View
224
Download
4
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Mines, Industry Regulation and SafetyPetroleum
Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Mines, Industry Regulation and SafetyMineral Titles
Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Mines, Industry Regulation and SafetyEnvironment
Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Mines, Industry Regulation and SafetyResources Safety
Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Mines, Industry Regulation and SafetyGeological Survey of Western Australia
1
DRAFT Guidance Note – Environmental Risk Assessment for mining proposals
and mine closure plans
PURPOSEThe purpose of this guidance note is to provide additional practical advice relating to the preparation of a comprehensive environmental risk assessment for inclusion in a Mining Proposal and/or Mine Closure Plan.
OBJECTIVES The objectives of this guidance note are to provide advice on: • whatconstitutesthescopeofasitespecificenvironmentalriskassessmentovertheminelifecycle;• theuseofoneriskassessmentforbothMiningProposalandMineClosurePlan;• thelevelofinformationrequiredforrisktreatments;and• thelevelofinformationrequiredforrisktreatmentsregulatedunderotherlegislation.
SCOPEThisguidancespecificallyrelatestoproponentspreparingenvironmentalriskassessmentsforinclusioninMiningProposalsbeingpreparedinaccordancewiththe‘GuidelineforMiningProposalsinWesternAustralia,April2016’(the2016MPGuideline)and‘GuidelinesforPreparingMineClosurePlans,May2015’(MCPGuidelines).Thisguidancenoteshouldbereadinconjunctionwiththe2016MPGuidelineandMCPGuidelines,whichstipulaterequirementsforenvironmentalriskassessment.
Pleasenotetheexamplesprovidedinthisguidancemaynotbeapplicabletoallsites.Itisimportanttoconsidersitespecificconditionswhenundertakingtheriskassessment.
DOCUMENT HIERARCHYThefollowingdocumentsguidetheassessmentandapprovalofMiningProposalsandMineClosurePlans.
Legislation and Statutory Guidelines:• RelevantLegislation;regulationsandconditions–Mining Act 1978andMiningRegulations1981• ‘GuidelineforMiningProposalsinWesternAustralia,April2016’(the2016MPGuideline–mandatoryforallnewprojectsites
from1January2017)• ‘GuidelinesforMiningProposalsinWesternAustralia,February2006’.• ‘GuidelinesforPreparingMineClosurePlans,May2015’(MCPGuidelines).
Policy:• Environmental Regulatory Strategy
Technical Guidance:• Guidancenote–environmentalriskassessmentforminingproposalsandmineclosureplans• Guidancenote–environmentaloutcomesforminingproposals
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
2
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
Itisimportanttodistinguishthisguidancenotefromthe‘statutoryguidelines’forMiningProposalsandMineClosurePlansthatareformallyapprovedundertheMining Act 1978.AMiningProposalandaMineClosurePlansubmittedtotheDepartmentofMines,IndustryRegulationandSafety(DMIRS)forassessmentandapprovalmustbeintheformrequiredbytherelevantstatutoryguideline,andcontaininformationofthekindrequiredbythatguideline(seeSection70OoftheMining Act 1978).These‘statutoryguidelines’1 are the:
• ‘GuidelineforMiningProposalsinWesternAustralia,April2016’(the2016MPGuideline–mandatoryforallnewprojectsfrom1January2017).
• ‘GuidelinesforMiningProposalsinWesternAustralia,February2006’.• ‘GuidelinesforPreparingMineClosurePlans,May2015’(MCPGuidelines).
Pleasenotethattheguidancenoteshavenostatutorybasis,andareprovidedtosupportproponentsinthepreparationof their applications.
GUIDANCEAnumberofresourcesexistinrelationtoriskassessmentandmanagement.TheStandardAS/NZSISO31000:2009Riskmanagement–PrinciplesandGuidelinesprovidesthegenericguidelinesonriskmanagementandtheHandbookHB203:2012ManagingEnvironment-relatedRiskdiscusseshowthestandardcanbeusedtoassistwiththemanagement of environment related risks.
TheAustralianGovernmenthasalsodevelopedguidanceonriskassessmentandmanagementspecifictotheminingindustrythroughtheirLeadingPracticeSustainableDevelopmentProgramfortheMiningIndustry–RiskManagementHandbook(2016).
The2016MPGuidelinedetailstherequirementsfortheenvironmentalriskassessmentincludedinaMiningProposal.
1. Scope of a the Risk Assessment
1.1. ProjectSitespecificRiskassessmentandmanagementshouldbesitespecific;ariskassessmentthatissuitableforonesitewillnotnecessarilybesuitableforuseatanother.MiningProposalsrequireanenvironmentalriskassessment.Theriskassessmentshouldpresentriskstotheenvironmentfromtheoperation;corporaterisks–suchascompanyreputationdamagefromanenvironmentalincident–arenotrequired.
Riskassessmentandmanagementneedstotakeintoaccountsitespecificssuchaslocation,baselineenvironment,proposedinfrastructureandoperationsandspecificpracticesandprocesses.Theenvironmental risk assessment provided in the Mining Proposal and Mine Closure Plan needs to demonstrate thatsitespecificshavebeenconsideredandaddressed.Itcanbeproblematictotryanduseariskassessmentfromanothersiteasthestartingpointortemplateforanassessmentofanewsiteasitislikelytocausethenewriskassessmenttobeinherentlybiasedbytheissuesthatwerepresentattheprevioussite.
Itisessentialfortheriskassessmenttobebasedon,andinformedby,thespecificattributesandbaselineenvironmentaldatarelatingtothesite.Itshouldbeeasytorelatetheriskassessmentbacktothemainissuesthathavebeenidentifiedinthesiteactivities,stakeholderengagementandbaselinedatasectionsoftheMiningProposalorMineClosurePlan.Whilstitisimportantfortheriskassessmenttoincludealltheissuesidentifiedforthesite,thereisnorequirementtoincluderiskswhichhavenotbeenidentifiedbytheprojectsitedescription,stakeholderengagementandenvironmentalbaselinedata(seeexample1intheAppendix).Forexample,iftheprojectsitehasnoconservationsignificantflora,conservationsignificantflorarisks are not relevant.
1.2 Considering all Phases of MiningTheenvironmentalriskassessmentshouldconsiderallphasesofmining,whetherplannedorunplanned.Thesephasesincludeconstruction,operation,careandmaintenance,andclosure.Itisimportantthatallphasesareconsideredbecausesomerisksmayonlybepresentduringonephase,ormightbeagreaterriskduringaparticularphaseorrequiredifferentmanagementstrategiesdependingonthephasee.g.dewateringmaybemanagedverydifferentlyduringcareandmaintenanceandmaypresentquitedifferentriskstoduring operations.
1 Thislistiscorrectasofthedatethisguidancewaspublished.ItisalwaysadvisabletorefertoDMIRS’swebsiteforanyupdatesorchangestotheseguidelines.
3
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
Ausefulwaytoensureallphasesofminingareconsideredisbyincludingtheminephaseasaspecificinputfield/columnintheriskassessment.Seeexample1intheAppendix).TheMCPGuidelinesalsorequirethattheMineClosurePlanincludeadescriptionofhowtemporaryclosureand/orcareandmaintenancewillbemanaged.Furtherdetail on these management strategies can be provided in the Mine Closure Plan rather than the Mining Proposal.
1.3 Single Risk Assessment for Mining Proposal and Mine Closure PlanWhilethe2016MPGuidelineandtheMCPGuidelinesbothrequireariskassessmenttobeundertaken,theseriskassessmentsdonotneedtobeundertakenseparately.Undertakingoneholisticriskassessmentthatconsidersboth operational and closure risks is recommended for the Mining Proposal. This can reduce the likelihood of inconsistenciesbetweentheMiningProposalandMineClosurePlanandreducesduplicationofeffort.Intheseinstances,theMineClosurePlansubmittedinsupportofaMiningProposalcanreferbacktotheriskassessmentprovidedintheMiningProposal.WhenarevisedMineClosurePlanisre-submittedforapprovaleverythreeyears, oratadateotherwiseadvisedbyDMIRS,asrequiredundertheMining Act 1978,anupdatedriskassessmentis to be included.
2. Risk Assessment CriteriaRiskcriteria–likelihoodandconsequence–underpintheriskassessmentandshouldbewelldefinedtoenableacomprehensive and relevant risk assessment to be undertaken.
Consequencelevelsshouldbebasedonthescaleoftheactivitiesoreffectsofagivenimpactonspecificenvironmentalvalues.Theyshouldalsotakeintoaccounttheenvironmentalsensitivityofanareainwhichtheactivityistakingplace.Thelikelihoodlevelforagivenimpactmayrelatetoaknownfrequencyofsuchaneventoccurring,basedonavailableindustrydataorstatisticalreview.
Althoughminingoperationsalsohavehealth,safety,financialandotherrisks,MiningProposalsrequireanenvironmentalriskassessment,andthereforetheconsequenceratingsshouldbedefinedinenvironmentalterms;costbasedorcorporatedefinitionsarenotsuitableandmayskewriskrankings.
3. Risk Pathway and Potential ImpactsItisimportanttofullydescribeeachrisk,pathwayandpotentialimpactasthisdemonstratesthattherisksareunderstoodandallowsfortheadequacyoftheproposedtreatmentstobeassessed;thereshouldbeadirectlinkbetweenthecause/sourceoftheriskandtheproposedtreatmentmeasures.Thisalsoenablestheidentificationofanypotentialgapsinriskidentification.Seeexample2intheAppendixforfurtherexplanation.
4. Reducing Environmental ConsequenceGenerally,themostcommonscenarioforloweringtheenvironmentalconsequenceisthroughtheeliminationorsubstitutionofariskpathway;thisoftenoccursduringtheprojectplanningphase.Examplesincludealteringtheplannedlocationofinfrastructuretoavoiddirectimpactstoconservationsignificantfloraoroptingforsmallerscalefuelstorageratherthanthestorageoflargevolumesofhydrocarbonsonsite.
DecisionstoeliminateorsubstituteriskpathwaysmayalreadyhavebeenmadewhenitcomestimetodrafttheMiningProposal or Mine Closure Plan. Proponents are encouraged to include these treatments in the risk assessment to demonstratethewaysinwhichriskhasbeenreducedduringtheplanningphase.Iftheconsequenceratingwithintheriskassessmentisreducedpost-treatmentbymeansotherthaneliminationorsubstitution,adequatejustificationshouldbeprovided.Refertothebottomtableinexample3intheAppendix.
5. Level of Information Required on Risk TreatmentsThelevelofinformationprovidedfortherisktreatments,ormanagementstrategies,riskmitigations,shouldbecommensuratetothelevelofriskthatisbeingtreated.Forraw(untreated)risksthatareconsideredlow,lessdetailisgenerallyrequiredfortherisktreatments,especiallyifthesetreatmentsutiliseexistingindustrystandardsorcodes,howeverthesestandardsshouldbeoutlined.Forraw(untreated)risksthatareconsideredhighorgreaterandrequirespecificandsignificantmanagementmeasures,theMiningProposalwillneedtocontainacomprehensivedescriptionoftheproposedtreatmentse.g.encapsulationplanforPotentiallyAcidForming(PAF)materialsandassociateddiagrams/drawingsoftheencapsulationcell.Thisinformationmaynotfitwithintheriskassessmenttableandmayneedtobesupportedbydetailsprovidedinanappendix;howeverthekeymanagementpointsshouldstillbeincludedintheriskassessment.Seeexample4intheAppendix.
FurtherdetailsareprovidedinSection3.9.4ofthe2016MPGuideline.
4
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
6. Applying the ALARP ‘As low as reasonably practicable’ PrincipleDMIRSexpectstheALARPprincipletobeusedwhendeterminingwhichrisktreatmentstoapply.Thisprincipleisexplainedfurtherinsection3.9.1ofthe2016MPGuideline.ItisimportantthattheprinciplesofALARPareconsideredwhenapplyingtreatments.InsomeinstancespastpracticesandstandardproceduresmaymeettheALARPprinciple;howeverinsomeinstancesitmaybereasonabletoapplymorestringenttreatmentstotherisk.Itultimatelydependsoneachindividualscenario.Example3intheAppendixillustrateshowtheALARPprinciplecanbeappliedinaspecificscenario.
7. Risks Regulated under Other LegislationAnumberofdifferentagenciesregulateenvironmentimpactsofminesitesunderotherlegislation.The2016MPGuidelinerequireproponentstoclearlyarticulatetheotherlegislativecontrolsthatexistforasitetoassisttheDMIRS’assessmenttoinsteadfocusonthoseaspectsthatarenotdirectlyregulatedunderotherlegislation.RefertoSection3.6ofthe2016MPGuideline.
Theriskassessmentstillneedstoconsiderallrelevantenvironmentalrisks,howeverifanyoftheserisksaredirectlymanagedviaotherlegislation,theselegislativecontrolscanbelistedastherisktreatmentthatwillbeapplied,withnoadditionalinformationrequiredinmostcircumstances.Thetreatmentinexample2oftheAppendixdemonstrates this scenario.
ItisimportanttonotethatsomeregulatorycontrolsoutsideoftheMining Act 1978,suchasaPartVLicence,onlyapplywhenaprojectsiteisoperating,soextradetailsmayberequiredontreatmentoftheriskduringotherphasesof mining such as care and maintenance and closure.
5
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
APPE
NDIX
– P
RACT
ICAL
EXA
MPL
ES
Exam
ple
1: L
ink
betw
een
base
line
data
and
risk
ass
essm
ent;
cons
ider
ing
all m
ine
phas
es.
Proj
ect P
hase
Activ
ityRi
sk P
athw
ayLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Raw
Risk
Trea
tmen
tLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Trea
ted
Risk
Cons
truct
ion,
Op
erat
ion
Vege
tatio
ncle
arin
g or
ot
her g
roun
d di
stur
bing
ac
tiviti
es.
Unau
thorise
dcle
arin
g / g
roun
d di
stur
bing
ac
tiviti
es
resu
lting
in
impa
cts t
o co
nser
vatio
n sig
nific
antflora.
Poss
ible
Maj
orHi
ghNo
kno
wn
cons
erva
tion
sign
ifica
ntflora
loca
ted
in th
e Pr
ojec
t site
ar
ea o
r bro
ader
vi
cini
ty.
Rare
Maj
orM
oder
ate
Thee
nviro
nmen
talb
aseline
datado
esnotapp
eartoha
veade
quately
inform
edth
eide
ntifica
tionofrisksf
orth
issit
e.Th
ebas
eline
stud
ieshaveind
icatedthatth
erea
re
noco
nservatio
nsig
nific
antfloralo
catedinth
eprojec
tsite
areaorbroad
ervicin
ity,how
everth
erisk
assessm
entind
icatest
heim
pactonco
nservatio
nsig
nific
antflorais
possible.Alth
ough
ther
iskishigh,no
trea
tmen
tiso
fferedforthe
risk,ju
stast
atem
enttoexplainthatth
ereisn
oreas
onab
leris
kpresent.O
nlyr
iskst
hata
reactua
llyre
levan
ttoth
eprojec
tsite
shou
ldbeinc
lude
dinth
erisk
assessm
ent,an
dan
app
ropriatelevelo
ftreatmen
tsho
uldbe
app
liedtoea
chofthe
serisks.
Adding
a‘projec
tpha
se’colum
ntoth
erisk
assessm
enttab
leisaus
efulwayofe
nsuringallp
haseso
fminingarec
onsid
ered
.
6
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
Exam
ple
2: F
ully
des
crib
ing
the
risk
Proj
ect P
hase
Activ
ityRi
sk P
athw
ayLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Raw
Risk
Trea
tmen
tLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Trea
ted
Risk
Operation
Pitd
ewatering.
Disc
harg
e of
de
wate
r int
o Bl
acka
dder
Cr
eek.
-------------------------
Disc
harg
e of
de
wate
r int
o Bl
acka
dder
Cr
eek
lead
ing
to in
crea
sed
salin
ity,
turb
idity
and
he
avy m
etal
le
vels
with
in
the
cree
k an
d br
oade
r ca
tchm
ent,
resu
lting
in
neg
ativ
e im
pact
s to
the
ecol
ogic
al
func
tion
of th
e cr
eek.
Likely
Mod
erat
eHi
ghAd
herenc
eto
Depa
rtmen
t of
Envir
onmen
tRe
gulatio
n(DER
)lice
nce
cond
ition
s.
Unlikely
Mod
erat
eM
oder
ate
Thed
escriptio
nofth
erisk
inth
etop
(red
)versio
nisqu
itelim
ited.The
bottomve
rsion(green
)describesin
mored
etailthe
spec
ifice
nviro
nmen
talelem
entsofthe
risk.T
hism
akesitea
sier
fora
revie
wertode
term
inew
hetherallt
heen
viron
men
talrisk
sforth
eprojec
thaveb
eeniden
tified
inth
erisk
assessm
ent,an
dtoen
sureth
etreatmen
tsapp
eara
ppropriate.
Adding
aco
lumnfor‘im
pact’can
beu
sedtoclea
rlydifferen
tiateth
eimpa
ctfrom
ther
iskpathw
ay.F
orth
eabo
veex
ample,ther
iskpathw
ayis‘disc
hargeo
fdew
aterfrom
Blackad
derC
reek’
andtheimpa
ctis‘in
crea
sedsa
linity,turbidityand
hea
vym
etalsw
ithinth
ecreekand
broad
erca
tchm
ent’.The
risktrea
tmen
tsho
uldad
dresst
heca
usesofthe
riskev
ent.Re
fertotheb
elow.
Proj
ect P
hase
Activ
ityRi
sk P
athw
ayIm
pact
Like
lihoo
dCo
nseq
uenc
eRa
w Ri
skTr
eatm
ent
Like
lihoo
dCo
nseq
uenc
eTr
eate
d Ri
sk
Operation
Pitd
ewatering.
Disc
harg
e of
dewa
terinto
Blac
kadd
er
Cree
k.
Incr
ease
d sa
linity
, tu
rbid
ity
and
heav
y m
etal
leve
ls
with
in cr
eek
and
broa
der
catc
hmen
t.
Likely
Mod
erat
eHi
ghAd
herenc
eto
Depa
rtmen
t of
Envir
onmen
tRe
gulatio
n(DER
)lice
nce
cond
ition
s.
Unlikely
Mod
erat
eM
oder
ate
7
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
Exam
ple
3: U
sing
the
ALAR
P pr
inci
ple
Proj
ect P
hase
Activ
ityRi
sk P
athw
ayLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Raw
Risk
Trea
tmen
tLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Trea
ted
Risk
Operation,
Care
and
Mainten
ance
,Cl
osur
e
Incid
ental
min
ing
and
expo
sure
of
PASS
2 mat
eria
l withinth
emine
void
.
Oxidationof
PASS
material
caus
ing
lowe
ringofpH
and
relea
se
of m
etal
s to
thes
oilp
rofile,
grou
ndwa
ter,
and
surfa
ce
water.
Poss
ible
Maj
orHi
ghPlac
eany
mined
PA
SSm
aterial
withinalin
ed
and
bund
ed
area
prio
r to
backfillin
gwithin
the m
ine v
oid.
Grou
ndwa
ter
quality
m
onito
ring
todetec
tany
redu
ctions
inpH
or el
evat
ions
in
heavym
etals.
Unlikely
Maj
orM
oder
ate
Proj
ect P
hase
Activ
ityRi
sk P
athw
ayLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Raw
Risk
Trea
tmen
tLi
kelih
ood
Cons
eque
nce
Trea
ted
Risk
Operation,
Care
and
Mainten
ance
,Cl
osur
e
Incid
ental
min
ing
and
expo
sure
of
PASS
material
withinth
emine
void
.
Oxidationof
PASS
material
caus
ing
lowe
ringofpH
and
relea
se
of m
etal
s to
thes
oilp
rofile,
grou
ndwa
ter,
and
surfa
ce
water.
Poss
ible
Maj
orHi
ghM
inin
g le
vels
set t
o av
oid
PASS
; 5m
buf
fer
mai
ntai
ned
abov
e m
appe
d PA
SS la
yer.
Grou
ndwa
ter
quality
m
onito
ring
todetec
tany
redu
ctions
inpH
or el
evat
ions
in
heavym
etals.
Rare
Mod
erat
eLo
w
Thet
opta
bleh
asnotdem
onstratedthatth
erisk
has
beentre
ated
toALA
RPin
compa
rison
toth
ebottomta
ble.Th
ebottomta
bleh
asapp
liedan
avo
idan
cest
rategy
toavo
idth
erisk
,as
oppo
sed
to ju
st co
ntro
l and
miti
gatio
n st
rate
gies
.
NB–DMIRSac
know
ledge
stha
tavo
idan
cem
aynotalwaysb
epos
sibleinev
eryc
ircum
stan
ce,how
everth
isscen
arioisprovid
edasa
nexam
ple.
2PAS
S–Poten
tiallyAcid
Sulph
ateS
oils
8
DRAFT ONLY FOR COMMENT
Exam
ple
4: P
rovi
ding
ade
quat
e in
form
atio
n on
trea
tmen
ts fo
r hig
her r
isk
issu
es
Phas
eAc
tivity
Risk
Pat
hway
Like
lihoo
dCo
nseq
uenc
eRa
w Ri
skTr
eatm
ent
Like
lihoo
dCo
nseq
uenc
eTr
eate
d Ri
sk
Operation,
Care
and
Mainten
ance
,Cl
osur
e
Storag
eof
potentially
host
ile m
ater
ials
inth
ewas
te
land
form
.
Expo
sureof
theh
ighly
reac
tive b
lack
sh
ale c
ausin
g ac
id a
nd/o
r m
etal
lifer
ous
draina
ge,
cont
amin
atin
g th
e soi
l and
grou
ndwa
ter
and
prev
entin
g re
vege
tatio
n ofth
ewas
te
land
form
.
Likely
Maj
orVe
ry H
igh
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
XY
Proj
ect
Blac
k Sh
ale
Man
agem
ent
Plan
(App
endi
x X)
to e
nsur
e:•AllP
oten
tially
Ac
id F
orm
ing
(PAF
) m
ater
ial i
s iden
tified
as
it is
min
ed.
•AllP
AF
mat
eria
l is
tem
pora
rily
stor
ed o
n th
e PA
F ho
ldin
g pa
d.•Th
ematerial
is d
umpe
d wi
thin
the
PAF
cell.
Enca
psul
atio
n of
all
PAF
mat
eria
l with
in
an e
ngin
eere
d co
ntai
nmen
t in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
desi
gn re
port
(App
endi
x X).
Unlikely
Maj
orM
oder
ate
Ther
aw(u
ntreated
)risk
inth
isexam
pleisv
eryh
ighan
drequ
iress
pecifi
cand
detailed
trea
tmen
tsto
lowe
rthe
riskto
mod
erate.Th
ereforea
ddition
aldetailsrega
rdingtheset
reatmen
tswillbe
su
pplie
d as
tech
nica
l app
endi
ces t
o th
e Min
ing
Prop
osal
and
/or M
ine C
losu
re P
lan.
DMIRSSEP17_4972
Recommended