Notice
Information request
aquifers. No site testing has taken place within the TSF footprint to verify this.
b) Confirms the permeability of the base of UGM TSF is accurately represented in the groundwater model.
16
PMF Assessment
Provide a PMF assessment of the proposed UGM TSF including consideration of the hydraulically connected features and present the findings.
PMF modelling has not been conducted for the proposed UGM TSF facility. A detailed PMF assessment is required and must quantify the total flood volume and peak flood level, and must evaluate the spillway positioning and requirements.
17
Rehabilitation
Provide revised application material which:
The application materials states rehabilitation for the proposed UGM TSF structure will involve the transfer of potentially acid forming (PAF) waste rock exposed during construction transferred to a void. Based on the EA definition of ‘void’, there is no clear understanding on the disposal location of PAF waste rock. The only available information on the rehabilitation of the embankment is ‘runoff management systems installed on the embankment’. There is limited understanding on what this entails and more importantly how the embankment will achieve the proposed post mining land use.
a) Clarify what ‘void’ is intended to be used as the disposal location for PAF waste rock and demonstrate this aligns with Heritage Minerals Pty Ltd activities. b) Provide information on the rehabilitation of the embankment including details on the runoff systems proposed and how the feature will achieve the proposed post mining land use.
18
Laboratory waste disposal
Provide justification for the proposed amendment to EA condition E7. In providing a response, detail:
It is proposed to amend existing EA condition E7 to dispose mineral waste from the laboratory into the UGM TSF. Further justification is required on this proposed amendment including what constitutes laboratory waste and why this cannot be accounted for under the existing approval.
a) What constitutes laboratory waste.
b) The expected quantity of laboratory waste to be disposed of in the UGM TSF, including why this cannot be accounted for under the existing approval and disposal locations. c) Demonstrate the expected quantity has been accounted for in the UGM TSF capacity and does not impact the storage volume determined.
19
Catchment reporting to the OCP
Provide evidence demonstrating the proposed activity will comply with existing EA condition W10.
Page 15 of 20 • ESR/2016/3447 • Version 4.02 • Last reviewed: 29 OCT 2025
Powered by FlippingBook