Marandoo Mine Phase 2 Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd Report 1355 April 2010 Environmental Impact Assessment Process Timelines Date Progress stages Time (weeks) 4/12/2007 Level of Assessment set (following any appeals upheld) 0 29/09/2007 Proponent Document Released for Public Comment 39 25/11/2008 Public Comment Period Closed 8 19/03/2009 Final Proponent response to the issues raised 69 19/04/2010 EPA report to the Minister for the Environment 4 03/05/2010 Appeals Close 2 ISSN 1836-0483 (Print) ISSN 1836-0491 (Online) Assessment No. 1686 Summary and recommendations This report provides the Environmental Protection Authority’s (EPA’s) advice and recommendations to the Minister for Environment on the proposal to extend mining at the existing Marandoo mine below the water table by Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd, a member of the Rio Tinto group. Section 44 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) requires the EPA to report to the Minister for Environment on the outcome of its assessment of a proposal. The report must set out: • The key environmental factors identified in the course of the assessment; and • The EPA’s recommendations as to whether or not the proposal may be implemented, and, if the EPA recommends that implementation be allowed, the conditions and procedures to which implementation should be subject. The EPA may include in the report any other advice and recommendations as it sees fit. The EPA is also required to have regard for the principles set out in section 4A of the EP Act. Key environmental factors and principles The EPA decided that the following key environmental factors relevant to the proposal required detailed evaluation in the report: (a) Flora and Vegetation; (b) Groundwater; and (c) Rehabilitation and Decommissioning. There were a number of other factors which were very relevant to the proposal, but the EPA is of the view that the information set out in Appendix 3 provides sufficient evaluation. The following principles were considered by the EPA in relation to the proposal: (a) the precautionary principle; (b) the principle of biological diversity and ecological integrity; and (c) the principle of waste minimisation. Conclusion The EPA has considered the proposal by Hamersley Iron to extend mining at the existing Marandoo Mine below the water table. The EPA considers that the location of the proposal surrounded by the Karijini National Park demands that the impacts associated with the proposal can be managed to meet the EPA’s environmental objectives for the area with a high level of confidence. i The key environmental assets to be protected during the implementation of this proposal include: • the Priority Ecological Community (PEC) Coolibah Woodlands within the Karijini National Park; and • springs, pools and gorges within the Karijini National Park. The EPA notes that extensive hydrological investigations and modelling have been carried out at Marandoo. Following advice from the Department of Water and review of the model by independent experts, the EPA accepts the proponent’s conclusion that leakage from the unconfined aquifer to the confined aquifer is highly unlikely due to the nature of the clay layer separating the aquifers below the Coolibah Woodland. The EPA notes that, given this conclusion, groundwater drawdown in the vicinity of the Coolibah Woodland is predicted to be in the order of 2.5-4m. The EPA also notes that the Coolibah Woodland is unlikely to be entirely dependant on groundwater and that, given the slow rate of the predicted fall in groundwater over 21 years resulting from mine dewatering, it is likely that the Coolibahs would be able to adapt to the changes in groundwater. The EPA has recommended a condition requiring that there be no impact to the Coolibah Woodland as a result of this proposal. In the unlikely event that a decline in tree health in the Coolibah Woodlands is detected, the proponent has outlined contingency management strategies including artificial irrigation of the woodlands. The EPA considers that irrigation of the woodland using the currently proposed methods is not appropriate. This is due to the potential to change the assemblage of vegetation in the Woodland and the physical disturbance to the Woodland and the Karijini National Park from the proposed irrigation infrastructure. The EPA has recommended a condition to ensure that alternative management strategies are developed by the proponent using appropriate experts prior to the commencement of dewatering, and to ensure that these contingencies, if required, are delivered in an appropriate and timely manner. The modelling and water chemistry studies conducted by the proponent demonstrate that, with the exception of Minthicundunna Spring, water sources including springs, gorges and pools in the Karijini National Park are unlikely to be impacted by drawdown associated with the proposal. Monitoring and mitigation strategies to manage impacts to Minthicundunna Spring have been proposed. The EPA considers that, given the existing evidence, springs and pools within the Karijini National Park are unlikely to be impacted by the proposal. However, given the high ecological, cultural and tourism values of these water sources, the EPA has recommended a condition to ensure that these values are maintained in the event that modelling is proved to be inaccurate. The EPA notes that intermittent discharge of excess dewater to the environment would be required. The Hamersley Station Themeda Grassland Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) is located approximately 26km downstream of the proposed dewater discharge points. The proponent has predicted that impacts discharge would not extend further than 20kms from the discharge points. ii The EPA accepts the proponent’s conclusion that areas impacted by the discharge are likely to return to a similar composition to pre-mining within decades after the cessation of discharge. The EPA has recommended a condition to ensure that dewater discharge does not travel outside the area predicted by the proponent, and that the spread of weeds does not significantly impact vegetation along the proposed dewater discharge channels. The EPA has also recommended conditions to ensure that, in the event of sinkhole formation occurring within the Karijini National Park as a result of dewatering activities, sinkholes would be detected in a timely manner and managed appropriately. The EPA has concluded that it is unlikely that the EPA’s objectives would be compromised, provided there is satisfactory implementation by the proponent of the recommended conditions set out in Appendix 4, and summarised in Section 4. Recommendations The EPA submits the following recommendations to the Minister for Environment: 1. that the Minister notes that the proposal being assessed is to extend operations at the existing Marandoo mine site below the water table; 2. that the Minister considers the report on the key environmental factors and principles as set out in Section 3; 3. that the Minister notes that the EPA has concluded that it is unlikely that the EPA’s objectives would be compromised, provided there is satisfactory implementation by the proponent of the recommended conditions set out in Appendix 4, and summarised in Section 4; and 4. that the Minister imposes the conditions and procedures recommended in Appendix 4 of this report. Conditions Having considered the proponent’s commitments and information provided in this report, the EPA has developed a set of conditions that the EPA recommends be imposed if the proposal by Hamersley Iron to extend operations at the existing Marandoo Mine below the water table is approved for implementation. These conditions are presented in Appendix 4. Matters addressed in the conditions include the following: (a) that the proponent shall ensure that groundwater abstraction, dewatering activities and mitigation strategies required to implement the proposal do not adversely impact the Coolibah Woodlands within the Karijini National Park; (b) that the proponent shall develop appropriate mitigation strategies to remediate any decline in health of the Coolibah Woodlands to the satisfaction of the CEO of the Office of the EPA, on advice from DEC prior to the commencement of any dewatering activities; (c) that the proponent shall ensure that groundwater abstraction, dewatering and interception of surface flows required to implement the proposal do not adversely affect any of the springs, pools or creeks in the Karijini National park; iii (d) that there is a TEC located approximately 26kms downstream of the dewater discharge point. The proponent shall ensure that dewater discharge does not extend more than 20kms along the designated discharge channels and that there is no increase in the variety or distribution of weed species as a result of dewater discharge; (e) that the proponent shall ensure that sinkhole formations attributable to the proposal are detected in a timely manner and managed appropriately; and (f) that closure and rehabilitation activities shall be planned and implemented appropriately. iv Contents Page Summary and recommendations.................................................................................i 1. Introduction and background.............................................................................1 2. The proposal.........................................................................................................1 3. Key environmental factors and principles.........................................................3 3.1 Flora and Vegetation..................................................................................8