2017 mmp - bynoe project -...

1

CORE EXPLORATION LTD

2017-2018

MINING MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR DRILLING (PHASE 1)

BYNOE PROJECT

EL29699, EL30012, EL30015 & MLN16 (The “BYNOE PROJECT TENEMENTS”)

Date of Submission: 5th October 2017

2

DOCUMENT DETAILS

VERSION RECORD

Date Document Reference Status Version

5 October 2017 Bynoe Project MMP 2017-2018 v0.5 Final Report

11 November 2017 Bynoe Project MMP 2017-2018 v0.6 Amended Table 6

Report

18 December 2017 Bynoe Project MMP 2017 Amended Fig 3 and Fig 7 and Table 9

Website version

SIGNITORIES:

I Stephen Biggins, Managing Director declare that to the best of my knowledge the information contained in this mining management plan is true and correct and commit to undertake the works detailed in this plan in accordance with all the relevant Local, Northern Territory and Commonwealth Government legislation.

SIGNATURE:

DATE: 5th October 2017

MMP – Bynoe Project ELs 29699 30012 30015 & MLN16 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 8

1.1 Operator Details ........................................................................................................................................ 8 1.2 Organisational Structure ........................................................................................................................... 9

1.3 Work Force .............................................................................................................................................. 10

2. IDENTIFIED STAKEHOLDERS AND CONSULTATION........................................................................... 11

2.1 Identified Stakeholders............................................................................................................................ 11

2.2 Consultation ............................................................................................................................................ 12

3. PROJECT DETAILS ................................................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Summary and Maps ................................................................................................................................ 13

3.2 History of Development and Current Status ........................................................................................... 16

3.2.1 Historical Mining/Exploration Chronology ....................................................................................... 16

3.2.2 Exploration by Liontown (“LTR”) ..................................................................................................... 16

3.3 Proposed Activities .................................................................................................................................. 18

4. SITE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................... 20 4.1 Physical Environment .............................................................................................................................. 20

4.1.1 Geology ........................................................................................................................................... 20

4.1.2 Hydrology ....................................................................................................................................... 20

4.1.3 Land Use ........................................................................................................................................ 20

4.2 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................... 21 4.2.1 Flora ................................................................................................................................................ 29

4.2.2 Weeds ............................................................................................................................................. 29

4.3 Fauna ...................................................................................................................................................... 30

4.3.1 General Fauna ................................................................................................................................ 30

4.3.2 Threatened Species ........................................................................................................................ 30

4.3.3 Feral Animals .................................................................................................................................. 35 4.4 Socio-Economic Environment .................................................................................................................... 35

4.4.1 Historical Aboriginal, Heritage Sites ............................................................................................... 35

5. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM / PLAN............................................................................. 38

5.1 Environmental Policy and Responsibilities ............................................................................................. 38

5.2 Statutory and Non-Statutory Requirements ............................................................................................ 38

5.3 Induction and Training............................................................................................................................. 39 5.4 Environmental Aspects and Potential Impacts ....................................................................................... 39

5.4.1 Environmental Aspects ................................................................................................................... 39

5.4.2 Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 39

5.4.3 Proposed Impact Reduction, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Methods ............................................. 39

5.4.4 Threatened Species Management ..................................................................................................... 43

5.4.5 Risk Assessment by CXO .................................................................................................................. 45 5.4.6 Risk Assessment by SLR Consulting ................................................................................................ 48

5.4.7 Assessment of Residual Impacts to Species of Concern .................................................................. 48


5.5 Environmental Audits and Inspections .................................................................................................... 52

5.6 Environmental Performance ................................................................................................................... 52 5.6.1 Objectives and Targets ...................................................................................................................... 52

5.6.2 Performance Reporting ...................................................................................................................... 53

5.7 Emergency Procedures and Incident Reporting ..................................................................................... 54

5.7.1 Potential Environmental Emergencies ............................................................................................ 54

5.7.2 Emergency Procedures – Safety .................................................................................................... 55

5.7.3 Emergency Procedures – Environmental ....................................................................................... 55 5.7.4 Incident Reporting ........................................................................................................................... 55

5.7.5 Incident Assessment ....................................................................................................................... 56

5.8 Consultation and Communication ........................................................................................................... 56

5.8.1 Communication ............................................................................................................................... 56

5.8.2 Consultation .................................................................................................................................... 56

5.8.3 Health and Safety Representatives ................................................................................................ 57 5.8.4 Reporting ......................................................................................................................................... 57

5.8.5 Key Deliverables ............................................................................................................................. 57

6. EXPLORATION REHABILITATION........................................................................................................... 58

6.1 Exploration Rehabilitation Records and Registers ................................................................................. 59

6.2 Costing of Closure Activities ................................................................................................................... 59

7. REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................ 60 8. GLOSSARY OF TERMS ............................................................................................................................ 62


FIGURES

Figure 1 CXO Organisational Structure ................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 2: Regional Location map CXO’s Bynoe Project tenements in relation to Darwin ................................... 14 Figure 3: Location of work areas in relation the Bynoe Project tenements. Detailed maps in Appendix 3. ....... 15 Figure 4 Bynoe Project area historic exploration ................................................................................................. 17 Figure 5 Location of waterbores in the Bynoe project area. Yellow dots are NT Government registered bores

(named). Brown dots are CXO waterbores. Blue are MMP drill polygons. ................................................... 21 Figure 6: Vegetation Communities of EL29699 (Northern tenement of the Bynoe Project) ................................. 26 Figure 7: Vegetation Communities of EL30015 (Central tenement of the Bynoe Project) ................................... 27 Figure 8: Vegetation Communities of EL30012 (Southern tenement of the Bynoe Project) ................................ 28 Figure 9: Locations of Threatened Species Records on or within 5 km of EL29699 and EL30015 (Northern and

Central tenements of the Bynoe Project) ...................................................................................................... 36 Figure 10: Locations of Threatened Species Records on or within 5 km of EL30012 (Southern tenement of the

Bynoe Project) ............................................................................................................................................... 37

TABLES

Table 1: Operator Details ........................................................................................................................................ 8 Table 2: Workforce Positions and Responsibilities ............................................................................................... 10 Table 3: Identified Stakeholders ............................................................................................................................ 11 Table 4: Consultation with Relevant Stakeholders ............................................................................................... 12 Table 5: Project Details ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Table 6: Proposed Activities within the Bynoe Project Tenements for late 2017 and early 2018......................... 19 Table 7: Vegetation Landcover (Greater Darwin) Definitions (Hempel, 2003) ..................................................... 22 Table 8: Vegetation Cover of Bynoe Project Tenements ...................................................................................... 23 Table 9: Vegetation Cover of Proposed Drilling Polygons .................................................................................... 24 Table 10: Frequently Recorded Weed Species in the proximity of the Bynoe Project tenements ....................... 30 Table 11: Threatened Fauna Species or Species Habitat known or likely to occur on or within 5 km of the Bynoe

Project tenements (EPBC Protected Matters Report. 2017; NRM Report, 2017) ........................................ 32 Table 12: Applicable Legislation ........................................................................................................................... 38 Table 13: Environmental Risk Assessment – Risk Matrix ..................................................................................... 45 Table 14: Environmental Risk Rating Definitions .................................................................................................. 45 Table 15: Results of the Environmental Risk Assessment ................................................................................... 46 Table 16: Definitions of Levels of Potential Impact (TSSC, 2015b) ..................................................................... 49 Table 17: Level of Potential Inherent and Residual Impacts to Threatened Species Possible or Likely to Occur

within the Bynoe Drilling Areas ..................................................................................................................... 50 Table 18: Performance Objectives for Environmental Management for the Bynoe Project ................................. 53 Table 19: Potential Environmental Emergencies and Associated Requirements ................................................. 54 Table 20: Rehabilitation Plan for the Bynoe Project ............................................................................................. 58


APPENDICIES Appendix 1 Application for Authorisation (Sect 1) Appendix 2 Nomination of Operator of a Mining Site (Sect 1) Appendix 3 Location Maps of Proposed Activities, including Vegetation and Threatened Species

Maps (Sect 3, Sect 4) Appendix 4 Biodiversity Database Search Reports/Results, Likelihood Analysis & Identification

Materials EPBC (Sect 4, Sect 5) 4A Protected Matters Search Tool

4B NR Maps (Threatened Species and Weeds) 4C NRM Infonet Report 4D Species Profile for Armstrong’s Cycad 4E Darwin Harbour SOCS Information Sheet Appendix 5 AAPA Register Search (Sect 4) Appendix 6 DENR Heritage Search & Hydrogeology Information (Sect 4) Appendix 7 DPIR Exploration Methods Guidelines (Sect 5, Sect 6) Appendix 8 DENR Landholder Searches (Sect 2, Sect 4) Appendix 9 CXO Emergency Procedures (Sect 5.7) Appendix 10 DPIR Security Calculation Spreadsheet (Sect 6.2) Appendix 11 CXO Induction Pack, including Safety Risk Management Plan (Sect 4, Sect 5)


ABBREVIATIONS

Acronym Description

AAPA Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority

AMETS Australian Mining & Exploration Title Services

ASX Australian Stock Exchange

CE Critically Endangered

CXO Core Exploration Ltd

DDH Diamond Drill Hole

DEE Commonwealth Department of Environment and Energy

DENR NT Department of the Environment and Natural Resources

DME Former NT Department of Mines and Energy

DPIR NT Department of Primary Industries and Resources

EL Exploration Lease

EN Endangered

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

HSE Health, Safety and Environment

MLN Mine Lease Number

MMP Mining Management Plan

MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance

MODAT Mineral Occurrence Database

NEPM National Environment Protection Measures

NLC Northern Land Council

NRETAS Former NT Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport

NRM Natural Resource Management

NT Northern Territory

NTEC NT Environment Centre

NVIS National Vegetation Information System

PWC Power and Water Corporation

PPE Personal Protective Equipment

RAB Rotary Air Blast

RC Reverse Circulation

SLR SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd

SOCS Site of Conservation Significance

TBA To be advised

VU Vulnerable

WM Act Weeds Management Act 2001

WoNS Weeds of National Significance


1. INTRODUCTION Core Exploration Ltd submits this Mining Operation Plan (MMP) for the proposed exploration activities at the Bynoe Project area for the 2017-18 period. See Appendix 1 and Appendix 2.

1.1 Operator Details The proponent, Core Exploration Ltd (CXO) has built a strong, strategic holding - through joint venture, acquisition and new tenement applications in highly prospectivegeology in the Northern Territory and South Australia.

Core Exploration's projects have been carefully acquired in geology which hosts world-class mines and within some of the most prospective geological terrains for lithium, base metals and uranium in Australia.

Table 1: Operator Details

Operator Name: Core Exploration Ltd.

Relationship to tenement holders

Core Exploration Ltd (CXO) via its 100% owned subsidiary Lithium Developments Pty Ltd is in the process of purchasing the Bynoe Project tenements from Liontown Resources Ltd (LTR). A purchase and sales agreement is currently being assessed by the NT Government in respect of Stamp Duty and should be ratified by the NT DPIR as a transfer of tenement ownership in the next two to three weeks. The assumption is that this MMP Authorisation should closely follow this ownership change.

Key Contact Person/s: David Rawlings – Exploration Manager

Postal Address: PO Box 12025, Sturt St, Adelaide, SA, 5000

Street Address: 26 Grey Court, Adelaide, SA, 5000

Phone: (08) 7324 2987

Email: [email protected]

Project contacts are as follows:

Name: Stephen Biggins Title: Managing Director Email: [email protected] Name: David Rawlings Title: Exploration Manager Email: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


1.2 Organisational Structure The CXO team organisational structure is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1 CXO Organisational Structure

Exploration Manager

David Rawlings

CXO Project Manager

Peter Hill

Field Assistant

Kim Petherick

Driller

TBA

Drillers Offsider

TBA

Drillers Offsider

TBA

Managing Director

Stephen Biggins

Earthworks Contractor

WRSC

Field Assistant

Mike Hope

CXO Project Geologist

Glen McIlwain

CXO Project Geologist

Mairi Walsh

CXO Environmental Geologist

Andrea Hodgson

Field Assistant

Dave McLean


1.3 Work Force The proposed workforce and associated work descriptions for the Bynoe Project have been provided in Table 2.

Table 2: Workforce Positions and Responsibilities

Company Position Number of Personnel Staff Responsibilities

Core Exploration Ltd

Geologist 1 David Rawlings

or Project Geologist

David or the delegated project geologist will supervise the project on site. They will be responsible for all aspects of the drilling program including • Managing the logistical and technical

aspects of the drilling program • Environmental management • Emergency response and HSE • Heritage, Cultural and Sacred Site

management • Interactions with the public on site • Rehabilitation management

Technical Assistant 1

Kim Petherick Mike Hope

Dave McLean

The technical assistant to the geologist, carrying out a variety of tasks, including monitoring access, positioning drill pads and sumps, maintaining sample integrity, collecting sub-samples for the laboratory, wash-downs of vehicles, liaison with driller and offsiders, acquiring and managing consumables etc.

Contact Drilling Company (TBA)

Driller 1 TBA

The role of the driller will be to operate equipment and complete all jobs in a safe, cost effective manner whilst complying with Company and Client policies/procedures, and to recover an accurate sample as per Client specifications. The driller will also have the responsibility to mobilise and maintain drill rigs and associated tools and equipment, and complete all reporting, inspection and other documentation correctly; in a timely manner.

Offsiders 2-3 TBA

Trainee drillers learning how to operate equipment and complete all jobs in a safe, cost effective manner under the guidance of the driller whilst complying with Company and Client policies/procedures, and to recover an accurate sample as per Client specifications. The Offsiders will assist in maintaining drill rigs and associated tools and equipment, and the completion of reporting, inspection and other documentation as directed by the driller.

Earthworks (TBA) Operator 1 Wildman River

Stock Company (WRSC)

The operator is responsible for operation, maintenance and management of plant machinery (Loader, Backhoe). The loader will be used to assist access as outlined in this document and undertake rehabilitation at the end of the drilling program


2. IDENTIFIED STAKEHOLDERS AND CONSULTATION

2.1 Identified Stakeholders Stakeholders associated with the Bynoe Project have been identified and are listed in

Table 3: Identified Stakeholders

Type of Stakeholder Identified Groups or Departments

Company Neighbouring exploration licence holders

Community

Neighbours Local Community Local Fire and Emergency Response Group (volunteers) Property owners or leases (NT Govt in this case) Native Title Claimants (DC2005/005 Bynoe No. 2) Belyuen Land Management Group Larrakia Rangers

Commercial Power and Water Corporation (PWC) Tenement Managers – Complete Tenement Services

Regulatory

Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority (AAPA) Bushfires NT NT Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

• Land Management Division • Weeds Management Branch • NT Herbarium • Water Resources Branch

NT Department of Primary Industry and Resources (DPIR) NT Department of Tourism and Culture – Heritage Branch NT Police, Fire and Emergency Services NT Environment Protection Authority (EPA) NT Worksafe

Non-government Organisations

Fire and Emergency Response Groups Minerals Council of Australia – NT Division Northern Land Council (NLC) Northern Territory Environment Centre (NTEC)

As required by the Mining Management Act and Regulations, CXO is required to report on all exploration works that occur across the site, as well as reporting to DPIR any environmental incidents of significance.


2.2 Consultation Consultation by CXO in relation to the Bynoe Project has been detailed in Table 4.

Table 4: Consultation with Relevant Stakeholders

Stakeholder Consultation

DENR

Environmental group SLR Consulting were commissioned by CXO to interrogate various publicly accessible datasets and documentation on land management and land management issues for the Bynoe Project area, including the NT DENR. Results are outlined in Section 4 – Current Project Site Conditions. Recommendations from this study have been incorporated into various parts of this MMP. As per the NT DPIR Mining Management Plan and Public Report Structure Guide for Exploration Operations (DPIR, 2017), the objectives of SLRs assessment are to report on the following for the project area: • Potential for and identification of any listed threatened species • Potential for any Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES), as listed under

the Commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), to occur on the site

• Flora and fauna native to the project area, including vegetation communities • Any flora and fauna of cultural significance • Description of any feral animals and weed species in the project area. • Provide specific management plans.

DPIR CXO has applied to the DPIR for permission to conduct substantial disturbance activities within Bynoe Project tenements (this MMP), and in it has outlined its philosophy, policies and procedures for this operation.

Bushfires NT

CXO will maintain contact with Bushfires NT through its web portal to establish the daily fire regime within the Project area to ascertain the level of fire danger pertinent to the site. CXO have in past years liaised with Bushfires NT leading up to the dry season regarding the coordination of controlled burning on the Finniss Project.

NT Worksafe CXO has ascertained its level of obligation to NT Worksafe through its adherence to National Health & Safety (National Uniform Legislation) Act and will continue to meet its obligations under this Act.

AAPA The AAPA was contacted to undertake a search of registered sacred sites over the tenement (Appendix 5). Two Restricted Work Areas are defined within the project area. CXO is committed to adhering to conditions stipulated in the AAPA document.

DTC – Heritage Branch

The Heritage Branch has been consulted in regards to registered heritage sites within the Bynoe Project area. Advice was received to indicate the presence of tenuous heritage value associated with historic mine sites such as Hang Gong (refer to correspondence in Appendix 6).

Neighbours and Community

The planned drilling program is enclosed with a number of vacant crown land parcels: • 605 00001 (the principal stakeholder – this is a crown lease) • 000 03283 (the principal stakeholder – this is a crown lease)

Title searches are available in Appendix 8. As the planned drilling program is well within the Vacant Crown land boundaries CXO does not consider it necessary to needlessly inform those members of the wider public community that are not directly affected by its planned activities.

Neighbouring Exploration

Licence Holders

CXO will inform neighbouring exploration licence holders when undertaking activities that are adjacent to or on the boundaries of the Bynoe Project tenements.

As the Bynoe Project tenements cover Government owned land (Crown Land), CXO are not required to enter into any Access Agreements. CXO will ensure all relevant information is available to stakeholders at all times including MMPs being published on the CXO website, as well as relevant information made available through ASX Announcements and on the DPIR’s website.


3. PROJECT DETAILS

3.1 Summary and Maps Key details associated with the Bynoe Project are provided in Table 5 below.

Table 5: Project Details

Project Name: Bynoe Project

Location: The Bynoe Project is located approximately 50 km SW of Darwin in the Bynoe Harbour area (Figure 2; Figure 3)

Site Access: Access into the area is excellent from Darwin via the Stuart Highway and sealed Cox Peninsula Rd, then west via the Fog Bay Road and south via the Litchfield Road. From these main sealed roads, access is then by dirt roads and tracks which traverse the Project area. Some of the proposed work areas need to be accessed via new tracks.

Mining Interest/s: EL29699, EL30012, EL30015, MLN16

Title holder/s: 100% - Lithium Developments Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Core Exploration Ltd. Transfer happening.

Core Exploration is the Operator


Figure 2: Regional Location map CXO’s Bynoe Project tenements in relation to Darwin


Figure 3: Location of work areas in relation the Bynoe Project tenements. Detailed maps in Appendix 3.


3.2 History of Development and Current Status

3.2.1 Historical Mining/Exploration Chronology

• The history of mining in the Bynoe Harbour – Middle Arm area dates back to 1886 when tin was discovered by Mr C Clark.

• By 1890 the Leviathan Mine and the Annie Mine were discovered and worked discontinuously until 1902.

• In 1903 the Hang Gong Wheel of Fortune was found and 109 tons of tin concentrates were produced in 1905. In 1906, the mine produced 80 tons of concentrates, but it was exhausted and closed down the following year after a total of 189 tons of concentrates had been won.

• By 1909 activity was limited to Leviathan and Bells Mona mines in the area with little activity in the period 1907 to 1909.

• Renewed activities in 1925 coincided with the granting of exclusive prospecting licences over an area of 26 square miles in the Bynoe Harbour – West Arm section but once again nothing eventuated.

• The records of production for many mines are not complete, and in numerous cases changes have been made to the names of the mines and prospects which tend to confuse the records still further. In many cases the published names of mines cannot be linked to field occurrences.

• In the early 1980s the Bynoe Pegmatite field was reactivated during a period of high tantalum prices by Greenbushes Tin which owned and operated the Greenbushes Tin and Tantalite (and later spodumene) Mine in WA. Greenbushes Tin Ltd entered into a JV named the Bynoe Joint Venture with Barbara Mining Corporation, a subsidiary of Bayer AG of Germany.

• Greenex (the exploration arm of Greenbushes Tin Ltd) explored the Bynoe pegmatite field between 1980 and 1990 and produced tin and tantalite from its Observation Hill Treatment Plant between 1986 and 1988.

• They then tributed the project out to a company named Fieldcorp Pty Ltd who operated it between 1991 and 1995.

• In 1996, Greenex undertook the first systematic RC drilling in the district (Figure 4). They drilled many of the pegmatites that are of current interest for lithium, but they did not analyse for this element, and frequently drilled to only shallow depths where spodumene is not present due to weathering.

• Various small mines operated within the Bynoe Project tenements during the periods outlined above, including Hang Gong, Lees, Lees West, Lees Extended, Highlands, Bells Mona, BP33, Carlton and Sandra’s (Figure 3). There are also some large historic mines annexed from the Bynoe project via granted MLS, including the Bilatos, Saffums and Annie mines. Beyond these, mining has also taken place at a plethora of small-scale “workings” in the earlier part of the century. These consist of shallow shafts and small pits. During the 1980s to 1990s exploration phases, costeans have been dug at many of these historic workings via back-hoe, but subsequently the prospects did not warrant mining. Costeans and pits remain at most of the prospects today.

• Beyond these historic mines and workings, there are even more mineral occurrences on the NT Government databases (e.g., MODAT; Figure 3).

• In the mid to late 2000s, Haddington Resource Ltd (now Altura Mining Ltd) undertook various exploration activities in the Bynoe Project area and beyond. Their program consisted largely of regional soil and RAB sampling of shallow bedrock (Figure 4). While Haddington was essentially seeking Sn and Ta, it was the first exploration in the area to include Lithium in its suite of sought elements. They did not drill any deep (RC) holes, despite generating numerous targets.

• Since that time, the field has been defunct until recently when exploration has begun on ascertaining the lithium prospectivity of the Bynoe pegmatites.

3.2.2 Exploration by Liontown (“LTR”) and CXO

Liontown (“LTR”) undertook exploration during the period April 2016 to present throughout the Bynoe Project area by way of RC drilling, soil sampling and rock chip sampling (Figure 4). They encountered economic grades of lithium at a number of prospects, including Hang Gong, Sandra’s and Ah Hoy, but intersections did not reach the necessary width to be considered economic. All up, LTR drilled 75 RC holes for 8142 m. They collected 1224 soils samples and 99 rockchip samples.

CXO started exploring in the adjacent tenement areas at the same time as LTR and have accelerated exploration in recent months, defining a maiden resource at the Grants Prospect, immediately west of EL30015. CXO became interested in acquiring the LTR ground to augment this exploration footprint and to discover and define further


resources to enable the broad project area to become sustainably economic. CXO have explored the Bynoe Harbour-Cox Peninsula region utilising mapping activities to locate historic workings and new pegmatites and existing access tracks. Mapping and rock-chip sampling are ongoing to allow the location and sighting of a number of Aircore, RAB and RC drill programs over the highest ranked pegmatites with the intention of investigating their lithium prospectivity. Rock and soil sampling programs also on-going in the region as part of the CXO broader exploration strategy. CXO intend to replicate this exploration methodology over the Bynoe Project area.

CXO purchased the Bynoe Projects ELs from Liontown Resource Ltd on 13/09/2017 via a purchase agreement. Transfer of Titles is in progress.

Figure 4 Bynoe Project area historic exploration


3.3 Proposed Activities CXO proposes to undertake various exploration activities with the Bynoe Project tenements, including soil sampling, rock chips sampling, ground geophysics, mapping and inevitably drilling. Activities in relation to drilling will include clearing vegetation for drill pads and some new access tracks (locations shown Figure 3, Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8). These activities have the potential to impact on threatened species occurring or potentially occurring on the site through removal of habitat, habitat fragmentation, erosion and sedimentation, introduction of weeds and pests, and death or injury of wildlife through contact with machinery and vehicles. Section 5.4.3 provides management and mitigation measures to minimise these potential impacts.

The exploration activities proposed to occur as part of the Bynoe Project are provided in Table 6.


Table 6: Proposed Activities within the Bynoe Project Tenements for late 2017 and early 2018. This includes outstanding disturbance/drilling originally covered by Liontown Authorisation 875-01

Mining Interests (i.e. Titles) EL29699, EL30012, EL30015, MLN16 (Bynoe Project)

Authorisation Not yet assigned

What time of the year will exploration occur? November 2017 to June 2018, as weather allows

How long is exploration expected to occur? 6-10 weeks

Type of drilling (i.e. RAB, RC, Diamond, Aircore) RC, DDH, Aircore/RAB

Target commodity Lithium

Is drilling likely to encounter radioactive material? No

Number of proposed drill holes (new CXO) 560 (RC x50, DDH x10 and Aircore/RAB x500)

Number of proposed drill holes (former Liontown Authorisation 875-01) 238 (RC x31 and Aircore/RAB x207)

Maximum depth of holes RC/DDH: 280 m RAB/Aircore: 30 m

Number of drill pads (Length: 25 m x Width: 20 m) 91 (RC and DDH only)

Is drilling likely to encounter groundwater? (Y, N, unsure)

No, area has very limited groundwater recognised by Water Resources Branch

Number of sumps (Length: 3m x Width: 2m x Depth: 1.2 m) 101 (1 per RC hole and 2 per DDH hole)

Length of line / track clearing (Kilometres: Width: 2.5 m)

37 km (inc. allowance for 4 km upgrade of existing tracks)

Number of costeans (Length: x Width: x Depth: m) Nil

Total bulk sample (tonnes) (Length: x Width: x Depth: m) Nil

Will topsoil be removed for rehabilitation purposes? No

Previous disturbance yet to be rehabilitated on title (ha) if known 0

Camp (Length: x Width: m) Camping off site at commercial accommodation

Total area disturbed (hectares)

Drill pads and sumps 4.6

Tracks 9.3

Total 13.9

Other


4. SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 Physical Environment

4.1.1 Geology

The Bynoe Project Tenements cover the central “spine” of a swarm of complex zoned rare element pegmatites which comprise the 55km long by 10km wide West Arm – Mt Finniss pegmatite belt. The main pegmatites in this belt are: Mt Finniss, Grants, BP33, Bilato’s (Pickett’s), Hang Gong and Bells Mona are up to 300m long and 100m wide.

The Mt Finniss pegmatites have intruded early Proterozoic shales, siltstones and schists of the Burrell Creek Formation which lies on the northwest margin of the Pine Creek Geosyncline. To the south and west are the granitoid plutons and pegmatitic granite stocks of the Litchfield Complex. The source of the fluids that have formed the intruding pegmatites is generally accepted as being the Two Sisters Granite to the west of the belt, and which probably underlies the entire area at depths of 5-10 km.

Lithium mineralisation has been identified as occurring at Bilato’s (Pickett’s), Saffums 1 (amblygonite) and more recently at Hang Gong, Grants, Ah Hoy and BP33 (spodumene).

The Burrell Creek Formation increases in metamorphic grade westward from sub-greenschist facies siltstone, phyllite and siltstone, to upper greenschist facies gneiss and schist. Sedimentary features and lithologies, typical of the lower grade units of the Burrell Creek Formation, can be recognised until the sillimanite isograd is approached, whereafter these features are obliterated by recrystallisation.

4.1.2 Hydrology

The Litchfield-Bynoe-Cox Peninsula area has very poor groundwater resources due to the “tight” nature of the Proterozoic rock. There are no Government registered bores within EL29699 and only one within EL30015 at Observation Hill (RN023177; Figure 5; Appendix 6). CXO have recently completed a groundwater drilling program on the adjacent EL29698 in association with the Grants Prospect, but flow rates rarely exceeded 0.5 L/sec (maximum 2 L/sec in RN040093; Appendix 6). In the southern tenement (EL30012) there are more bores, but these tend to be distal to the work areas proposed herein, located at historic mines that CXO do not have access to (annexed MLs from the Bynoe project area). Those that are close or within the drilling polygons (Figure 5) include:

• Lucy Mine (6 bores; max 1.2 L/sec in RN020672, otherwise very low yield; Appendix 6) • Annie Mine (4 bores; 12 L/sec in both RN030582 and RN030583 for production at old mine; otherwise

low yield; Appendix 6) • Bilatos Mine (1 bore; 3 L/sec in RN021868; Appendix 6) • Saffums Mine (2 bores; max 3 L/sec in RN024251 and 1.4 L/sec in RN024252; Appendix 6)

Based on the good flow rates for bores at the Annie Mine, which appear to have been used to produce mine process water, there appears to be a local structure at that site and this has a reasonable groundwater source. There are no recordings on the bore longevity or sustainability, however.

CXO and LTR experience in the broader RC drilling campaigns in the region provides a better indication of regional groundwater resources. Flow rates anecdotally are low and apparently not sufficient to justify measurement.

4.1.3 Land Use

There is no current land use stated for the area underlying the Bynoe Project tenements, but several private land parcels and crown leases are affected by the proposed work program. Title searches are available in Appendix 8, as is a map showing these in relation to Core’s work areas.


Figure 5 Location of waterbores in the Bynoe project area. Yellow dots are NT Government registered bores (named). Brown dots are CXO bores. Blue are MMP drill polygons.

4.2 Vegetation Vegetation community data across the Bynoe Project tenements was obtained from the following datasets:

• NVIS Version 3.1 National Vegetation Information System (NVIS), NT Data Compilation (Scale 1:1,000,000) (Source: DENR)

• Landcover Vegetation Mapping for the Greater Darwin Region (Landcover Vegetation Mapping) (Scale 1:100,000) (Source: DENR).

The Landcover Greater Darwin Vegetation Mapping identifies three primary communities as occurring across the three tenements (24 drilling polygons) - ‘Eucalypt woodland’, ‘Eucalypt open forest’ and ‘Melaleuca Open Forest. These vegetation communities are described in Hempel (2003) and have been provided in Table 7.


Table 7: Vegetation Landcover (Greater Darwin) Definitions (Hempel, 2003)

Land Cover Class Description (Hempel, 2003)

Eucalypt Woodland

Woodland occurring in shallow soils on undulating uplands, rises and rugged low hills. Grassland ground cover interspersed with a variety of shrubs and vines... Frequently recorded species include Livistona humilis, Pandanus spiralis, Erythrophleum chlorostachys, Grevillea pteridifolia, Lophostemon latifluus, Themeda triandra (perennial grass), Buchanania obovata, Heteropogon triticeus (perennial grass), Petalostigma pubescens, Planchonia careya, Terminalia ferdinandiana, Eucalyptus tetrodonta, Eriachne triseta (perennial grass), Eucalyptus miniata, Persoonia falcata, Xanthostemon paradoxus, Cycas armstrongii, Alloteropsis semialata (perennial grass), Petalostigma quadriloqulare, and Pseudopogonatherum contortum (annual grass).

Eucalypt Open Woodland

Open woodland again occurring in shallow soils on undulating uplands, rises, rugged low hills and plains, with grasses beginning to dominate the ground layer. Frequently recorded species include Livistona humilis, Pandanus spiralis, Grevillea pteridifolia, Themeda triandra (perennial grass), Heteropogon triticeus (perennial grass), Eragrostis cumingii (perennial grass), Petalostigma pubescens, Erythrophleum chlorostachys, Buchanania obovata, Schizachyrium fragile (annual grass), Triodia bitextura (perennial grass), Terminalia ferdinandiana, Pseudopogonatherum contortum (annual grass), Cycas armstrongii, Planchonia careya, Eriachne avenacea (perennial grass), Mnesithia rottboellioides (perennial grass), Petalostigma quadriloculare, Eriachne triseta (perennial grass) and Persoonia falcata. Indicator species include Eragrostis cumingii (perennial grass).

Eucalypt Open Forest

Open forest occurring in deep sandy soils on undulating uplands and rises, often adjacent to the coastline. Frequently recorded species include Pandanus spiralis, Livistona humilis, Erythrophleum chlorostachys, Cycas armstrongii, Terminalia ferdinandiana, Planchonia careya, Buchanania obovata, Petalostigma pubescens, Eucalyptus miniata, Lophostemon lactifluus, Eriachne triseta (perennial grass), Acacia auriculiformis, Eucalyptus tetrodonta, Persoonia falcata, Smilax australis (vine), Themeda triandra (perennial grass), Heteropogon triticeus (perennial grass), Grevillea pteridifolia, Mnesithea rottboellioides (perennial grass) and Panicum mindanaense (perennial grass). Indicator species include Cycas armstrongii.

Drainage Open

Woodland

Open woodland dominated by Lophostemon lactifluus, occuring on broad flats with seasonally waterlogged soils and impeded drainage. Frequently recorded species include Lophostemon lactifluus, Pandanus spiralis, Grevillea pteridifolia, Livistona humilis, Eriachne burkittii (perennial grass), Melaleuca viridiflora, Melaleuca nervosa, Themeda triandra (perennial grass), Xyris complanata (sedge), Ectrosia leporina (annual grass), Ischaemum australe (perennial grass), Erythrophleum chlorostachys, Heteropogon triticeus (perennial grass), Corymbia polycarpa, Corymbia polysciada, Acacia auriculiformis, Drosera petiolaris (herb), Banksia dentata and Xanthostemon paradoxus. Indicator species include Lophostemon lactifluus, Themeda triandra (perennial grass) and Grevillea pteridifolia.

Riparian Open Forest

Open forest associated with the edges of perennial and seasonal watercourses, swamps and floodplains. Dominant species include Pandanus spiralis, Acacia auricoma, Smilax australis (vine), Erythrophleum chlorostachys, Lophostemon lactifluus, Melaleuca cajuputi, Livistonia humilis, Alphitonia excelsa, Eriachne triseta (perennial grass), Petalostigma pubescens, Carpentaria acuminata, Breynia cernua, Canarium australianum, Carallia brachiata, Cycas armstrongii, Melaleuca viridiflora, Terminalia ferdinandiana, Acacia auriculiformis, Barringtonia acutangula, Buchanania obovata, Diospyros littorea, Corymbia polycarpa, Nauclea orientalis, Opilia amentacea (vine), Panicum trichoides (perennial grass), Planchonia careya, Syzygium suborbiculare, Terminalia microcarpa and Timonius timon. Indicator species include Pandanus spiralis.

Mangrove Forest

Low open to closed forest growing alongside tidal channels and in areas inundated by salt water. Frequently recorded species include Sonneratia alba, Rhizophora stylosa , Ceriops tagal, Avicennia marina and Lumntizera racemosa (Brock, 1995). Due to a lack of plot data for this community no indicator species are given.

As shown in Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8 and detailed in Table 8, the vegetation community with the largest extent in the Bynoe Project tenements, according to the NVIS dataset, is ‘Open Forest’ in EL29699 and EL30015, and ‘Woodland’ in EL30012. These communities are also mapped widely within the surrounding area.

It should be noted that EL30012 and EL30015 are both intersected by roads (Fog Bay Road and Cox Peninsula Road respectively) and EL30012 is also intersected by a number of dirt access tracks.


Table 8: Vegetation Cover of Bynoe Project Tenements

EL NVIS Level 2 Description NVIS Level 3 Description /

Vegetation Landcover Name (Greater Darwin Community)

NVIS Level 4 Description Vegetation Landcover (Greater Darwin Community)

EL29699

Majority open forest with small pockets of mid closed forest and

sparse samphire shrubland, bordered by closed forest

Majority Eucalyptus open forest with small pockets of Canarium (mixed)

mid closed forest and Halosarcia low sparse samphire shrubland, bordered

by Ceriops low closed forest

Majority Eucalyptus mid open forest\ Livistona low sparse palmland\

Heteropogon tall tussock grassland with small pockets of Canarium (mixed) mid closed forest and

Halosarcia low sparse samphire shrubland, bordered by Ceriops low

closed forest\Ceriops unknown tree\Ceriops low sparse shrubland

Majority eucalypt woodland and eucalypt open woodland with a some

areas of Eucalypt open forest, drainage open woodland and

mangrove forest

EL30012

Majority open forest intersected by Roads (specifically Cox Peninsula

Road and existing access tracks) with the south eastern corner as woodland

Majority eucalyptus open forest with the south eastern corner as

Eucalyptus woodland

Majority eucalyptus mid open forest\ Livistona low sparse palmland\

Heteropogon tall tussock grassland with the south eastern corner as

Eucalyptus mid woodland\ Gardenia tall open shrubland\ Heteropogon mid

tussock grassland

A mix of drainage open woodland, eucalypt open woodland and

eucalypt woodland with portions of cleared land

EL30015

The majority of the tenement is woodland with Roads (Fog Bay

Road) intersecting the north of the tenement. There are small patches of

woodland across portions of the tenement associated with creeks.

Majority Eucalyptus woodland with small portions of Melaleuca open

forest

Majority eucalyptus mid woodland\ Gardenia tall open shrubland\

Heteropogon mid tussock grassland with small portions of Melaleuca mid

open forest\Pandanus low sparse palmland\Germainia mid open

tussock grassland

A mix of Eucalypt woodland, Eucalypt open forest, Eucalypt open

woodland, drainage open woodland and some small portions of riparian

open forest.

There are 24 drilling polygons proposed as part of this MMP. Table 9 provides details of the vegetation cover for each of the new drilling polygons. It should be noted that the EL29699 lies entirely within the Darwin Harbour Site of Conservation Significance (SOCS) which includes the proposed Jade drilling polygon.


Table 9: Vegetation Cover of Proposed Drilling Polygons

EL Drilling Polygon NVIS Level 4 Description Vegetation Landcover Name

(Greater Darwin Community) SOCS

EL29699 Jade Eucalyptus mid open forest\Livistona low sparse palmland\Heteropogon tall tussock grassland

Eucalypt woodland and Eucalypt open woodland. The southern boundary is lined with mangrove forest

Yes Entirely within the Darwin

Harbour SOCS

EL30015

Hang Gong

Eucalyptus mid open forest\ Livistona low sparse palmland\Heteropogon tall tussock grassland intersected

from the north west to the south by Rural/Residential/Roads Drainage open woodland, Eucalypt open woodland and

Eucalypt woodland with areas of cleared land

No

Solomons Majority Eucalyptus mid open forest\ Livistona low sparse palmland\Heteropogon tall tussock grassland with small

portions of Rural/Residential/Roads Monas Eucalyptus mid open forest\ Livistona low sparse

palmland\Heteropogon tall tussock grassland Drainage open woodland, Eucalypt open woodland and

Eucalypt woodland Boulder

Lees

Eucalyptus mid open forest\ Livistona low sparse palmland\Heteropogon tall tussock grassland and

Rural/Residential/Roads with small portion of the south east corner as Eucalyptus mid woodland\Gardenia tall open shrubland \ Heteropogon mid tussock grassland

Drainage open woodland, Eucalypt open woodland and Eucalypt woodland with areas of cleared land

BP33N & BP33NE

Eucalyptus mid woodland\Gardenia tall open shrubland \ Heteropogon mid tussock grassland

Drainage open woodland, Eucalypt open woodland and Eucalypt woodland

EL30012

Arlee

Eucalyptus mid woodland\ Gardenia tall open shrubland\ Heteropogon mid tussock grassland

Eucalypt open woodland and Eucalypt woodland Jans Eucalypt woodland and Eucalypt open forest Jans West Eucalypt open forest

Saffums 4 Eucalypt woodland Sandras

East Majority Eucalypt woodland with small pocket of

eucalypt open woodland Annie North

Eucalyptus mid woodland\ Gardenia tall open shrubland\ Heteropogon mid tussock grassland intersected by

Pastoral/Horticulture/roads

Eucalypt woodland

Rocky Ridge

Drainage open woodland, Eucalypt open woodland and Eucalypt woodland

Sabine A combination of drainage open woodland, Eucalypt open woodland, Eucalypt open forest and Eucalypt

woodland


EL Drilling Polygon NVIS Level 4 Description Vegetation Landcover Name

(Greater Darwin Community) SOCS

Bilatos Majority Drainage open woodland with small portions of , Eucalypt open woodland and Eucalypt woodland

Fred Eucalypt woodland

Turners Drainage open woodland, Eucalypt open woodland and Eucalypt woodland

Lucy

Eucalyptus mid woodland\ Gardenia tall open shrubland\ Heteropogon mid tussock grassland

Majority Eucalypt woodland with small portions of Eucalypt open woodland and drainage open woodland

Fred East Eucalypt woodland and Eucalypt open forest Talmina

West Majority Eucalypt woodland with some Eucalypt open

forest

Hungry Majority Drainage open woodland with small portions of , Eucalypt open woodland and Eucalypt woodland

Sandras Majority drainage open woodland and Eucalypt woodland with small portions of Eucalypt open

woodland and Eucalypt open forest Fold Eucalypt woodland


Figure 6: Vegetation Communities of EL29699 (Northern tenement of the Bynoe Project)


Figure 7: Vegetation Communities of EL30015 (Central tenement of the Bynoe Project)

BP33NE


Figure 8: Vegetation Communities of EL30012 (Southern tenement of the Bynoe Project)


4.2.1 Flora

A search of the following biodiversity databases was undertaken for the Bynoe Project tenements in September 2017 (with a 5 km buffer):

• Australian Government’s ‘Protected Matters Search Tool’ (DEE, 2017; Appendix 4A); • NT Government’s ‘NR Maps’ (NR Maps, 2017; Appendix 4B); • NRM Infonet (NRM Infonet, 2017; Appendix 4C); and • Darwin Harbour SOCS Factsheet (NRETAS, 2008; Appendix 4E).

The 5 km buffer was considered adequate given the proximity of the site to Darwin and the volume of flora records in the region.

Threatened species

EL29699 (within which the Jade drilling polygon is located) sits entirely within the Darwin Harbour SOCS. The two threatened species known to occur in the Darwin Harbour SOCS are Armstrong’s Cycad (Cycas armstrongii) (VU/-) (National/NT Listing) and Utricularia singeriana (a small-medium sized terrestrial bladderwort) (VU/-).

Armstrong’s Cycad (Cycas armstrongii) has been identified within the proximity of the Bynoe Project tenements (as per the NRM Report Appendix 4C). Further investigation of the likelihood of it being impacted as a result of this project is presented in Table 17, along with its conservation status, preferred habitat and likelihood of occurrence. The Species Profile for Armstrong’s Cycad has been provided as Appendix 4D. Additional specific environmental management measures have been provided for the species in Section 5.4.4 in the event that the species is encountered during the proposed drilling events.

No recordings of Utricularia singeriana have been made in, or within 5 km of, the Bynoe Project tenements. The species is currently known from only five localities within the NT. It occurs on the margins of wet sandy flats and swamps with short relatively open grasses and sedges (Holtze 2011). Due to the relatively small population size, small area of occupancy and restricted distribution of the population, any disturbance of the species from the proposed exploration activities is not considered likely and this species has been excluded from further assessment within this MMP.

The EPBC Protected Matters Search of the Bynoe Project tenements indicated that Stylidium ensatum, a triggerplant listed as Endangered both in the NT and nationally, or its habitat is likely to occur within the area. It has been recorded at four localities around Darwin and is currently extant at two localities; one in the immediate Darwin area and the other approximately 150 km to the south of Darwin (Cowie, 2015). The species has not been collected since 1974 despite several flora surveys in the Darwin region over the last ten years. No recordings of Stylidium ensatum have been made in, or within 5 km of, the Bynoe Project tenements (Appendix 4B and Appendix 4C). Due to the relatively small population size, small area of occupancy and restricted distribution the population (the preferred habitat of the species is the wet margins of drainage flats in damp heavy clay or peaty soils (Cowie & Westaway, 2012)), any disturbance of the species from the proposed exploration activities are not considered to be likely, as such this species has been excluded from further assessment within this MMP. A copy of the EPBC Protected Matters Search report for the Bynoe Project Area has been provided as Appendix 4A.

4.2.2 Weeds

Weeds classified under the NT Weeds Management Act 2001 (WM Act) are to be managed in accordance with this Act. All owners, managers and occupiers of land as well as any other land user within the NT must comply with the WM Act.

Once a weed is declared in accordance with Section 7 of the WM Act, there is a requirement for all land holders, land managers and land users to comply with the declaration classification.

In the NT, there are three classification types, these being:

• Class A - To be eradicated • Class B - Growth and spread to be controlled • Class C - Not to be introduced into the NT.

Both Class A and Class B weeds are also considered Class C.


National classifications or statuses of weeds must also be considered in the ongoing management of an area. The Australian Government has compiled a list of 32 Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) based on an assessment process which categorise these weeds based on their invasiveness, potential for spread, and environmental, social and economic impacts (DoE, 2016b). In conjunction with the WoNS, there is a National Environmental Alert List (the Alert List). The Alert List identifies plant species that are in the early stages of establishment and have the potential to become a significant threat to biodiversity if they are not managed (DoE, 2016a). It is up to the relevant state or territory government to take responsibility for this within their own jurisdiction.

The combined database results from NR Maps (NR Maps, 2017; Appendix 4B) and NRM Infonet (2017; Appendix 4C) contain records of 43 species of weeds in the general area of the Bynoe Project tenements. This includes three WoNS, of which two are Class A weeds (Gamba Grass (Andropogon gayanus) and Mimosa (Mimosa pigra). The frequently recorded weed species within the search results have been listed in Table 10. Weed management controls and measures are detailed in section 5.4.3.g.

Table 10: Frequently Recorded Weed Species in the proximity of the Bynoe Project tenements

Common Name Scientific Name Declared Weed (NT) WoNS

Mission grass – perennial Cenchrus polystachios B/C No Mission grass – annual Cenchrus pedicellatus No No

Gamba Grass Andropogon gayanus A/B/C Yes Sicklepod Senna obtusifolia No No

Para Grass Urochloa mutica No No Buffel Grass Cenchrus ciliaris No No

Caltrop Tribulus terrestris B/C No Mimosa Mimosa pigra A/B Yes

Coffee Bush Leucaena leucocephala B/C No Lantana Lantana camara B/C Yes Hyptis Hyptis suaveolens B/C No

Coffee Bush Leucaena leucocephala No No Spiny-head Sida Sida acuta B/C No

4.3 Fauna A search of the following biodiversity databases was undertaken for the Bynoe Project tenements on 20 September 2017 (with a 5 km buffer):

• Australian Government’s ‘Protected Matters Search Tool’ (DEE, 2017; Appendix 4A); • NT Government’s ‘NR Maps’ (NR Maps, 2017; Appendix 4B) • NRM Infonet (NRM Infonet, 2017; Appendix 4C); and • Darwin Harbour SOCS Factsheet (NRETAS, 2008; Appendix 4E).

The 5 km buffer was considered adequate given the proximity of the site to Darwin and the volume of fauna records in the region.

4.3.1 General Fauna

NR Maps lists previous records of 164 native fauna species within 5 km of the Bynoe Project tenements (NR Maps, 2016; Appendix B). Many of these species are common within the Darwin region, including several species of finches, honeyeaters, kingfishers, parrots, lorikeets, pigeons and cockatoos. Kites, Black Cockatoos, Magpie Geese, Kookaburras and Sea Eagles are also common.

4.3.2 Threatened Species


A total of 38 threatened fauna species were identified as having the potential to occur within the area. As shown in Table 11, suitable habitat does not exist within the Bynoe Project tenements for many of these species (including six species of shark, two species of whale and six species of marine turtles) and therefore they are not assessed any further within this MMP.

Whilst the listed marine turtles frequent the waters of Darwin Harbour, the lack of sandy beaches close to the project area inhibit nesting activity. The Jade drilling polygon is the closest to the coast yet remains a significant distance from any beach areas.

The remaining species and/or species habitat likely to occur in, or within 5 km of, the Bynoe Project tenements have been listed in Table 11.

It should be noted that significant aggregations of seabirds are not known from this site (Chatto 2001) and although large areas of mudflats occur around Darwin Harbour during periods of low tide, high numbers of shorebirds have not previously been recorded (Chatto 2003). As such, it is likely that the majority of migratory bird species listed in Table 11 are unlikely to be impacted by the proposed exploration.


Table 11: Threatened Fauna Species or Species Habitat known or likely to occur on or within 5 km of the Bynoe Project tenements (EPBC Protected Matters Report. 2017; NRM Report, 2017)

Common Name Scientific Name NT Status (TPWC Act)

National Status (EPBC Act) Preferred Habitat

Number of Records within 5 km (most

recent year recorded)

Likelihood of Occurring

Birds Red Goshawk Erythrotriorchis radiatus VU VU Forests and woodlands 0 Possible – foraging habitat likely to be present.

Gouldian Finch Erythrura gouldiae VU EN Wooded hills with snappy or salmon gums in the breeding season, and surrounding lowland grasslands during the non-breeding season.

0 Unlikely – no previous records and preferred habitat not understood to be present.

*Partridge Pigeon Geophaps smithii VU VU Lowland eucalypt open forests and woodlands that have grassy understoreys, where they nest on the ground, and feed on fallen seeds between grass tussocks.

9 (1996) Possible – habitat likely to occur.

Australian Painted Snipe Rostratula australis VU EN On shallow, grassy, freshwater swamps, claypans and seasonally flooded grasslands. In the NT, most suitable habitat occurs on pastoral land.

0

Unlikely – there are no previous known records and preferred habitat is unlikely to be located within the proposed drilling areas, nor in new access tracks to be created.

Masked Owl (northern) Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli VU VU

Eucalypt tall open forests (especially those dominated by Darwin Woollybutt (Eucalyptus miniata) and Darwin Stringybark (E. tetrodonta)), but also roosts in monsoon rainforests, and forages in more open vegetation types, including grasslands (Woinarski and Ward, 2012b)

0 Possible – foraging habitat likely to be present.

Migratory Species

*Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis VU CR Most common in mangrove areas, but will also forage on intertidal flats and saltmarshes 2 (1994)

Unlikely –Preferred habitat is unlikely to be located within the proposed drilling areas, nor in new access tracks to be created.

Red Knot Calidris canutus VU EN

Mainly intertidal mudflats, sandflats and sandy beaches of sheltered coasts, in estuaries, bays, inlets, lagoons and harbours; sometimes on sandy ocean beaches or shallow pools on exposed wave-cut rock platforms or coral reefs.

0

Unlikely – no previous records preferred habitat is unlikely to be located within the proposed drilling areas, nor in new access tracks to be created.

Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea VU CR

Forages around coastal brackish lagoons, intertidal mud and sand flats, estuaries, saltmarshes and occasionally on inland freshwater wetlands (Garnett et al 2011, cited in Ward, 2012a).

0


Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris VU VU Sheltered coastal habitats, with large intertidal mudflats or sandflats. This includes inlets, bays, harbours, estuaries and lagoons.

0


*Greater Sand Plover Charadrius leschenaultii VU EN

Almost entirely coastal, inhabiting littoral and estuarine habitats. They mainly occur on sheltered sandy, shelly or muddy beaches with large intertidal mudflats or sandbanks, as well as sandy estuarine lagoons (Bamford 1988; Blakers et al. 1984; Lane 1987; Sibson 1948; Stewart et al. 2007), and inshore reefs, rock platforms, small rocky islands or sand cays on coral reefs.

0


Lesser Sand Plover Charadrius mongolus VU VU

Coastal littoral and estuarine environments. It inhabits large intertidal sandflats or mudflats in sheltered bays, harbours and estuaries, and occasionally sandy ocean beaches, coral reefs, wave-cut rock platforms and rocky outcrops.

0


*Bar-tailed Godwit (baueri) Limosa lapponica baueri VU VU Intertidal mudflats and shallow water. 1 (1994) Unlikely –Preferred habitat is unlikely to be located within the proposed drilling areas, nor in new access tracks to be created.

*Northern Siberian Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica menzbier VU CR Large intertidal sandflats, banks, mudflats, estuaries, inlets, harbours, coastal lagoons and bays 0


Mammals

*Fawn Antechinus Antechinus bellus EN VU Savannah woodland and tall open forest 1 (1995) Possible – preferred habitat likely to occur, although no records exist.







Brush-tailed Rabbit-rat Conilurus penicillatus EN VU Eucalypt tall open forest 0 Possible – preferred habitat likely to occur, although no records exist

*Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus CR EN Near-coastal forests and woodlands, most commonly in rocky country 9 (1995)

Possible – whilst preferred habitat probably exists, the numerous records from the region all occur pre-1995. Given that numbers of quolls reduced drastically elsewhere following Cane Toad arrival to the Darwin region (approx. 2006), it is possible (though with much less certainty than 2006) that the species occurs on site.

Black-footed Tree-rat Mesembriomys gouldii gouldii VU EN Continuous forest with large trees with tree hollows and diverse shrubby understorey 0 Possible – suitable habitat likely to exist,

however no records exist.

Nabarlek (Top End) Petrogale concinna canescens VU EN Restricted to rocky areas (sandstone or granite), especially on steep slopes, with large boulders, caves and crevices 0 Unlikely – no records and preferred habitat not

predicated to occur on site.

Northern Brush-tailed Phascogale Phascogale pirata EN VU Tall open forests dominated by Darwin Woollybutt (E. miniata) and Darwin Stringybark (E. tetrodonta). 0 Possible – suitable habitat likely to exist,

however no records exist.

Water Mouse, False Water Rat Xeromys myoides - VU Mangroves and the associated saltmarsh, sedgelands, clay pans, heathlands and freshwater wetlands 0

Unlikely – suitable habitat likely to exist within EL29699 however unlikely to be located within the proposed drilling areas, nor in new access tracks to be created. No records exist.

*Pale Field-rat Rattus tunneyi VU - Dense vegetation along creeks 2 (1995) Possible – preferred habitat likely to occur, although few records exist from the region with the latest being over 20 years ago.

Ghost Bat Macroderma gigas Near threatened VU Foraging habitat generally consists of tropical savanna woodlands and rainforests. Favoured roosting sites are undisturbed caves or mineshafts.

0 Possible – preferred habitat likely to occur, although no records exist.

Bear-rumped Sheathtail Bat Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus - VU Coastal lowlands, where they have been recorded in open

screw-palm woodland, eucalypt tall open forest and rainforest 0 Possible – preferred habitat likely to occur, although no records exist.

Blue Whale Balaenoptera musculus Data Deficient EN Occurs in all oceans and inhabits coastal, shelf and oceanic waters 0 Unlikely – no previous records and preferred

habitat not present

Humpback Whale Megaptera novaeangliae - VU Occurs in all major oceans, mostly in coastal and continental shelf waters 0 Unlikely – no previous records and preferred

habitat not present Reptiles

Plains Death Adder Acanthophis hawkei VU VU Cracking soils on floodplains of the Adelaide, Mary and Alligator Rivers 0 Unlikely – not within, or near to, the known

distribution of the species.

Mertens` Water Monitor Varanus mertensi VU - Seldom seen far from water, preferring to climb on rocks or trees near water, and often basking on branches overhanging the water or on rocks mid-stream (Ward et al., 2006).

1 (1995)

Possible – Suitable habitat likely to exist on site, however the species has likely been substantially impacted by Cane Toads and therefore it’s abundance in the region is uncertain.

Mitchell’s Water Monitor Varanus mitchelli VU -

Semi-aquatic and arboreal and inhabits margins of watercourses, swamps and lagoons in northern Australia. It rests and shelters in hollows and under bark on trees next to water. It basks on rocks and overhanging limbs and readily takes to the water when disturbed (Ward, 2012).

0


Yellow-spotted Monitor Varanus panoptes VU - Ground-dwelling monitor occupying a variety of habitats, including coastal beaches, floodplains, grasslands and woodlands (Ward et al. 2012)

0


Green Turtle Chelonia mydas Least concern VU Tropical and subtropical waters throughout the world. Nesting common in the NT. 2 (1995)

Unlikely – preferred habitat is unlikely to be located within the proposed drilling areas, nor in new access tracks to be created.

Flatback Turtle Natator depressus Data Deficient VU Tropical waters of Australia and New Guinea. 1 (2001) Unlikely – preferred habitat is unlikely to be located within the proposed drilling areas, nor in new access tracks to be created.







Loggerhead Turtle Caretta caretta VU EN Open ocean, benthic foraging habitat and sandy beaches for nesting. 0


Leatherback Turtle Dermochelys coriacea CR EN Regarded as an oceanic species nesting mostly in tropical areas and feeding in temperate areas. 0


Hawksbill Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata VU VU Tropical, subtropical and temperate waters of all oceans of the world. 0


Olive Ridley Turtle Lepidochelys olivacea VU EN Shallow, protected tropical and subtropical waters throughout the world. Nesting common in the NT. 0


Amphibians

*Howard Springs Toadlet Uperoleia daviesae VU - Appears to be confined to sandsheet heath, areas of sandy soils with short vegetation that is inundated in the Wet season, or to adjacent melaleuca woodland areas.

16 (unknown) Possible – Records show observations of the species have been made within 5 km of EL30015.

Sharks

Great White Shark Carcharodon carcharias Data Deficient VU Range from close inshore around rocky reefs, surf beaches and shallow coastal bays to outer continental shelf and slope areas.

0 Unlikely – no previous records and preferred habitat not present

Northern River Shark Glyphis garricki EN EN Restricted to shallow, brackish reaches of large rivers. 0 Unlikely – no previous records and preferred habitat not present

Dwarf Sawfish Pristis clavata VU VU Usually inhabits shallow (2–3 m) coastal waters and estuarine habitats.


Freshwater Sawfish Pristis pristis VU VU Muddy bottoms of freshwater areas and upper reaches of estuaries.


Green Sawfish Pristis zijsron VU VU Inhabits muddy bottom habitats and enters estuaries. 0 Unlikely – no previous records and preferred habitat not present

Whale Shark Rhincodon typus Data Deficient VU Oceanic and coastal, tropical to warm-temperate seas/oceans


*Based on the NRM InfoNet reports and the NR Map, threatened fauna species marked with an asterisk have previously been recorded within 5 km of the Bynoe Project tenements (Figure 9, Figure 10)

CR = Critically Endangered, EN = Endangered, VU = Vulnerable


As previously mentioned EL29699 lies entirely within the Darwin Harbour SOCS. The following threatened fauna species have been known to occur within the Darwin Harbour SOCS (National/NT Listing):

• Atlas Moth Attacus atlas (VU/-); • Australian Bustard Ardeotis australis (-/VU); • Christmas Frigatebird Fregata andrewsi; • Gouldian Finch Erythrura gouldiae (VU/EN); • Masked Owl Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli (VU/VU); • Mertens Water Monitor Varanus mertensi (VU/-); • Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus (CR/EN); • Partridge Pigeon Geophaps smithii (VU/VU); • Red Goshawk Erythrotriorchis radiatus (VU/VU); and • Yellow-spotted Monitor Varanus panoptes (-/VU).

Whilst none of these species have been mapped on the Darwin Harbour SOCS factsheet (Appendix 4E) to occur within EL29699, the Masked Owl, Partridge Pigeon, Red Goshawk, Gouldian Finch and Northern Quoll have all been listed as likely to occur on or within 5 km of the Bynoe Project tenements.

Information regarding conservation status, preferred habitat and likelihood of occurrence within the Bynoe Project tenements for the remaining species is presented in Table 15.

CXO staff inductions include identification and avoidance measures for threatened and endangered flora and fauna in the area. The threatened species identification information pack used in these inductions is provided in Appendix 11 of this MMP. In addition, suitably skilled CXO personnel will walk new access tracks and drill pads prior to construction to avoid specific threatened fauna occurrences.

4.3.3 Feral Animals

Whilst no species of feral animal has been recorded on or within 5 km of the Bynoe Project tenements (NR Maps, 2017; Appendix 4B), it is likely that a range of feral animals exist in the area including, but not limited to, cane toads, cattle, pigs, cats and introduced rats.

Management of these species, appropriate to the project, is detailed in Section 5.4.

4.4 Socio-Economic Environment

4.4.1 Historical Aboriginal, Heritage Sites

Requests were made of the AAPA and the Heritage Branch of the DTC to identify known historical, Aboriginal and heritage site within the Bynoe Project Tenements.

The AAPA search identified two Restricted Work Areas (“RWAs”) within EL30012, on the far eastern edge near the historic Lucy’s Mine (Figure 3; detailed map in Appendix 3). Other registered points lie within or close to the adjacent Kangaroo Flat military ground. CXO has designed the work program at Lucy’s to avoid working within these RWAs or traversing through the sites. Correspondence from the AAPA indicates that the RWAs have a sizable buffer already and that should CXO wish to operate within the RWAs, a more detailed assessment of previous Authority Certificates would provide greater clarity and potentially enable work within at least part of the RWAs. CXO believes it currently has no desire to work within these RWAs and will ensure that exploration does not encroach on the RWAs.

The request from the Heritage Branch returned the information that the only sites of heritage significance within the work area are historic mine sites (Hang Gong, Bells Mona, Golden Boulder, Good Hope, Newsham’s). The heritage value of these is tenuous because they have been disturbed significantly during the 1980s and 1990s via excavation of materials for the Greenex mine production. Inspection of the sites indicates that items of obvious heritage value are not present. However, CXO will ensure that more detailed inspections are carried out if and when exploration takes place at the sites.

See Appendix 5 and Appendix 6.


Figure 9: Locations of Threatened Species Records on or within 5 km of EL29699 and EL30015 (Northern and Central tenements of the Bynoe Project)


Figure 10: Locations of Threatened Species Records on or within 5 km of EL30012 (Southern tenement of the Bynoe Project)


5. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM / PLAN

5.1 Environmental Policy and Responsibilities In addition to the requirements of legislation in the Northern Territory, CXO maintains a strict policy to monitor the environmental impact of all exploration activities. CXO’s policy is that compliance with statutory obligations is a minimum standard and strives for best practice in all aspects of environmental management.

The Exploration Manager will be the person responsible for environmental management.

5.2 Statutory and Non-Statutory Requirements CXO management identify and track the legal and other requirements applicable to its activities and services in accordance with the MMP. Mining operations have obligations to meet the requirements of several Northern Territory and Commonwealth laws. These have been listed in Table 10. CXO also comply with all Licence and Authorisation conditions.

Table 12: Applicable Legislation

Northern Territory Legislation Commonwealth Legislation

Atomic Energy Act Bushfires Act Crown Lands Act Dangerous Goods Act Environmental Assessment Act Environmental Offences and Penalties Act Heritage Act Lands, Planning and Mining Tribunal Act Mineral Royalty Act Minerals (Acquisition) Act Minerals Title Act and Regulations Mining Management Act and Regulations Northern Territory Aboriginal Sacred Sites Act Northern Territory Land Corporation Act Parks and Wildlife Commission Act Pastoral Land Act Soil Conservation and Land Utilisation Act Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act Traffic Act Validation (Mining Tenements) Act Waste Management and Pollution Control Act Water Act Weeds Management Act Workplace Health and Safety (National Uniform Legislation) Act

Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act Australian Heritage Council Act 2003 Environment and Heritage Legislation Amendment Act (No 1) 2003 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

Native Title Act National Environmental Protection Measures (NEPM)

In addition, CXO will comply with industry codes of practice with respect to environmental management and closure planning.

There are currently no non-statutory agreements in place.


5.3 Induction and Training CXO will induct all contract field staff involved in the program in relation to the HSE risks and management requirements of the specific work program in addition to the specific environmental and cultural sensitivities of the licence area. A copy of CXO’s current Induction Pack is included as Appendix 11. The CXO site manager or appointed qualified team member will distribute a hard copy and read through the Induction pack, followed by some project specific information. Some specific induction items for this project are presented below. The role of the Inductee determines which of these items are presented. For example, the earthworks crew won’t be briefed on items 7 and 8.

1. Travel mudmap for access to and around work sites. Local hazards around the work area and en route to the area from the accommodation.

2. Bushfire conditions expected. 3. Endangered flora and fauna species in the area – how to identify and avoid (with the aid of illustrated

fact sheets). 4. Archaeological artefacts – how to recognise and procedures to follow should their preservation be

threatened (with the aid of illustrated fact sheets). 5. Weed identification – outline the important weeds to recognise and the specific management system that

will be used whilst on site (with the aid of illustrated fact sheets or “weed decks”). 6. Clearing methods agreed in the MMP – articulate these to the earthworks crew 7. Groundwater conditions expected and agreed procedures in the vent of groundwater intersection. 8. Sampling procedures. 9. Tool box meetings – when, how, what. 10. Emergency response procedures. 11. Contact numbers for routine and emergency communications.

The level of knowledge required for each of these is either implicit with the qualifications of the operator (e.g., driller will be qualified for groundwater procedures) or is consistent with that expected of the general public (e.g., the recognition of a weed species by way of comparison to an identification kit designed for public consumption). If in the companies view the level of knowledge of inductees isn’t sufficient, CXO will arrange for appropriate training.

5.4 Environmental Aspects and Potential Impacts

5.4.1 Environmental Aspects

CXO has identified a number of aspects of any given program that have the potential to have an environmental impact. CXO has identified the activities with the greatest risk of an environmental impact as:

a) Implementing new tracks; b) Drillhole sites; c) The camp site; d) Intersection of groundwater in drilling and potential for spillage; e) Drilling sample bags and waste; f) Rubbish; g) Weed management; h) Hydrocarbon storage & management.

5.4.2 Potential Impacts

Unregulated drilling and mining has the potential to impact vegetation, soil, air, and water. Drilling operations present a range of environmental issues that need to be managed at every step of the process. Identified impacts, along with a range of measures to avoid and mitigate these impacts, have been described below.

5.4.3 Proposed Impact Reduction, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Methods

CXO proposes to undertake exploration drilling within EL29698, as outlined in Table 6. Planning of the allocation of access tracks, drill lines and holes to the various polygons in Figure 3 will be carried out as the program progresses, based on results and priorities. Indicative distributions have been determined to calculate the Security and CXO will manage the actual program to ensure that the company is operating well within those limits.


Activities to enable the drilling to take place will include clearing vegetation for drill pads and some new access tracks (locations shown in Figure 3). These activities have the potential to impact on threatened species occurring or potentially occurring on the site through removal of habitat, habitat fragmentation, erosion and sedimentation, introduction of weeds and pests, and death or injury of wildlife through contact with machinery and vehicles.

In all fieldwork and field operations it is CXO’s policy and intention to cause minimal impact on the environment. CXO endeavours to leave all areas visited in the same state as they were before visiting that area.

CXO proposes to minimise the potential impacts of the field activities have an environmental impact as follows:

a) Implementing new tracks and refurbishing existing tracks

Tracks will be prepared and cleared with a minimum of disturbance to the environment and will be rehabilitated in such a way as to promote rapid revegetation and prevent the initiation of erosion. Whilst existing tracks will be used wherever possible, new tracks will be required to access areas with no previous tracks. Locally, there may be refurbishment of existing access track, depending on their condition. These various track types are shown in Figure 3 and Appendix 3. Security calculations are based estimates derived from Table 6, with some contingency built in more unforeseen (but otherwise immaterial) modifications to the current drill plan.

Access tracks

• Where possible, tracks will be located in flat areas with low slopes, naturally clear routes and will avoid areas of sensitive habitat such as vine thickets, monsoon rainforest and riparian habitat (except to cross creeks). No specific sensitive habitat areas were identified in the Desktop study undertaken by environmental group SLR Consulting (Section 4). Potential habitat areas are managed in accordance with the guidelines below.

• New tracks that will receive regular travel to and from work areas will need to be cleared such that vehicle access is facilitated and safety is not compromised.

• Existing tracks will be utilised where available and the use of earthworks will be minimised. The existing/historic access tracks are in various physical conditions, which may change from year to year, especially during the recent large wet season. Experience suggests that when planning to utilise existing historic access for the first time with heavy equipment such as drill rigs, it is prudent to assume 10% of the total length of these tracks will need refurbishment in terms of vegetation clearing or pruning.

• Deep wheel ruts will be mitigated by avoiding driving in the same wheel ruts every time a road is used (i.e. spread the load), as wheel ruts quickly channel water, increasing erosion potential.

• No windrows will be created. • Land clearing will only be undertaken for the establishment of drill sites or access tracks where it is

deemed necessary. Wherever possible, vegetation will only be flattened by vehicle/loader tyres to retain root structure and surface soil stability. Sandpalms that are extensively developed in the area pose a significant problem for access, as they tend to be elastic and spring back into an upright or inclined position after they have been run over. In this position they are a significant safety risk to vehicles. In the worst-case scenario, a sandpalm impacting on the front of an oncoming vehicle has the capacity to overturn the vehicle. Most incidents involving sandpalms are the rupturing of the vehicle cooling system. To alleviate this problem, CXO will utilise two runs of back-blade techniques with a front-end loader that is able to flatten most sandpalms. If this proves ineffective, particularly difficult sandpalms will be either dug out by the root ball or will be cut off at ground level with a chainsaw.

• Notwithstanding the above, for the Security calculation it is assumed that the lines will be cleared in full. Hence there is sufficient contingency in the calculations.

• Where large trees overhang existing access tracks and pose a safety issue they will be pruned using a chainsaw or loader bucket. In worst case scenario a tree may need to be felled, however, on most occasions these trees can be avoided.

• Microhabitat features such as rocks and fallen logs should be removed from areas to be disturbed and stockpiled at the edge of the site for re-use in rehabilitated areas.

• Any fauna that is injured should be taken to an appropriate animal care organization (e.g. Wildlife Rescue Darwin in Humpty Doo, ph. 0409 090 840).

• Portions of routinely-used tracks may be sheeted to enable access at the start of the wet season, so as to avoid equipment and vehicles getting bogged and causing damage. Gravel materials will be sought from local gravel pits and bought in by tipper truck, then levelled by loader. It is worth noting that there are already some sheeted tracks in the area dating back to the operational times of the tin-tantalum mining/processing, for example, the majority of the tracks into BP33, Sandra’s, Lees and Carlton. A total


of 1000 m of scarification is allowed for in the security calculation of October 2016, specifically allocated to newly sheeted (compacted) tracks.

Ephemeral creek crossings

• Existing creek crossings are used in most instances and will be maintained in good condition. • Ephemeral drainage will be kept clear of soil and debris to allow water to cross roads. • Ephemeral creek crossings will be located where the bank edge is lowest. • Tracks will be designed to intersect creeks at a right angle to the direction of flow. • If/where creek banks are too steep for vehicles; ramps will be constructed to a suitable approach angle.

Material will be moved away from the drainage line (i.e. no sand to be deposited within drainage). Material from scraping will be used to make a low bank at the top of the ramp to direct water away from the track. This will reduce risk of gully erosion, as in the event of rainwater will be directed into stable soils.

Implementing new tracks will be done in accordance with the DPIR advisory note AA7-005 “Clearing and Rehabilitation of Lines and Tracks Guide” (Appendix 7).

b) Drillhole sites

The number of holes, pads and sumps anticipated are outlined in Table 6. Drill hole site planning will ensure drill holes are located within approved polygons or drill-prescribed access lines.

Rotary Air Blast (RAB) drillholes will not require a specific pad. They are simply drilled in the centre of the line. Reverse circulation (RC) pads will be constructed on an as-needs basis along the drill lines or as off-shoots from the lines. These need to large enough to accommodate the drill rig and support vehicles safely. Where possible, holes will be designed to occur on relatively flat areas of ground that are naturally clear of trees and rocky outcrops. If the drill site is vegetated, CXO will need to clear grass and shrubs from an area of 25x20m (500 m2) for RC and diamond drill core (DDH) to allow the drill rig and geological crew to operate safely. This is particularly critical where the work area has not been burnt by the regular fires that pass through the area – fire safety is a significant issue in this area. This 500m2 includes the sump area.

For DDH holes, two sumps are dug for each drill hole. If groundwater becomes an issue, sumps will be dug at each RC drill site for containment of excess ground water that is encountered. The nominal size of the sumps will be 3m x 2m x 1.2m, which will be dug using a front-end loader or excavator. If there is reason to believe that the hole will produce more groundwater, then the sump will be dug deeper and longer. Sufficient tolerate is built into the Security calculation for this scenario. There is no need to use a liner as water is not recirculated, and the groundwater will not pose a problem to the sub-soil environment.

For the RC drill holes and DDH, the hole diameter is ~150 mm at the top of hole and ~130 mm at depth. Aircore/RAB holes will be ~85 mm along their length.

Depending on the competence of the thin soil profile, PVC collars may need to be used in the top 1 to 3 metres but will be removed or cut down below surface during rehabilitation. Drill hole depths are expected to be between 50 and 160 m for RC and 1 to 30 m for aircore/RAB, depending on purpose of hole and lithology intersected at depth.

Sample materials are collected in green plastic bags and placed in rows of 20. A subsample is taken from each bag and used for analysis. A chip tray is kept for each metre drilled. For DDH, core is laid out in plastic core trays.

The rehabilitation process for all of the drill sites will be to back-fill the sample spoils/cuttings down the hole and/or sump as much as possible. Experience thus far at Finniss indicates that holes collapse soon after drilling and that negligible backfilling is possible. Excess spoils are spread on the work site and raked into the soil, unless they are substantially different in colour to the surface. In this case the excess spoils are buried in a nearby sump or a pit dug immediately next to the samples. The top section of the hole is plugged >40 cm below surface, using a recommended hole plug. Soil is heaped over the collar to allow for natural subsidence. Rehabilitation of sumps will ensure correct reconstruction of natural soil profiles. Topsoil is stored separately so it can be spread over the top of the sump.

All waste, including the plastic bags, will be removed from site and disposed as detailed below.


All drill holes will be rehabilitated according to the DPIR’s advisory note AA7-008 Drill Hole Capping and Plugging Guide and AA7-029 Construction and Rehabilitation of Exploration Drill Sites (Appendix 7).

Measures relating to the avoidance and mitigation of impacts on Armstrong’s Cycad are described in the previous section.

c) Camp site

CXO will locate its drill camp at the Sand Palms Roadhouse, Tumbling Waters or other commercial site, which are located outside the Bynoe Project tenements. Exploration crew will drive or helicopter in to site each day.

d) Groundwater in drilling

CXO’s targets during this program are all hard-rock targets. As such no aquifer bearing cover sequences are expected to be intersected. Ground water is not expected to be intersected given the paucity of bores in the area, however, there is a small chance that existing structures could act as a zone of weakness in the rock and therefore be a conduit or trap for groundwater. If this is the case CXO will trap the water in the drill sump and isolate it from the surrounding environment. Should groundwater flows be significant the hole will be grouted to reseal the aquifer. The significance of groundwater flow will be determined by consultation with the Water Resources Branch.

e) Waste

CXO anticipates the only waste produced during the drilling to be green plastic cuttings bags, empty additive (for drilling fluids) containers and miscellaneous rubbish. All hydrocarbon waste, any contaminated soil and other waste aside from plastic bags will be transported to an appropriately licenced waste disposal facility such as Shoal Bay. The remaining “household” type waste will be disposed of in the Berry Springs waste transfer station.

f) Rubbish

All rubbish will be removed from around the drill holes.

g) Weed Management

It is the requirement and responsibility of the owner and occupier of land to adhere to the following measures under the NT Weeds Management Act:

A. Take all reasonable measures to prevent the land being infested with a declared weed. B. Take all reasonable measures to prevent a declared weed or potential weed on the land spreading to

other land. C. Within 14 days after first becoming aware of a declared weed that has not previously been, or known to

have been, present on the land, notify an officer of the presence of the declared weed.

There are many weed species known to occur in the local area. Site inductions will include discussion on weed management and cover identification of main weed species (largely Mission and Gamba Grass, Mimosa).

Exploration activities may result in introduction or spread of weed species if appropriate planning and weed control measures are not implemented. The following mitigations will be adopted (at a minimum) by CXO to reduce weed impact on the site as a result of the exploration drilling operations.

All machinery and vehicles will be cleaned in suitable facility in Darwin (or site of origin) prior to mobilisation to site. Likewise if moving between areas and at the completion of the program prior to demobilisation all vehicles and equipment will be washed / blown-down at site at the nominated weed washdown and inspection site. The nominated site for this program is the Observation Hill Government borrow pit at waterbore RN023177 (695400e, 8595800n; Figure 5). This site has substantial existing disturbance and weeds are already prevalent. Most drilling contractors have their own facilities for washdowns at their point of hire.

No vehicles will go off-road on transit to site and approved access routes will be strictly adhered to.

Follow up weed monitoring activities will occur as part of site inspections conducted by CXO, and will target weed blow down points, drill pads, and access tracks. Any suspected weeds will be photographed and supplied to an


ecologist for identification. If weeds are identified, CXO will inform DPIR and initiate relevant controls for the species.

h) Hydrocarbon Storage & Management

Diesel fuel and oils (including: engine oil, gear oil, hammer oil, grease, penetrating oils, hydraulic oils/fluids) will be required to operate the drilling equipment. The drilling contractor will be responsible for providing and safely storing both fuel and other hydrocarbon products. CXO requires all hydrocarbons brought to CXO’s worksites be appropriately bunded and stored as part of our HSE contractor management. A full list of MSDS sheets of all chemical products brought to site is available at request and maintained onsite.

Several spill kits and absorbent matting are readily available should an incident occur (located close to all hydrocarbon / chemical storage and work areas), which will be fully documented and investigated. Should any soil be contaminated it will be bagged and disposed at a licensed waste disposal facility.

5.4.4 Threatened Species Management

Armstrong’s Cycad

Armstrong’s Cycad occurs around the Darwin area south to near Hayes Creek, and to the north-western corner of Kakadu National Park in the east, as well as on the Tiwi Islands, Cobourg Peninsula, and Cox Peninsula. It occurs mainly in open grassy woodland on yellow and red earths.

Armstrong’s Cycad, like all cycads, is a long-lived, slow-growing, woody plant, with male and female individuals. Reproductive age is unknown, but can be 15 years under cultivation. Seeding may be annual or sporadic. Pollination appears to be mainly through insects, in particular beetles in the family Boganiidae. Seeds are dispersed through gravity, water and animals. Cycads live in symbiosis with cyanobacteria which provide the plant with nitrogen. The species is relatively resilient to low intensity fires, and can regenerate from crown damage, apical growing shoot damage, and even from destruction of the entire above ground stem, through regrowth from the stem base or root stock. However, populations decline when subjected to high intensity fires (Liddle, 2004).

A species profile is provided in Appendix 4D. The species is threatened by:

• Conversion of its habitat for residential and rural pursuits • Through changes in prevailing fire regimes, facilitated by the influx of weeds into the species’ habitat,

resulting in enhanced fuel loads and higher intensity fires.

The performance criterion and indicator for this issue includes the following:

• Number of Armstrong’s Cycad individuals to be impacted and where relevant, the number successfully translocated.

• Number of seed collected, number of seed successfully grown into plants, number of seedlings successfully planted.

• Majority (>80 %) of translocated Amstrong’s Cycad individuals survive two years after translocation.

Recognition

Armstrong’s Cycad grows to a height of 6 m, with a slender trunk 6-12 cm in diameter. Branching occurs, with occasional offsets and basal suckers. The crown is obliquely erect to spreading, with 84-156 leaflets. Leaflet have a prominent midrib on the upper surface, and are attached to the rachis at an angle of about 56-70 degrees. Additional description is available in Hill (1996), Hill and Osborne (2001), Jones (2002) and Dixon (2004).

Management Measures

The following management measures have been formulated specifically for Armstrong’s Cycad. Procedures for propagation and translocation are summarised from Origin Energy (2014).

Pre-Clearing Survey

The following measures should be employed prior to disturbance activities commencing:


• Proposed new tracks and drill sites should be surveyed by personnel suitably skilled in the recognition of Armstrong’s Cycad. Should any individuals of Armstrong’s Cycad be encountered within these areas, plants should be avoided as much as practically possible. Where it is anticipated that a substantial number of individuals (>10) cannot be avoided, the plants should be clearly marked for appropriate removal during clearing operations with the aim of translocation.

• The northern side of the plant should be marked with marker paint or fluorescent dye to facilitate re-planting with the same orientation.

• Seed encountered on the forest floor surrounding the plants should be collected for propagation and rehabilitation purposes either elsewhere on the site or at the collection location once mining operations have ceased.

Operational Phase

The following measures should be employed during drilling operations, where a substantial number of plants (>10) cannot be avoided:

• During clearing operations, Armstrong’s Cycad individuals marked during pre-clearing surveys must be removed for relocation in rehabilitation areas elsewhere on the site or for temporary storage for rehabilitation at a later date.

• Prior to removal, the area around plants must be cleaned by hand or with machinery (e.g. front end loader) and foliage removed to where the rhachis is attached to the stem. Using a spade, excavator or backhoe, soils surrounding the root ball is loosened prior to excavation ensuring that as much of the rootball around the plant roots remains intact. Damaged roots are to be trimmed and treated with Banrot® and/or Formula20®. To initiate root growth, Vitamin B or Seaweed can be sprayed on the roots. Roots are bagged in breathing material, such as hessian, and moistened with water prior to transport to a temporary holding location or to a prepared rehabilitation location elsewhere on the site. Care should be taken not to bruise plant stems during transport, using soft materials such as hessian to stabilise the plant.

• Upon arrival, plants are to be immediately potted or put into woven fibre planter bags for temporary holding or, if used for rehabilitation elsewhere on the site, in a prepared hole of a size suitable for the inserted root ball. Plants should be positioned in their original orientation. Washed sand or sandy loam should be used to for packing around the roots, to provide a suitable medium for root growth. The crown of each cycad must be sprayed with an insecticide (either Confidor® at a rate of application of 10 millilitres (mL) per 9 litres (L) of water or application of Crown® at a rate of application of 5 mL per 9 L of water). Translocated plants must also be watered with 5-9 L of water around each root ball with a systemic fungicide (Banrot® at the recommended rate). Rocks can be placed around the base of plants to assist in the stability of plants and to provide protection from fires and hot weather.

• Seed collected from the cleared areas must be propagated in pots using standard horticultural methods or direct seeded in areas to be rehabilitated.

• Translocation and propagation operations must be supervised by a suitably trained horticulturalist or arborist.

Post-Operation

The following measures should be employed following mining operations:

• Translocation of individuals held in the temporary storage area back to the original area of extraction must follow similar procedures as outlined above. Each plant must be watered about once a month (10-20 L) depending on rainfall for six months after replanting or as appropriate and any new expanding leaves must be sprayed with insecticide.

• Plants must be monitored for new growth, death, insect attack, reproduction, gender etc. for a period of at least two years after planting in the ground.

Monitoring and Reporting

Monitoring will be the responsibility of CXO’s Exploration Manager to ensure the health of translocated individuals in accordance with the performance indicators outlined above. This person will be responsible for reporting the number of individuals found on areas to be cleared (if any) to the DPIR upon completion of the pre-clearing search. Further reports will be submitted on completion of the initial translocation and once again on completion of replanting of the translocated stock on completion of mining and revegetation operations.


5.4.5 Risk Assessment by CXO

A qualitative risk assessment has been applied to the environmental risks associated with CXO’s Bynoe Project. It has been applied in accordance with AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk management – Principles and guidelines (Standards Australia, 2009). Each environmental risk has been given a rating in terms of likelihood and consequence using the criteria in Table 13. These ratings were then combined to generate a risk rating in the absence of mitigation measures (i.e. inherent risk) as well as following the application of the mitigation measures identified above (i.e. residual risk). The objective of the risk assessment process is to ensure that significant risks are identified and evaluated in order to ensure an appropriate level of risk treatment is applied to mitigate such risks.

Table 13: Environmental Risk Assessment – Risk Matrix

Consequence

Low (little to no impact)

Medium (medium term negative

impact)

High (irreversible or long-term

impact)

Like

lihoo

d

High (>75% chance event will

occur in life of plan) 4 7 9

Medium (25-75% chance event will occur in life of plan)

2 5 8

Low (<25% chance event will

occur in life of plan) 1 3 6

Table 14: Environmental Risk Rating Definitions

Risk Level Risk Treatment Criteria

Low No significant action or further assessments required Managed under existing operational controls Some mitigation may be required - no detailed assessment of factors and aspects required but addressed in management measures as routine controls

Moderate Substantial mitigation required - assessment required of factors and aspects

High Major mitigation action required - assessment required of factors and aspects

Critical Potentially unacceptable - Urgent management and mitigation action required


Table 15: Results of the Environmental Risk Assessment

Aspect Impact Inherent Risk Rating Management Measures (prevention) Management Measures (remediation) Residual

Risk Rating

Native vegetation disturbance

Potential for damage to native vegetation M

The Bynoe Project tenements have limited established access tracks, and these variably over-grown since last used intensively. These will be used where possible, but not all of the target areas are serviced by existing tracks and will require new access track construction. New tracks or drill pads at will need to be “cleared” along at least part of their length because the vegetation is thick, particularly with sandpalms. Naturally clear pathways between large trees will be utilised, but shrubs and grass will need to be driven over using a loader with blade-up techniques, thereby reducing the disturbance to the topsoil, and allowing for a greater chance of quick regeneration from in-situ root systems. Large trees will be avoided by not drilling near them and directing tracks around them. Difficult sandpalms will either be removed by the rootball or will be cut off at ground level with a chainsaw. The extent of this sandpalm problem can only be gauged once the access is being created. It is likely that the area will be burnt by the time access is being put in place, so the “clearing” process will be minimised further.

Where continued use of vehicle pathways results in the development of a firm track the site will be scarified after use to even the ground surface and encourage the regeneration of native vegetation. If vegetation is physically removed from the track route, it will be placed back over the track upon rehabilitation.

L

Soil disturbance Potential for erosion of soil due to exploration activities

M

The drill sites/pads for this program will preferably be located in naturally clear areas and as such will not require clearing. They will also be located greater than 50 m from waterways. This greatly reduces the potential impact of the drilling in terms of soil disturbance and vegetation disturbance. This should be the case for many of the already-disturbed historic mine sites. However, at least some “clearing” will be required for drill pads, as described above. Regardless, allowance has been made in this MMP for all drill pads to be cleared. As discussed, new access tracks are locally required to undertake this drill program. The tracks are planned to begin at existing tracks and/or public roads. The new tracks are located along routes designed to have the minimum impact on the natural environment, as determined from imagery and from field reconnaissance. The tracks are designed to avoid, when possible, steep topography and large or significant vegetation. The tracks will largely be simple flattened paths clear of upright vegetation, however, if vegetation is thick and not responding to flattening techniques, it may be necessary to physically remove specific vegetation (e.g., sandpalms) off the track route, as described above. The tracks will not be graded or have topsoil cleared/removed. Vehicle speeds will be restricted (variant on style and condition of track). CXO believes that by utilising these techniques the program will have only minor disturbance to the soil profile from its proposed new tracks and drill pads. Where soil is disturbed due to earthworks activities, where possible the topsoil will be separately stockpiled and restored in its correct position in the soil profile during rehabilitation. In the event of heavy rain, works will cease to prevent damage to tracks, soils and vegetation.

By utilising natural clear paths and avoiding soil disturbance constructing the new tracks, it is planned that little to no scarification will be necessary during rehabilitation. However, if it is deemed necessary and beneficial, tracks and drill pads will be scarified. Tracks will be blocked by vegetation to discourage future use by the general public. The speed restrictions on tracks will reduce the potential for tracks to degrade or “bull dust”. In the event that this occurs CXO will endeavour to rehabilitate the problem area before continuing use.

L

Scientific & cultural sites

Disturbance of sites of cultural or scientific interest

M

There are no recorded specific scientific or cultural sites within the confines of the proposed work program. Where work areas or access tracks exist nearby to sites of significance, a sufficient buffer is put in place to minimise the chances of encroachment on the site. In addition, staff are alerted of the nearby existence of the site prior to works via the induction process. Disturbance of un-recorded sites will be avoided through fact sheets provided to field staff with feed-back as determined by the AAPA and the DENR Heritage Branch.

Any un-recorded culturally significant site that is encountered during reconnoitre will be avoided during clearing. If CXO earthworks, by accident, encroach on a site, work will be suspended in that area while the AAPA is consulted.

L

Fauna disturbance

Disturbance of vulnerable or endangered fauna

L

A desktop study undertaken by environmental consultants SLR and has shown that the potential disturbance to fauna, especially threatened species, from this program is low. They did not recommend a specific on-ground survey of the work area. Regardless, suitably skilled CXO personnel will walk new access tracks and drill pads prior to construction to avoid specific threatened fauna occurrences (see Section 5.4.4). All Employees will be inducted using the materials provided by SLR, including a threatened species identification information pack.

Any habitat that is damaged through CXO works will be re-established. Recognition of NTG INFONET listed species or significant damage to fauna or fauna habitat will be reported to NT DENR by calling (08) 8995 5000.

L

Flora disturbance Disturbance of vulnerable or endangered flora

L

One threatened species possibly occurs within the proposed drill sites – Armstrong’s Cycad (Appendix 4D) (refer Section 4). All Employees will be inducted to be able to recognise this species. Disturbance of vegetation will be minimised by careful management of all earthworks. Individuals of Armstrong’s Cycad will be avoided, or where disturbance is unavoidable, managed in accordance with the process described in Section 5.4.4. Suitably skilled personnel will walk new access tracks and drill pads prior to construction to identify any species of conservation significance.

Recognition of NTG INFONET species or damaged flora of significance will be reported to NT DENR by calling (08) 8995 5000. Individuals of Armstrong’s Cycad will be avoided, or where disturbance is unavoidable, managed in accordance with the process described in Section 5.4.4. Whilst several individuals of Armstrong’s Cycad may exist in the areas proposed for drilling activities (including new tracks), the avoidance and/or translocation measures detailed in Section 5.4.4 are likely to reduce the residual level of potential impact sufficiently. For example, all individuals of the species will be avoided as much as possible and even where there may be impacts to a small number of individuals (<10), given that the species is locally abundant (Clugston & Nagalingum, 2016; Kerrigan et al, 2006), it is expected that such impacts are unlikely to be significant. Where there is a higher number of individuals (>10) that may be unavoidably impacted, they should be translocated as per the guidelines in Section 5.4.4. The implementation of the above measures (as detailed in Section 5.4.4) is likely to ensure: • Minimal impact on local population numbers

L


Aspect Impact Inherent Risk Rating Management Measures (prevention) Management Measures (remediation) Residual

Risk Rating • Area affected negligible compared to total population

Minimal or acceptable impact on population size.

Visual impact Evidence of increased vehicle activity in the area.

L

Through implementing the land use techniques discussed in this document CXO is reducing the impact of the program on the environment and therefore having a lesser effect on the visual impact on the area. All works are well off the main roads and won’t be visible or audible to passers-by in vehicles. There are no residences within 5 km of the work area.

It is expected that once the program is completed and rehabilitation has taken place the evidence of the work program on the area will be restricted to increased tyre tracks due to increased traffic in an otherwise rarely used area, it will be evident that vehicles have used the new proposed tracks and the drillhole locations will be visible due to the lack of grasses and other small vegetation in the immediate radius of the hole. Over time natural regeneration will remediate the visual impacts of this program to their pre disturbance state.

L

Fire

Ignition of a fire from hot exhausts/ equipment Threat to safety of people or equipment by wild fire

L

CXO believes fire risk from this program is likely to be minimal, as it will have been burnt by the regular burning regime of the Bushfires NT (Government). However, if work areas have not been burnt, there is a high risk of a wild fire starting in the area (generally by members of the public) and resulting in a threat to CXO people and equipment. Drilling operations will cease on total fire ban days, unless the area has previously been burnt and no grass fire risk exists. No vehicles with petrol engines which can have hot exhausts will be allowed on site, except for ATV’s and quadbikes with sufficient fire control measures in place. This should drastically reduce the chances of CXO starting a fire. All vehicles will carry fire extinguishers and shovels. Vehicles and equipment will be parked on open ground.

For non-emergency situations call NT Emergency Services 24-hour call 131 444 For information on controlled burns call Bushfires NT:

• Batchelor office (08) 8976 0098 • Darwin office (08) 8922 0844

L

Groundwater contamination

Cross contamination of fresh aquifers with saline aquifers

L There is little or no cross contamination of aquifers expected during this program, as all groundwater is in tight fracture controlled situations.

If significant aquifers are encountered cement plugs will be placed between and above aquifers to preserve the integrity of the seals. Water Resources will be consulted first by calling (08) 8999 4455.

L

Surface drainage interference

Disturbance of natural drainage systems and erosion

L The proposed work area has only minor low-order surface drainage with no significant or steeply banked drainage systems. No clearing will occur within 25m of any significant drainage features and will follow the guidelines discussed in Section 5.4.3.

Any works will be removed/cleared at the completion of the program back to as close to its original state as possible. L

Introduced weeds Introduction and spread of weeds from vehicles and equipment

M

CXO anticipates that the risk from introduced species is low for this work program. Induction processes will inform all Employees of potential weed species and their management to prevent weed propagation. As a precautionary measure CXO will ensure that all CXO staff and contractors vehicles are cleaned before entering the site and when moving between sites, to reduce the risk of contamination. Fact sheets and/or weed-decks will be distributed to CXO staff during the program.

Weed monitoring will be periodically ongoing to ensure any blow down areas do not become infested. Weeds Hotline number is 1800 084 881 Weeds Management Branch (08) 8999 4567

L

Feral Animals

Increased potential for disturbance by introduced animals such as horses or feral pigs.

L Monitoring. Manage impacts.

Treatment of disturbed areas. L

Rubbish and waste

Contamination of drill sites and tracks with rubbish and waste

H CXO will induct all staff and contractors on the appropriate actions when dealing with rubbish and waste. As per Section 4, all rubbish at the drill sites will be collected and removed from site. L

Soil contamination exposure

Exposure of contaminants such as hazardous materials or ASS

L Monitoring during drilling and appropriate control if suspected contaminated materials located Appropriate remediation, if required. All contaminated material will be disposed of in accordance with relevant legislation

L

Landowner activities/interests

Disturbance of landowner activities/assets

H As the land is freehold land owned by the NT Government there are no landowner activities or interests present on the site.

The exploration manager will be responsible for managing any unforeseen conflicts with the wishes of the stakeholders. L

Fuel Storage

Hydrocarbon leak / spill – contamination of soil, surface and ground water

H

No refuelling is to take place within 50 m of any water source. Spill Kits and absorbent matting will be available at all areas where there is potential to spill hydrocarbons (ie drill sites). Where possible, full or partial bunding will be deployed to storage tanks/drums to contain any leaks (exceptions include fitted vehicle fuel tanks). Water based dust suppression, where required.

Any contaminated soil will be removed, bagged and disposed of at an appropriately licenced facility with contaminated areas replaced with clean topsoil. All leaks of hydrocarbons over 20L will be recorded as an environmental incident and will thus be fully investigated and reported to the Department with the rehabilitation report. Environmental Emergency procedures are outlined in the body of this document.

L

Air Quality Potential for excessive dust L Dust suppression of access roads and mining areas, where required. Water based dust suppression, where required. L

Public or third party activities

Disturbance of public activities. Access by unauthorized parties to drill sites.

H

The area is frequented by pig hunters and ATV enthusiasts, and as such there is potential for Core’s programs to come into contact with these people. Signs will be placed at all public entrances stating no unauthorised access to the immediate drill work area. Core have no authority to deny access to the work area more generally, but the new access tracks will need to be made impassable as soon as possible after drilling.

Any unauthorized access to drill sites will be managed by the supervising geologist who will be on site at all times while drilling. L

Potential Impact significance: - = Not applicable, L = low/negligible, M = medium, H = high


5.4.6 Risk Assessment by SLR Consulting

In addition to the Risk Assessment carried out by CXO, a qualitative risk assessment has also been carried out by Environmental consultants SLR Consulting, based on the desktop biodiversity assessments. Based on the results of the assessment of likelihood of occurrence of threatened species in Section 4, an additional assessment of potential (inherent) impacts to these species was undertaken. The ratings used to define the levels of potential residual impacts to the species are shown in Table 16. The results of the assessment are provided in Table 17. Note that these assessments relate to inherent potential impacts, that is, prior to the application of recommended impact avoidance and mitigation measures.

5.4.7 Assessment of Residual Impacts to Species of Concern

The previous sections have assessed the likelihood of occurrence of a range of threatened species, the inherent and residual potential impacts to species determined to possibly occur within the drilling areas and tracks, and their recommended avoidance and mitigation measures. Provided that the measures in Section 4 of this MMP are implemented to avoid or mitigation impacts to species of concern, it is expected that the residual potential impact to each threatened species assessed is insignificant.


Table 16: Definitions of Levels of Potential Impact (TSSC, 2015b)

Consequence Insignificant

1

Minor

2

Moderate

3

Major

4

Critical

5

Impact on population1

Minimal impact on local population numbers; area affected negligible compared to total population; minimal or acceptable impact on population size

Minor impact on local population numbers. Population in other locations not impacted

Moderate impact on local population numbers. Some impacts on populations in other locations; moderate and/or short term effects

Major population reduction or loss of local population; recovery measured in years to decades; serious and significant impact on species

Population reduction which may results in species extinction; recovery period is greater than decades; very significant and serious impact on high value species

Fragmentation of habitat/loss of habitat connectivity/reduce the areas of occupancy2

Minimal losses of local habitat only, recovery likely in a relatively short period of time; threats are covered by current management or legislation

Minor losses of local habitat requiring recovery over short term

Moderate loss of local habitat requiring recovery over a short to medium term and resulting in loss of connectivity between habitats at a local scale

Loss of local habitat with no potential for recovery, or partial loss of habitat across large areas and/or with limited potential for recovery in the medium to long term. Results in a net reduction in connectivity over a large area

Complete loss of local habitat with no potential for recovery and loss of habitat in other locations with limited potential for recovery in the long term resulting in a significant impact on habitat connectivity over a large area

Impact on the habitat critical to the survival of the species3

Minimal modification, destruction, removal ore decrease of local habitat only, recovery likely in a relatively short period of time; insignificant impact to habitat or threat activity only occurs in a very small areas of habitat; limited damage to minimal area of low significance; minor effects on physical environment

Minor modification, destruction, removal or decrease of local habitat requiring recovery over short term

Moderate modification, destruction, removal ore decrease of local habitat requiring recovery over a short to medium term and resulting in loss of connectivity between habitats at a local scale

Modification, destruction, removal or loss of local habitat with no potential for recovery, or partial loss of habitat across large areas and/or with limited potential for recovery in the medium to long term. Results in a net reduction in connectivity over a large area; habitat is affected which may endanger the species and habitat long term survival – 70-90% habitat affected or removed; 30% fragile habitat affected or removed; 10-20% critical habitat affected or removed;

Significant impact resulting in the removal, destruction, fragmentation and degradation of habitat; the entire habitat is in danger of being affected or removed, that >90% habitat, >50% fragile habitat , and >30% critical habitat

Disruption to breeding cycle4 Minimal impact on any aspect of the breeding cycle; Minor disruption to the breeding cycle

Moderate disruption to breeding cycle resulting in modification of behaviour both within the direct impact zone and at nearby locations; long term recruitment and/or population dynamics are not adversely impacted

Direct impacts on breeding cycle resulting in a net decline in size of the population; the is limited information to judge the impact

Complete disruption of breeding cycles over several seasons with significant population decline and possible extinction

Impact of invasive species and/or disease5 Minimal impact on local population numbers or habitat quality

Minor impact on local population numbers or habitat quality. Population in other locations not impacted

Moderate impact on local population numbers or habitat quality. Some impacts on populations in other locations

Major population reduction or loss of local population or loss of habitat quality

Population reduction which may results in species extinction loss of critical habitat extent or quality

Interaction with species migration Minimal impact on species migratory patterns

Results in minor behavioural modification on a local scale or impacts to physical conditions of animal interfering with migration for the short term only. Unlikely to negatively impact on the overall success of migration

Results in modification of behaviour or animal conditions such that there is potential for medium term impacts, with some possibility of individuals failing to complete migration

Results in modification of behaviour or animal condition such that there is potential for medium to long term impacts, both locally and in nearby locations, with some individuals failing to complete migration

Significant impact resulting in either complete failure, or failure of majority of individuals, to complete migration in that cycle

1 Refers to the proportional changes to the numbers of individuals; change in the size of the population 2 Refers to the physical destruction of the species habitat and/or chemical or physical barriers 3 Refers to species habitat resource includes modify, destroy, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat 4 Breeding cycle including activities associated with breeding (mating, gestation, nesting). Assessment assumes that the species is present in the affected area during the breeding cycle 5 Refers to the invasive species that is harmful to the species becoming established in the species habitat and introduced disease that may cause the species to decline

Table 17: Level of Potential Inherent and Residual Impacts to Threatened Species Possible or Likely to Occur within the Bynoe Drilling Areas

Scientific Name Common Name Level of Potential Impact - Inherent6 Level of Potential Impact - Residual7

FLORA

Cycad armstrongii Armstrong’s Cycad

Minor – several individuals of the species may occur within areas proposed for development of access tracks or drill pads and may be damaged as a result of unmanaged activities. This could have a minor impact on local population numbers (as per the definition in Table 16).

Insignificant – whilst several individuals may exist in the areas proposed for drilling activities (including new tracks), the avoidance and/or translocation measures detailed in Section 5.4.4 are likely to reduce the residual level of potential impact sufficiently. For example, all individuals of the species will be avoided as much as possible and even where there may be impacts to a small number of individuals (<10), given that the species is locally abundant (Clugston & Nagalingum, 2016; Kerrigan et al, 2006), it is expected that such impacts are unlikely to be significant. Where there is a higher number of individuals (>10) that may be unavoidably impacted, they should be translocated as per the guidelines in Section 5.4.4. The implementation of the above measures (as detailed in Section 5.4.4) is likely to ensure that the definition for an ‘insignificant’ impact (as per Table 16) is achieved, as follows:

• Minimal impact on local population numbers • Area affected negligible compared to total population • Minimal or acceptable impact on population size.

FAUNA

Birds

Erythrotriorchis radiatus Red Goshawk

Insignificant – any disturbances to the species from the proposed exploration activities are not considered to be significant given the minimal modification/ destruction/ removal of potential habitat, the mobile nature of the species and the minimal impact to its breeding cycle.

Insignificant

Geophaps smithii smithii Partridge Pigeon (eastern)


Insignificant

Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli Masked Owl (northern)


Insignificant

Mammals

Antechinus bellus Fawn Antechinus


Insignificant

Conilurus penicillatus Brush-tailed Rabbit-rat


Insignificant

Dasyurus hallucatus Northern Quoll


Insignificant

Macroderma gigas Ghost Bat Insignificant – any disturbances to the species from the exploration activities are not considered to be significant given the small area of habitat to be modified, no caves will be disturbed, the mobile nature of the species and the minimal impact to its breeding cycle.

Insignificant

6 Level of potential impact prior to the application of impact avoidance or mitigation measures

7 Level of potential impact following the application of impact avoidance and mitigation measures (detailed in Section 5.4.4)


Scientific Name Common Name Level of Potential Impact - Inherent6 Level of Potential Impact - Residual7

Mesembriomys gouldii gouldii Black-footed Tree-rat


Insignificant

Phascogale pirata Northern Brush-tailed Phascogale


Insignificant

Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat

Insignificant – any disturbances to the species from the exploration activities are not considered to be significant given the small area of habitat to be modified, no caves will be disturbed, the mobile nature of the species and the minimal impact to its breeding cycle.

Insignificant

Rattus tunneyi Pale Field-rat

Insignificant – any disturbances to the species from the proposed exploration activities are not considered to be significant given the preferred habitat (dense vegetation along creeks) is unlikely to be impacted, the mobile nature of the species and the minimal impact to its breeding cycle.

Insignificant

Reptiles

Varanus mertensi Mertens` Water Monitor Insignificant – there will be a limited amount of vegetation clearance required and, at most, very few creeks will require traversing. Insignificant

Varanus mitchelli Mitchell’s Water Monitor Insignificant – there will be a limited amount of vegetation clearance required and, at most, very few creeks will require traversing. Insignificant

Varanus panoptes Yellow-spotted Monitor Insignificant – there will be a limited amount of vegetation clearance required and, at most, very few creeks will require traversing. Insignificant

Amphibians

Uperoleia daviesae Howard Springs Toadlet

Insignificant – any disturbances to the species from the proposed exploration activities are not considered to be significant given the lack of suitable habitat at proposed drill locations. Results from recent surveys appear to suggest that the Howard River toadlet is confined to sandsheet heathland within the Howard and Elizabeth River Catchments close to Darwin (Fisher et al. 2011).

Insignificant

5.5 Environmental Audits and Inspections For each drilling program, CXO monitors exploration impacts during and after the program. The first step is to accurately record (through photographs) the natural environment before any work is undertaken. CXO will then monitor the drill program whilst it is underway specifically focusing on the state of the tracks and the state of the drill sites. These will be accessed daily and if issues are beginning to arise they will be rectified by the site manager immediately. These will be recorded and photographed.

Upon completion of each program CXO will observe, record and photograph the rehabilitation process and the immediate results. Roughly one in ten drill sites covering all work area polygons will be nominated as ongoing monitoring sites, these being easily accessible and representative of the environment in which the disturbance has taken place. Similarly, representative sites along access tracks will be nominated for ongoing monitoring. Approximately 12 months after rehabilitation has taken place, observations and photographs are taken at the monitoring sites to assess progress of rehabilitation. This is to ensure a seasonal cycle has ensued and any remediation issues will have arisen. In some cases, more regular monitoring will take place if the seasonality/burning off etc warrant it. These steps will be recorded and the areas photographed as part of the usual rehabilitation procedures undertaken by CXO in accordance with its responsibilities as an exploration company. During this monitoring process if any areas are deemed to need to be further rehabilitated CXO will arrange to have that work undertaken and further document and photograph the results.

The Exploration Manager will be ultimately responsible for environmental audits and inspections. CXO has employed a full-time Environmental Geologist, who overseas this directly, but reports to Exploration Manager.

5.6 Environmental Performance

5.6.1 Objectives and Targets

Performance targets relevant to this phase of exploration are the rehabilitation of tracks, drill pads and collars, the removal of waste from sites and, where appropriate, back-filling of drill sumps within 3 months after completion of the drill holes. In regards to the management of Armstrong’s Cycad where individuals of the species cannot be avoided, the performance target is that all individuals are successfully translocated and remain healthy for a further two years.

The Site Geologist will be responsible to ensure the tracks and drill sites are fully rehabilitated before the onset of the next wet season.

If exploration results are sufficiently encouraging and indicate that further work is warranted during the next field season in the same prospect areas, then existing tracks and drill pads, if any, maybe required for this work. In this eventuality, they will not be rehabilitated until work has been finalised in the area. These have the status of “open” in the Rehabilitation register.

Control and reporting on the rehabilitation work will be managed by establishing a Rehabilitation Register (see Section 6), in which the nature of the disturbance and the state of rehabilitation efforts will be recorded. The Exploration Manager will verify the completeness of rehabilitation before signing off. A periodic review will ensure that steady progress on rehabilitation is maintained and no areas are overlooked.

To provide a measurable basis for the rehabilitation works a photographic record will be started and maintained throughout the exploration program. Photographs of tracks and areas that have previously been cleared will be taken. Prior to any ground disturbing work occurring photographs of the area to be affected will be taken. The photographs will be used as base line data against which the effectiveness of the rehabilitation work will be assessed. Additional photographic evidence will be collected at designated monitoring sites to monitor the progress of the rehabilitation; these will also include photos at the time of drilling, at completion of rehabilitation, and 12 months after completion of rehabilitation.


Table 18: Performance Objectives for Environmental Management for the Bynoe Project

Management Issue Performance Objective Timeframe Responsibility

Clearing of vegetation and other types of disturbance to fauna

Minimal clearance of vegetation to a level that allows for a safe work place. No removal of topsoil and preservation of roots systems to allow quick regeneration of flora.

Assessment 12 months after drilling completed Exploration Manager

Soil erosion and stream sedimentation

No observed soil erosion or stream sedimentation as a result of exploration activities

Assessment 12 months after drilling completed or after the wet season.

Exploration Manager

Spreading of weeds No spread of weeds from outside or within the tenement


Exploration Manager

Noise, light and dust levels

Noise, light and dust levels to be within acceptable limits according to Government Regulations (Work Health and Safety Act – NUL, 2011).

Ongoing assessment through program and review at completion.

Exploration Manager

Disturbance to culturally significant sites

Identification of all culturally sensitive sites within the tenement

Prior to commencement of works within the area. Walk new tracks and drill pads prior to “clearing”.

Exploration Manager

Disruption to other land users

No disruption to the normal activities of the general public, landowners or tourists


Exploration Manager

Contamination of soil and water

No adverse contamination of soil or water due to exploration activities


Exploration Manager

Injury to, or detrimental effects on the health and wellbeing of employees, other persons at work and the public

Zero lost time due to injuries from employees and contractors and no effect on the public.


Exploration Manager

5.6.2 Performance Reporting

The findings of all monitoring and audit/inspection programs undertaken during each reporting period, including any DPIR corrective actions, are documented above in Section 5.5.


5.7 Emergency Procedures and Incident Reporting

5.7.1 Potential Environmental Emergencies

Table 19: Potential Environmental Emergencies and Associated Requirements

Environmental incident or emergency Risk Rating Assessment

Responsibility: CXO

CXO: Management actions/ procedures

CXO: Monitoring and reporting

procedures

FIRE Risk rating - 5

To avoid causing outbreak of fire during exploration activities. To minimise personal safety risk associated with wild fires. To prevent loss of equipment due to wild fire.

1) Clear access tracks of ignition source (grass) prior to program. 2) Park on clear areas. 3) Field vehicles to carry fire extinguisher and shovel. 4) Area is prescribed to be burnt by Bushfires NT each year and if this is carried out, it will limit bushfire risk.

1) Liaise with stakeholders in event of fire. 2) Liaise with Bushfires NT in relation to planned burns and in the event of wild fire.

HYDROCARBON (FUEL)

SPILLAGE Risk rating - 2

To avoid hydrocarbon spillage. To contain any hydrocarbon spillage.

1) MSDS sheets available for all hydrocarbons used. 2) Bulk hydrocarbons stored within self-bunded tanks. 3) Hydrocarbon spill kit to be employed in case of hydrocarbon spillage, with appropriate PPE used.

Substantial spillage to be reported to the CEO, of the NT DPIR in accordance to the procedures set out in the Guideline at the first practical opportunity.

CHEMICAL SPILLAGE

Risk rating - 1

To avoid chemical spillage. To contain any chemical spillage.

1) Chemicals stored within certified containers and stored in appropriate location. 2) MSDS sheets available for all chemicals used. 3) Chemical use to be conducted according to safe handling procedure, using appropriate PPE. 3) Chemical spillage to be contained, removed for disposal at approved site using appropriate PPE.

Substantial spillage not currently anticipated, owing to a maximum of <1L of any chemical to be used for current operations.

SIGNIFICANT HERITAGE

SITES Risk rating - 1

To avoid damage or destruction of significant sites (including undocumented heritage sites)

1) Review AAPA survey. 2) Plan field program to avoid AAPA and other delineated sites (1km buffer zone). 3) No sites recognised in the work area from DENR heritage register search.

Maintain awareness for artefacts during earthworks via Fact sheets. Damage to undocumented sites to be reported to Heritage Branch of DENR, plus reported to the CEO, of the NT DPIR in accordance to the procedures set out in the Guidelines. Cease work in area if suspected site encroached upon, and alert Heritage Branch on 08 89995039 (Darwin) or 89519247 (Alice Springs).

CONTAINMENT OF EXCESS

GROUND WATER

Risk rating - 2

To restrict discharge of potentially contaminated ground water. To contain all ground water.

1) Establish drilling sump at drill site if groundwater becomes a problem (on a case by case basis). 2) Contain/direct all ground water flow to drillhole sump. 3) Contain any additional spillage or residues and contain within the drill sump.

Substantial damage to be reported to the CEO, of the NT DPIR in accordance to the procedures set out in the Guidelines at first opportunity.


5.7.2 Emergency Procedures – Safety

CXO’s emergency procedures for this program are outlined in Appendix 9.

5.7.3 Emergency Procedures – Environmental

In the event of an environmental emergency, the following general procedures are to be followed:

1. Ensure the safety of workers and anyone else present.

2. Prevent, control and stop the incident and its impact from spreading

3. Advise the Exploration Manager or Site Geologist and seek their assistance

4. Advise the Chief Executive of the NT DPIR by telephone of the incident and the steps undertaken to mitigate the impact and control the source of the incident if the incident rating is Class 2 or above, according to Guidelines “AT8-006_S29_Reporting_Guideline” (Appendix 7).

5. Record the incident.

6. Submit a written report on Form “CF7-001 Notification of an Environmental Incident” (Appendix 7) to the Chief Executive as soon as practical after assessing the incident

7. Undertake all instructions as issued by the mining officers.

5.7.4 Incident Reporting

Environmental Incidents must be reported to the NT DPIR in accordance with Section 29 of the Mining Management Act.

The appropriate form to report an environmental incident is NT DPIR Form CF7-001, which is included in Appendix 7.

The following guide to Incident assessment and reporting has been sourced from the NT DPIR advisory note AT8-006 “Environmental Incident Reporting”, which is included in Appendix 7.

Incidents likely to be the subject of a Section 29 incident report may include, but are not limited to, the following:

(a) Escape (by any means such as a spill or leak) of a fuel, chemical, product or residue in solid, liquid or gaseous form including fumes, smoke, vapours, contaminated water, or dust;

(b) Emissions of noise (beyond reasonable permitted levels);

(c) Uncontrolled or accidental fire on any land, structure or infrastructure;

(d) Unauthorised, uncontrolled, or both, discharge of controlled waters to surface or ground waters;

(e) Damage to a Sacred Site, Aboriginal Protected Area, other protected area, archaeological or heritage site;

(f) Unauthorised mining, whether the activity is undertaken on or off an authorised mining site;

(g) Unauthorised clearing of vegetation or disturbance of the ground on or off an authorised mining site; and,

(h) Harm to human well-being.

In accordance with Section 29 of the MMA operators are required to report an environmental incident or serious environmental incident:

(1) As soon as practicable after the operator for a mining site becomes aware of the occurrence of an environmental incident or serious environmental incident on the site, the operator must notify the Chief Executive Officer of the occurrence.

Section 29 also states:

(2) An operator who gives notice orally must, as soon as practicable after doing so, give a written notice to the Chief Executive Officer.


Operators should also be aware of Section 33 of the MMA, which states:

(1) A person commits an offence if: (a) the person releases waste or a contaminant that is from a mining site; and (b) the release is not authorised by the mining management plan for the site.

5.7.5 Incident Assessment

When assessing an incident and making decisions about reporting on an environmental incident or serious environmental incident an operator should have regard to the definition of “environment” in the MMA.

“Environment” is defined under Section 4 of the MMA as follows:

land, air, water, organisms and ecosystems on a mining site and includes:

(a) the well-being of humans;

(b) structures made or modified by humans;

(c) the amenity values of the site; and

(d) economic, cultural and social conditions.

Operators should conduct an appropriate assessment of the incident in order to determine the severity of the incident and whether the operator will be required to report the incident to the Chief Executive Officer of DPIR. For the purpose of classifying the severity of an incident and determining whether a report is required an operator may be guided by the assessment matrix above.

Operators should also have regard to the obligations set out in Section 16 of the MMA, the conditions of authorisation, the permitted activities and the relevant procedures contained in the operator’s own management plan, including its associated systems.

It is not always necessary for there to have been an environmental impact for the requirement to report an incident to be triggered. The potential for any incident to have an impact on the environment should also be taken into account when considering whether to make a report to the Chief Executive Officer. The definition of “environment” is broad and careful consideration should be given to each aspect of the environment before a determination is made.

5.8 Consultation and Communication Core Exploration needs to ensure that the WHS Plan and company Policies have been communicated to all workers and that they understand their obligation to cooperate with that policy (via an Induction).

5.8.1 Communication

Communication on WHS matters need to be in place at all levels of the organisation. This is carried out at Core Exploration operations through:

• The induction process • Conducting regular toolbox talks to ensure transfer of information. All workers should attend the

project toolbox meetings • Involving our site workers in workplace inspections • Having in place hazard reporting systems which allows immediate hazards to be raised outside of

regular meetings • Management Review Meetings • Notice Boards & E-mail

5.8.2 Consultation

Consultation between all workers will be facilitated during the development, implementation and regular review of plans, policies, procedures & SWI’s.


The Core Exploration workers are to be consulted regarding the following health and safety matters that could affect their health and safety:

• when identifying hazards and assessing risks to health and safety arising from the work carried out; • when making decisions about ways to eliminate or minimise those risks; • when making decisions about the adequacy of facilities for the welfare of workers; • when proposing changes that may affect the health or safety of workers; • when making decisions about the procedures for— • consulting with workers; • resolving work health or safety issues at the workplace; • monitoring the health of workers; • monitoring the conditions at any workplace; • providing information and training for workers.

Meeting minutes, documentation and other relevant WHS information & communications will be disseminated via notice boards & email.

5.8.3 Health and Safety Representatives

If the workers are represented by a health and safety representative, the consultation must involve that representative.

5.8.4 Reporting

The Exploration Manager will ensure Contract companies who are part of the work force participate in all communication processes undertaken on Core Exploration projects.

This includes reporting of incidents and all necessary information to comply with regulations. This can be completed by the contractor supervisor.

5.8.5 Key Deliverables

• Regular toolbox meetings shall be held and minutes recorded on the toolbox meeting form. • Workers are consulted regarding proposed changes that could affect their health and safety. • Relevant WHS information shall be communicated during meetings, via noticeboards and email.

Relevant WHS information shall be completed and sent through to Core Exploration office for review and recording purposes.


6. EXPLORATION REHABILITATION CXO is committed to Industry Best Practice in all aspects of field activities. Relevant DPIR guidelines for the avoidance, minimization, mitigation or rehabilitation of environmental impacts during field operations that require exploration tracks and drilling are provided in Appendix 7. Various sections of this MMP also outline more site-specific undertakings in this regard.

Table 20: Rehabilitation Plan for the Bynoe Project

Disturbance Rehabilitation Activities Schedule (Timing) Closure Objectives / Targets Monitoring Techniques

Drill holes

• Cement plugs at the interface of any significant aquifers encountered

• Remove PVC casing >40 cm below surface • Backfill hole with cuttings/spoils if possible • Plug collar >40 cm below surface • Cover over collar with top soil

Within 3 months of completion of drilling

• Return drill hole as close as possible to pre-drilling conditions

• All holes filled, plugged and stable

• Photograph and record site conditions prior to drilling.

• Photograph and record site conditions immediately after rehabilitation.

• Photograph and record site conditions 12 months after rehabilitation.

Drill pads

• Remove all rubbish and waste from site • Spread or rake excess cuttings into soil • If needed, scarify dill pad with bucket combs

and hand tools and distribute any dead vegetation available to encourage regrowth


• Return drill pads as close as possible to pre-drilling conditions

• All drill sites cleaned and rehabilitated.



• Photograph and record site conditions 12 months after rehabilitation (approximately 1 in 10 drill holes nominated as “environmental monitoring site”).

Sumps

• Remove all rubbish and waste from sump (plastic liners will not be used)

• Backfill sumps with stockpiled soil, restoring the original soil horizons


• Return sumps as close as possible to pre-drilling conditions including the separate stockpiling and appropriate replacement of topsoil



• Photograph and record site conditions 12 months after rehabilitation (environmental monitoring sites).

Tracks and Gridlines

• Remove all rubbish and waste from sites • If needed, scarify tracks with bucket combs

and hand tools and distribute any dead vegetation available to encourage regrowth

• Block off entrances from public tracks to discourage use

Within 3 months of completion of drilling (unless to be utilised on the next program)

• Return tracks as close as possible to pre-drilling conditions.

• All tracks prepared for natural regeneration and stable.



• Photograph and record site conditions 12 months after rehabilitation (representative sites).


6.1 Exploration Rehabilitation Records and Registers The following registers will be developed to monitor the rehabilitation status of disturbances at selected drill holes/pads and selected track points – these are referred to as Environmental Monitoring Sites – “EMS”:

• Hole Rehabilitation Register • Track Status Register • Environmental Monitoring Site Register.

Each register includes relevant data such as Hole/Site ID, MMP reference, relevant dates to activity, site coordinates, location and status of the site.

6.2 Costing of Closure Activities For details of the costing for closure activities associated with exploration and post closure management, refer Appendix 10.


7. REFERENCES Bamford, M.J. (1988). Kakadu National Park: a Preliminary Survey of Migratory Waders, October/November 1987. RAOU Report Series. 41:1-34. Melbourne: Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union.

Blakers, M., S.J.J.F. Davies & P.N. Reilly (1984). The Atlas of Australian Birds. Melbourne, Victoria: Melbourne University Press.

Braby, M. and Woinarski, J. 2006. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Ogyris iphis doddi. Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts.

Clugston, J.A.R and Nagalingum, N.S. 2016. Conservation genetics of wild populations and botanic garden collections of Australian cycads. Conservation genetics of Australian cycads. Progress Report 19 Apr 2016.

Cogger HG (2000). Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia: 6th edition. Reed Books. Melbourne.

Cowie, I. (2015). Personal communication, 19 August 2015. Chief Botanist, Northern Territory Herbarium, Darwin.

Cowie, I. and Kerrigan, R. 2012. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Utricularia singeriana. Department of Land Resource Management.

Cowie, I. and Westaway, J. 2012. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Clausena sp. Tipperary. Department of Land Resource Management.

Cowie, I. and Westaway J. (2012). Threatened Species of the Northern Territory Stylidium ensatum Information Sheet. Department of Land Resource Management Northern Territory. Compiled December 2012.

DEE (Department of the Environment and Energy). 2016. EPBC Act Protected Matters Report. http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/pmst/, Accessed 9 September 2016. Australian Government, Canberra.

del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., & Sargatal, J., (eds) (1996). Handbook of the Birds of the World. Volume 3, Hoatzin to Auks. Barcelona: Lynx Edicions

Dixon D., (2004). The Gymnosperms of the Northern Territory. The Beagle, Records of the Museum and Art Galleries of the Northern Territory. 20: 1-24.

DME (NT Department of Industry and Resources), 2016. Mining Management Plan and Public Report Structure Guide for Exploration Operations. Updated 29 August 2016. Northern Territory Government, Darwin, NT.

DoE (Department of the Environment), 2016. Lucasium occultum in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed Tue, 13 Sep 2016 21:50:52 +1000.

Fisher,A., Mahney, T., Mackay, L., Tynan,C., Dostine, P., Young, S. and Fegan, M. (2011). Assessmentof the terrestrial vertebratefauna of theWeddell area. Final Report, July 2011.

Fraser, F.J. (2001). The impacts of fire and grazing on the Partridge Pigeon: the ecological requirements of a declining tropical granivore. PhD thesis. Australian National University, Canberra.

Hempel, C.J., (2003). The application of Landsat imagery to land cover mapping in the greater Darwin region. Technical report number 74, ISBN 1 9207 7217 0. Biodiversity Unit, Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, Darwin.

Hill, K. and Osborne R. (2001). Cycads of Australia. Kangaroo Press, Sydney.

Hill, K.D. (1996). A taxomomic revision of the genus Cycas (Cycadaceae) in Australia. Telopea 7: 1-63.

Jones, D.L. (2002). Cycads of the World. 2nd Edition. Reed. Sydney, NSW.

Kerrigan, R. and Cowie, I. 2006. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Monochoria hastata. Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts.

Kerrigan, R. and Cowie, I. 2012. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Utricularia dunstaniae. Department of Land Resource Management.

http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat


Kerrigan, R., Cowie, I. and Liddle, D. 2006. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Cycas armstrongii. Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts.

Liddle, D.T. (2004) The ecology of Cycas armstrongii and management of fire in Australia’s tropical savannas. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory.

Liddle, D.T. (2009). Management Program for Cycads in the Northern Territory of Australia 2009-2014. Northern Territory Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport, Darwin.

Marchant, S. & P.J. Higgins, eds. (1993). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 2 - Raptors to Lapwings. Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press.

NR Maps. 2017. NR Maps Database, http://nrmaps.nt.gov.au/. Accessed 3 August 2017. NT Government, Darwin.

NRM Infonet. 2017. NT NRM Report. http://www.infonet.org.au/infonet2/#. Accessed 3 August 2017.

Origin Energy (2014). Cycas megacarpa Management and Translocation Plan. Origin Energy.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2015b, Threatened Species Status Assessment Manual, Department of the Environment, online (28 July 2015).

Ward, S. 2012b. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Varanus mitchelli. Department of Land Resource Management.

Ward. S., Woinarski, J., Griffiths, T. and McKay, L. 2006. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Varanus mertensi. Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts.

Ward. S., Woinarski, J., Griffiths, T. and McKay, L. 2012. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Varanus panoptes. Department of Land Resource Management.

Woinarski JCZ (2004). ‘National multi-species recovery plan for the Partridge Pigeon [eastern subspecies] Geophaps smithii smithii, Crested Shrike-tit [northern (sub)species] Falcunculus (frontatus) whitei, Masked Owl [north Australian mainland subspecies] Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli; and Masked Owl [Tiwi Islands subspecies] Tyto novaehollandiae melvillensis, 2004–2009’. Northern Territory Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, Darwin.

Woinarski, J. and Ward, S. 2012. Threatened Species of the Northern Territory – Masked Owl (north Australian mainland subspecies) Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli. Department of Land Resource Management.


8. GLOSSARY OF TERMS

TERM MEANING Audit Means any systematic investigation or appraisal of procedures or operations for the

purpose of determining conformity with prescribed procedures. Bynoe Project Tenements EL29699, EL30012, EL30015, MLN16 CEO Means the Chief Executive Officer, within the meaning of the Public Sector

Employment and Management Act, of the Agency administering this Act. CXO Core Exploration Ltd Contractor Means a person who under a contract performs work or supplies a service in

connection with an exploration activity on a site. Critical Incidents Means an event on a mining site that has the potential to cause a significant adverse

effect on the environment. Emergency Response A plan for the minimisation of environmental harm in the event of an emergency. Employee Means a person employed by a company. Environment Means land, air, water, organisms and ecosystems on a site and includes:

• the well-being of humans; • structures made or modified by humans; • the amenity values of the site; and • economic, cultural and social conditions

Environmental Aspects The elements of an organisations activities or products or services that can interact with the environment.

Environmental Impacts Any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, wholly or partially resulting from an organisation’s environmental aspects.

Hazardous Material A substance having properties capable of having adverse effects on the environment.

Issues An important topic of discussion or point in question i.e. management of risk. HSE Health, Safety & Environment MMA Mining Management Act. MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet. It is provided by manufacturer or supplier of hazardous

materials, and describes the properties and nature of the material. Operator Means the operator for a mining site referred to in Mining Management Act Section

10. Plant Includes machinery, pressure vessels, equipment, appliances, implements,

scaffolding and tools, any component of the plant and anything fitted or connected to the plant.

Serious Accidents Means an event on a site that causes material environmental harm.


APPENDIX 1

Application for Authorisation


APPENDIX 2

Nomination of Operator of a Mining Site


APPENDIX 3

Location Maps of Proposed Activities, including Vegetation and

Threatened Species Maps


APPENDIX 4

Biodiversity Database Search Reports / Results, Likelihood

Analysis & Identification Materials: A. Australian Government’s EPBC

‘Protected Matters Search Tool’ (DoE, 2017)

B. Various outputs from NT Government’s ‘NR Map’ (NR Maps, 2017)

C. NRM Report (NRM Infonet, 2017).

D. Species Profile for Armstrong’s Cycad

E. Darwin Harbour SOCS Information Sheet (NRETAS, 2008)


APPENDIX 5

AAPA Register Search


APPENDIX 6

DENR Heritage Search & Hydrogeology Information


APPENDIX 7

DPIR Exploration Methods Guidelines


APPENDIX 8

DENR Landholder Searches


APPENDIX 9

CXO Emergency Procedures


APPENDIX 10

DPIR Security Calculation Spreadsheet (Digital file)


APPENDIX 11

CXO Induction Pack, including Safety Risk Management Plan

2017 mmp - bynoe project -...

Documents