Gloucester Resources Limited Rocky Hill Coal Project Presentation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Gloucester Resources Limited Rocky Hill Coal Project Presentation to: NSW Planning Assessment Commission November 2017 27 th July 2017

Introduction

Project Overview 2006-11 2012 2013-14 2015 2016 • GRL granted ELs • January 2012 – • August 2013 – • June 2015 – DPE • Preparation of 6523, 6524, 6563 Application for Development assessment of 2013 amended Director- General’s Application (DA)/ application “on hold” Environmental • Initial drilling by GRL Requirements (DGRs) Environmental pending GRL’s Impact Statement. All • >200 drill holes for the Rocky Hill Impact Statement investigation of prior studies updated • Identification of high Coal Project (EIS) lodged design and • Extensive quality coking coal operational • March 2012 – • September /October environmental resource in the refinements Planning Focus 2013 – EIS exhibited assessment over south-eastern corner Meeting • December 2015 – more than 5 years • 1,700 submissions of EL 6523 agreement reached resulting in the • April 2012 – DGRs • Government for processing and Amended Project issued agencies (13) despatch of RHCP • The Amended Project • Special interest coal using existing responded to groups (18) approved Stratford perceived noise, dust • Individual Mining Complex and visual impacts as • About 570 from facilities. well as other Gloucester area community concerns • April 2014 – • Result = a small yet Response to important minimal Submissions impact mine

Rocky Hill Has Undergone Significant Design Change Original Design New Design

Rocky Hill Amended Project Overview Construction Phase • 10 months in duration • up to 60 personnel Production Phase • 16 year duration • up to 110 personnel (75% local by the end of year 3) • 21Mt ROM, up to max 2Mtpa • 95% Metallurgical coal Final Rehabilitation • 2-3 year duration

Public Submissions 2,286 Objections to the amended Rocky Hill Project were received Numbers based on ABS Census from 2015 (Total population of Gloucester = 5160) • 1,700 Objections (74%) were outside of Gloucester • 586 were from Gloucester, – with only 226 being individual objections. • 86.4% of Gloucester residents neither supported or objected to the project.

Project represents best practice • Compliance with all non-discretionary development standards • Rehabilitated landscape that mimics the original landscape • No final void • Unique cooperation agreement with dairy farm resulting in increased agricultural production • Generous Community Grants Program • Excellent and ongoing community engagement • Voluntary Price Protection Initiative • Maximisation of existing infrastructure • Strong economic benefits – employment of up to 110 workers and royalty payments of $63.4 million (NPV – undiscounted value is $144 million) • Agreement with adjoining/nearby landowners

Direct Benefits of Rocky Hill Coal Project Local and Regional Benefits Target of 75% local employment (110 full-time at peak or an average of 73 1. full-time local) at the end of Year 3 of operations 2. Generation of wages of approx. $9M per annum Non-labour spending of $65M per annum during production with an 3. estimated $48M of this spent locally Payment of additional local rates of more than $5.6M over project or an 4. increase of 520% over current land rates

Direct Benefits of Rocky Hill Coal Project State Benefits Payments estimated to be $144M in royalties (undiscounted value – NPV $63.4M) Payments estimated to be $47M in corporate tax (undiscounted value – portion attributable to NSW) Commonwealth Benefit Payments estimated to be $146M in taxes (undiscounted value)

DPE Report - Noise Impacts • Short term noise impacts from construction (deemed to be acceptable) • Compliance with the most stringent category of Rural amenity during the Day and Evening periods • No cumulative noise impacts predicted • VLAMP satisfied - negotiated agreement reached with the owners of Property 6 • Majority of mitigation measures considered ‘best practice’ • Multi-layered noise management measures are achievable

Reduction of Noise Impacts Noise Mitigation Activities • Use of existing coal processing, stockpiling and train loading infrastructure at the Stratford Mine • Tailored operation hours – to suit residents – adaptable to weather conditions – no night time operations • Noise-attenuated plant and equipment • Establishment of noise amenity barriers • Continuous real-time noise and meteorological monitoring • Placement of processing equipment as far as possible from town. Bunded for acoustic and visual protection • Sufficient down-time factored to hours/days sought to reflect production losses due to adverse conditions

Hours of Operation Activity Days* Hours Mining (Year 1 to 3) Monday – Saturday 7:00am – 6:00pm Mining (Year 4 onwards) Monday – Saturday 7:00am – 10:00pm Breaker Station Operations Monday – Saturday 7:00am – 6:00pm Coal Haulage (via Private Monday – Saturday 7:00am – 6:00pm Haul Road) Maintenance Monday – Saturday 7:00am – 10:00pm Sunday 8:00am – 10:00pm Monday – Sunday All other hours** * Public Holidays excluded *** If activities are not audible at privately-owned residences / receivers.

DPE Report - Air Quality Impacts • Potential air quality impacts are well within the relevant assessment criteria for particulate matter (also meets the more stringent criteria published in 2017) • Predicted PM10 cumulative impacts less than half the acceptable criteria • Implementation of mitigation and management strategies would allow mining operations to be undertaken in accordance with both best practice dust management measures and all air quality emission limits • Blast fumes and spontaneous combustion are avoidable

Mitigation of Dust Impacts Dust Mitigation • Amenity barrier • Continual use of dust suppression techniques • Real time dust monitoring equipment and responsiveness throughout life of mine • Sealed private haul road and the use of road-registered coal haulage vehicles • Predictive meteorological forecasting in response • Operational adjustment of operations to forecasting and monitoring • Placement of processing equipment as far as possible from town . Bunded for acoustic and visual protection

DPE Report - Incompatible Land Use • Project is permissible under Mining SEPP • Inconsistent with strategic land use zonings • Land use conflicts with – rural residential – tourism land uses – agricultural and agribusiness • Concern about maintenance of road infrastructure

Residential Impact Mitigation Reduction of impacts on residents and industry has been achieved by: Relinquishment of sections of Exploration licences close to Gloucester Partnership with adjoining Speldon dairy operation Voluntary price protection initiative

EL Relinquishment Original EL6523 Original EL6523 area as granted in 2006 was 5,525ha 2012 Relinquishment 2012 relinquishment was of 1,966ha to create a non-mining buffer around the Gloucester township and protect the scenic attributes 2018 Relinquishment Planned/committed 2018 relinquishment is approx. 600ha to confirm that there would be no planned mining east of Gloucester

Speldon Co-existence Model Long Term Lease Preserves significant area of the existing residential views of agricultural activities Ensuring ongoing agricultural production of GRL-owned land Helps support local industry (is currently one of the largest agricultural employers in Gloucester)

Speldon Co-existence Model Key Attributes • • Increased dairy yield Life of mine agreement allows operator to invest - Under the developed model the Speldon dairy has capital into the leased property increased its milking herd from approx. 500 to more • Environmental Management System in place than 700 head • Water sharing arrangement • Speldon will maintain current employment levels throughout life of mine • Farming operation will work alongside changing mining footprint Co-existence model has full support and sign-off by Dairy Connect

DPE Report - Visual Impacts • Visual impacts on local residents, travellers and tourists throughout the life of the mine • Scenic quality of Gloucester = drawcard for tourism industry • Amenity barriers are considered to be an intrusion into the existing landscape • DPE acknowledges that: – earthen barriers are in use at many other mines to shield the visual impacts of mining operations – very substantial visual mitigation strategy which has been carefully considered and designed

Amenity Barrier

Reduction of Visual Impacts Visual Impact Mitigation • Mining operations shielded from neighbouring tourist • Incorporation of natural looking amenity routes and attractions (herb farm and Barrington Tops) barriers • Amenity barrier removed last (from inside) to fill final • Gradients of outer slopes will be consistent with void existing surrounding topography • Most residences in Forbesdale Estate face northeast, i.e. • Minimal mining activities seen by residents towards the Speldon diary which will remain operational throughout the life of the Project throughout life of mine Views from Grantham Road – Forbesdale Estate