Re Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd

[2009] QLC 179

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:  Re Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd & Anor [2009] QLC 0179

PARTIES:Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd and Anglo Coal (Callide) No. 2 Pty Limited

(applicants)

FILE NO:MRA378-09

PROCEEDING:  Application for Mining Lease No 80151

DELIVERED ON:                  30 November 2009

DELIVERED AT:                   Brisbane

HEARD AT:Heard on the Papers

MEMBER:Mr PA Smith

ORDER/S:1.      Hearing dispensed with. 

2.Recommendation made to the Honourable the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and Minister for Trade that Mining Lease No. 80151 be granted for the purpose and term sought by the Applicants.

CATCHWORDS:                  Mining – mining lease – all objections withdrawn following negotiations – recommendation - Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss 245, 252, 269, 270

APPEARANCES:                  Not Applicable – Heard on the Papers

1. On 31 October 2008 Anglo Coal (Callide) Pty Ltd and Anglo Coal (Callide) No. 2 Pty Limited (“the Applicants”) lodged Mining Lease Application No 80151 with the Mining Registrar, Rockhampton District. The Application was lodged pursuant to s. 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (“the Act”) for the purpose of mining for coal and associated purposes. Although a number of objections were duly lodged to the Mining Lease Application and the draft Environment Authority, negotiations resulted in all of the objections being withdrawn.

Request to dispense with a hearing – Section 270

1. The Applicants have requested that the Application be dealt with without an oral hearing. Taking in to account s. 270 of the Act, I am satisfied that there is sufficient information before me. Accordingly, I order that a hearing of this Application be dispensed with.

Section 269(4) criteria

1. In taking account of and considering the criteria specified in s. 269(4) of the Act, I have relied on the Applicants’ Additional Information and Statutory Declaration. I have also relied upon the other material lodged by the Applicants with the Mining Registrar and the Mining Registrar’s Report in relation to this Application. These reasons refer to the salient points, but not all the relevant evidence, that I have taken into account.

Section 269(4)(a) – Have the provisions of the Act been complied with? 

1. On 30 April 2009, the Mining Registrar issued a Certificate of Application. The Mining Registrar can only issue the Certificate if satisfied that the Applicants are eligible to apply for the mining lease and have complied with the requirements of the Act with respect to the Application.[1] I note that the Application is over freehold land and road reserves. In my opinion, there is sufficient evidence of compliance with the provisions of the Act in respect to this Application.

Section 269(4)(b) – Is the land applied for mineralised or are the other purposes for which the lease is sought appropriate?

[1] See s. 252 of the Act.

1. I am satisfied from the Applicants’ evidence that the land applied for is mineralised. The Application is in a known coal producing area.

Section 269(4)(c) – If the land applied for is mineralised, will there be an acceptable level of development and utilisation of the mineral resources within the area applied for?   

1. The material before me reveals the Applicants proposed mining operations and program, and shows appropriate development and utilisation of the mineral resources within the area applied for.

Section 269(4)(d) – Is the land and the surface area of that land in respect of which the mining lease is sought of an appropriate size and shape?

1. The material before me appears to indicate a mining lease application of an appropriate size and shape in light of the proposed mining operation. 

Section 269(4)(e) – Is the term sought appropriate?

1. The term sought for this mining lease is 21 years, which I consider appropriate. 

Section 269(4)(f) – Has the Applicant the necessary financial and technical capabilities to carry on mining operations under the proposed mining lease?

1. The material indicates that the Applicants have the financial and technical capabilities to carry on the mining operations. The Applicants currently undertake substantial coal mining activities. I am satisfied that the requirements of this criterion are met. 

Section 269(4)(g) – Has the past performance of the Applicant been satisfactory? 

1. The Applicants’ evidence is that no enforcement action has been taken against either company. The Mining Registrar’s Report is consistent with what the Applicants say. 

Section 269(4)(h) – Will any disadvantage result to the holders of existing exploration permits or mineral development licences or existing applicants for exploration permits or mineral development licences?

1. The Applicants held EPC 188C. There is nothing to indicate any disadvantage to any other person.

Section 269(4)(i) – Do the operations to be carried on under the authority of the mining lease conform with sound land use management?

1. There is no evidence before me to suggest that the proposed operations do not conform with sound land use management. 

Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent thereof:

1. A draft environmental authority was publicly advertised. Although there were objections lodged, they were withdrawn following negotiations. There is no evidence to suggest that the environmental impacts will not be adequately dealt with by compliance with the conditions of the authority.

Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced? 

1. Although the area applied for does impact on public infrastructure, I am satisfied, following a full review of the material, that satisfactory arrangements have been put in place to protect the public right and interest, including by the realignment of roads. 

Section 269(4)(l) – Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant the mining lease?    

1. There was no evidence before me that indicated any good reason why this Application should be refused. This point is strengthened by the satisfactory resolution of all objections through negotiation, for which all parties involved are to be congratulated.

Section 269(4)(m) – Is the proposed mining operation an appropriate land use taking into consideration the current and prospective uses of the land? 

1. The materials show that the project is for the extraction of a valuable resource in accordance with the environmental processes. The application is now without objection. I am satisfied that the proposed mining operation is an appropriate land use. 

Recommendation 

1. Taking into account all the evidence before me and, in particular, that evidence referred to above,  I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and Minister for Trade that Mining Lease No. 80151 be granted for the purpose and term sought by the Applicants.

P A SMITH

MEMBER OF THE LAND COURT