AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL MINING CORPORATION LTDepa.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/API_documents... ·...

AUSTRALIANABORIGINALMINING

CORPORATIONLTD

EXTENSIONMININGPROJECTASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION

ADDENDUM

3FEBRUARY2015

Preparedfor:AAMCLtdByPrestonConsultingPtyLtd

ASSESSMENTONPROPONENTINFORMATION–ADDENDUMAAMCLtd‐ExtensionMiningProject

PRESTONCONSULTINGEmail: [email protected]: www.prestonconsulting.com.auPhone: +61892210011Fax: +61892214783StreetAddress: Level3,201AdelaideTerrace,EASTPERTHWesternAustralia6004PostalAddress: POBox3093,EastPerth,WesternAustralia,6892DisclaimerThis Report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Australian Aboriginal MiningCorporationLtdandissubjecttoandissuedinaccordancewiththeagreementbetweenPrestonConsultingPtyLtdandAustralianAboriginalMiningCorporationLtd.PrestonConsultingPtyLtdacceptsnoliabilityorresponsibilitywhatsoeverfororinrespectofanyuseoforrelianceuponthisReportbyanythirdparty.CopyingofanypartofthisReportwithouttheexpresspermissionofPrestonConsultingPtyLtdandAustralianAboriginalMiningCorporationLtdisnotpermitted.


P a g e | iii

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 4

The Proposal .............................................................................................................................4

Assessment Background Information ......................................................................................4

2 FLORA AND VEGETATION .................................................................................................. 5

Habitat of Sauropus sp. Koodaideri Detritals ...........................................................................5

Additional Surveys. ...................................................................................................................6

Mine Development Envelope Boundary ...................................................................................6

Location of Infrastructure ..................................................................................................... 10

3 SUBTERRANEAN FAUNA ................................................................................................. 11

Proposed Disturbance per Geological Unit ........................................................................... 11

Geological Connectivity ......................................................................................................... 12

Depth of Potential Troglofauna Habitat ............................................................................... 16

Suitability of Geological Units for Troglofauna Habitat ........................................................ 16

4 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 18

5 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... 20

LISTOFFIGURES

Figure 1: Original and Revised Mine Development Area ....................................................................... 7

Figure 2: Vegetation Map Showing Revised Unsurveyed Portion of Mine Development Area ............. 8

Figure 3: Revised Proposal Area to Reduce Unsurveyed Portion of Mine Development Area .............. 9

Figure 4: Geological Cross Sections ...................................................................................................... 13

Figure 5: Locations of Geological Cross Sections ................................................................................. 14

Figure 6: Spatial Extent of Geological Units ......................................................................................... 15

LISTOFTABLES

Table1:SummaryofExtensionMiningProposal .............................................................................. 4 Table2:KeyCharacteristicsoftheProposal. ................................................................................... 10 Table3:ProposedDisturbanceofNorthDepositperGeologicalUnitofSurfaceGeology ........... 11 Table4:ProposedDisturbanceofNorthDepositperGeologicalUnitofSurfaceGeology ........... 11

LISTOFAPPENDICES

Appendix1:ConfirmationPlantSpecimenisnotSauropusAppendix2:RevisedProposalAreaShapefiles


P a g e | 4

1 INTRODUCTION

THEPROPOSAL

AustralianAboriginalMiningCorporationLimited(AAMC)isproposingtodeveloptheExtensionMiningProject (theProposal)which seeks tomine ironore from the superficialChannel IronDeposits (CID) found above thewater table. The Proposal Area is located approximately 70kilometres (km)north‐westofNewman in thePilbararegionofWesternAustralia (WA). TheProposalwillresultintheproductionofapproximately2‐4Mtpaofironore.

AbriefdescriptionoftheProposalisprovidedinTable1below.

Table1:SummaryofExtensionMiningProposal

SummaryoftheProposal

ProposalTitle ExtensionMiningProposal

ProponentName AAMCLimited

ShortDescription TheProposalistomineironorefromthesuperficialChannelIronDepositsabovethewatertable at the Extension Deposit. Some or all of the ore may be upgraded through abeneficiationprocesswithsolarcellsusedtoconsolidatetailings. Wasterockandtailingsaretobeplacedinsidetheminepits.

The Proposal requires supporting infrastructure including an access road (two options),internal roads, accommodation camp, ore crushing and processing plant with associatedconveyors and stockyard, solar drying cells, ROM pad, water supply system and othersupportinginfrastructure.

ASSESSMENTBACKGROUNDINFORMATION

AAMCsubmittedtotheOfficeoftheEnvironmentalProtectionAuthority(OEPA)on5December2014 an Assessment on Proponent Information (API) document (AAMC 2014), outlining thepotential environmental impacts and proposed management measures associated with theProposal. An initial set of comments were received from the OEPA on 5 January 2015 andaddressedinarevisedAPIsubmittedon14January2015.

On 22 January 2015, a meeting was held with the OEPA to discuss additional queries onsubterraneanfauna,floraandvegetation.FollowingthismeetingaletterwasreceivedfromtheOEPAon22 January2015seekingadditional informationonhow impactsassociatedwith theProposal may be managed. Eight separate queries were outlined in this letter and it wasrequestedthattheinformationbeingsoughtshouldbeprovidedintheformofanaddendumtobeattachedtotheexistingAPI.ThisdocumentformstheaddendumtotheAPI.


P a g e | 5

2 FLORAANDVEGETATION

HABITATOFSAUROPUSSP.KOODAIDERIDETRITALSQuery 1: Identification of habitat in themine development envelope suitable for Sauropus sp.Koodaideridetritals.

Response

SingleSpecimen

ThefloraandvegetationsurveyundertakenbyPhoenixfortheExtensionProject(Phoenix2014a)identified a single sterile plant of what was thought to be Sauropus sp. Koodaideri detritals(Sauropus).TheplantwaslocatedinasmallgorgewithintheMineDevelopmentEnvelopebutoutsideoftheorebodyandplanneddisturbancearea.Theplantwassterile,makingidentificationdifficult.

FollowingfurtherconsultationwithRioTinto,thesinglespecimenwasprovidedtoMrAndrewPerkins (DPaW –WA Herbarium) viaMr Jeremy Naaykens (Rio Tinto) for confirmation. MrPerkinshasbeenunabletoidentifytheplantspecimen,buthasconfirmedthatitisNOTSauropussp.Koodaideridetritals(seeAppendix1).Hereafteritiscalled“UnidentifiedSpecimen”.

AAMCproposestoregularlyreturntotheareawheretheUnidentifiedSpecimenwasfoundtosearchforotherindividualsandtotryandlocateanymaterialthatwouldenableidentificationtobecompleted.

SauropusHabitat

Sauropushabitatislikelytobeconfinedtogullies,valleysandcliffsthatareoutsideoftheorebody.The only potential sources of impact being direct disturbance from roads or other linearinfrastructurethatmustcrossthesehabitatareas,orindirectdisturbancefromadjacentactivities.Thepotentialhabitatforthisspeciesisbrieflyreviewedbelow.

Phoenix(2014a)identifiedthatapreferredhabitatforSauropusisinrockyslopes,beneathclifflinesofdetrital iron formationsand inrockgullieswithin theKoodaideriMiningLease(KML)area. Vegetation and flora surveys were undertaken by Biota for the proposed Rio TintoKoodaideriprojectin2010and2011.Initially,Sauropuswasrecordedfromasinglelocationonasteeprockyhillslope,approximately18kmnorthoftheExtensionMineDevelopmentEnvelope(Biota2012a).Followingthe2010and2011surveys,adetailedstudyoftheareawhereSauropuswasfirstidentifiedwasconducted.PreferredhabitatsforSauropuswereidentifiedaspartofthisdetailedstudy.ThekeydriverforSauropusdistributionappearstobeshelterfromfire,withallknownlocationsbeingbetween500mand700mabovesealevelintheKoodaideriearea(EcoLogicalAustralia,2013).ItwasdeterminedthatSauropushasapreferencefor:

Habitatwithinthe500‐700mrangeofelevation(andmorecommonlyinthe550‐650mrange);

Smallgulliesandcliffsthatprovidesomepotentialshelterfromfire(oftenevidencedbyalackofspinifex);

Geological correlation with substrates broadly categorised as belonging to the JoffrememberoftheBrockmanIronFormation;and

VegetationtypicallydominatedbyEucalyptusleucophloia(andothers).

Theseformalogicalcriteriaforfurthertargetedsurveywork.


P a g e | 6

AsatearlyJune2013,596individualsofSauropushavebeenrecordedwithina30kmsectionofthenorthernboundaryof theHamersleyRangesasaresultofadditional surveys(EcoLogicalAustralia,2013).

TargetedSurveys

TominimisepotentialimpactsonSauropushabitat,AAMCproposestoundertakethefollowing:

Adesktophabitat assessment to identify suitablehabitat forSauropuswithin theMineDevelopment Envelope will be undertaken prior to the commencement of grounddisturbanceworks. Thehabitat assessmentwill bebasedon the four factors outlinedabove;

Where potential Sauropus habitat is identified in areas proposed to be disturbed, atargetedsurveywillbeundertakenintheseareas;

WherethetargetedsurveyhasdeterminednoSauropusplantsexist,workswillcontinueintheseareas;and

Where the targeted survey has identified the presence of Sauropus plants, AAMCwillprepare an infrastructure plan that shows the location of the Sauropus plants anddemonstrateshowimpactsareavoidedorminimisedwherepracticable.

ADDITIONALSURVEYS.Query2:Confirmationof(a)theproponent’scommitmenttoconductFloraandVegetationsurveysof any unsurveyed areas prior to disturbance, and (b) to conduct further targeted surveys forSauropussp.Koodaideridetritalsinanyareastobedisturbedfortheconstructionofinfrastructure.

Response

Item(a):AsdocumentedinAAMC(2014),AAMCproposetoconductFloraandVegetationsurveysofanyunsurveyedareaspriortodisturbance.

Item(b)hasbeenaddressedinSection2.1above.

MINEDEVELOPMENTENVELOPEBOUNDARYQuery3:Confirmationastowhethertheminedevelopmentenvelopecanbereducedtominimiseunsurveyed areas in the north east corner. If so, please provide a figure showing the reviseddevelopmentenvelopeandassociatedspatialdata.

Response

AAMCcommitstoreducingtheextentoftheMineDevelopmentEnvelopeintheunsurveyedarea.Figure1illustratestheoriginalandrevisedMineDevelopmentEnvelope.DuetochangesinthesizeoftheMineDevelopmentEnvelope(reducedby48haofunsurveyedarea(Figure2)‐from848 ha to 795 ha) and Northern Access Road Development Envelope a revised Table of KeyCharacteristicsisprovidedbelow(Table2).TheNorthernAccessRoadDevelopmentEnvelopehas alsobeenmodified toensure that it connects to the revisedMineDevelopmentEnvelope.ShapefilesfortherevisedMineDevelopmentEnvelopeandNorthernAccessRoadDevelopmentEnvelopeareprovidedinAppendix2,withtherevisedenvelopeboundariesillustratedinFigure3.

LegendRevised Mine Development Envelope

Original Mine Development EnvelopeMine Study AreaProposed PitsProposed Infrastructure

Priority flora survey records(Phoenix 2014)") Unidentified Specimen") Priority 3

0 500 1,000metres

ÜExtension Project

Mine Study Area andLocation of Priority Flora

(Phoenix 2014)

Date: 2/02/20151:30,000Scale: Projection: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50

File: 4_Study_Area.mxd

")

")")

Sida sp. Barlee Range 1

Sida sp. Barlee Range 2

Unidentified Specimen

Original MineDevelopment Envelope

710,000

710,000

712,000

712,000

714,000

714,000

7,488

,000

7,488

,000

7,490

,000

7,490

,000

7,492

,000

7,492

,000

ccollins

Typewritten Text

Figure 1

LegendMine Development Envelope

Vegetation typeVegetation 1Vegetation 2Vegetation 3Vegetation 4Vegetation 5

Vegetation 6Vegetation 7Vegetation 8Vegetation 9Vegetation 10Vegetation 11Vegetation 12Vegetation 13

0 500 1,000metres

Ü Extension ProjectVegetation Types within

Mine Proposal Area


File: 6_Vegetation_Types.mxd

Veg1

Veg10

Veg8

Veg8

Veg8

Veg1

Veg1

Veg8

Veg8

Veg8

Veg4

Veg7

Veg4

Veg11

Veg4

Veg9

Veg4

Veg4

Veg9

Veg9

Veg3

Veg8Veg4

Veg3

Veg3

Veg4

Veg4Veg4

Veg4Veg3

Veg8

Veg9Veg9

Veg8

Veg9

Veg3

Veg3

Veg11

Veg3

Veg8

Veg6

Veg6Veg9

710,000

710,000

712,000

712,000

714,000

714,000

7,488

,000

7,488

,000

7,490

,000

7,490

,000

7,492

,000

7,492

,000

ccollins

Typewritten Text

Figure 2

710,000

710,000

720,000

720,000

7,490

,000

7,490

,000

7,500

,000

7,500

,000

7,510

,000

7,510

,000

LegendSealed RoadRailwayProposed pitsMine Development EnvelopeRoad Development EnvelopeIBRA Subregions 0 2,000 4,000

metres

Ü Extension ProjectProposal Area


File: 2_Project_Layout.mxd

HamersleyIBRA Subregion

FortescueIBRA Subregion

Service Layer Credits: © Harris Corp, Earthstar Geographics LLC Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2015 Microsoft Corporation

ccollins

Typewritten Text

Figure 3


P a g e | 10

Table2:KeyCharacteristicsoftheProposal.

SummaryoftheProposal

ProposalTitle ExtensionMiningProposal

ProponentName AAMCLimited

ShortDescription TheProposalistomineironorefromthesuperficialChannelIronDepositsabovethewatertableattheExtensionDeposit.Someoralloftheoremaybeupgradedthroughabeneficiationprocesswithsolarcellsusedtoconsolidatetailings.Wasterockandtailingsaretobeplacedinsidetheminepits.

TheProposalrequiressupportinginfrastructureincludinganaccessroad(twooptions),internalroads,accommodationcamp,orecrushingandprocessingplantwithassociatedconveyorsandstockyard,solardryingcells,ROMpad,watersupplysystem,contingencyforexplosivesstorageandothersupportinginfrastructure.

Projectlifespan Expectedtobeapproximately15years

PhysicalElements

Element Location ProposedExtentAuthorised

MineDevelopmentEnvelope

Figure1ofAddendumReport

Clearingnomorethan380hawithina795haminedevelopmentenvelope

AccessRoadDevelopmentEnvelope

Figure3ofAddendumReport

Clearingnomorethan150hawithina4,714haaccessroaddevelopmentenvelope.

OperationalElements

Element Location ProposedExtentAuthorised

WaterUse Throughoutminearea.Abstractionofupto0.5GL/yrofgroundwaterforwatersupply.

LOCATIONOFINFRASTRUCTUREQuery4:Confirmationastowhetherthelocationofinfrastructurewithinthemineareaisflexibleandcanbealteredbasedontheresultsofanyadditionalsurveys.

Response

AAMCconfirmsthatwiththeexceptionoftheminepits,thereissomeflexibilityinthelocationofotherinfrastructureintheminedevelopmentenvelope.Shouldconservationsignificantfeaturesbeidentifiedinadditionalsurveys,AAMCwillreviewalternativelocationstoavoidorminimiseanypotentialimpactonthesefeatures.


P a g e | 11

3 SUBTERRANEANFAUNA

PROPOSEDDISTURBANCEPERGEOLOGICALUNITQuery5:Atableshowingtheextentofproposeddisturbance(asapercentage)withineachoftherelevantgeologicalunitsthatmayprovidetroglofaunahabitat.

Response

Table3 (Northdeposit) andTable4 (Westdeposit) show theextentofproposeddisturbancewithineachoftherelevantgeologicalunitsthatmayprovidetroglofaunahabitat.Thecalculateddisturbancesarebasedonmappingof thesurfacegeology andbasedon thegeological crosssectionsthroughtheNorthdeposit(Figure4).Theseimpactcalculationsmayvastlyoverestimatethepercentageofeachgeologicalunitimpactedbytheproposedpitsastheydonotaccountforsub‐surfacegeology.Forexample,theore‐bearingHematite‐goethitedeposits(Czr)extendunderallcolluvialsediments(Czc) intheNorthdepositandthereforetheCzrsurfaceexpression(onwhichthecalculationsinTable3arebased)ismuchsmallerthanitsactualextent.TheCzrunitisdividedintoCzr1–theeasternsurfaceexpression,andCzr2,thewesternsurfaceexpression.Thecalculated17.1%impactonCzr(Northdeposit–Table3)mustbeconsideredgreatlyinflated,butit is not possible to more accurately estimate the impact on Czr due to the lack of regionalgeologicaldatabeyondsurfacegeology.

Theproportionsofthesurfacegeologyimpacted,combinedwiththesubsurfaceconnectivity(seeSection3.2below)demonstratethatthe likelihoodof theminingoperationspreventing futureconnectivitybetweenareasoftroglofaunahabitatisverylow.

Table3:ProposedDisturbanceofNorthDepositperGeologicalUnitofSurfaceGeology

AreaColluvium(Czc)

WeeliWolliFormationBandedIron

Formation–BIF(PLHj)

Haematite‐goethiteonBIF(Czr)

Total

Czr1 Czr2 Czrtotal1

Impactarea(ha) 77.1 0.7 6.7 151.2 157.9 235.7Totalcontinuousarea(incl.beyondimpact)(ha)

12,087.0 7,261.9 687.5 237.6 925.1

Impactareaaspercentage(%)oftotalcontinuousarea

0.64 0.01 0.98 63.62 17.1

1Czr1andCzr2consolidatedbasedonFigure3(seealsochapter3.2below)

Table4:ProposedDisturbanceofNorthDepositperGeologicalUnitofSurfaceGeology

Area RobePisolite(Czp)

WeeliWolliFormationBandedIronFormation–

BIF(PLHj)

Total

Impactarea(ha) 19.9 1.5 21.4Totalcontinuousarea(incl.beyond

impact)(ha)561.1 7,261.9

Impactareaaspercentage(%)oftotalcontinuousarea

3.5 0.02


P a g e | 12

GEOLOGICALCONNECTIVITYQuery6:AdditionalinformationthatdescribesthegeologicalconnectivitybetweenthegeologicalunitsCzr1andCzr2asshowninFigure3‐1oftheTroglofaunaSurveyreport.

Response

The occurrence of the same troglofauna species of presumably very different ecologicalrequirementsanddispersalcapabilities(i.e.theclitellatewormEnchytraeus‘marillana’andthespiderPrethopalpus‘marillana’)intheCzr1(boresRC121andRC193)andCzr2(multiplebores)units strongly suggest very good geological connectivity between these geological units. Thegeologicalcrosssections(Figure4,locationsshowninFigure5)confirmthisconnectivityasboththeore‐bearingHematite‐goethitedeposit(Czr),butalsotheunderlyingRobePisolite(PLHj)arecontinuous under the colluvial sediment (Czc). Figure 6 illustrates the spatial extent of thegeologicalunitsinquestion.

Geological Cross Section 7491450 North

Geological Cross Section 7490500 North

Bores with troglofauna

Bores without troglofauna

Other drill holes

Czc: Colluvium - partly consolidated quartzand rock fragments in silt and sand matrix;old valley-fill deposits

Czr: Hematite-goethite deposits on bandediron-formation and adjacent scree deposits

PLHj: Weeli Wolli Formation - banded iron-formation (commonly jaspilitic), pelite, andnumerous metadolerite sills

Pit Outline

A A’

B B’

GeologyLegend

Extension ProjectGeological Cross Sections

Date: 29/01/2015

1:8 Vert. Exag.Scale: Projection: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50

File: Sections.cdr

30m below average ground level




Conceptual groundwater level

ccollins

Typewritten Text

Figure 4

LegendMine Development EnvelopeProposed Pits

! Bores with troglofauna!( Bores without troglofauna

Cross Section Lines

Surface GeologyCzc: Colluvium - partly consolidated quartzand rock fragments in silt and sand matrix;old valley-fill depositsCzp: Robe Pisolite - pisolitic limonitedeposits developed along river channelsCzr: Hematite-goethite deposits on bandediron-formation and adjacent scree depositsPLHj: Weeli Wolli Formation - banded iron-formation (commonly jaspilitic), pelite, andnumerous metadolerite sills 0 500 1,000

metres

Ü Extension ProjectTroglofauna survey bores

and bores yielding troglofauna


File: 7_Troglofauna_Bores.mxd

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!( !( !(

!(

!(

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!!!

! !

Pit 1

Pit 2

Pit 3

Cross Section 7491450 North

Cross Section 7490500 North

A A'

B B'

RC184RC193

RC121 DC042

RC014RC013

RC250

RC087

RC015

DC072

DC026DC030

DC067

DC045

RC016

RC011

710,000

710,000

712,000

712,000

714,000

714,000

7,488

,000

7,488

,000

7,490

,000

7,490

,000

7,492

,000

7,492

,000

ccollins

Typewritten Text

ccollins

Typewritten Text

ccollins

Typewritten Text

ccollins

Typewritten Text

Figure 5

0 1,500 3,000metres

Ü Extension ProjectRegional GSWA Geology


File: 10_Geology.mxd

PLHb

Czc

PLHj

PLHj

Qa PLHj

PLHj

Czr

Czc

Czp

Czc

Czc

Czp

Czp

PLHj

Qa

Czp

Czp

PLHt

Czr

Czk

Qa

Czp

Czc

Czp

Czp

Qw

Czr

Qc

PLHb

Czp

PLHj

PLHj

PLHt

Czc

PLHj

Czc

Qa

Czc

Czp

Czc

Czk

Czc

Czp

Czp

Czp

Czc

Czr

Czp

Qa

Qa

PLHj

Czp

Qa

Qa

Qa

PLHj

Czr

Qw

Czc

Czc

PLHj

Qw

705,000

705,000

710,000

710,000

715,000

715,000

7,480

,000

7,480

,000

7,490

,000

7,490

,000

7,500

,000

7,500

,000

LegendMine Development EnvelopeQa: Alluvium - unconsolidated silt, sand, andgravel; in drainage channels and on adjacentfloodplainsQc: Colluvium-unconsolidated quartz androck fragments in soil; locally derived soil,and scree, and talus depositsQw: Alluvium and colluvium-red-brown sandyand clayey soil; on low slopes andsheetwash areasCzc: Colluvium - partly consolidated quartzand rock fragments in silt and sand matrix;old valley-fill deposits

Czk: Calcrete-sheet carbonate; found alongmajor drainage linesCzp: Robe Pisolite - pisolitic limonitedeposits developed along river channelsCzr: Hematite-goethite deposits on bandediron-formation and adjacent scree depositsPLHb: Brockman Iron Formation - bandediron-formation, chert, and pelitePLHj: Weeli Wolli Formation - banded iron-formation (commonly jaspilitic), pelite, andnumerous metadolerite sillsPLHt: Medium- to coarse-grainedmetadolerite sills intruded into HamersleyGroup

ccollins

Typewritten Text

Figure 6


P a g e | 16

DEPTHOFPOTENTIALTROGLOFAUNAHABITAT

Query7:Anestimationofthedepthofpotentialtroglofaunahabitat,withparticularreferencetotheproposedpitvoids.

Response

Thedepthofpotentialtroglofaunahabitatislikelytobelimitedby:

Groundwater;and/or Rocktypesthatdonotdisplayvuggycharacteristics(littleornovoidspace).

Drillingonsitehasbeenrelativelyshallowwithmostholesonlydrilled20‐30mdeep.Fewdrillholeshaveintersectedgroundwater.Whereithasbeenintersecteditappearstobearound30‐40mbeneathsurface.Iftherocktypeissuitable,thedepthoftroglofaunahabitatwouldbeoftheorderof30‐40m(seeFigure4).Thepitsareplannedtobeminedtoapproximately20mdeep,likelytobeleavingaround10‐20mofpotentialtroglofaunahabitatabovegroundwater.

Whilsttheiron‐orebearingCID(CzrandCzpgeologicalunits)ismostprospectivefortroglofauna,onlyafractionofitscontinuousextentisearmarkedformining.Inaddition,theunderlyingrockoftheWeeliWolli formationalsoappearssuitabletohosttroglofauna(seeSection3.4below).WhilstthedepthoftheCIDlayersarevariableandthelandscapeisamosaicofmesasanddrainagelines, thewholesite isunderlainby theWeeliWolli formation (seeFigure4). Therefore, tworefugia are likely to be available for troglofauna from the impact area, i.e. CIDs around theproposedpitsandWeeliWolliformationbelow.

SUITABILITY OF GEOLOGICAL UNITS FOR TROGLOFAUNAHABITAT

Query8:Ananalysisofthesuitabilityofthegeologicalunitsinthemineandsurroundingareasfortroglofaunahabitat, includingconfirmationastowhetherthestructureofthegeologicalunits islikelytosupporttroglofauna.

Response

Allgeologicalunitsinthevicinityoftheproposedpitshavepotentialtosupporttroglofauna.TwogeologiesofCIDarepresent,includingHematite‐goethitedeposits(Czr)andRobePisolite(Czp).CIDsbelongtotheearliestgeologies thatrevealedtroglofauna inthePilbara(Biota2004)andhavesincebeenrecognisedashighlyprospectivetroglofaunahabitat(Biota2006;Harveyetal.2008).

Hematite‐goethite(Czr)

DrillcoresfromtheNorthdepositindicatedthattheCIDisporousandcontainsmanyvugsandfissures that could provide habitat for subterranean fauna (Phoenix 2014b; figure 3‐3). ThepotentialofCzrtohosttroglofaunawassubsequentlyconfirmedwheneightoutof14boresinthisgeology in the North deposit recorded a total of seven troglofauna species (Phoenix 2014b).RecentsurveysinthePilbaraalsoprovidedhightroglofaunadiversityinCzrgeologyatHancockProspecting’sMulgaDowns(Phoenix2012)andAscot’sWonmunna(Phoenix2014e).


P a g e | 17

RobePisolite(Czp)

SimilartotheCzrdepositoftheNorthdeposit,drillcoresoftheCzpdepositoftheWestdepositshowed extensive vugginess and fissures to structurally support troglofauna (Phoenix 2014b;figure3‐2);fourspeciesweresubsequentlycollectedfromsixoutofnineboressampledinCzpintheWestdepositdemonstratingthesuitabilityofthisgeologyfortroglofauna(Phoenix2014b).

ThepisoliticmesasoftheRobeValleywerethefirsttorecordtroglofaunainthePilbararegion(Biota2004)andmanystudieshavesubsequentlyfoundrichsubterraneanfaunasinthisgeology,includingmost recently inAPIManagement’sWPIOP (Biota 2010), IronOreHoldings (IOH’s)BucklandProject(Bennelongia2013;Phoenix2014d),RedHillIron’sPannawonicaTenements(Phoenix2014c)andDragonIron’sRockleaProject(Phoenix2014f).

The high prospectivity of Robe Pisolite to host troglofauna has also been recognised by theregulatorswhodeclaredtwoPriorityEcologicalCommunitiesfrompredominantlythisgeology,‘SubterraneaninvertebratecommunitiesofmesasintheRobeValleyregion’and‘SubterraneaninvertebratecommunityofpisolitichillsinthePilbara’(DPaW2014).

Colluvium(Czc)

Nodrillcoreswereavailabletostructurallyassessthecolluvialdepositsoftheproject;however,twoboresinCzcweresampledandbothrevealedatotaloffourspeciesoftroglofauna(Phoenix2014b).

AlluvialandcolluvialdepositshavefrequentlyproducedtroglofaunainthePilbara,includingatRioTinto’sHopeDowns4(Biota2009),Brockman’sMarillanaIronOreproject(Ecologia2010),HancockProspecting’sMurrayHills(Ecologia2011)andMulgaDowns(Phoenix2012).

WeeliWolliformation–bandedironformation(PLHj)

NodrillcoredataisavailableforthePLHjgeologicalunitineithertheNorthorWestdeposits.Banded iron formations (BIF) have continuously produced troglofauna throughout WesternAustralia, includingthePilbara, i.e.at IOH’sBucklandsatellites(Phoenix2014d),RedHill IronPannawonicaTenement’s(Phoenix2014c)andRioTinto’sKoodaideri(Biota2012b).Whilstmosttroglofauna in BIF’s of the Pilbara have been found in Brockman Formation, Weeli WolliFormationhasrevealedtroglofaunaatIOH’sIronValleyProject(Bennelongia2012).


P a g e | 18

4 REFERENCES

AAMC.2014. ExtensionMiningProject. AssessmentonProponent Information. UnpublishedreportpreparedforAAMCPtyLtd.

Bennelongia. 2012. Iron Valley Project: Subterranean fauna assessment. BennelongiaEnvironmentalConsultantsPtyLtd,Jolimont,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforIronOreHoldingsLtd.

Bennelongia.2013.BungarooSouth:subterraneanfaunaassessment—Finalreport.BennelongiaEnvironmental Consultants, Jolimont, WA. Unpublished report prepared for Iron OreHoldingsLtd.

Biota.2004.MesaAandBungarooCreekexplorationareas,subterraneanfaunasurvey.Perth,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforRobeRiverIronMiningPtyLtd.

Biota. 2006. Mesa A and Robe Valley mesas troglobitic fauna survey. Subterranean faunaassessment. BiotaEnvironmental SciencesPty Ltd,West Leederville,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforRobeRiverIronAssociates.

Biota.2009.HopeDowns4troglofaunaassessment.BiotaEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,WestLeederville,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforRioTintoonbehalfofHamersleyHMS.

Biota. 2010.West Pilbara IronOre Project troglobitic fauna assessment. Biota EnvironmentalSciences Pty Ltd, West Leederville, WA. Unpublished report prepared for APIManagement.

Biota.2012a.AVegeatationandFloraSurveyoftheKoodaideriStudyAreaBiotaEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,WestLeederville,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforRioTintoIronOrePtyLtd.

Biota.2012b.KoodaideritroglobiticfaunaassessmentphasesI–IV.BiotaEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,WestLeederville,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforRioTintoIronOrePtyLtd.

DPaW. 2014. Priority Ecological Communities forWestern Australia, Version 21. Species andCommunities Branch, Department of Parks and Wildlife, Perth, WA. Available at:http://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au/images/documents/plants‐animals/threatened‐species/tecs/Priority_ecological_community_list_20_May2014.pdf

Eco Logical Australia. 2013. Koodaideri Iron ore Mine and Infrastructure project ‐ PublicEnvironmentalReview.ReportpreparedforRioTintoIronOrePtyLtd.StateAssessmentNumber:AssessmentNo.1933.EPBCActReferenceNumber:EPBC2012/6422

Ecologia.2010.BrockmanResourcesLtdMarillanaIronOreProjecttroglofaunareport.EcologiaEnvironment Pty Ltd, West Perth, WA. Unpublished report prepared for BrockmanResourcesLtd.

Ecologia.2011.MurrayHillTroglofaunaSurvey.EcologiaEnvironmentPtyLtd,WestPerth,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforHancockProspecting.

Harvey, M. S., Berry, O., Edward, K. L. & Humphreys, G. 2008. Molecular and morphologicalsystematicsofhypogeanschizomids (Schizomida:Hubbardiidae) in semiaridAustralia.InvertebrateSystematics22:167–194.

Phoenix.2012.SubterraneanfaunasurveyoftheMulgaDownsProject.PhoenixEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,Balcatta,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforHancockProspectingPtyLtd.

Phoenix.2014a.FloraandvegetationsurveyfortheExtensionProject.PhoenixEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,Balcatta,W.A.Unpublishedreportprepared forAustralianAboriginalMiningCorporationPtyLtd.

Phoenix.2014b.TroglofaunasurveyfortheExtensionProject.PhoenixEnvironmentalSciencesPty Ltd, Balcatta, W.A. Unpublished report prepared for Australian Aboriginal MiningCorporationPtyLtd.

Phoenix. 2014c. Troglofauna survey for the Pannawonica Tenements. Phoenix EnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,Balcatta,W.A.UnpublishedreportpreparedforRedHillIronLtd.

Phoenix.2014d.TroglofaunasurveyoftheBucklandsatellites:Rabbit,RoosterandRoosterSouth.PhoenixEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,Balcatta,W.A.UnpublishedreportpreparedforIronOreHoldingsLtd.


P a g e | 19

Phoenix.2014e.TroglofaunasurveyoftheWonmunnaIronOreProject.PhoenixEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,Balcatta,WA.UnpublisheddraftreportpreparedforWonmunnaIronOreLtd.

Phoenix. 2014f. Subterranean fauna survey for the Rocklea Iron Ore Project. PhoenixEnvironmentalSciencesPtyLtd,Balcatta,WA.UnpublishedreportpreparedforDragonEnergy.


P a g e | 20

5 APPENDICES

Appendix1

Plantidentificationemail–Sauropusmis‐identification


P a g e | 21

From: Perkins, Andrew [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 29 January 2015 11:56 AM To: Naaykens, Jeremy (RTIO) Cc: Grant Wells ([email protected]) Subject: RE: Sauropus Importance: High

Hi Jeremy,

I have been busy looking at the sample Grant dropped off & I am now sure it's not Sauropus

sp. Koodaideri detritals. The specimen submitted has tufts of septate on both side of the

stem bracts & occasionally in the stem axils ‐ whereas S. sp. Koodaideri detritals stems &

stem bracts are glabrous . The stem bracts seem simple in form (no lobes) ‐ whereas S. sp.

Koodaideri detritals stem bracts are often trilobed (formed from the reduced leaf plus

stipules). What this specimen is, I cannot determine with confidence due to a lack of fertile

material. The stem bracts with the septate hairs are most similar to some specimens of

Ptilotus schwartzii but the branching pattern of the stems is more indicative of some

cladodinous members of the Santalaceae & Fabaceae. In conclusion, I’m ruling out Sauropus

sp. Koodaideri detritals for this specimen but I cannot put any further determination due to

lack of fertile material. If in the future flowering material is available, I’m keen to check it

out.

Cheers, Andrew.


P a g e | 22

Appendix2

RevisedProposalAreaShapefilesandCoordinates(seeenclosedCD)

AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL MINING CORPORATION LTDepa.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/API_documents... ·...

Documents

Transcript of AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL MINING CORPORATION LTDepa.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/API_documents... ·...