year) of excess mine dewater to the Western Sediment Basin and 8.67 GL/year of excess mine dewater to the Central Sediment Basin. Water is directed to the sedimentation basins either through the existing stormwater management drainage system or through water pipelines.

Impact: Infiltration of water through the soil profile, impacting on groundwater quality and levels in the receiving aquifer, potential impacts to ecosystems receiving groundwater in the area.

Depth to groundwater is approximately 80 m at the Western Sediment Basin and 106 m at the Central Sediment Basin.

Controls: The quality of groundwater within the source and receiving aquifers are the same, therefore impacts to groundwater quality are not expected to occur as a result of the infiltration of mine dewater.

Infiltration rates are low due to clay-rich detritals, groundwater levels are deep and the basement aquifer (dolomite) is highly permeable and will conduct water away. Groundwater mounding impacting on vegetation in the disturbed mining areas is unlikely.

Groundwater levels are monitored regularly throughout MAC and towards the Coodewanna Flats to the west, and so any changes in groundwater levels which could affect vegetation would be identified. However, no specific groundwater monitoring at these basins is undertaken or planned by the Licensee.

Discharge water will also be lost to evaporation.

Risk Assessment Consequence: Minor Likelihood: Possible Risk Rating: Moderate

Regulatory Controls: Condition 2.3.1 has been amended to include the Western and Central Sediment Basins as specified emission points to land. Under Condition 3.3.1 the Licensee will be required to monitor the volume of surplus mine dewater discharged to the basins and undertake quarterly monitoring to analyse water quality. The Licensee will be required to report the monitoring results annually to DER for review, including a comparison against previous monitoring results to identify any trends.

Residual Risk Consequence: Minor Likelihood: Possible Risk Rating: Moderate

Emergency situations Emission: Overtopping of sediment basins, discharging mine dewater to land.

Impact: Infiltration of potentially sediment laden water to land, impacting on vegetation. Infiltration of water, impacting groundwater quality and levels in the receiving aquifer.

Controls: The Licensee manages the sediment basins such that overtopping does not occur, except during high rainfall events. In the event that the basins overtop the vegetation downstream is unlikely

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 25 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

to be impacted as the overtopping events are likely to be short term and the vegetation occurs on a floodplain which is used to periodic inundation.

The quality of groundwater within the source and receiving aquifer are the same, therefore groundwater quality is unlikely to be effected as a result of overtopping of the ponds.

An operational freeboard of 300 mm is maintained on the Western Sediment Basin and the spillway has been designed to accommodation flows over a 100 year Annual Recurrence Interval (ARI).

The Central Sediment Basin lies along a highly disturbed unnamed non-perennial drainage line which flows easterly from the centre of MAC before leaving the side at the Eastern boundary of MAC. Prior to leaving MAC this unnamed non-perennial drainage line passes through the Eastern Sediment Basin to ensure that no sediment is discharged from the site. The Eastern Sediment Basin has been constructed to capture sediment flowing to the east from the mining operation, and has been constructed with a spillway which accommodates flows over the 5 year ARI.

Risk Assessment Consequence: Insignificant Likelihood: Unlikely Risk Rating: Low

Regulatory Controls: The risk associated with the overflow of mine dewater from the basins has been assessed as low. No regulatory controls are required to be applied to the Licence. Section 49 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 applies and discharges may also be subject to the Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharges) Regulations 2004.

Residual Risk Consequence: Insignificant Likelihood: Unlikely Risk Rating: Low

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Page 26 of 26 Decision Document: L7851/2002/6 Amendment date: Thursday, 29 September 2016 File Number: DER2013/000925 IRLB_TI0669 v2.7

South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 5C: Other Approvals: Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan Revision 3.4 CMO --> 1SAP + TEOs discussion

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Version 3.4 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Table of Contents Summary...... 5 1. Context, Scope and Rationale ...... 6 1.1. Proposal...... 6 1.2. Key environmental factors...... 9 1.3. Condition requirements ...... 9 1.3.1. Other regulatory requirements...... 9 1.4. Rationale and approach...... 11 1.4.1. Overall objective, purpose and scope of this CPWRMP...... 11 1.4.1.1. Key Water Sensitive Receptors ...... 12 1.4.1.2. Sources of Hydrological change ...... 12 1.4.1.3. Methodology for monitoring hydrological change...... 12 1.4.1.4. Water management options...... 13 1.4.1.5. Cumulative effects...... 14 1.4.2. Coondewanna Flats...... 14 1.4.2.1. Survey and Study Findings...... 14 1.4.2.2. Key Assumptions and uncertainties...... 20 1.4.2.3. Management Approach ...... 20 1.4.2.4. Rationale for choice of provisions ...... 21 1.4.3. Weeli Wolli Spring ...... 24 1.4.3.1. Survey and Study Findings...... 24 1.4.3.2. Key Assumptions and uncertainties...... 27 1.4.3.3. Management Approach ...... 28 1.4.3.4. Rationale for choice of provisions ...... 29 1.4.4. Ben’s Oasis...... 30 1.4.4.1. Survey and Study Findings...... 30 1.4.4.2. Key Assumptions and uncertainties...... 31 1.4.4.3. Management Approach ...... 33 1.4.4.4. Rationale for choice of provisions ...... 34 2. EMP provisions ...... 36 Page 2 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

3. Adaptive Management and review of this CPWRMP...... 37 3.1. Methodology for monitoring hydrological change...... 37 3.2. Setting thresholds for significant impact ...... 37 3.3. Scientific uncertainty - triggers and thresholds...... 38 3.4. Central Pilbara Regional Monitoring...... 39 3.5. Review and update of this CPWRMP ...... 39 4. Terminology...... 40 5. References...... 42 Schedule 1 – Ministerial Statement 1072 Mining Area C ...... 43 Appendix 1 – Proposal / Operation Summaries...... 53 Appendix 2 – Stakeholder Consultation...... 57

List of Figures Figure 1: Central Pilbara water management area...... 7 Figure 2: Mining Area C development Envelope, mine layout and environmental values ...... 8 Figure 3: Coondewanna Flats Ecohydrological conceptual model...... 19 Figure 4: Weeli Wolli Spring Ecohydrological Conceptualisation ...... 26 Figure 5: Ben's Oasis Catchment ...... 32 Figure 6: CPWRMP Adaptive (staged and iterative) management approach...... 37 Figure 7: Iteratively refined thresholds to reflect scientific knowledge for the Central Pilbara Receptors...... 39 List of Tables Table 1: Key environmental factors for which a Schedule has been developed in this CPWRMP...... 9 Table 2: Ministerial Statement conditions and requirements for which a Schedule has been developed in this CPWRMP...... 10 Table 3: Impact Pathways between BHP operations and Central Pilbara Receptors...... 13 Table 4: Feasible water management options to minimise potential impacts to receiving receptors resulting from BHP operations...... 13 Table 5: Mitigation options for selected receptor and impact sources ...... 14 Table 6: Potential source and pathway of hydrologic change at Coondewanna Flats...... 20 Table 7: Summary of Coondewanna Flats Threats and Controls ...... 21 Table 8: Potential source and pathway of hydrologic change at Weeli Wolli Springs...... 28 Table 9: Summary of Weeli Wolli Spring Threats and Controls ...... 28 Table 10: Potential source and pathway of hydrologic change at Ben's Oasis...... 33

Page 3 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

DWER Submission / Approval Record

Date of Director General of Version Date of DWER Submission DWER endorsement October 2016 2.0 n/a Submitted with Southern Flank PER initial referral December 2018 Submitted is response to 3.3 n/a DWER (EPA Services) feedback March 2019 Submitted in response to 3.4 DWER Feedback

Document Amendment Record

Page Date of Version Version description Key changes Number Change 1.0 All New Document New document. March 2014

2.0 All Revised document. Submitted with Southern Flank Updated to reflect latest PWRMP October Revised Proposal. template, including changes to reflect 2016 Environmental Assessment Guidelines EAG 17 direction. Includes content relating to ecohydrology and hydrological processes from Mining Area C EMP Rev 6. Updated to include Southern Flank Revised Proposal and the Juna Downs Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme. 3.0 All Revised document, updated as part of Southern Restructured to align with Instructions. November Flank PER process Minor edits to align with EIA assessments. 2017 Coondewanna drawdown triggers reinstated, separate schedule for Ben’s Oasis, updated commitments on cumulative impacts and mitigation strategies. 3.1 All Document updated for resubmission as per Wording of commitments updated to align April 2018 requirements of MS 1072. with MS 1072. References to MS 491 removed. 3.2 All Updated to include surface water management Added description of surface water August 2018 discharge scheme including risks, triggers, thresholds, monitoring and management response to Schedule 1 3.3 All Updated to address requested amendments by Further detail added to justify choice of December DWER (EPA Services) in letter dated 21 November provisions. 2018 2018 Updated to be consistent with EPA’s Instructions on how to prepare Environmental Protection Act 1986 Part IV Environmental Management Plans. 3.4 23, 29, Updated to address requested amendments by Further detail added to justify choice of March 2019 34 and DWER (EPA Services) in letter dated provisions. Schedule 1

Page 4 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Summary

Proponent EMP Purpose Title of proposal Ministerial Key environmental factors and objectives Key provisions in the plan / operation Statement Number

Outcomes-based provisions (including trigger and threshold criteria) for Coondewanna Flats relating to : · Water quantity - Groundwater level mounding (rise). · Water quantity - Groundwater level drawdown (fall). · Tree health - Canopy decline (defined as Crown Condition Score) · Changes to surface water flow regime – surface water approaching Lake Robinson outside natural flow events.

Management-based provisions (including management targets) for Weeli Wolli Spring relating to : · Improving understanding of the aquifer system east of Mining Area Inland Waters - To maintain the hydrological regimes and C, changes in groundwater levels and the pathways to Weeli Wolli Implementation of quality of groundwater and surface water so that Spring. BHP condition Mining Area C 1072 environmental values are protected. · Confirming the extent of Weeli Wolli Spring. requirements · Developing a mitigation and aquifer recovery approach. · Developing a combined catchment management approach with RTIO.

Management-based provisions (including management targets) for Weeli Wolli Spring relating to : · Improving understanding of the aquifer system east of Mining Area C, changes in groundwater levels and the pathways to Ben’s Oasis. · Confirming the extent of Ben’s Oasis. · Developing a mitigation and aquifer recovery approach. · Developing a combined catchment management approach with RTIO.

Page 5 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

1. Context, Scope and Rationale

This Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan (CPWRMP) has been compiled by BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd (BHP) to meet requirements under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The requirements include the development and submission of an ‘Environment Management Plan (EMP)’ in accordance with the Instructions on how to prepare Environmental Protection Act 1986 Part IV Environmental Management Plans (EPA, 2018) (Instructions).

BHP has utilised these provisions to manage an identified number of regional water assets to meet its outcome-based water management objectives in the Central Pilbara water management area1 of Western Australia (WA). BHP’s outcome-based objective for water in the Central Pilbara water management area is:

To manage the range of potential hydrological changes (groundwater, surface water and/or soil moisture) resulting from Mining Area C (Northern Flank and Southern Flank) operations impacting on receiving receptors to an acceptable level.

The regional water assets within the Central Pilbara water management area (Figure 1) to which a Ministerial Statement implementation condition applies are: · Coondewanna Flats vegetation community Priority ecological Community (PEC) · Weeli Wolli Spring riparian vegetation and groundwater system PEC · Ben’s Oasis riparian vegetation and groundwater system PEC

This document is one of a number of ‘EMPs’, which have been, or are being, developed by BHP to address its water management requirements in water catchment areas within the Pilbara Region.

In accordance with the Instructions (EPA, 2018), the following sub-sections outline the Proposals that this CPWRMP addresses (Section 1.1), the relevant key environmental factors (Section 1.2), the condition requirements applicable to this Proposal (Section 1.3) and the rationale and approach underlying this CPWRMP (Section 1.4). The EMP Provisions (Section 2) are in the form of a “schedule” as described in the Instructions. 1.1. Proposal This EMP addresses Ministerial water management conditions for BHP activities within the Coondewanna and Upper Weeli Wolli creek catchments, which BHP refers to as the ‘Central Pilbara water management area’. This includes water management relating to the existing Mining Area C development and the activities of the expanded Mining Area C (MAC) operations that include the Southern Flank development both of which are approved under MS1072. The key activities include dewatering of the existing and expanded Mining Area C via borefields; the management of the surplus water generated through dewatering via Managed Aquifer Recharge in the form of reinjection borefields and infiltrations basins; and the management of surface water discharged via the Packsaddle infiltration ponds. Figure 2 shows the location of pits across Mining Area C coded by depth as well as the location of receptors. Deeper pit are more likely to interact with the water table and act as a source of change in the regional aquifers. More detail on the proposal is given in Appendix 1.

1 Further explained in Section 1.1

Page 6 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Figure 1: Central Pilbara water management area

Page 7 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Figure 2: Mining Area C development Envelope, mine layout and environmental values

Page 8 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

1.2. Key environmental factors The Instructions require, for each key environmental factor, that a Proponent describes: 1. “the proposal activities which would affect the key environmental factor; and 2. the site-specific environmental value, existing and/or potential uses, ecosystem health condition or sensitive component of the key environmental factor which will be affected”. (EPA, 2018, p. ii) The Mining Area C Northern Flank Life-of-Mine Proposal was approved in December 1998 under Ministerial Statement 491 (MS 491). The Proposal was extended to include the Southern Flank deposits via the Public Environmental Review process in 2017 and was approved in February 2018 under Ministerial Statement 1072 (MS 1072) which replaced MS491.

The key environmental factors applicable to this EMP are listed in Table 1.

Table 1: Key environmental factors for which a Schedule has been developed in this CPWRMP

Title of Ministerial Key proposal / Statement Environmental Values Potential Impacts operation Number Factors

Coondewanna Flats Reduction in extent of priority vegetation at vegetation community Coondewanna Flats PEC PEC

Weeli Wolli Creek Reduction in extent of riparian vegetation at Weeli Wolli Mining Inland Waters Area C 1072 riparian vegetation Spring PEC Hub community PEC Ben’s Oasis Reduction in extent of riparian vegetation at Ben’s Oasis occurrence of Weeli Wolli Spring PEC.

1.3. Condition requirements This EMP addresses the requirements of Condition 6: Water Management Environmental Management Plan of MS1072. Table 2 contains the key clauses relating to the EMP requirements. The condition requirements include the development and submission of an ‘Environment Management Plan (EMP)’ in accordance with the Instructions on how to prepare Environmental Protection Act 1986 Part IV Environmental Management Plans (Condition 6-4). BHP has prepared this EMP in accordance with the Instructions (EPA, 2018). A list of those Ministerial Statement implementation conditions, for which a Schedule has been developed within this CPWRMP is provided below in Table 2. The relevant Schedule number is also included in Table 2.

1.3.1. Other regulatory requirements It is noted that groundwater water quality relating to discharge is managed via Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) (Licence L7581/2002/6)). EP Act Licence allows for discharge of excess mine dewatering water to groundwater in order to facilitate mining below the water table. Compliance to water quality Licence conditions are reported in the Annual Environment Report. Monitoring requirements are outlined in Appendix 1. Groundwater quality and abstraction is managed via the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 5C Licence to Take Water Licence requirements (GWL110044(10)). The groundwater abstraction is carried out in accordance with the GWL Operating Strategy for Mining Area C (BHP, 2018).

Page 9 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Table 2: Ministerial Statement conditions and requirements for which a Schedule has been developed in this CPWRMP

Ministerial Environmental Operation Condition No. Condition Requirements Schedule Value Statement Factor

No reduction in the extent of each of the following components of the Coolibah— Lignum Flats Priority Ecological Community occurrence on the Coondewanna Flats: Schedule 1 Coondewanna Condition 6-1 (1) (a) Coolibah woodlands over lignum over swamp wandiree, or (Table 1) Flats PEC (b) Coolibah and mulga woodland over lignum and tussock grasses on clay plains, attributable to the Revised Proposal.

Condition 6-1 (2) No reduction in the extent of the Weeli Wolli Spring occurrence of the Weeli Wolli Schedule 1 Weeli Wolli Spring Priority Ecological Community attributable to the Revised Proposal. (Table 2) Spring PEC Mining No, 1072 Inland Waters Area C Condition 6-1 (3) No reduction in the extent of the Ben’s Oasis occurrence of the Weeli Wolli Spring Schedule 1 Ben’s Oasis Priority Ecological Community attributable to the Revised Proposal. (Table 3) PEC

Condition 6-2 The Plan shall specify Outcome/s, Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Schedule 1 Coondewanna Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting to demonstrate (Table 1) Flats PEC that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met.

Condition 6-3 Schedule 1 Weeli Wolli The Plan shall specify Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and (Table 2 Spring PEC, Reporting to demonstrate that the objectives in Condition 6-1(2) and 6-1(3) will be and Table Ben’s Oasis met. 3) PEC

Page 10 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

1.4. Rationale and approach This section provides a concise description of the rationale and approach for this CPWRMP overall (to meet internal requirements around managing all activities within the Central Pilbara water management area).

For each regional water asset, it summarises: · survey findings; · key assumptions and uncertainties; · the management approach; and · the rationale for choice of provisions, as is required by the Instructions (EPA, 2018, p. ii).

1.4.1. Overall objective, purpose and scope of this CPWRMP As previously mentioned, this CPWRMP has been compiled by BHP to meet regulatory requirements to develop and submit an EMP and relevant Schedules to demonstrate how BHP meets the intent of various water-related implementation conditions.

Over 30 years of surveys, data collection and understanding of water in the Central Pilbara water management area have been considered in the development of this CPWRMP. This CPWRMP seeks to continue that work and: … consider the hydrological changes resulting from BHP operations, the receiving receptors (water resources, environment, social and third-party operations), external influence and factors, the potential impacts and the required risk-based adaptive management to mitigate potential impacts to acceptable levels. As part of BHP’s ongoing commitment to water stewardship this CPWRMP also seeks to: · establish specific water resource and water-dependent ecosystem management requirements for the Central Pilbara water management area; · provide a standardised and consistent risk-based approach to regional water management for multiple BHP operations within the same catchment area; · set out the overarching approach and incorporate technical considerations, assumptions and adaptive management approaches; · direct the consistent development and consideration of the catchment, hub and site-specific water resource management requirements for each of the hubs within this catchment area; and · incorporate adaptive management as knowledge regarding the implementation of a particular objective or management action for a specific factor changes over time. This CPWRMP does not manage impacts on receiving receptors that are beyond BHP's operational impact, control or responsibility, such as impacts resulting from prolonged dry periods, climate variability or third-party operations.

Page 11 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

1.4.1.1.Key Water Sensitive Receptors Three regional water sensitive assets are identified in Condition 6 that require provisions to be developed. These are: · Coondewanna Flats vegetation community PEC (Schedule 1, Table 1) · Weeli Wolli Spring riparian vegetation and groundwater system PEC (Schedule 1, Table 2) · Ben’s Oasis riparian vegetation and groundwater system PEC (Schedule 1, Table 2) Detail on the rationale and approach for each of the key water sensitive receptors is provided in the following sections: · Coondewanna Flats vegetation community PEC (Section 1.4.2) · Weeli Wolli Spring riparian vegetation and groundwater system PEC (Section 1.4.3) · Ben’s Oasis riparian vegetation and groundwater system PEC (Section 1.4.4).

1.4.1.2.Sources of Hydrological change There are a range of water-affecting activities in the Central Pilbara catchment which may result in changes to hydrological processes. These include: 1. Local drawdown of the groundwater levels, resulting from abstraction of water to facilitate below water table mining; 2. Regional drawdown or mounding of the groundwater levels, which is a change in groundwater levels that extends beyond the immediate vicinity of the deposit or site or re-injection of surplus water into the aquifer via managed aquifer recharge; 3. Changes in groundwater water quality resulting from mining, abstraction or re-injection; and 4. Changes in surface water flows or water quality resulting from surface water management, including discharge of surplus water, or diversion. A high level assessment of the range of water-affecting activities, potential change in hydrological environment and controls in place for each receptor is presented in Sections 1.4.2 to 1.4.4.

1.4.1.3.Methodology for monitoring hydrological change Adaptive management for the key receptors allows for three stages of response, including an investigation, action and mitigation stage. The approach ensures that any change and/or response observed is characterised and understood prior to implementing corrective action. A Source-Pathway-Receptor approach to monitoring will provide the data that supports the response hierarchy:

1. Source – measure the change created by BHP operations. This includes the magnitude, timing and duration of the change to water. 2. Pathway – measure how this change propagates into the surrounding environment. This includes rate, magnitude, timing and direction of changes moving out from our operations. Pathway measurement forms the basis of regional conceptual models and impact forecasts. 3. Receptor – measurement of water parameters at receptors is used to confirm predictions based on Source and Pathway monitoring. Potential impact pathways between Mining Area C operations and these water dependent receptors have been identified using regional monitoring data and groundwater modelling. The likelihood of these pathways effecting change at receptors has been informed by measurement of catchment response to existing stresses. These measurements have also informed our numerical and conceptual models. Table 3 shows the impact pathways between BHP activity and the listed receptors and the likelihood of connection.

Page 12 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Table 3: Impact Pathways between BHP operations and Central Pilbara Receptors Source of Receptor Change Coondewanna Flats PEC Weeli Wolli Spring Ben’s Oasis Connection to Central Connection to western Northern Flank deposits via Northern Flank deposits via Northern regional dolomites and Marra Connection via Weeli Wolli regional dolomites and Marra Flank Mamba formation. Connection Valley sediments. Connection Mamba formation. Connection Drawdown unlikely as stress from Hope unlikely likely as drawdown has been Downs not observed in Central observed along pathway. deposits. Connection to Vista Oriental Connection via Brockman Southern Connection to Highway deposits via Southern Flank geology south of Pebble Mouse Flank deposits via regional dolomite Valley sediments. Connection Creek Valley. Connection Drawdown and Marra Mamba Formation uncertain as stress from Hope possible but not observed. Downs not observed in valley. Connection via Valley detritals. Connection likely based on Connection via Weeli Wolli R Deposit No obvious impact pathway significant drawdown Valley sediments. Connection Drawdown observed in area from Hope possible but unlikely Downs

Likelihood: Unlikely Possible Likely

The monitoring strategy is to deploy sufficient monitoring along these pathways to confirm and refine predictions and to act as trigger points for minimisation or mitigation works. Trigger points and mitigation actions will be refined over time as conceptual uncertainties are resolved.

R Deposit is one of the 14 orebodies approved under the original North Flank MS491, however due to its location in a separate aquifer compartment it is being treated as an independent source of change for water management purposes.

1.4.1.4.Water management options The water management options outlined in Table 4 consider feasible options and controls (preventative and mitigating) to counteract hydrological changes resulting from BHP operations and the potential impacts to receiving receptors during BHP operations and closure. This enables flexibility with regards to water management and takes into account optimising of mine dewatering, storage and use. This approach is consistent with the DWER guidance (Water and Mining Guidelines, 2013) and considers prioritisation of transferring water for reuse, minimising the dewatering drawdown footprint, and offsetting the impacts to receiving receptors to an acceptable level.

Table 4: Feasible water management options to minimise potential impacts to receiving receptors resulting from BHP operations

Note: Options shown in bold are confirmed and currently in place. Options shown in regular are currently under evaluation or a future possible alternative under suitable water balance and sustainability scenarios.

Page 13 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

These tools are based on capturing and moving groundwater or surface water to locations that best prevent or mitigate impacts. Depending on how water supports a particular receptor, mitigation of impacts could involve moving water into surface water systems or back into the underlying aquifers.

Ongoing evaluation and selection of appropriate mitigation tools are integral components of adaptive management. The choice of tools may change over time: for instance surface irrigation may be required during peak disturbance periods but aquifer augmentation may be more appropriate once recovery is underway.

For the receptors and high-likelihood pathways identified in Table 3, examples of potential mitigation tools are detailed in Table 5. Given the range of operational and hydrological uncertainty the selection and implementation of these tools are subject to change. Consultation with Rio Tinto Iron Ore (RTIO) may be needed to enable effective planning and implementation of some solutions.

Table 5: Mitigation options for selected receptor and impact sources Receptor Impact Source Mitigation during Operations Mitigation at Closure Coondewanna Northern Flank Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) Backfill of North Flank to aid groundwater Flats dewatering injection to offset drawdown propagation. recovery. Southern Flank Periodic surface water irrigation Backfill of Highway pit to pre-mining Highway following extended drought period to water table to aid groundwater recovery. dewatering replenish soil moisture store. MAR and/or augmented recharge to speed recovery, flood irrigation during drought periods. Weeli Wolli R Deposit Mitigation dependent on timing. Pre- Augmented recharge via infiltration Spring dewatering Hope Downs closure, store surplus via basins in R Deposit valley or exposed MAR. Post-Hope Downs closure, supply calcretes upstream of WWS. Use of surplus to Hope Downs for injection, tree former pits as infiltration basins. Water irrigation if required sources Backfill Ben’s Oasis Southern Flank MAR along identified impact pathway. Augmented recharge via infiltration dewatering Flood irrigation upstream to recharge basins upstream of Ben’s Oasis. system. Vista pit backfill

1.4.1.5.Cumulative effects There are currently two mining operators within the Central Pilbara catchment, BHP (Mining Area C) and RTIO (Hope Downs operations). BHP has taken into account third party operations and data in assessment as far as the available data allows. Monitoring and catchment scale eco-hydrological studies are undertaken to provide baseline assessments and inform predictive models, which will be updated iteratively to inform cumulative impact assessments and inform adaptive management. BHP will manage its share of impacts on a receptor. BHP’s proportion of impacts will be determined based on measurement and appropriate predictive techniques. Where the majority of change results from third party effects, BHP will not be responsible for final outcome at receptor. A co-operative and collaborative approach with third parties will be sought for water management.

1.4.2. Coondewanna Flats

1.4.2.1.Survey and Study Findings Location Coondewanna Flats is located about 18 km south west of BHPs Mining Area C operations. The flats occur within an intermontane area bound by hills of Mt Robinson and The Governor to the east and south, and Packsaddle and Mt Meharry to the north and west. The Great Northern Highway passes to

Page 14 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan the east of the Coondewanna Flats boundary and Rio Tinto’s West Angelas to rail line passes to the west. Values Coondewanna Flats (including Lake Robinson) includes several vegetation communities with two being classified as a PEC (DPaW, 2014): · Coolibah woodlands over lignum over swamp wandiree (Priority 1). Lake Robinson has the only known occurrence of this community. · Coolibah and Mulga woodland over lignum and tussock grass on clay plains (Priority 3). This community has only been identified at Coondewanna Flats and Wanna Munna, which is about 40 km to the southeast. It is extensive on the flats to the south of Lake Robinson.

Hydrology Lake Robinson forms within Coondewanna Flats during the wet season as a shallow ephemeral lake. The lake may persist for several months following periods of heavy rainfall. Surface water flows towards the flats from the north, west and south draining a catchment area of approximately 866 km2. Lake Robinson occurs within a topographic low at the north-Central extent of the flats and is the ultimate terminus for catchment runoff. Water in the lake is either lost to evaporation or infiltrates into the underlying Tertiary detritals, where it replenishes soil water in the unsaturated zone and potentially contributes to groundwater recharge.

Hydrological dependencies An ecohydrological conceptualisation of Coondewanna Flats is provided in Figure 3. Figure 3 makes use of the Pilbara landscape Ecoydrological Units (EHU) developed as part of BHP’s Strategic Proposal (BHP, 2015). The Lake Robinson area of Coondewanna Flats (EHU 9 in Figure 3) supports distinct Coolibah (Eucalyptus victrix) woodland vegetation communities. The surrounding flats (EHU 6 in Figure 3) are characterised by poorly-defined drainages with Coolibah and mulga (Acacia aptaneura) woodland vegetation. The key hydrological aspects of the system are: · Surface water flow into Coondewanna Flats is likely to occur every three in four years and is an important process for replenishing soil moisture in the unsaturated profile. · Beneath the flats, an unconfined calcrete aquifer is present at a depth of 20 to 30 meters below ground level (mbgl). It is overlain by largely unsaturated Tertiary detritals and underlain by low to high permeability dolomite of the Wittenoom Formation. This dolomite forms part of a regional groundwater flow system that ultimately reaches Weeli Wolli Spring. · Groundwater recharge is associated with the infiltration of ponded surface water runoff. Recharge events are estimated to occur once in every four years. RPS (2014a) estimated that annual average recharge rates are about 2.4 GL at Lake Robinson and 4 GL over the broader Coondewanna Flats area. The Coondewanna Flats has been identified as a potential groundwater recharge area for Weeli Wolli Spring. · Groundwater discharge occurs as outflow to the Southern Flank and Northern Flank Valleys, which hydraulically connect the Coondewanna and Weeli Wolli Spring catchments from a groundwater perspective however a southwest-northeast trending dyke cutting across the south east corner of Coondewanna Flats may act as a partial barrier for groundwater flow into the Southern Flank valley. Long-term investigations into the eco-hydrology of the Coondewanna Flats priority communities indicate that the vegetation assemblage is highly unlikely to rely on groundwater to meet water requirements. The ecological studies were collectively reviewed in AQ2, 2016. For the key species in the PEC communities:

Page 15 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

· E. victrix on Coondewanna Flats rely on stored soil moisture to meet their water requirements, which is replenished by surface water inflow. Studies indicate these trees are able to obtain soil moisture for prolonged periods from horizons within the unsaturated zone above the watertable (Astron, 2014). The E. victrix woodlands at Coondewanna Flats are considered unlikely to rely on groundwater. · The surface water dynamics of Coondewanna Flats are likely to influence bud-set, flowering, seed production and seedling recruitment of the E. victrix. However, further investigations are necessary to understand the relationship between flooding regimes and the reproductive cycle of the woodland trees. · Mulga (Acacia aptaneura) is a shallow-rooted species with xerophytic adaptations to drought stress. Water use requirements of the Mulga communities on the flats are most likely met by soil water in surface layers (up to 5 mbgl), which is replenished by rainfall and runoff. · Muehlenbeckia are vadophytic and may not rely on groundwater to meet plant water requirements owing to the depth to water (>15 m) and seasonal surface water inundation (AQ2, 2016). For E. victrix, the species with the highest likelihood of groundwater dependency, the key findings that support dependency on soil moisture rather than groundwater derived from studies undertaken within the PEC are as follows: · Basal stem area per hectare is indicative of a water limited community. Equivalent densities of E. victrix have been observed in the Pilbara in areas with no available groundwater; · Symptoms of drought stress during dry season have been observed in leaf water potential measurements, indicating groundwater is not being used; · Matric potential indicates water is accessed to a maximum depth of 18m below ground surface; · Size of soil moisture reservoir and surface water replenishment regime is sufficient to meet transpiration calculations based on basal stem area; and · Depth to groundwater (>20m) is at the upper end of the accessible depth for E. victrix. In summary E. victrix are considered to rely on the soil water reservoir to meet plant water needs with a low likelihood of facultative dependence on groundwater. It is likely that the surface water regime at Coondewanna Flats supports these vegetation communities via soil moisture replenishment by periodic infiltration. While none of these indicators are conclusive in isolation, taken together, and in the absence of any contraindicative data, they show a low likelihood that groundwater drawdown will impact this community. Assessment of potential impacts Hydrological change Changes to hydrological conditions at Coondewanna Flats are likely to be associated with: · falling groundwater levels as a result of dewatering at Southern Flank and Northern Flank, and to a lesser extent through the cumulative effects of dewatering the remaining Mining Area C and Hope Downs deposits, and · increasing groundwater levels due to surplus water management through managed aquifer recharge at Juna Downs. Groundwater modelling results predict that water levels could fall by between 10 and 22 m in the central area of Coondewanna Flats by 2047 (unmitigated), after which water levels begin to recover. The rate of change is estimated to be up to 3 m/year. The rate and extent of drawdown is dependent upon the hydraulic connection between the Highway deposits at Southern Flank and aquifer storage in the local area. Timing of maximum drawdown at Coondewanna is associated with two deep pits at Highway,principally with Pushback 5 which extends approximately 160m below water table. Uncertainty remains about the hydraulic behaviour of a dolerite dyke which passes through the Highway

Page 16 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan deposits and maintains a 30m head difference on either side. There is potential for this structure to limit drawdown beneath Coondewanna from the Southern Flank dewatering to the east. Injection of surplus water at the Juna Downs MAR scheme will reduce the extent of drawdown at Coondewanna Flats. MAR has advantages over other surplus water disposal options due to a small surface disturbance footprint. However, as MAR replenishes groundwater systems at much higher rates than natural recharge processes, it has the potential to elevate groundwater levels (i.e. create a groundwater ‘mound’) in a zone around to the injection bores for a period of time. Modelling undertaken predicts the progression and extent of the MAR groundwater mound over the nominal 18-year operating life of the MAR scheme (2016-2034). The development of the Northern Flank and Southern Flank mining operations are expected to reduce the size of the surface water catchment that drains into Coondewanna Flats. The surface water impact assessment undertaken for Southern Flank (MWH, 2016) determined that 6.9% of the catchment will be disturbed by the combined Mining Area C operation. This value is considered conservative as surface water will be returned to the catchment via small diversions and pumping stormwater out of pits during operations. Excess water from the Packsaddle Infiltration Ponds will be discharged into one of two natural drainage lines known as West Packsaddle Tributary North and West Packsaddle Tributary South. These drainage lines will allow infiltration of water into the underlying sediments. Water discharge will alternate between the two drainage lined to allow drying periods and to limit the extent of wetting footprint. Where the water does not infiltrate within the drainage line, this could potentially reach Lake Robinson which forms within Coondewanna Flats following large rainfall events. Recharge events within Coondewanna Flats occur every 4 years on average (AQ2, 2016). The potential risk of this activity is disruption to the natural existing surface water regime at Lake Robinson, for example having water in the lake for prolonged periods of time or outside of the wet season. This in turn could impact the composition of the existing vegetation communities. To avoid this impact, a Wetting Front Limit will be located 4km upstream from the PEC. If water approaches the wetting front limit, the discharge regime will be modified to avoid crossing the limit. Ongoing monitoring of the Wetting Front Limit will ensure discharge does not extend beyond this point.

Assessment of potential impacts on the Coondewanna Flats ecological communities Coondewanna ecological communities are unlikely to be dependent upon groundwater and therefore the magnitude and rate of change in hydrological conditions outlined above are unlikely to result in an impact to the PEC. Nonetheless triggers for groundwater level will remain in place Planned injection of surplus water at the Juna Downs MAR scheme has the potential for groundwater draw-up to impact PEC community composition and water access strategies. The MAR scheme is predicted to progressively increase groundwater levels underlying stands of E. victrix trees on Coondewanna Flats. Based on the predicted maximum extent of groundwater mounding, the lower portion of the root systems of some mature E. victrix trees may become exposed to groundwater for a period of time. In such cases tree water stress (as measured by leaf water potential) may increase relative to unaffected trees, particularly during prolonged dry conditions, when water levels are elevated. Where trees have sustained access to groundwater tree water use and growth rates may increase. Once injection ceases trees with root systems that were brought into connection with the groundwater system will become disconnected from groundwater. In such cases tree water stress may increase during prolonged dry conditions; potentially with associated decreases in leaf area, tree water use and growth rates. More extreme adjustments including canopy die back are unlikely but possible. The trees will gradually re-adjust to the surface driven hydrological regime. The majority of the tree root systems will remain unaffected. However, pruning of the deeper roots may occur if they are exposed to frequently saturated soils. The trees may reconfigure their root systems to some extent to exploit the groundwater resource. Due to their shallow roots systems mulga and understory species are not expected to be affected by the predicted increase in groundwater levels associated with the MAR scheme. Discharge to surface into West Packsaddle Tributary North and South is not expected to influence the PEC as the scheme will be operated to prevent water reaching the PEC footprint.

Page 17 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Changes in surface water volume resulting from ground disturbance are not considered likely to impact the PEC values (Onshore, 2016). Reduction in surface water flow volume is not expected to be material in the context of the wide range of seasonal variation which the historical record shows is up to 50% over any given 5 year period (BHP, 2015). However, further work is planned to which will improve understanding of the hydrological dependency at Coondewanna Flats. External Considerations – weather The ecological assessment has identified that seasonal rainfall and resulting runoff and ponding is likely to be the most significant hydrological factor in maintaining the vegetation community at Coondewanna Flats (AQ2, 2016). Analysis of historic rainfall suggests that Lake Robinson receives some quantity of runoff every year and receives enough water to initiate groundwater recharge every 4 years on average (AQ2, 2016). The smaller annual events are likely to replenish soil moisture in the vicinity of Lake Robinson which then becomes the main source of water for the herbs and understory vegetation that comprise the PEC. Long term variability in rainfall is expected to result in periods of reduced rainfall although the presence of the current vegetation assemblage suggests resilient strategies for dealing with these changes.

Page 18 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Figure 3: Coondewanna Flats Ecohydrological conceptual model Source: MWH (2015) Development of Pilbara Landscape Ecohydrological Units. Published in Appendix 7 of the BHP Strategic Environmental Assessment

Page 19 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

1.4.2.2.Key Assumptions and uncertainties Assumptions · The key species in Coondewanna Flats are unlikely to rely on groundwater o Eucalyptus victrix (Coolibah) roots extend to a depth of about 15 m. o The root systems of Mulga (A. aptaneura) and understorey species such as lignum are predominantly confined to the top 5 m of the profile. · Recharge events large enough to initiate aquifer recharge (and result in prolonged water in Lake Robinson) occur 1 in every 4 years. Improving understanding The following work is required to improve understanding at Coondewanna Flats: · Ongoing studies investigating the groundwater dependency of Coondewanna Flats vegetation communities and key tree species, i.e. Eucalyptus victrix · Monitoring of groundwater drawdown extent and groundwater levels during operations · Ongoing studies investigating sensitivity of vegetation fringing the PEC to seasonal variation in rainfall, runoff and surface water regime. · Ongoing studies investigating surface water catchment response to spatial variation in rainfall distribution. · Update of conceptual ecohydrological model, based on study findings.

1.4.2.3.Management Approach Monitoring Groundwater monitoring for Coondewanna Flats follows the Source-Pathway-Receptor approach outlined in section 1.4.1.3 and is presented in Table 6 below.

Table 6: Potential source and pathway of hydrologic change at Coondewanna Flats Site Source Pathway Receptor Northern Flank Western edge of Northern flank valley Aquifer beneath dewatered pits at E dolomites Coondewanna Flats deposit Juna Downs MAR Aquifer beneath Aquifer beneath borefield Coondewanna Flats Coondewanna Flats Packsaddle Infiltration Overland surface water Surface water regime at Ponds flow via drainage lines Coondewanna Flats (Lake Robinson) Southern Flank Western edge of Southern Flank valley Aquifer beneath dewatered pits at dolomites west of dyke Coondewanna Flats Highway Deposit

Vegetation health monitoring will also be carried out at the Coondewanna Flats PEC.

Table 7 summarises the threats from current operations and controls in place under existing approvals to manage the potential impacts to Coondewanna Flats from BHP existing operations.

Page 20 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Table 7: Summary of Coondewanna Flats Threats and Controls Aspect Site/s Operations / Threat Control Activities Drawdown Mining Area C Mining below Mining Area C is mining Managed under (regional) – Northern water table within below water table, Ministerial Statement Flank and the Coondewanna dewatering is required to 1072 – monitoring Southern Flank Flats catchment undertake these required under this plan. operations, which may Abstraction volumes and result in impacts to rates are controlled via regional groundwater 5C Licence levels and impact the GWL110044(10) Coondewanna Flats PECs.

Surplus water Water Potential threat to Planned injection of Managed under management Discharge – the receiving surplus water at the Juna Ministerial Statements Juna Downs environment of Downs MAR scheme has 1072 – monitoring and Managed Coondewanna potential that management required Aquifer Flats priority groundwater draw-up under this plan. Recharge ecological may impact PEC Discharge locations, communities community composition volumes and quality are and water access controlled under DER strategies. Licence L7851/2002/6.

Surface water Surface water Potential threat to Disruption to the existing Managed under management discharge - the receiving surface water regime at Ministerial Statements Packsaddle environment of Lake Robinson e.g. 1072 – monitoring and Infiltration Coondewanna Increased periods of management required Ponds Flats priority inundation. This could under this plan. ecological impact the composition of Ongoing monitoring of communities the existing vegetation the Wetting Front Limit communities. and adjustment to discharge regime to prevent discharge from reaching PEC.

Adaptive Management Management options to reduce or mitigate detrimental changes to the groundwater regime at Coondewanna Flats involve injection of water into the aquifer to offset drawdown and ceasing injection or abstraction of water to avoid potential impacts from groundwater mounding. Implementation of these actions will occur according to the triggers and thresholds in Schedule 1.

1.4.2.4.Rationale for choice of provisions Type of provisions Condition 6-2 requires that the plan specifies outcome-based provisions (Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting) to demonstrate that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met. Table 1 of Schedule 1 contains the outcomes-based provisions for the Coondewanna Flats PEC. Choice of performance indicators (environmental criteria) As discussed in Section 1.4.2.1, indirect impacts to the Coondewanna Flats PEC vegetation communities are possible from hydrological changes. Therefore, BHP has chosen water-related indicators as the primary indicator, relating to the following hydrological changes: · groundwater level rise (mounding);

Page 21 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

· groundwater level fall (drawdown); and · changes to surface water flows (increase in water in Lake Robinson during periods of discharge). BHP has also developed vegetation-related indicators and proposes to initiate vegetation monitoring if groundwater level triggers are reached. The outcome in Condition 6-1(1) is that there is no reduction in the extent of the components of the Coondewanna Flats PEC, however the extent may change due to natural conditions and/or impacts from BHP and/or other third party operations. BHP will confirm the extent of the PEC to provide a baseline. The rationale for the choice of indicators and monitoring program design (location, timing, frequency etc) is based on survey and study findings (Section 1.4.2.1). Water provisions BHP will undertake monthly monitoring of groundwater levels along the fringe of the PEC (Figure 1a). BHP considers that the location and frequency of monitoring will provide sufficient early detection of changes in groundwater levels that could have indirect impacts on Coondewanna flats. The frequency is consistent with the recommendations of the Coondewanna Flats Eco-hydrology Review and Conceptual Model (AQ2, 2015). As discussed in Section 1.4.2.1, the Coondewanna ecological communities are unlikely to be dependent upon groundwater and therefore are unlikely to be impacted by groundwater drawdown. However, as a precautionary approach, BHP has established groundwater drawdown criteria based on the historic range of groundwater levels that the system has experienced: · trigger: based on pre-impact baseline water levels in 2005/2006 (24.85 mbgl); and · threshold: based on predicted water levels prior to 1999/2000 wet event (26.6 mbgl). The criteria for groundwater mounding are based on the depth that plant roots may become exposed to groundwater for a prolonged period of time. The criteria is based on 2 species, E. victrix and Acacia aptaneura: · trigger: based on the lower depth that E. victrix accesses soil water (15 mbgl); and · threshold: based on maximum root depth of Mulga species (7 mbgl). BHP will monitor the presence of water at the surface outside natural flow conditions, at locations upstream of the PEC. The criteria for changes to the surface water flow regime at Coondewanna Flats are based on the presence of water at these locations (see Figure 1b): · trigger: surface water recorded approximately 7.5 km from the PEC (Early warning point); and · threshold: surface water recorded approximately 4 km from the PEC (Wetting front limit). Tree health provisions BHP will commence biannual monitoring of indicator tree species (E. victrix) if the groundwater levels triggers (mounding or drawdown) (see Schedule 1, Table 1) are reached. BHP considers that vegetation monitoring is only required once the groundwater level triggers are reached because studies indicate that the trees rely on soil water rather than groundwater (and these groundwater levels reflect the historic water level range). Noting there is still uncertainty about this, and applying the precautionary principle where there is scientific uncertainty, if it were assumed the trees do use groundwater, impacts may be detected when groundwater levels fall below the proposed groundwater drawdown trigger level as the trees would no longer have access to groundwater. Conversely, if groundwater levels rise above the groundwater mounding trigger level, there may be impacts as trees change the way they access water that could result in changes to the composition of the PEC community. However, for Evictrix at Mt Bruce Flats evidence suggests the trees primarily rely on water stored in the soil when groundwater is not available and it is a resilient tree able to withstand rapid rises in groundwater of up to 10 m (Batini, 2009). Vegetation communities at Coondewanna Flats are analogous

Page 22 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan to Mt Bruce Flats and do not appear to rely on groundwater so there would be limited local impact as the system is surface water driven (AQ2 2015). The Coondewanna Flats Eco-Hydrology Review (AQ2, 2015) recommended the following: · Continued monitoring of tree-health indicators to compare with trends in climate and changes to the soil and groundwater regime. This monitoring should move from an intensive study/campaign basis to more regular operational monitoring: o Regular test sites should be adopted (the investigation previously used that coincide with locations of detailed hydrological monitoring are recommended). o Tree water use can assessed by the proxies of Sapflow and / or Leaf Water Potential o Tree health can be assessed by canopy cover assessment or remotely using Normalised Vegetation Difference Index o Tree water use can also be inferred from regular stem basal area measurements (at the end of the dry season and wet season respectively). Fast growth rates correspond with higher water use, in connection with an increase in sapwood area. In combination with sapflow measurements, stem basal area measurements provide the basis for calculating stand level water use. BHP has developed the vegetation monitoring program for Coondewanna Flats on the basis of the AQ2 recommendations, and considers that the following monitoring methodology is appropriate: · Frequency and duration: If triggered, biannual monitoring for 3 three years (and repeated if triggered again). · Location: same locations as groundwater monitoring. · Timing: wet season and dry season. · Indicator species: E. victrix · Indicator: Crown Condition Score Condition 6-1 relates to both the Coolibah (E. victrix) woodlands and Coolibah and mulga woodland components of the Coondewanna PEC. BHP has selected E. victrix as the indicator species because: · Mulga generally has a shallower root system than E. victrix – approximately within 3 to 5 m of the surface (Page and Grierson 2012 and Astron unpublished data). · The landscape positon of the mulga at Coondewanna Flats suggests its water requirements is likely to be provided by periodic surface water flow events. · Any impacts from re-injection and or dewatering are likely to impact E. victrix first rather than mulga. BHP is currently developing a vegetation monitoring program (mulga and other species to be determined) which will inform future vegetation provisions relating to surface water discharge. BHP has chosen the Crown Condition Score (CCS) methodology for monitoring, derived from Souter 2009. This semi-quantitative methodology is considered appropriate as it was specifically developed to monitor Eucalyptus camaldulensis which has a life form and a riparian habitat similar to the indicator species E,victrix. CCS has been shown to provide an accurate estimate of a range of tree variables that can be used to determine tree condition (Souter 2010). BHP has commenced vegetation monitoring at vegetation sites (Figure 1a) and has undertaken monitoring for multiple seasons. A suite of monitoring sites with up to 18 sample trees at each, are assessed using CCS based on a percentage estimate of crown extent and crown density. Crown extent refers to the amount of foliage within the crown on the outer edge of the crown, while crown density refers to the amount of foliage within the crown. A score of zero indicates no leaves and total of 9 indicates a tree with maximum extent and density. Mean changes in CCS can then be determined across sites and across years.

Page 23 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

The criteria for tree health are based on a comparison of CCS to the baseline condition of monitored trees: · trigger: Statistically significant canopy decline (Crown Condition Score compared to baseline condition of trees over four consecutive monitoring periods; and · threshold: Statistically significant canopy decline compared to baseline reference condition of trees over eight consecutive monitoring periods; or death of any tree (attributable to MAC operations).

1.4.3. Weeli Wolli Spring

1.4.3.1.Survey and Study Findings Weeli Wolli Spring is located approximately 14 km east of Mining Area C and is an area where surface water and groundwater flows converge and discharge from the Upper Weeli Wolli Creek catchment. The spring occurs where groundwater flow is constrained through a gorge in the Wildflower Range. The creek and surrounding floodplain area support permanent pools and riparian woodlands. A shallow groundwater system with extensive areas of calcrete is present up-gradient of the spring. Downstream of the gorge, the creek flows via a narrow channel past the confluence with Marillana Creek and ultimately into the Fortescue River Valley. The spring’s natural function is currently being impacted from Hope Downs operations and is maintained through artificial discharge through a series of spigots. Hydrological baseline conditions An ecohydrological conceptualisation of Weeli Wolli Spring is provided in Figure 4 with the key features being: · Surface flow at Weeli Wolli Spring is a combination of spring baseflow supported by groundwater discharge, as well as seasonal surface water inflows. · On average, the area experiences two surface water flow events each year. Local infiltration of the surface water results in recharge to the shallow groundwater system. · The groundwater system comprises an unconfined aquifer sequence including calcrete and detritals. Groundwater is shallow being less than 10 mbgl and becoming shallower towards the spring. As the aquifer thins and narrows towards Weeli Wolli Spring, groundwater flow is concentrated and discharged over near-surface basement as baseflow. · The water balance suggests that groundwater throughflow from the upstream catchment is about 11 ML/day. Discharge occurs as spring baseflow (7 ML/day), evapotranspiration (2.6 ML/day) and groundwater throughflow in the shallow aquifer (4 ML/day). · There is no evidence for outflow associated with a fractured-rock aquifer through the gorge in Wildflower Range. There may be a zone of slightly enhanced permeability; otherwise, the basement at the spring is of low permeability. Assessment of potential impacts Hydrological Change The regional groundwater drawdown response to Mining Area C pumping is predicted to propagate out from the Marra Mamba orebodies in an east-west direction following the higher transmissivity Wittenoom dolomite and detrital aquifers. The extent of drawdown associated with Brockman dewatering is considered to be less significant owing to low permeability rocks (shale and banded iron formation (BIF)) constraining the drawdown extent.

The predicted groundwater drawdown resulting from Mining Area C only abstraction activities until 2054 extends to the east and reduces water levels in the lower catchment aquifer (alluvials, dolomite and calcrete aquifers) by 2 to 4 m.

Page 24 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

The predicted maximum groundwater drawdown at Weeli Wolli Spring from proposed Northern Flank and Southern Flank activities is around 1.75m and occurs in 2054 following cessation of aquifer recovery activities at Hope Downs. This magnitude of water level change may impact the vegetation community at Weeli Wolli Spring. Further work is required to determine the likelihood and extent of impacts however should there be a clear risk of vegetation impacts, BHP will take steps to avoid or mitigate this outcome. The maximum predicted cumulative groundwater drawdown (from Mining Area C and Hope Downs operations) occurs prior to Hope Downs closure (estimated to be in 2025 and is between 3 m and 14 m at Weeli Wolli Spring. This drawdown is associated predominantly with abstraction from Hope Downs. This cumulative impact could result in decline of groundwater dependent vegetation at both sites (Onshore Environmental 2015). The timing and success of Hope Downs closure plans to recover groundwater levels will influence the final water level and potential for a continued impact at Weeli Wolli Spring. Surface water flow interception which contributes to Weeli Wolli creek flow will be around 4.2% and considered to be within predictive error and insignificant in terms of change or impact.

Assessment of potential impacts on the Weeli Wolli Spring Over the next 20 years Hope Downs will predominantly continue to impact and manage the spring and any long term effects from Mining Area C are considered to be comparatively small and ultimately will depend upon the success of Hope Downs closure. However, the potential impacts will be reviewed and where necessary controls implemented as more monitoring data is made available. External Considerations As discussed previously RTIO’s Hope Downs operations will continue to dominate groundwater drawdown in the vicinity of Weeli Wolli Spring. This will continue into closure with the extent and duration of impacts being determined by the selected remediation strategy. BHP‘s catchment management activities will be planned and undertaken in the context of RTIO’s planned actions. .

Page 25 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Figure 4: Weeli Wolli Spring Ecohydrological Conceptualisation Source: BHP (2015) SEA Hydrology – Ecohydrological Change Assessment, Appendix 7 of the BHP Strategic Environmental Assessment

Page 26 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

1.4.3.2.Key Assumptions and uncertainties Ecological understanding The Weeli Wolli Spring area is recognised as having multiple ecological values that collectively contribute to its status as a Priority 1 Ecological Community (DPaW, 2014). These include: · Riparian woodland and forest associations with unusual understory species composition including an assortment of wattles (Acacia spp.), and sedges and herbs that fringe many of the pools and associated water bodies along the main channel. There are several species of conservation interest including one named after the spring (Stylidium weeliwolli). The woodland trees include the obligate phreatophyte Melaleuca argentea, and facultative phreatophytes Eucalyptus camaldulensis and E. victrix. · An unusual and diverse aquatic fauna assemblage occurs in a series of permanent pools upgradient of the spring associated with the shallow groundwater system. The permanent discharge from Weeli Wolli Spring is an uncommon habitat for the Pilbara and may function as a refuge for mesic-adapted fauna. A relatively high diversity of stygofauna is associated with the calcrete and alluvial aquifer system. · The creek valley at Weeli Wolli Spring supports a diverse bird and microbat assemblage with the permanent pools providing a water source and foraging habitat. · The creek valley of Weeli Wolli Spring is known to support a very rich microbat assemblage including the Ghost Bat (Macroderma gigas; EPBC Act - Vulnerable, WC Act - Schedule 4), the Chocolate Bat (Chalinolobus morio) occurring at the most northern extent of its natural range, and the White-striped Free-tailed Bat (Tadarida australis). The Weeli Wolli Spring PEC includes a second location at Ben’s Oasis, located about 20 km upstream to the south of Weeli Wolli Spring. At this location, the vegetation is concentrated along a relatively narrow creek channel adjacent to some surface water pools. Ben’s Oasis has been identified as a separate receptor and is discussed further in Section 1.4.4.

Hydrological dependency The Weeli Wolli Spring area hosts a PEC comprising groundwater-dependent vegetation, permanent pools supporting a range of fauna, and a diverse stygofauna community. · There is up to 30 m of saturated calcrete that provides the main stygofauna habitat. · A number of permanent pools upgradient from Weeli Wolli Spring (sustained by the shallow groundwater regime) provide aquatic habitat, and a permanent water source for terrestrial fauna and avifauna.

Improving understanding There are a number of uncertainties relating to regional groundwater flow across the Central Pilbara catchment. The current conceptualisation considers Weeli Wolli a terminal outflow location for groundwater that has accumulated across the Central Pilbara catchment. However recent investigations have suggested local flow pathways appear to be absent or restricted in key locations. Consequently opportunity exists to test and improve understanding of key groundwater transmission pathways that may influence hydrologic function at Weeli Wolli including: · connectivity east of A deposit at Northern Flank; · connectivity across the dolerite dyke south east of Coondewanna; · connectivity of regional dolomite within Pebble Mouse valley across structures east of Southern Flank · R deposit dewatering and drawdown estimates;

Page 27 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Improved understanding of the regional groundwater system may also come from third party operations in the catchment, in particular RTIO’s Hope Downs and Baby Hope deposits. In addition, post-closure remediation and mitigation plans at these operations have potential to influence BHP’s approach to long term management at Weeli Wolli Spring.

1.4.3.3.Management Approach Monitoring Groundwater monitoring for Weeli Wolli Spring follows the Source-Pathway-Receptor approach outlined in section 1.4.1.3 and is presented in Table 8 below.

Table 8: Potential source and pathway of hydrologic change at Weeli Wolli Springs Site Source Pathway Receptor Northern Flank Central edge of dewatered Northern Flank valley Aquifer beneath Weeli pits at A Deposit dolomites Wolli Spring North Central edge of Detrital valley deposits Aquifer beneath Weeli dewatered pits at R within Weeli Wolli Creek Wolli Spring Deposit Valley Southern Flank Central edge of dewatered Southern Flank valley Aquifer beneath Weeli pits at Vista dolomites Wolli Spring

It should be noted that dewatering at R deposit has not started and monitoring in this area is currently to gather baseline data and to measure aquifer response to Hope Downs dewatering.

Table 9 summarises the threats from current operations and controls in place under existing approvals to manage the potential impacts to Weeli Wolli Spring from BHP existing operations. Table 9: Summary of Weeli Wolli Spring Threats and Controls

Aspect Site/s Operations / Activities Threat Control

Drawdown (local) Mining Area C – Mining below water table Mining Area C is mining Managed under Northern Flank within the Weeli Wolli Creek below water table, Ministerial Statements catchment dewatering is required to 1072 undertake these operations, which may result in Abstraction volumes and localised groundwater rates are controlled via 5C drawdown. Licence GWL110044(10)

Drawdown Mining Area C – Mining below water table Mining Area C is mining Managed under (regional) Northern Flank within the Weeli Wolli Creek below water table, Ministerial Statements catchment dewatering is required to 1072 – monitoring Hope Downs will undertake these operations, required under this plan. predominantly continue to which may result in impacts impact the spring and any to regional groundwater long term effects from levels. Mining Area C are considered to be comparatively small

Water Discharge Mining Area C – Water re-injected into local Potential threat to the Discharge locations, – Managed Northern Flank aquifer within the Weeli Wolli receiving environment of volumes, quality and Aquifer Creek catchment Weeli Wolli Spring groundwater levels are Recharge community controlled under DER Licence L7851/2002/6.

Page 28 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Adaptive Management Adaptive management at Weeli Wolli Spring will be complex due to the presence of significant dewatering operation at Hope Downs. BHP’s response to mitigate the effects of drawdown from the MAC deposits will necessarily be designed in the context of Hope Down’s current and planned activity at the time.

A number of options have been identified to avoid or mitigate detrimental change to the groundwater regime at Weeli Wolli Spring. Recharge of the aquifer could be carried out by injection of dewatering surplus or enhanced recharge using dedicated basins, small dams or open pits to capture, impound and infiltrate surface water. Local irrigation has been demonstrated to be effective at Weeli Wolli spring to maintain groundwater levels and ecosystem health.

1.4.3.4.Rationale for choice of provisions Type of provisions Condition 6-3 requires that the plan specifies management-based provisions (Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting) to demonstrate that the objective in Condition 6-1(2) will be met. Table 2 of Schedule 1 contains the management-based provisions for the Weeli Wolli Spring PEC. The provisions in this version of the CPWRMP (V3.4) retain the intent of previous provisions, but have been amended to be consistent with the management-based provisions in the EPA’s Instructions (EPA, 2018) Choice of provisions As discussed in the previous sections, indirect impacts to the Weeli Wolli PEC are possible from hydrological changes, due groundwater level fall (drawdown). Although the impacts from drawdown will predominantly be from the Hope Downs operations, modelling predicts that water levels will fall to the east of Mining Area C as a result of Mining Area C abstraction activities and may extend as far as Weeli Wolli Spring, without mitigation (Section 1.4.3.1). BHP has chosen water-related management actions and targets to improve the understanding (and reduce uncertainty) of the following: · aquifer system east of the North and South flank valleys at Mining Area C · pathway from Mining Area C (in particular R deposit) to Weeli Wolli Spring · changes in groundwater levels in the vicinity of Weeli Wolli Spring (and whether changes are attributable to BHP or RTIO operations, or natural conditions). Monthly monitoring has commenced and will provide a baseline prior to dewatering at R deposit (at the eastern end of the north flank). Monitoring bores (early warning bores) are located between R deposit and Weeli Wolli Spring, to identify early changes in water levels and enable BHP to adjust the dewatering scheme and implement mitigation measures if the changes are attributable to Mining Area C operations. Multiple numerical models were developed to predict the range of change in groundwater levels as the groundwater system is complex and covers a large area, and some of the major influences on these outcomes are open to multiple interpretations (BHP 2017a). To counter this uncertainty the approach was taken to develop multiple models where key modelled parameters were allowed to vary, in particular those relating to the regional and orebody aquifers and the connection between them. The predicted drawdown due to dewatering activities in the catchment is presented in terms of a range between the 20th and 80th percentiles (P20 to P80) of model outcomes (BHP 2017a). The range of outcomes are a consequence of variations made to regional connectivity and hydraulic parameters. Importantly, previous modelling results and field monitoring fall between the 20th and 80th percentile of the model outputs in key areas, demonstrating that this approach is both consistent with previous work and calibrates to measurements from the catchment. This approach allows assessment of the range of predictive outcomes that reflect the technical uncertainty, particularly propagation of drawdown from Mining Area C – South Flank towards Weeli Wolli Creek. The management target for groundwater levels

Page 29 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

is based on this percentile range, which reflects the current uncertainty related to groundwater drawdown impacts. If updates of the hydrological conceptual model east of Mining Area C indicate different understanding of the aquifer system beneath Weeli Wolli Spring and/or different understanding of the hydrological pathways to Weeli Wolli Spring, BHP will review the monitoring program and revise if required. The objective in Condition 6-1(2) is that there is no reduction in the extent of the Weeli Wolli Spring PEC, however the extent may change due to natural conditions and/or impacts from RTIO, BHP and/or other third party operations. BHP will confirm the extent of the PEC to provide a baseline. BHP has not proposed other vegetation-related provisions as RTIO drawdown and surplus disposal are currently the dominant impacts on the system. Predictions by BHP indicate that the maximum drawdown from Mining Area C operations will be following closure of the Hope Downs operations. BHP recognises the need to work co-operatively with RTIO has retained provisions relating to developing a combined catchment management approach with RTIO.

1.4.4. Ben’s Oasis

1.4.4.1.Survey and Study Findings Ben’s Oasis is located in the upper reaches of Weeli Wolli Creek about 15 km south of Weeli Wolli Spring and 15 km east of the Southern Flank Vista Oriental deposit. Ben’s Oasis consists of several small perennial pools with fringing vegetation, and appears to be similar in occurrence to the pools seen downstream at Weeli Wolli Spring, albeit at a smaller scale.

BHP has had limited opportunity to assess and catalogue the vegetation community at Ben’s Oasis. An initial field inspection was carried out by BHP staff in 2011 as part of work to support the 2011 BHP Jinidi Mine submission. That inspection showed a phreatophytic vegetation community with a similar composition to Weeli Wolli Spring.

Ben’s Oasis was recognised as a PEC in 2011 on advice from members of the Threatened Ecological Communities Scientific Committee. It is considered to have similar environmental values and faces the same threats as Weeli Wolli Spring.

The geology beneath the spring comprises Wittenoom Formation (including the Paraburdoo Member) bedrock (Figure 5). This is bounded to the north by unmineralised Brockman Iron Formation which forms a prominent ridge to the south of the Southern Flank Valley. The bedrock is overlain in places by a thin detrital and alluvial cover. A NW-SE trending regional dyke also extends through the area, to the northeast of Ben’s Oasis. The regional dyke is believed to form a barrier to groundwater flow within the Paraburdoo Member and may lead to ‘backing up’ of groundwater to the southwest of the dyke and hence groundwater levels being expressed at surface as a spring. However, this conceptualisation carries a significant degree of uncertainty due to the lack of data (Ben’s Oasis is located on RTIO tenure).

Preliminary observations from recent drilling suggests that the water level south of the dyke is about 17 m higher than to the north (600 mRL and 583 mRL respectively). If this dyke does impede groundwater flow, it could also potentially isolate Ben’s Oasis from the effects of groundwater drawdown from mining operations in the North and Southern Flank Valleys.

The surface water catchment supporting Ben’s Oasis is outside of the MAC development footprint and impact to surface water quality or quantity in this catchment and at the spring is unlikely.

Assessment of potential impacts Ben’s Oasis is understood to be separated from BHP’s activities by a hydrogeological barrier and therefore is outside the domain of the groundwater model (BHP, 2017). To estimate the amount of drawdown at Ben’s Oasis, a proxy location was selected about 1km inside the model domain to the

Page 30 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

north along Weeli Wolli Creek, considered the most likely pathway for drawdown propagation. The predicted groundwater drawdown at the proxy location from Northern Flank and Southern Flank activities is less than 1m and occurs in 2054 following cessation of aquifer recovery activities at Hope Downs. The maximum predicted cumulative groundwater drawdown (from Mining Area C and Hope Downs operations) occurs prior to Hope Downs closure (estimated to be in 2025) and is between 2m to 5m at this location. The impacts reported for the proxy location are considered conservative and changes of this magnitude are unlikely to be seen at Ben’s Oasis itself. Under the current conceptualisation, drawdown is not considered likely to propagate upstream of the dyke.

Based on the current conceptualisation and subsequent groundwater modelling there is a low likelihood of drawdown impacts at Ben’s Oasis resulting from BHP activity at Mining Area C. Likely timing of potential impacts will be towards the end of the mine life following maximum extent of dewatering drawdown at Southern Flank. As described in Table 4, two potential impact pathways exist:

· Drawdown propagating from Northern Flank and R Deposit via Weeli Wolli creek sediments · Drawdown propagating from Southern Flank through Brockman formation in the ridge separating Ben’s Oasis Valley and Pebble Mouse Creek Valley.

External Considerations Similarly to Weeli Wolli Spring, changes at Ben’s Oasis are likely to result primarily from activity at RTIO’s Hope Downs operation. BHP‘s catchment management activities will be planned and undertaken in the context of RTIO’s planned actions. . Further work is required to establish access to tenure at, and adjacent to, Ben’s Oasis to allow confirmation of the current conceptual understanding for groundwater as well as the biological baseline.

1.4.4.2.Key Assumptions and uncertainties Ecological understanding Based on brief field inspection in 2011 BHP observed a riparian woodland and forest associations fringing the pools at Ben’s Oasis. The woodland contains a similar composition to Weeli Wolli spring with unusual understory species composition including sedges and herbs that fringe many of the pools along the main channel. Species of conservation value observed in the understory included Fimbristylis sieberiana (Priority 3) and Stylidium weeliwolli (Priority 3). The woodland trees include the obligate phreatophyte Melaleuca argentea, and facultative phreatophytes Eucalyptus camaldulensis and E. victrix.

A detailed survey has not been undertaken by BHP to date due to lack of access as the spring itself is on RTIO tenure.

Hydrological dependency The presence of obligate phreatophytes and an extensive understory indicates long term water availability at Ben’s Oasis. The pools at Ben’s Oasis are likely to be fed from surface runoff as well as from the underlying aquifers comprised of Wittenoom Dolomite. Recharge to the dolomites is likely to come the upstream catchment west of the spring from surface water infiltration via the stream bed and the extensive calcrete deposits upstream.

However, at areas where current mining operations (MAC and ) and the proposed Project are on the down-stream side of the water table off-set (i.e. Ben’s Oasis), it is interpreted the geological barrier may limit progression of drawdown impacts on the spring itself.

Page 31 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Figure 5: Ben's Oasis Catchment Page 32 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Improving understanding The hydrogeological understanding both at Ben’s Oasis and along the hydraulic pathway north towards Hope Downs is very limited. At present, there is no observed evidence of adverse impacts on Ben’s Oasis ecology due to groundwater abstraction from either MAC or Hope Downs Mine.

In 2016 4 monitoring bores were installed on BHP tenure east of Ben’s Oasis on either side of the dyke thought to generate the spring (see Figure 3a). It is expected that long term data at these points will provide insight on the extent of groundwater connection downstream of the dyke towards Hope Downs.

There is currently a limited understanding of potential hydraulic pathways between the valley upstream of Ben’s Oasis and Pebble Mouse creek valley to the north. Based on differences in groundwater elevation, the current conceptual model considers that the geology between the two valleys acts as a barrier to groundwater and that hydraulic connection between Southern Flank and Ben’s Oasis is unlikely. Installation of additional monitoring points outside of BHP tenure will be required to confirm the conceptual model in this area.

BHP’s current understanding of the vegetation community is based on brief field inspections and a thorough survey is yet to be undertaken. A survey will be carried out once land access has been secured with RTIO.

1.4.4.3.Management Approach Monitoring Groundwater monitoring for Ben’s Oasis follows the Source-Pathway-Receptor approach outlined in section 1.4.1.3 and is presented in Table 10 below.

Table 10: Potential source and pathway of hydrologic change at Ben's Oasis Site Source Pathway Receptor Northern Flank North Central edge of Detrital valley deposits Aquifer beneath Ben’s dewatered pits at R within Weeli Wolli Oasis Deposit Creek Valley Southern Flank South-Central edge of Southern Flank valley Aquifer beneath Ben’s dewatered pits at Vista dolomites and Oasis overlying detritals

Monitoring of the recently installed bores adjacent to Ben’s Oasis will continue both to establish baseline data and to understand response to current catchment stresses. Work will be undertaken to install additional monitoring points, off-tenure, along the potential impact pathway across the Southern Flank Valley.

BHP will review whether alternate vegetation monitoring techniques such as remote imagery can be used to evaluate change in vegetation condition prior to gaining ground access.

Adaptive Management Impacts at Ben’s Oasis are most likely to result from propagation of drawdown along the Weeli Wolli Creek valley south of Hope Downs. A preliminary assessment has identified a number of options that could avoid or mitigate detrimental change to the groundwater regime at Ben’s Oasis Spring. These include: · Aquifer recharge along the impact pathway south of Hope Downs to prevent drawdown extending to Ben’s Oasis. · Discharge of water into the catchment upstream of Ben’s Oasis to increase groundwater levels and fill pools · Use of enhanced recharge by diverting surface water to infiltration ponds or basins. Page 33 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

1.4.4.4.Rationale for choice of provisions Type of provisions Condition 6-3 requires that the plan specifies management-based provisions (Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting) to demonstrate that the objective in Condition 6-1(3) will be met. Table 3 of Schedule 1 contains the management-based provisions for the Ben’s Oasis PEC. The provisions in this version of the CPWRMP (V3.4) retain the intent of previous provisions, but have been amended to be consistent with the management-based provisions in the EPA’s Instructions (EPA, 2018) Choice of provisions As discussed in the previous sections, indirect impacts to the Ben’s Oasis PEC are possible from hydrological changes, due groundwater level fall (drawdown). Although the impacts from drawdown will predominantly be from the Hope Downs operations, modelling predicts that water levels will fall to the east of Mining Area C as a result of Mining Area C abstraction activities and conservative estimates suggest it is possible that drawdown may reach the vicinity of Ben’s Oasis (Section 1.4.3.1). BHP has chosen water-related management actions and targets to improve the understanding (and reduce uncertainty) of the following: · aquifer system east the north and south flank valleys Mining Area C (as for Weeli Wolli Spring); · pathway from Mining Area C (in particular Vista Oriental deposit) to Ben’s Oasis, including to confirm whether there is a hydrogeological barrier between the south flank and Ben’s Oasis; and · changes in groundwater levels in the vicinity of Ben’s Oasis (and whether changes are attributable to BHP or RTIO operations, or natural conditions). Monthly monitoring has commenced within 2 km of Ben’s Oasis and will provide a baseline prior to dewatering at Vista oriental deposit (at the eastern end of the south flank). Four monitoring bores are located on BHP tenure on either side of the dyke (see Figure 3a), to characterise the hydrologic behaviour of the dyke under current conditions. These bores may also be used to identify changes in water levels and enable BHP to implement mitigation measures if the changes are attributable to Mining Area C operations. Multiple numerical models were developed to predict the range of change in groundwater levels as the groundwater system is complex and covers a large area, and some of the major influences on these outcomes are open to multiple interpretations (BHP 2017a). To counter this uncertainty the approach was taken to develop multiple models where key modelled parameters were allowed to vary, in particular those relating to the regional and orebody aquifers and the connection between them. The predicted drawdown due to dewatering activities in the catchment is presented in terms of a range between the 20th and 80th percentiles (P20 to P80) of model outcomes (BHP 2017a).The range of outcomes are a consequence of variations made to regional connectivity and hydraulic parameters. Importantly, previous modelling results and field monitoring fall between the 20th and 80th percentile of the model outputs in key areas, demonstrating that this approach is both consistent with previous work and calibrates to measurements from the catchment. This approach allows assessment of the range of predictive outcomes that reflect the technical uncertainty, particularly propagation of drawdown from Mining Area C – South Flank towards Weeli Wolli Creek. The management target for groundwater levels is based on this percentile range, which reflects the current uncertainty related to groundwater drawdown impacts. If updates of the hydrological conceptual model east of Mining Area C indicate different understanding of the aquifer system beneath Ben’s Oasis and/or different understanding of the hydrological pathways to Ben’s Oasis, BHP will review the monitoring program and revise if required. The objective in Condition 6-1(3) is that there is no reduction in the extent of the Ben’s Oasis PEC, however the extent may change due to natural conditions and/or impacts from RTIO, BHP and/or other third party operations. BHP has not proposed specific vegetation-related provisions as Ben’s Oasis is

Page 34 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan not located on BHP tenure and BHP does not currently have access. BHP will confirm the extent of the PEC (subject to obtaining access) to provide a baseline. Predictions by BHP indicate that the maximum drawdown from Mining Area C operations, should they occur at Ben’s Oasis, will be following closure of the Hope Downs operations. BHP recognises the need to work co-operatively with RTIO has retained provisions relating to developing a combined catchment management approach with RTIO.

Page 35 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

2. EMP provisions According to the Instructions, the EMP ‘Provisions’ are the “key component of an EMP and are the legal requirements to be met by the proponent in implementing the EMP” (EPA, 2018, p. iii).

To meet the requirements of this particular section of the Instructions (EPA, 2018), BHP has utilised the ‘Schedule’ approach, which the Instructions suggest may be used. The Schedules are attached to this CPWRMP. Schedule 1 for MS1072 contains both outcome-based provisions (as required by Condition 6-2 for Coondewanna Flats) and management-based provisions (as required by Condition 6-3 for Weeli Wolli Spring and Ben’s Oasis) following the template provided in the Instructions (EPA, 2018).

BHP is of the understanding that these Schedules will be used as stand-alone documents, which the DWER can endorse as meeting the intent of a particular implementation condition or conditions. New and/or revised Schedules will be provided to the DWER for review and endorsement by the Director General as per the requirements of the respective Ministerial Statement conditions as applicable in future. Changes may arise from, but are not limited to the following: • new Proposals are approved and conditioned through Part IV of the EP Act; • existing Proposals subject to historic EP Act Part IV conditions are revised and brought under this CPWRMP though a section 46 or Revised Proposal process; • stakeholder consultation; • the level of scientific knowledge relating to a key environmental or social receptor; and/or • the Director General of the DWER has confirmed by notice in writing that it has been demonstrated that the objective in the relevant condition is being and will continue to be met and therefore implementation of commitments or aspects of this CPWRMP are no longer required.

Page 36 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

3. Adaptive Management and review of this CPWRMP BHP applies an adaptive management framework for implementing management measures identified in this CPWRMP. This CPWRMP iteratively collates the key findings and knowledge of the eco- hydrogeology technical studies and changes in water-affecting activities to inform the required adaptive management to enable achievement of outcome-based objectives. The adaptive management is risk- based and is expected to proactively counteract, mitigate or manage potential impacts (both predicted and actual) to an acceptable level. As outlined in Figure 6, the CPWRMP considers the following aspects: · hydrological changes (baseline, current and future conditions of groundwater, soil moisture and surface water) potentially resulting from BHP groundwater abstraction and surface water diversion;

· receiving receptors (water resources, environment, social and third-party operations), identified value and hydrological dependency (groundwater, soil moisture and/or surface water);

· potential impacts (predicted and actual); and

· required risk-based adaptive management techniques that are feasible (tested and practicable) to mitigate potential impacts to acceptable levels during operations and closure.

1. Protect Values Identify key environmental and community assets to be protected

6. Review & Adapt 2. Hydrological Baseline Review via CAP cycle & for new projects Determine baseline hydrological condition Report via AAR/AER cycle at catchment scale Update EPWRMP and thresholds & trigger values as required by review cycle Corporate Commitments New or removed Charter values stress Environmental 5. Implement & Monitor Strategy 3. Assess Change Implement management measures Assess hydrological change Monitoring auditing & compliance Assess impact on key receptors via Use Regional Monitoring Network technical studies & modelling Risk Assessment & management

4. Adaptive Management Evaluation & selection of adaptive management options Set triggers and thresholds for monitoring of change to hydrological conditions

Figure 6: CPWRMP Adaptive (staged and iterative) management approach 3.1. Methodology for monitoring hydrological change Adaptive management for the key receptors allows for three stages of response: investigation, action and mitigation. The approach ensures that any change and/or response observed is characterised and understood prior to implementing corrective action. 3.2. Setting thresholds for significant impact Trigger values are defined to provide the point at which water management options must be considered and implemented to avoid potential impact to a receiving receptor; the trigger is intended to operate sufficiently early to allow water management options to be put in place well before the threshold value for the receiving receptor is reached.

Page 37 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Threshold values are defined to provide the point at which corrective actions must be implemented in order to prevent unacceptable environmental impact or reverse the negative trends. Three receptors have been identified as having the potential to be impacted by changes in hydrological processes associated with the implementation of additional discharge or abstraction volumes, these being the vegetation communities at Coondewanna Flats, Weeli Wolli Spring and Ben’s Oasis. Triggers and thresholds have been set for Coondewanna Flats (as required by Condition 6-2) to assess whether a hydrological change has resulted in an impact to a receiving receptor as a result of BHP operations. The EPA notes that developing accurate triggers and thresholds for any impacts that MAC may have on Weeli Wolli Spring is difficult given that specific information about closure planning at Hope Downs 1 is not available. The EPA also notes that the development of triggers, thresholds and actions for Ben’s Oasis should consider the proponent’s [BHP’s] current inability to physically access the site (EPA, 2017). As required by Condition 6-3, BHP has defined management-based provisions for Weeli Wolli Spring and Ben’s Oasis. These provisions focus on improving the conceptual understanding of the hydrological systems and the pathways to the receptors, to better understand potential impacts. As understanding improves, triggers and thresholds may be able to be set for Weeli Wolli Spring and Ben’s Oasis in the future. 3.3. Scientific uncertainty - triggers and thresholds To achieve the outcome-based objectives, triggers and thresholds will be used to monitor and verify predicted and actual impacts from BHP operations. These thresholds will be considered in the context of natural variance and influences from third parties and will be established where the operations area of influence has potential to impact key receptors. Triggers and thresholds have been based on ongoing monitoring, however have been established in a conservative and precautionary way to allow for the uncertainty present in the environment. Key areas of uncertainty include the hydrologic function of the catchment, resilience and susceptibility of receptors to water changes and long term changes to mining activities. As the scientific understanding improves the level of uncertainty decreases and thresholds will be iteratively refined to reflect current knowledge, as shown in Figure 7. BHP has had time to establish and revise the conceptual understanding through investigations that address key local uncertainties and monitoring to verify assumptions, and is therefore towards the narrow end of the spectrum. This approach accommodates the persistence of hydrological and ecological uncertainty during operations and ultimately post closure. The approach also recognises that variation in mine plans and mine development rates are likely to remain.

Page 38 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Figure 7: Iteratively refined thresholds to reflect scientific knowledge for the Central Pilbara Receptors 3.4. Central Pilbara Regional Monitoring

BHP’s regional monitoring network includes data collection from various hydrological systems, including: · aquifer water levels and quality, within the operational mining hub; · surface water flow volumes; · dewatering borefield water levels and quality; · surplus water volumes and quality, prior to discharge into the environment; and · weather and climatic conditions.

The Regional Monitoring Network is an operational and catchment scale monitoring program that collects important information for compliance monitoring and reporting and to improve the capacity to estimate receptor response to changing hydrological conditions resulting from BHP operations.

The Regional Monitoring Network is consistent with, and complimentary to, aspects of other regulatory reporting requirements such as EP Act Operating Licenses through the BHP Annual Environmental Report, as well as Annual and Triennial Aquifer Reviews. 3.5. Review and update of this CPWRMP The CPWRMP is underpinned by current scientific understanding. The triggers, thresholds and outcome-based objectives also reflect current scientific understanding and will require iterative updating as uncertainty is addressed and actual results are compared against observed results. The predicted footprint of water-affecting activities and the regional water balance is based on a midterm mine plan (5 year plan) and it is recognised that the extent of dewatering and surface water interception may change with further mine development planning. Mine Planning and hydrological modelling will also be iteratively updated to reflect predicted and actual changes. The CPWRMP will be reviewed at intervals not exceeding five years and updated to ensure it addresses the relevant conditions and is being implemented effectively. This CPWRMP will be updated to include date of review and details of subsequent Schedules. BHP undertakes regular and ongoing stakeholder engagement as part of its core business activities. BHP aims to facilitate regular, open and honest dialogue to understand expectations, concerns and interests of stakeholders and incorporate them into business planning to help build strong, mutually beneficial relationships. The main objectives of the consultation programme are to: • provide information and the opportunity to comment to relevant government agencies (including but not limited to EPA, DWER and DBCA), local authorities and to other groups or individuals who may potentially be interested in a Proposal; • where relevant, discuss and allow stakeholder comments on Proposals to be incorporated into this CPWRMP; and • BHP will continue to engage with Traditional Owners through targeted consultation and via administration of Native Title agreements. As per Ministerial Statement condition 6-9, any changes to Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, Management Actions, Management Targets Monitoring or Reporting in the Plan will be approved by the CEO of the DWER in writing. Please refer to Appendix 2 for details of specific consultation activites, relevant to this CPWRMP.

Page 39 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

4. Terminology adaptive management n. planning, organising, leading and controlling an operation in a manner that changes iteratively as new knowledge comes to light. Baseline Conditions n. the hydrological conditions that prevailed before BHP mining operations commenced, including natural variation. Crown Condition Score n. Assessment of the outward appearance of the above-ground portion of a plant that supports foliage (the crown), based on visual assessment. cumulative impacts n. detrimental effects on a receiving receptor from more than one source; for example, two or more BHPBIO mining operations within one water catchment or a combination of BHP and third-party operations within one water catchment. current conditions n. the hydrological conditions that prevail now that BHP has begun mining operations, including natural variation. early warning trigger n. the point at which water management options must be considered and investigated to avoid potential impact to a receiving receptor; the trigger should operate sufficiently early to allow water management options to be put in place well before the threshold value for the receiving receptor is reached. Future Conditions n. the hydrological conditions that prevail post BHP operations including transitioning towards mine closure, mine closure final land form and relinquishment. hub area (hub) n. a geographical location within which more than one BHP mine is operating in sufficient proximity to other BHP mines to, for example, allow sharing of resources or potentially increase detrimental effects. Hubs are based on tenements rather than on water catchments. hydrological dependencies n. the numerous factors, such as scale, time, interconnectivity, recharge sources, topography and land use, that determine the hydrological characteristics and receiving receptors dependencies on surface water and groundwater. indicator species n. flora species such as Eucalyptus victrix or Mulga (Acacia aptaneura) as they are stationary and easily visible, and so are thought to be indicators of conditions at a particular site. outcome-based objectives n. a covenant setting out the result that will be met to ensure potential impacts on receiving receptors have been mitigated to acceptable levels. receiving receptors n. the water resources, environmental, social and third-party operations that scientific study has shown have the potential to be detrimentally affected by a BHP mining operation. Environmental receiving receptors potentially include such things as flora and fauna, biodiversity. Social receiving receptors potentially include Indigenous cultural heritage sites and domestic or industrial water bore users. Third-party operations potentially include other mining operations in the vicinity of the BHP mining operation. significant hydrological impact n. a detrimental change in hydrological condition causing an effect on a receiving receptor that inhibits its ability to continue to function, such as a lowering of the groundwater level outside the natural variation of Baseline Conditions. Tree health n. the overall condition of a tree at a given time. third party n. a party other than BHP living or doing business within the area of interest. third-party operations n. mining activities other than those of BHP occurring within the area of interest. trigger n. a scientifically informed value, informed by baseline studies, to the amount of hydrological change that a receiving receptor can accommodate before reaching the point at which impact may occur. threshold n. a scientifically informed value, informed by baseline studies, to the amount of hydrological change that a receiving receptor can accommodate before reaching the point at which unacceptable impact may occur. transparency n. operating with openness, communication, and accountability in such a way that it is easy for others to see what actions are performed and for all observers to have the ability to see what is wrong, to see what the problems are, or to see potential trouble.

Page 40 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan water management area n. a geographical extent within which all surface water drains to the same point, such as a river, or at which the drained surface water percolates into the groundwater. Water management areas are based on water catchments and are divided one from the other by a ridge, hill or mountain. water management option n. a mitigation activity that is tested and practicable (i.e., known to produce the desired outcome and feasible both technically and economically).

Page 41 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

5. References AQ2, 2016. Coondewanna Flats ecohydrological conceptualisation. Unpublished report prepared for BHP. Astron 2014, Coondewanna Flats Ecohydrological Study Ecological Water Requirements of Vegetation Report. Unpublished report prepared for BHP Batini, 2009. Eucalyptus victrix, Karijini National Park. Report to EPA. BHP, 2014a. Pilbara Water Resource Management Strategy. Internal document number 0092277. Perth, Western Australia BHP, 2015. Strategic Environmental Approval – Ecohydrological Change Assessment. BHP internal document. BHP, 2017. Southern Flank Summary of groundwater change assessment. BHP internal document BHP, 2017a. Mining Area C Southern Flank ProposalHydrological Impact Assessment and Water Management Summary. Perth, Western Australia BHP, 2018. GWL Operating Strategy for Mining Area C. Internal document number 0019544. Department of Parks and Wildlife, 2014, Priority Ecological Communities for Western Australia, Version 21, 4 May 2014. Species and Communities Branch, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth. EPA, 2017. Mining Area C - Southern Flank Project. Report and recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority, Report 1610. EPA, 2018. Instructions on how to prepare Environmental Protection Act 1986 Part IV Environmental Management Plans. Environmental Protection Authority. Perth, Western Australia. Version 1.1 Published April 2018 MWH, 2016. Southern Flank Surface Water Environmental impact assessment. Unpublished report prepared for BHP. Onshore 2016. Mining Area C Southern Flank Flora and Vegetation Impact Assessment. Unpublished report prepared for BHP. Souter et al, 2010. Evaluation of a visual assessment method for tree condition of eucalypt floodplain forests. Ecological Management & Restoration. Vol 11-3, 210-214.

Page 42 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan Schedule 1 – Ministerial Statement 1072 Mining Area C Purpose of Schedule 1: To meet the requirements of Condition 6 of Ministerial Statement 1072.

Table 1: Outcome-based provisions – Coondewanna Flats

EPA Factor and objective: Inland Waters - To maintain the hydrological regimes and quality of groundwater and surface water so that environmental values are protected. Key Environmental Values: Coondewanna Flats Priority Ecological Community Outcome: MS1072 6-1(1) No reduction in the extent of each of the following components of the Coolibah—Lignum Flats Priority Ecological Community occurrence on the Coondewanna Flats: (a) Coolibah woodlands over lignum over swamp wandiree, or (b) Coolibah and mulga woodland over lignum and tussock grasses on clay plains, attributable to the Revised Proposal. Key Impacts and Risks: Coondewanna Flats Priority Ecological Community has the potential to be impacted from changes in groundwater levels due to dewatering and reinjection activities and changes to surface water flows associated with Mining Area C operations. Outcome-based provisions

Environment criteria: Response actions: · Trigger criteria · Trigger level actions Monitoring Reporting · Threshold criteria · Threshold contingency actions MS 1072 6-2 The Plan shall specify Outcome/s, Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting to demonstrate that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met. MS 1072 6-2 The Plan shall specify Outcome/s, Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting to MS 1072 6-8 In the event of exceedance of threshold demonstrate that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met. criteria in condition 6-2 or failure to meet management targets in condition 6-3, the proponent shall meet the requirements in condition 3 (Compliance Reporting) and shall implement the measures outlined in the Plan, including, but not limited to, actions and investigations to be undertaken, and reporting to the CEO. Water Quantity - Groundwater level mounding: Trigger level actions: Monthly monitoring of groundwater levels Notification of a potential exceedance of threshold criteria · Trigger criteria – groundwater level rises to 15 mbgl at · Commence vegetation monitoring; (mbgl) of GWB0039M, HCF0032M, HCF0023M or a potential non-compliance of the outcome will be any of the following monitoring bores: GWB0039M, and HCF0045M during operations (i.e. active provided to the DWER within 7 days of that potential non- · Review rate of groundwater change and conceptual dewatering / surplus water discharge) (See compliance being known. HCF0032M, HCF0023M and HCF0045M model Figure 1a) An annual Compliance Assessment Report will be submitted · Threshold criteria – groundwater level rises to 7 mbgl at Responses to this review may include, but are not limited to: any of the following monitoring bores: GWB0039M, as part of the Annual Environment Report, which will be HCF0032M, HCF0023M and HCF0045M · Decrease surplus water discharge rate; and/or submitted by 1 October each year to the DWER. The · Alter surplus water discharge regime Compliance Assessment Report shall: (1) be endorsed by BHP’s CEO or a person delegated to sign on BHP CEO's behalf; Threshold contingency actions may include, but are not limited (2) include a statement as to whether the proponent to: has complied with the conditions; · Decrease surplus water discharge rate; (3) identify all potential non-compliances and describe · Alter surplus water discharge regime; and/or corrective and preventative actions taken; (4) be made publicly available in accordance with the · Cease surplus water discharge approved Compliance Assessment Plan; and (5) indicate any proposed changes to the Compliance Assessment Plan required by MS 1072 condition 3- 1.

The Compliance Assessment Report will be provided to DBCA annually to report the results of the monitoring program and any exceedances of criteria.

Page 43 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan Environment criteria: Response actions: · Trigger criteria · Trigger level actions Monitoring Reporting · Threshold criteria · Threshold contingency actions MS 1072 6-2 The Plan shall specify Outcome/s, Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting to demonstrate that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met. MS 1072 6-2 The Plan shall specify Outcome/s, Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting to MS 1072 6-8 In the event of exceedance of threshold demonstrate that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met. criteria in condition 6-2 or failure to meet management targets in condition 6-3, the proponent shall meet the requirements in condition 3 (Compliance Reporting) and shall implement the measures outlined in the Plan, including, but not limited to, actions and investigations to be undertaken, and reporting to the CEO. Tree health of indicator tree species – Groundwater Mounding Trigger level actions may include, but are Within 6 months (i.e prior to the next wet or dry Monitoring of tree heath will be undertaken in response to the not limited to: season) of identification of an exceedance of water quantity trigger criteria, undertake: triggers of groundwater level increase to 15 mbgl (mounding): · Decrease surplus water discharge rate; · Biannual (wet and dry season) Crown · Trigger criteria – Statistically significant canopy decline · Alter surplus water discharge regime; and/or (defined as Crown Condition Score (CCS) compared to Condition Score (CCS) monitoring (for baseline condition of reference trees over four consecutive · Undertake vegetation monitoring to confirm trigger and/or a minimum of three years or until monitoring periods within monitoring sites 12, 15 or 20. further investigate the event. groundwater levels return to pre-trigger levels or CCS is comparable to · Threshold criteria – Statistically significant canopy decline baseline condition) of indicator tree Threshold contingency actions may include, but are not limited (defined as Crown Condition Score (CCS) compared to species (E. Victrix) at monitoring sites baseline condition of reference trees over eight to: 12, 15 and 20 (see Figure 1a) consecutive monitoring periods; or death of any tree · Decrease surplus water discharge rate; compared to baseline monitoring (attributable to water stress caused by dewatering or results at the same sites. reinjection), within monitoring sites 12, 15 or 20. · Alter surplus water discharge regime; and/or · Cease surplus water discharge Within 18 months of approval of the CPWRMP (V3.4), confirm the extent of Coondewanna Flats PEC using information including but not limited to, canopy cover monitoring and remote sensing. Water Quantity - Groundwater level drawdown: Trigger level actions may include, but are not limited to: Monthly monitoring of groundwater levels · Trigger criteria – groundwater level falls below 24.85 mbgl · Investigate source of groundwater level change to (mbgl) at GWB0039M or HCF0032M during (663.75 mRL) at GWB0039M evaluate whether change is due to BHP activity; operations (i.e. active dewatering / surplus water discharge) (See Figure 1a) · Threshold criteria – groundwater level falls below 26.60 · Commence vegetation monitoring; and/or mbgl (662 mRL) at GWB0039M. · Evaluate and design groundwater recovery system.

Threshold contingency actions may include, but are not limited to: · Implement aquifer recovery using MAR injection.

Page 44 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan Environment criteria: Response actions: · Trigger criteria · Trigger level actions Monitoring Reporting · Threshold criteria · Threshold contingency actions MS 1072 6-2 The Plan shall specify Outcome/s, Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting to demonstrate that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met. MS 1072 6-2 The Plan shall specify Outcome/s, Trigger Criteria, Threshold Criteria, Monitoring, Trigger Level Actions, Threshold Contingency Actions, and Reporting to MS 1072 6-8 In the event of exceedance of threshold demonstrate that the outcome in Condition 6-1(1) will be met. criteria in condition 6-2 or failure to meet management targets in condition 6-3, the proponent shall meet the requirements in condition 3 (Compliance Reporting) and shall implement the measures outlined in the Plan, including, but not limited to, actions and investigations to be undertaken, and reporting to the CEO. Tree health of indicator tree species – Groundwater level drawdown Trigger level actions may include, but are Within 6 months (i.e prior to the next wet or dry Monitoring of tree heath will be undertaken in response to the not limited to: season) of identification of an exceedance of water quantity trigger criteria, undertake: triggers of groundwater level decrease to 24.85 mbgl (663.75mRL) · Investigate source of groundwater level change to (drawdown): evaluate whether change is due to BHP activity; · Biannual (wet and dry season) Crown · Trigger criteria – Statistically significant canopy decline Condition Score (CCS) monitoring (for · Evaluate and design groundwater recovery system; a minimum of three years or until (defined as Crown Condition Score (CCS) compared to and/or baseline condition of reference trees over four consecutive groundwater levels return to pre-trigger monitoring periods within monitoring sites 12, 15 or 20. · Undertake vegetation monitoring to confirm trigger and/or levels or CCS is comparable to further investigate the event. baseline condition) of indicator tree · Threshold criteria – Statistically significant canopy decline species (E. Victrix) at monitoring sites (defined as Crown Condition Score (CCS) compared to 12, 15 and 20 (see Figure 1a) Threshold contingency actions may include, but are not limited baseline condition of reference trees over eight compared to baseline monitoring consecutive monitoring periods; or death of any tree to: results at the same sites. (attributable to water stress caused by dewatering or · Implement aquifer recovery using MAR injection reinjection), within monitoring sites 12, 15 or 20. Within 18 months of approval of the CPWRMP (V3.4), confirm the extent of Coondewanna Flats PEC using information including but not limited to, canopy cover monitoring and remote sensing. Changes to the surface water flow regime – water in Lake Trigger level actions may include, but are not limited to: Continuous telemetry monitoring for presence Robinson outside natural flow events: · Decrease surface water discharge rate; and/or of water at the Early Warning Point and Wetting Front Limit during discharge (See Figure 1b). · Trigger criteria – surface water reaches the Early Warning · Change to alternate discharge point Point · Threshold criteria – surface water reaches the Wetting Threshold contingency actions may include, but are not limited Front Limit to: · Decrease surface water discharge rate; · Change to alternate discharge point · Cease surface water discharge

Page 45 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Page 46 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Page 47 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan Table 2: Management-based provisions – Weeli Wolli Spring

EPA Factor and objective: Inland Waters - To maintain the hydrological regimes and quality of groundwater and surface water so that environmental values are protected. Key Environmental Values: Weeli Wolli Spring Priority Ecological Community Objective: MS1072 6-1(2) No reduction in the extent of the Weeli Wolli Spring occurrence of the Weeli Wolli Spring Priority Ecological Community attributable to the Revised Proposal. Key Impacts and Risks: Weeli Wolli Spring Priority Ecological Community (PEC) has the potential to be impacted from groundwater, resulting in changes to the biological diversity and/or ecological integrity of the PEC. However, this drawdown is predominantly associated with abstraction from Hope Downs. Management-based provisions

Management actions Management targets Monitoring Reporting MS 1072 6-3 The Plan shall specify Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting to demonstrate that the objectives in Condition 6-1(2) and 6- 1(3) will be met. MS 1072 6-3 The Plan shall specify Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting to demonstrate that the objectives in Condition 6-1(2) and 6-1(3) will be MS 1072 6-8 In the event of exceedance of threshold met. criteria in condition 6-2 or failure to meet management targets in condition 6-3, the proponent shall meet the requirements in condition 3 (Compliance Reporting) and shall implement the measures outlined in the Plan, including, but not limited to, actions and investigations to be undertaken, and reporting to the CEO. Management actions for baseline understanding: Management targets for baseline understanding: Monthly monitoring of groundwater levels Notification of a potential failure to meet management targets · Update the hydrological conceptual model east of Mining · Update the hydrological conceptual model every 3 years (mbgl) during operations (i.e. active dewatering / will be provided to the DWER within 7 days of that potential Area C to Weeli Wolli Spring from date of publication of MS1072 (20 February 2018) surplus water discharge): non-compliance being known. · Confirm the extent of Weeli Wolli Spring PEC. · Extent of Weeli Wolli Spring PEC confirmed within 18 · Early warning: GWB0013M; An annual Compliance Assessment Report will be submitted months of approval of the CPWRMP (V3.4) GWB0014BM; GWB0015M; as part of the Annual Environment Report, which will be GWB0021SM;HEPX0001 submitted by 1 October each year to the DWER. The Management actions during operations: · At receptor: GWB0016DM; Compliance Assessment Report shall: · Review groundwater levels changes via the annual or GWB0016SM; GWB0017DM; (1) be endorsed by BHP’s CEO or a person delegated triennial aquifer review process; and/or as required by GWB0017SM; GWB0018DM; to sign on BHP CEO's behalf; BHP GWB0018SM; GWB0032DM; (2) include a statement as to whether the proponent · Review provisions for Weeli Wolli (and revise if required) (See Figure 2a) has complied with the conditions; at notification of pre-closure of Rio Tinto Iron Ore’s Hope (3) identify all potential non-compliances and describe Downs mining operation Management targets during operations: Monthly monitoring of groundwater levels corrective and preventative actions taken; · Water level change due to BHP operations in monitoring (mbgl) during operations (i.e. active dewatering / (4) be made publicly available in accordance with the bores along the pathway to Weeli Wolli Spring is within P20 surplus water discharge): approved Compliance Assessment Plan; and and P80 forecast range of the current version of the · Early warning: GWB0013M; (5) indicate any proposed changes to the Compliance hydrological conceptual model. GWB0014BM; GWB0015M; Assessment Plan required by MS 1072 condition 3- GWB0021SM;HEPX0001 1. (See Figure 2a)

Page 48 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan Management actions Management targets Monitoring Reporting MS 1072 6-3 The Plan shall specify Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting to demonstrate that the objectives in Condition 6-1(2) and 6- 1(3) will be met. MS 1072 6-3 The Plan shall specify Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting to demonstrate that the objectives in Condition 6-1(2) and 6-1(3) will be MS 1072 6-8 In the event of exceedance of threshold met. criteria in condition 6-2 or failure to meet management targets in condition 6-3, the proponent shall meet the requirements in condition 3 (Compliance Reporting) and shall implement the measures outlined in the Plan, including, but not limited to, actions and investigations to be undertaken, and reporting to the CEO. Management actions to be implemented due to below water Management targets for below water table mining at R Deposit: Monthly monitoring of groundwater levels The Compliance Assessment Report will be provided to table mining at R Deposit and/or if groundwater levels fall below · Pathway and receptor monitoring network established (mbgl) during operations (i.e. active dewatering / DBCA annually to report the results of the monitoring predicted levels at any of the early warning bores (and are between R deposit and Weeli Wolli Spring 2 years prior to surplus water discharge) as above. program and any exceedances of criteria. attributable to BHP operations): dewatering activities commencing at R Deposit · Establish pathway and receptor monitoring network · Mitigation and aquifer recovery approach developed 2 Monthly monitoring of groundwater levels between R deposit and Weeli Wolli Spring years prior to dewatering activities commencing at R (mbgl) along impact pathway between R Deposit · Develop mitigation and aquifer recovery approach Deposit, considering current aquifer conditions (including and Weeli Wolli Spring. · Engage with RTIO regarding a combined catchment RTIO mining and remediation activity) management approach · Discussions with RTIO begin 2 years prior to dewatering · Establish baseline data for pathway from R deposit to activities commencing at R Deposit, to determine most receptor (Weeli Wolli Creek) effective approach for catchment water management to meet ecological outcomes · Baseline data for pathway and receptor established prior to commencement of dewatering activities at R deposit · Agreement with RTIO in place for combined catchment management approach, prior to commencement of dewatering activities at R deposit.

Page 49 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Page 50 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan Table 3: Management-based provisions – Ben’s Oasis EPA Factor and objective: Inland Waters - To maintain the hydrological regimes and quality of groundwater and surface water so that environmental values are protected. Key Environmental Values: Ben’s Oasis Spring Priority Ecological Community Objective: MS1072 6-1(3) No reduction in the extent of the Ben’s Oasis occurrence of the Weeli Wolli Spring Priority Ecological Community attributable to the Revised Proposal. Key Impacts and Risks: Ben’s Oasis Priority Ecological Community (PEC) has the potential to be impacted from groundwater, resulting in changes to the biological diversity and/or ecological integrity of the PEC. Management-based provisions

Management actions Management targets Monitoring Reporting

MS 1072 6-3 The Plan shall specify Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting to demonstrate that the objectives in Condition 6-1(2) and 6- 1(3) will be met. MS 1072 6-3 The Plan shall specify Management Actions, Management Targets, Monitoring and Reporting to demonstrate that the objectives in Condition 6-1(2) and 6-1(3) will be MS 1072 6-8 In the event of exceedance of threshold met. criteria in condition 6-2 or failure to meet management targets in condition 6-3, the proponent shall meet the requirements in condition 3 (Compliance Reporting) and shall implement the measures outlined in the Plan, including, but not limited to, actions and investigations to be undertaken, and reporting to the CEO.

Management actions for baseline understanding: Management targets for baseline understanding: Monthly monitoring of groundwater Notification a potential failure to meet management targets levels (mbgl) adjacent to Ben’s Oasis · Update the hydrological conceptual model east of · Update the hydrological conceptual model every 3 years from the date of will be provided to the DWER within 7 days of that potential prior to operations (i.e. active dewatering non-compliance being known. Mining Area C of Mining Area C to Ben’s Oasis publication of MS1072 (20 February 2018) / surplus water discharge): · Confirm the extent of Ben’s Oasis PEC · Extent of Ben’s Oasis PEC confirmed within 18 months of approval of the An annual Compliance Assessment Report will be submitted CPWRMP (V3.4), subject to obtaining access to Ben’s Oasis · Early warning: HDD0003M or as part of the Annual Environment Report, which will be HDD0004M submitted by 1 October each year to the DWER. The Management actions during operations: · At receptor: HDD0001M or Compliance Assessment Report shall: Management targets during operations: HDD0002M (1) be endorsed by BHP’s CEO or a person delegated · Review groundwater levels changes via the (See Figure 3a) to sign on BHP CEO's behalf; annual or triennial aquifer review process; and/or · Water level change due to BHP operations in monitoring bores along the (2) include a statement as to whether the proponent as required by BHP pathway toward Ben’s Oasis is within the P20 and P80 forecast range of has complied with the conditions; · Review provisions for Ben’s Oasis (and revise if the current version of the hydrogeological conceptual model. (3) identify all potential non-compliances and describe required) at notification of pre-closure of Rio Tinto corrective and preventative actions taken; Iron Ore’s Hope Downs mining operation (4) be made publicly available in accordance with the Management actions to be implemented due to below Management targets for water table mining at Southern Flank: Monthly monitoring of groundwater approved Compliance Assessment Plan; and water table mining at Southern Flank and/or if groundwater levels (mbgl) adjacent to Ben’s Oasis (5) indicate any proposed changes to the Compliance levels fall below predicted levels at any of the early warning · Pathway and receptor monitoring network established 2 years prior to prior to operations (i.e. active dewatering Assessment Plan required by MS 1072 condition 3- bores (and are attributable to BHP operations): dewatering activities commencing at Vista Oriental deposits adjacent to / surplus water discharge) as above. 1. Pebble Mouse Creek valley · Establish pathway and receptor monitoring · Mitigation and aquifer recovery approach developed 2 years prior to The Compliance Assessment Report will be provided to network between Southern Flank pits and Ben’s DBCA annually to report the results of the monitoring dewatering activities commencing at Vista Oriental deposits adjacent to Monthly monitoring of groundwater Oasis program and any exceedances of criteria. Pebble Mouse Creek valley, considering current aquifer conditions levels (mbgl) along identified impact · Develop mitigation and aquifer recovery approach (including RTIO mining and remediation activity) pathways (such as Pebble Mouse Creek · Establish baseline data for pathway from R · Discussions with RTIO begin 2 years prior to dewatering activities valley) between Southern Flank and deposit to receptor (Ben’s Oasis) commencing at Vista Oriental deposits adjacent to Pebble Mouse Creek Ben’s Oasis. valley, to determine most effective approach for catchment water management to meet ecological outcomes · Baseline data for pathway and receptor established prior to commencement of dewatering activities at dewatering activities at Vista Oriental deposits in Pebble Mouse Creek valley · Agreement with RTIO in place for combined catchment management approach, prior to commencement of dewatering activities at dewatering activities at Vista Oriental deposits in Pebble Mouse Creek valley

Page 51 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Page 52 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Appendix 1 – Proposal / Operation Summaries Mining Area C Hub Mining Area C is located approximately 100 km north-west of the town of Newman in the Pilbara region of Western Australia. The mine is situated within Mining Lease ML281SA and is operated by BHP in accordance with the Iron Ore (Mount Goldsworthy) Agreement Act 1964. BHP was granted approval under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) for the mining of 14 iron ore deposits (A, B, C, D, E, F, R, P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6 and the Brockman Detrital deposits) in the Northern Flank area of Mining Area C in 1998, under Ministerial Statement 491. In 2018 this was superseded by Ministerial Statement 1072 which included the Southern Flank development Mining Area C has been an operational mine since 2003. Mining Area C operations comprise campaign mining of iron ore and overburden through conventional open cut mining methods. Campaign mining involves drilling, blasting, and categorisation of blasted material into iron ore or waste rock. Mining Area C will continue dewatering of nominated pits in accordance with the mine plan to facilitate dry mining conditions. Groundwater abstraction (i.e. dewatering volumes and monitoring) is regulated by the DWER 5C licensing process and various groundwater operating strategies under the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 (the RIWI Act). A Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) is currently in operation to reinject surplus water back into the aquifer. This activity is managed under the Mining Area C operating license. Some of the excess water generated from mine dewatering is also re-used by operations on site (for example, dust suppression and ore processing requirements). Existing Environment Regional groundwater flow occurs predominantly in the regional aquifers of the Wittenoom Dolomite (particularly the karstic Paraburdoo member) and overlaying Tertiary detritals. As such, regional groundwater flow is concentrated in the valleys and intervening alluvial plains of Mining Area C. Prior to mining related activities in the catchment, groundwater flows were from west to east (from Coondewanna Flats to Weeli Wolli Spring). Water levels ranged from ~660 mAHD to ~560 mAHD over this area. Water supply abstraction for Mining Area C commenced in 2001 from C Deposit (the local Marra Mamba aquifer) and the western end of the Northern Flank Valley (regional aquifer), with additional temporary abstractions used during construction of the railway line and Coondewanna airstrip. Dewatering commenced from C Deposit and E Deposit in mid-2010 and early 2011 respectively. Rio Tinto Iron Ore’s Hope Downs Mining operations are located within the Northern Flank Valley (North and South Deposits). Dewatering commenced in January 2007 and is proposed to continue until the end of 2025 (i.e. until the end of mining and infilling). This is predicted to have a significant impact on flows at Weeli Wolli Spring and Rio Tinto Iron Ore are artificially supporting the system until the natural flow returns to within 10% of pre-mining rates, potentially up to 20 years after decommissioning (HDMS 2000).

Potential Impacts BHP commissioned RPS Aquaterra to undertake a hydrogeological assessment for Mining Area C. Pit designs and development rates for all deposits associated with EMP Revision 6 Base and High Cases (derived from the 2014 mine plan) were included in model predictions. The model was used to test the significance of both the hydrogeological system and the EMP Revision 6 Base and High Cases on the response of the groundwater system to mining at Mining Area C. The model was run numerous times, with the following variables: · Mining Area C (EMP Revision 6) mine plan Base Case and High Case; · with and without Hope Downs mine related water management and mitigation measures;

Page 53 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

· with Hope Downs but without historical or future Mining Area C related water management activities; · open voids and in filled voids at A and E Deposits; and · injection of water to mitigate the propagation of drawdown from Mining Area C towards Coondewanna Flats. The Mining Area C regional model has been updated and calibrated to a significant amount of data to support the Mining Area C Southern Flank Revised Proposal. In places, this data spans many years and is representative of different aspects of the groundwater system (flows, spring baseflow and a regional water balance). The model uses an uncertainty approach to establish a plausible range of groundwater responses to mining activity in the catchment. The modelling has shown that for the proposed mining below the water table at the combined Mining Area C operations (based on the 2016 mine plan): · Regional connectivity will be a significant control for environmental impacts. · The maximum dewatering rate may be up to 85,000 kL/d (31 GL/a). · The maximum cumulative groundwater drawdown at: o Coondewanna is predicted to be between 10m and 22m. o Ben’s Oasis is likely to be less than about 2 m; and o Weeli Wolli Spring is likely to be around 1.75 m (after the period of proposed mitigation by Rio Tinto Iron Ore). · Post-closure, the recovery of the groundwater system is likely to take hundreds of years at Coondewanna Flats and Ben’s Oasis, but tens of years at the Weeli Wolli Spring. · The scenario of leaving open voids at Highway Deposits post-closure is predicted to have a significant reduction in the final recovery groundwater levels, particularly at Coondewanna Flats. Surface water flow is an important contribution of stream flow and groundwater recharge in the Coondewanna Flats and Weeli Wolli Spring areas. Runoff assessments indicate that the extent of surface water interference to the natural system from the proposed Mining Area C activities will be minimal due to the diversion of creeks and channel flow. The volume of surface water intercepted by mining activities is estimated to be around 740 ML/a from the total catchment flow for the Upper Weeli Wolli catchment area. The interception and effective removal of surface water from which would ultimately discharge or infiltrate into the Weeli Wolli Spring region is around 4.2% of the total volumes and is considered to be insignificant in comparison to the disruption which has occurred owing to mining in the lower catchment. For Coondewanna, the volume of surface water flow may increase slightly to 0.3% owing to changes in landform runoff in the vicinity of the surface water catchment divide, which effectively increases the capture area. The subsequent downstream impacts to aquifer recharge and riparian vegetation in the areas of Weeli Wolli and Coondewanna are considered to be insignificant and within natural variance.

Mining Area C: Southern Flank Mining Area C Southern Flank is located approximately 8 km to the south of the existing Mining Area C (northern flank) operations and will comprise the development of the proposed new satellite deposits at Southern Flank. Conventional open pit mining methods will continue to extract ore from the existing approved Mining Area C deposits and the proposed Southern Flank deposits. Overland conveyors will transport ore from the Southern Flank deposits to existing processing facilities at Mining Area C. Incremental mining activity will be supported by the construction of new infrastructure as required. Approximately 8% of the Sothern Flank pits lie below water table. Dewatering enables access to below water table ore and includes the Highway Pushbacks 1, 3, 5 , Grand Central Pushbacks 12, 13, 14, 15,

Page 54 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

16, 19 and Vista Oriental Pushbacks 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28. The lowering of groundwater levels during mine dewatering activities will result in a propagation of drawdown and the modification of the hydrological conditions away from the orebody aquifers and more regionally towards the key receptors of Coondewanna Flats, Weeli Wolli Spring and Ben’s Oasis. Existing Environment The Southern Flank deposits occur along the northern side of the Southern Flank valley with some deposits extending a short way into the valley floor. Similar to Area C, regional groundwater flow occurs predominantly in the regional aquifers of the Wittenoom Dolomite (particularly the karstic Paraburdoo member) and overlaying Tertiary detritals. As such, regional groundwater flow is concentrated in the valley and alluvial plains. Prior to mining related activities in the catchment, groundwater flows were from west to east (from Coondewanna Flats to Weeli Wolli Spring). In the western end of Southern Flank valley a 30m groundwater drop is seen across one of the regional dolomite dykes that is likely to limit groundwater flow. Groundwater gradients in the central part of the valley are relatively flat and become steeper in the east as the valley narrows around Pebble Mouse Creek. Potential Impacts Groundwater modelling was carried out in support of the project assessment using an updated version of the Area C Model. Due to the early stage of the project uncertainty remains about the response of local groundwater systems within the project area to dewatering although the regional groundwater setting is well understood. Additional change in regional aquifers as a result of Southern Flank dewatering will been seen primarily to the south and west in the regional dolomite aquifer, including beneath Coondewanna Flats. Cumulative drawdown from Northern Flank and Southern Flank beneath Coondewanna Flats is modelled to be between 10 and 22m by 2047. Southern Flank is likely to contribute to drawdown in the lower catchment to the east in the vicinity of Weeli Wolli Creek. Modelling shows a relatively small change of between 0.2 and 0.5m in 2054 at GWB0018 in response to Southern Flank dewatering. This change is seen following aquifer recovery and closure activities at Hope Downs. Change at Ben’s Oasis due to Southern Flank dewatering is expected to be unlikely and cumulative impacts from Northern Flank and Hope Downs are expected to be less than 1m in 2054.

Mining Area C Surplus management: Juna Downs and Camp Hill Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) Schemes, Packsaddle West surface discharge The Juna Downs MAR Borefield is located approximately 10 km south-west of the Mining Area C – Northern Flank operations, shown in Figure A1. The discharge of surplus mine water will occur during periods when the mine water demand is less than the dewatering rate. While MAR (through infiltration and injection) is the preferred method of surplus management, surface discharge will be utilised during periods of peak surplus. MAR injection at Camp Hill and Juna Downs was assessed as part of EMP Rev 6. Groundwater levels are expected to rise and fall in the vicinity of the Juna Downs and Camp Hill borefields as the areas are used for surplus MAR and subsequently as Camp Hill is used as a water supply borefield. Surface discharge will occur at the Packsaddle infiltration ponds and will travel down the West Packsaddle tributaries North and South. Water is expected to infiltrate via the sediments in both valleys. Potential Impacts Operation of a MAR borefield at Juna Downs at the maximum proposed rate of 20 ML/d for a period of 18 years leads to development of a groundwater mound which propagates throughout the Juna Downs and Coondewanna Flats area. The aquifer drawdown effects from Camp Hill are predicted to be isolated from the mine dewatering area of influence owing to the ridge of low permeability BIF and shale separating the pumping centers.

Page 55 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Based on the current conceptual hydrogeological model (and corresponding numerical model set-up), which includes drawdown from MAC extending into the Coondewanna Flats area, the result is a net increase in groundwater levels of between 5 and 8 m. This corresponds to a minimum depth to groundwater of 14 to 16 m in the north-eastern part of the Flats. There is potential for water discharged at the Packsaddle infiltration ponds to reach the Coondewanna PEC. This could result in surface water being present in the lake out of season and could impact vegetation health if present for prolonged periods. To manage this risk the wetting front will be monitored and limited to 3.5km upstream from the PEC.

Figure A1: Water effecting activities in the Upper Weeli Wolli Catchment

Page 56 of 57 Iron Ore Controlled Document

Central Pilbara Water Resource Management Plan

Appendix 2 – Stakeholder Consultation

Date of Description of Consultation Version Stakeholder Topics / Issues Raised BHP Response Consultation

1.0 DoW 2015 Initial review of document

2.0 OEPA April 2017 Submitted as part of Mining Area C Update document to new format as per Instructions Updated document as per feedback. Southern Flank Revised Proposal Reinstate drawdown triggers for Coondewanna Flats

3.0 DWER November 2017 Updated Plan submitted as part of PER process

3.2 DWER March 2018 Early consultation with DWER – RSW Early consultation on MAC surplus challenge, discussion of concepts being considered within catchment.

March 2018 Early consultation with EPA Services Early consultation on MAC surplus challenge, discussion of concepts being considered within catchment.

May 2018 Letter to EPA Request for confirmation of approvals pathway for surplus water management

Note that the above stakeholder consultation is in addition to that conducted as part of the Southern Flank Revised Proposal process, which is described in relevant submission documentation.

Page 57 of 57 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 5D: South Flank Valley MAR Numerical Modelling (BHP, 2018)

South Flank Valley MAR Numerical modelling

20 June 2018

Contents

Model set-up 1

Predictive sensitivity analysis 4

BHP Model set -up

Model set-up

Introduction

The regional numerical groundwater flow model that was developed for the South Flank Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was used to predict the response of the groundwater system to MAR in the South Flank Valley. This model incorporates a vast area, which, in addition to the South Flank orebodies and detrital valley, includes the areas of MAC, Hope Downs 1 and 4, Jinidi, Coondewanna Flats, Camp Hill and Weeli Wolli Creek and Spring.

With the exception of three short term aquifer tests, monitoring in the South Flank area consists of numerous single observations associated with exploration drilling and a number of time variant datasets (recording climatic variations in head). For the purposes of predicting the behaviour of the groundwater system under MAR however, there is little to calibrate the model against (i.e. any like for like stresses).

The strategy for this modelling study was developed with this in mind and can be summarised as:

• Simplification of the model – removing areas not pertinent to the objectives, simplifying boundary conditions and hydrostratigraphic layering.

• Predictive sensitivity analysis – aiming to define the hydraulic parameters most relevant to predicting the system response to MAR and assessing the potential range of outcomes.

The predictive sensitivity analysis was focussed on understanding two main aspects of the aquifer system with respect to MAR: 1. What physical aspects of the numerical model (and hence the conceptual hydrogeological model) control the rate of mounding and recovery of MAR. 2. What range of outcomes (in terms of the injection capacity of a future MAR borefield and recirculation of water during future dewatering) can be expected given what is known of the system.

Model simplifications

The following changes were made to the regional model:

• Model cells outside of the two dykes that cut through the South Flank Valley in the west and east were removed (Figure 1).

• All external model boundaries were set as no-flow. This includes the dykes.

• Recharge was removed.

• The hydraulic conductivity of all dolomite south of the main South Flank Valley area was reduced to 0.1 m/d.

• The representation of the dolomite in the South Flank Valley was limited to Layer 2. As this layer in this area has a uniform thickness of 20 m, this means that the transmissivity (T) of the dolomite can be accurately and easily varied with changes to hydraulic conductivity.

• Initial heads were set at 628 mRL in the detrital valley and southern South Flank orebodies and 638 mRL in the northern South Flank orebodies.

• There was no steady state model.

1 BHP Model set -up

Figure 1. Model domain and MAR borefield.

Model settings

The model is built in Groundwater Vistas using the MODFLOW-USG code. This allows rewetting of dry cells (which can be important in MAR scenarios) using some simple unsaturated flow assumptions.

To simulate MAR (and recovery) and mine dewatering, the model runs for 31 years, from 1st July 2020 to 1st July 2051, which is the period from which injection is planned to commence, until the end of the South Flank mine life. The model is divided into 31 stress periods each 365 days long.

MAR is simulated using eight wells located in the dolomite just south of Grand Central Pushback 4 (Figure 1). Each well is set to inject at a rate of 4,375 m3/d (4.4 ML/d, 50 l/s) for the first ten years. The total wellfield injection rate is therefore 35,000 m3/d (35 ML/d, 400 l/s).

Mine dewatering is simulated by using Drain boundary conditions. The elevations of these are set at the base of the mine plan for each particular year. When mining is finished in individual pushbacks, the drains are switched off and water levels allowed to rebound. The mine plan is shown in Figures 2 and 3. As Highway pushbacks west of the dyke are not included in the simplified model, dewatering estimates from the South Flank EIA modelling were added to the predictions to ensure that the complete South Flank dewatering requirements were used in the analysis of recirculation. The 50th percentile dewatering rates were used.

Figure 2. Mine plan (pushback locations)

*HW = Highway, GC = Grand Central, VO = Vista Oriental

2 BHP Model set -up

Figure 3. Mine plan (pushback elevations)

Comparison to conceptual model

The main features of the simplified model are aligned with the current conceptual understanding (Figure 4). These are:

• 3D spatial representation of the hydrostratigraphic units of the northern and southern orebodies and the South Flank Valley detritals and dolomite. These are accurate in so much as they closely match the current BHP geological model and more widely spaced drilling information.

• The reduction in T of the dolomite towards the western and towards the eastern dyke (starting roughly at the eastern end of Vista Oriental Pushback 6).

• The reduction in T of the dolomite south of Mt Robinson.

• The presence of dykes at either end of the valley that act as significant barriers to flow.

Due to the simplification however, some features vary from the conceptualisation. These, including their potential impact on the prediction, are listed below:

• The initial heads become progressively too high to the east of Vista Oriental, where the observed groundwater level reduces from 628 mRL to about 595 mRL at the dyke (the model assumes a flat water level of 628 mRL). This coincides with the lower hydraulic conductivity dolomite here, which most likely the cause of the observed gradient. This is unlikely to have a significant impact on the predictions due to the lower hydraulic conductivity dolomite. Furthermore, this area is beyond the zone where model predictions are most important.

• There is no flow into the South Flank Valley across the dyke to the west and no outflow across the dyke to the west. This is not thought to be significant due to:

o The fact that the flows are uncertain and most likely small (less than a few ML/d).

o Within the timeframe of modelling, the influence of these flows on MAR and the influence of MAR on the flows is likely to be limited.

3 BHP Predictive sensitivity analysis

Figure 4. Extent of dolomite of 20 m thickness in model layer 2

Predictive sensitivity analysis

Set-up

The predictive sensitivity analysis was focussed on understanding two main aspects of the system with respect to MAR:

• What physical aspects control the rate of mounding and recovery of MAR

• What range of outcomes can be expected given what is known of the system.

To this end, the model was run for various scenarios that tested hydraulic parameters, boundary conditions and aspects of the MAR borefield itself. All scenarios included mine dewatering.

The hydraulic parameters tested and the value ranges considered are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Sensitivity analysis settings

Parameter Values tested Dolomite transmissivity (m 2/d) 100 / 500 / 1,000 / 5,000 Dolomite specific yield (%) 0.5 / 5 Tertiary detrital hydraulic conductivity (m/d) 0.1 / 1.0 Tertiary detrital specific yield (%) 1 / 10 / 20 Unmineralised Marra Mamba 0.0001 * Values in bold indicate initial settings

The influence of outflow to the east was tested by placing boundary conditions in the tertiary detritals in the eastern part of the model where the dolomite transitions from high to low hydraulic conductivity. If the head at these locations increased above the initial level, it was removed from the system.

The MAR rate was tested at 20 ML/d and the influence of wellfield design was assessed by spreading the eight wells out over the full extent of high T dolomite.

For all runs, unless the particular parameter was subject to the analysis, the values used were equal to the initial settings shown in Table 1.

4 BHP Predictive sensitivity analysis

Results

The response of the South Flank Valley groundwater system to MAR is most sensitive to:

• Dolomite transmissivity

• Tertiary detrital storage

• Wellfield extent and injection rate

The response is not sensitive to:

• Dolomite storage

• Tertiary detrital K

• Eastern boundary outflow

The predicted head changes in the centre of the MAR wellfield are shown for the high sensitivity parameters in Figure 5 and 6. The results show that, at 35 ML/d and with the centralised borefield, mounding is likely to approach or exceed the ground surface 5 to 10 years into MAR.

The modelling also suggests that mounding is unlikely to occur in the majority of northern orebodies. A small amount may occur in those directly north of Grand Central pushback 4 however.

Figure 5. Predicted mounding at key locations

5 BHP Predictive sensitivity analysis

Figure 5 (continued). Predicted mounding at key locations

Figure 6. Mounding at end of MAR

The majority of dewatering in the South Flank Valley will be required for Vista Oriental pushbacks 1 and 5 (starting FY2027 and FY2031) and Grand Central pushback 4 (starting FY2047). The impact of MAR on dewatering rates is shown in Figure 7. These results suggest that:

• Between 30 and 65% of MAR water will be abstracted again during dewatering. The same value for MAC C Deposit is estimated to be about 35% so far from sediment pond infiltration and A Deposit MAR.

• The total South Flank dewatering effort will increase by between 20 and 35%. The same value for MAC C Deposit is estimated to be about 20%.

• Higher dolomite T results in greater recirculation. The MAR water travels more rapidly towards Vista Oriental (where the first major BWT pushbacks are scheduled) resulting in increased dewatering requirements early on. This does however mean that by the time Grand Central pushback 4 comes online, more water has moved away from this area and dewatering rates are only slightly impacted. With lower dolomite T values the reverse is true.

• Lower tertiary detrital storage values result in greater recirculation, particularly in the early stages (i.e. Vista Oriental pushbacks). This happens because with lower storage, MAR water migrates more readily along the valley. Higher storage results in more water remaining local to the injection borefield and therefore greater recirculation when Grand Central pushback 4 is dewatered.

6 BHP Predictive sensitivity analysis

Figure 7. Predicted South Flank water balance

The results of reducing the MAR rate to 20 ML/d and of spreading the borefield over the entire South Flank Valley are shown in Figures 8 and 9. The results show that:

• The success of a full ten years of MAR is much more likely at a rate of 20 ML/d:

o Groundwater levels are likely to remain well below the ground surface.

o Recirculation and total mine dewatering are reduced to 40% and 25% respectively.

• Spreading the borefield out:

o Significantly reduces any localised mounding.

o Increases the rate of recirculation and total dewatering volume (to 65% and 35% respectively).

Figure 8. Mounding in central wellfield (i.e. just south of GC Pushback 4)

7 BHP Predictive sensitivity analysis

Figure 9. Mounding at 10 years with MAR borefield spread out

* Red squares indicate MAR bores

Uncertainties

The modelling described above represents a high level exploration of the main processes controlling MAR in the South Flank Valley and what impact this might have on the dewatering effort. The main uncertainties not addressed by this study are:

• The hydrostratigraphic nature of the tertiary detritals. This unit is simulated with a single model layer but it is in fact comprised of many discrete units that are likely to have significantly different hydraulic parameters. As well as the usual inaccuracies that the lack of detail would produce, some of these units may behave as confining layers, which could have a major impact on MAR behaviour (i.e. increased pressures and less storage).

• The model does not simulate near bore effects such as well losses etc. Furthermore the injection is applied over the entire model cell in which it is located. Given that the cells are 200 m 2, the actual near bore heads are likely to be significantly higher in reality.

• Additional permeability in the dolomite south of the valley. This would have the effect of reducing mounding and recirculation.

• The dynamics of the western dyke. Although buffered slightly by lower T dolomite, mounding adjacent to the dyke may result in flow across it to the west, thus reducing mounding and recirculation at the MAR borefield.

• South Flank orebody hydraulic parameters. These will contribute to the system response, but it is assumed to a lesser degree than the dolomite and tertiary detritals.

• The hydraulic connection between the southern and northern South Flank orebody aquifers is believed to be poor as evidenced by the 10 m difference in observed groundwater levels between them. If this assumption is incorrect then MAR water may flow into the northern orebodies (particularly at Grand Central), resulting in increased dewatering of these pits.

8 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 5E: Pebble Mouse Creek Surface Discharge Hydraulic Modelling (Surface Water Solutions, 2019). SURFACE WATER SOLUTIONS www.surfacewater.biz

7 February 2019

BHP Billiton Iron Ore Attn: Iain Rea Level 37, 125 St. Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000

Dear Iain,

Please find the attached draft summary of two-dimensional hydraulic modelling results for wetting front estimation at Pebble Mouse Creek for BHPBIO’s South Flank operations.

Modelling was undertaken for a range of assumed discharge rates and infiltration rates. Modelled discharge rates range from 5 ML/day to 45 ML/day, and applied infiltration rates range from 50 mm/day to 500 mm/day.

The available terrain mapping extends approximately 18 km downstream of the discharge point. The accompanying electronic spreadsheet allows any combination of discharge and infiltration rates to be entered, with wetting front extents predicted to the nearest 500 metres up to a maximum extent of up to 40 km downstream of the discharge point.

Predicted wetting front extents are based on the assumption that the average discharge vs. width relationship in the downstream-most reach covered by the available mapping applies to the channel downstream of the survey coverage area.

Thank you for the opportunity to assist with this project. Should there be any further requirements or comments on the draft deliverables, please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] or on +61 400 367 542.

Best regards,

Krey Price Director, Surface Water Solutions

57 Bromfield Drive 0400 367 542 Kelmscott WA 6111 [email protected] SURFACE WATER SOLUTIONS

1. Model setup

Terrain. Figure 1 shows the Pebble Mouse Creek terrain coverage provided by BHPBIO relative to other Pilbara discharge locations. The coverage extent and resolution of the Pebble Mouse Creek terrain surface is shown in Table 1.

Figure 1: Discharge locations and terrain coverage

Table 1. Discharge locations Terrain Terrain Discharge rates Infiltration rates Location Northing Easting Extent Resolution (ML/day) (mm/day) (km) (m) South Flank 695852 7453999 18 1.5 15 – 45 50 – 500

2D Mesh. A coarse-grid two-dimensional (2D) mesh was delineated over the terrain coverage area to establish the maximum flow extents under a steady discharge rate of 100 ML/day. A separate fine-grid mesh area was then delineated to cover the maximum inundated area at 500-metre intervals to establish discharge vs. inundation area relationships within each of the channels.

A computational mesh spacing of 5 metres by 5 metres was applied to the 2D area as a baseline model run, with resolutions ranging from 1 metre to 20 metres applied as sensitivity analyses. Breaklines were applied along selected roadway alignments and concentrated flow paths to align cell faces and prevent artificial breaching that would occur if the mesh cells were to span both sides of an embankment.

Roughness. Given the significant size of the roughness elements relative to the flow depths, a relatively high Manning’s roughness coefficient of 0.08 was adopted for baseline runs. Coefficients ranging from 0.06 to 0.12 were applied as sensitivity analyses.

Inflow Boundary Conditions. Inflows were introduced as steady flow time series discharge hydrographs at the location shown in Figure 1. The range of applied discharge rates is tabulated in Table 1.

South Flank Wetting Front Estimation February 2019 SURFACE WATER SOLUTIONS

Outflow Boundary Condition. Bed slopes were extracted from the available terrain data and applied as the downstream energy gradient, based on the assumption of uniform flow under which the bed slope and friction slope are parallel to the energy gradient and water surface elevation slope.

Loss rates. Infiltration losses were removed from each reach based on the discharge vs. inundated area relationship. Discharge rates are assumed to be continuous across the inundated area and do not vary with flow depth or groundwater table elevations.

Modelling approach. Preliminary runs were set up in TUFLOW, and the results were found to be extremely sensitive to the grid size. Simulation windows of several months or more were required to achieve steady flow conditions under computational mesh sizes that match the underlying terrain resolution, resulting in impractical run times at the highest resolution. Models were imported into HEC-RAS as a comparison. HEC-RAS recognises sub-grid terrain resolution within individual computational cells, allowing flow transfer calculations between individual grid cells to account for the geometry of the underlying surface at the terrain resolution of up to 1-metre by 1-metre.

Calculation options. Sensitivity analyses were performed using the Full Momentum equation set and the Diffusion Wave simplification within HEC-RAS. Although some differences in arrival times were apparent between the two equation sets, the discharge vs. flow width relationships did not differ significantly between the two equation sets, and the diffusion wave simplification was adopted for baseline runs. Except where otherwise noted, program defaults have been applied to all remaining coefficients, options, tolerances, and model settings.

Simulation window. In order to further reduce the run times, inflows and outflows for each reach were computed using a spreadsheet-based approach in which the discharge vs. inundated area relationship of each reach is used to calculate infiltration losses. Scenarios were then run for all reaches simultaneously, allowing steady flow conditions to be reached with simulation windows of up to 7 days rather than several months in duration.

Computational time step. Variable time steps were assigned based on a maximum Courant Number of 3.0, allowing the time step to be automatically adapted based on the assigned computational mesh size and computed velocities. The adopted time step generally ranged between approximately 2 seconds and 10 seconds. Mass balance errors and water surface elevation convergence errors were checked for model stability and to confirm that imbalances remained below reasonable thresholds for compliance with adopted Courant Number criteria.

Structures. No culverts were included in the model geometries. Discharge scenarios assume that culverts not included in the model are effectively blocked.

South Flank Wetting Front Estimation February 2019 SURFACE WATER SOLUTIONS

2. Model results

Table 2 show the estimated wetting front extents for each of the modelled scenarios. Figures 2 shows the corresponding locations.

Table 2. Estimated wetting front extent for South Flank Discharge Infiltration Scenario Length (km) (ML/day) (mm/day) 1 15 50 35 2 15 150 11.5 3 15 500 2 4 30 50 >40 5 30 150 19.5 6 30 500 4 7 45 50 >40 8 45 150 27 9 45 500 7

South Flank Wetting Front Estimation February 2019 SURFACE WATER SOLUTIONS

Figure 5: Wetting front extents by scenario for South Flank/Pebble Mouse Creek

South Flank Wetting Front Estimation February 2019 SURFACE WATER SOLUTIONS

3. Limitations and Recommendations The results presented above are based on the assumption that discharge rates remain constant for sufficient time to allow storages to fill and steady flow conditions to be reached.

Infiltration rates are likewise assumed to be constant and do not vary with flow depth or groundwater table elevation.

Predicted wetting front extents are based on the assumption that the average discharge vs. width relationship in the downstream-most reach covered by the available mapping applies to the channel downstream of the survey coverage area.

The accompanying electronic spreadsheet allows any combination of discharge and infiltration rates to be entered, with wetting front extents predicted to the nearest 500 metres up to a maximum extent of up to 40 km downstream of the discharge point.

As improved or extended survey data becomes available, discharge vs. inundated area relationships for individual reaches can be reassessed, and estimated wetting front extents can be recalculated. For improved accuracy, future modelling efforts may incorporate variable discharge rates that are influenced by groundwater levels or antecedent hydrological conditions.

South Flank Wetting Front Estimation February 2019 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 6A: Emissions and discharges See Section 4. South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 6B: Waste acceptance Not required. South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 7: Siting and location See Attachment 2A. South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 8: Supporting Document See Sections 1 to 8. South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 9: Fees A fee of $16,443.00 is applicable to this licence amendment application (Table 8). Table 8: Works Approval Fee Calculation

Project Cost Breakdown Total Cost of Fee Units Unit Cost Works Approval Works Fee 1) Equipment: $6,000,000 2) Site works: $2,900,000 $10,200,000 405 $40.60 $16,443.00 3) Labour: $1,300,000 South Flank Surplus Water Scheme Works Approval Application Supporting Document Attachment 10: Submission of application Not Required.