QUARTERLY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT #4 · Quarterly Environmental Report #4 May to July 2007 Blast...

QUARTERLY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT #4

MAY 2007 TO JULY 2007

33 rr dd SSeepptteemmbbeerr 22000077

Quarterly Environmental Report #4

May to July 2007

Executive Summary

The fourth Quarterly Environmental Report (QER) presents the results of Angas Zinc Mine monitoring program between May and July 2007 for surface water, groundwater, dust and community complaints. Visual amenity, noise and blast monitoring are being presented in the QER for the first time.

During this quarter AZM completed constructing the box cut and moving to the new Offices on site. Work on the Tailing Storage Facilities was postponed until dryer weather. Most noise/visual amenity bunds have been constructed and seeded with sterile pearl millet, native plant species and clover using hydromulch to facilitate seeding the steep slopes and suppress dust generation.

Monitoring of the Angas River for this period showed that the mine is having no adverse impact on the river. Surface water monitoring during this quarter suggests that metals in river water come from sources upstream of Angas Zinc Mine (AZM), from the Strathalbyn township area.

Groundwater and surface water quality during this reporting period were similar to those reported in the baseline, with the bores in mineralised areas recording the highest metal values.

Major improvements have been made in the levels of dust around the mine lease. This is demonstrated by results from both dust deposition gauges and high volume samplers (HVS) which have shown significant reductions in dust deposition and suspended particulates since AZM took over the site. On one occasion in May total suspended particulates (TSP) exceeded the WHO criteria of 120µg/m3. Lead levels in deposited dust and TSP were well below the MARP criteria again in this quarter.

Noise levels for construction were found to be compliant under the environmental protection proposal (EPP) draft guideline for construction noise levels. Attended noise monitoring will commence at select locations after unexplainable noise levels were reported, these noise levels do not correlate with monitoring at other sites.

During this quarter a series of photos were taken at permanent photopoints, these clearly show extensive construction activities and the beginning of the mine revegetation program. This is the second set of photographs in the time series, which is expected to document the progress of mining activities and the success of rehabilitation and revegetation programs in addressing visual amenity.

The noise monitoring program commenced in May 2007. The results demonstrate that noise was generally within the specified EPA criteria. This was confirmed by PIRSA and the EPA in a spot check triggered by a complaint from a local resident.


May to July 2007

Blast monitoring equipment was installed and tested on site, this will be used to track blasting activities, which are expected to commence in October 2007. The first blast monitoring results will be reported in the fifth quarterly environmental report.

Community Complaints registered in this reporting period were lower than those reported in the previous quarter. This was attributed to AZM management working with the Strathalbyn Community Consultation Committee (SCCC) and complainants to improve working procedures to minimise the impact on the neighbouring community.


May to July 2007

1

Table of Contents

1 Background...................................................................................................... 2 2 Surface Water Quality ....................................................................................... 3

2.1 Introduction............................................................................................... 3 2.2 Surface Water Sampling Locations ............................................................... 3 2.3 Sampling Methodology................................................................................ 5 2.4 Results and Discussion................................................................................ 5

3 Groundwater Quality ......................................................................................... 9 3.1 Introduction............................................................................................... 9 3.2 Groundwater Sampling Locations............................................................... 10 3.3 Sampling Methodology.............................................................................. 12 3.4 Results and Discussion.............................................................................. 12 3.5 Groundwater Levels.................................................................................. 18

4 Noise Monitoring Program ............................................................................... 19 4.1 Introduction............................................................................................. 19 4.2 Monitoring Methodology ........................................................................... 19 4.3 Results and Discussion.............................................................................. 21

5 Dust Monitoring Program................................................................................. 22 5.1 Introduction............................................................................................. 22 5.2 Methods for Dust Monitoring ..................................................................... 22

5.2.1 Total Suspended Particulates and Particulate Lead ............................... 22 5.2.2 Ambient Dust and Lead Deposition...................................................... 24

5.3 Results and Discussion of Dust Monitoring.................................................. 25 5.3.1 Particulate Dust and Lead................................................................... 25 5.3.2 Dust Deposition ................................................................................. 26

6 Blast Monitoring.............................................................................................. 29 7 Flora and Fauna Monitoring ............................................................................. 30

7.1 Visual Amenity Photopoints ....................................................................... 30 7.2 Flora and Fauna ....................................................................................... 30

8 Rainwater Tank and Regional Topsoil Monitoring............................................... 31 9 Interaction with the Strathalbyn Community ..................................................... 32

9.1 Strathalbyn Community Consultation Committee......................................... 32 9.2 Complaints Register.................................................................................. 32

10 Environmental Milestones............................................................................. 33 11 Conclusion .................................................................................................. 34


May to July 2007

2

1 Background

On 20 March 2007, the Mining and Rehabilitation Program (MARP) for the Angas Zinc Mine (AZM) – Mining Lease 6229, was approved by the Department of Primary Industries and Resources of South Australia (PIRSA). Terramin was well into the construction phase during this reporting period. The box-cut was completed, noise/amenity bunds erected and seeded and staff moved into the new site office. Work on the tailing storage facilities was postponed until dryer weather.

This Fourth Environmental Quarterly Report (QER) presents the results of monitoring between May and July 2007. The results were compared to the baseline data collected between April 2006 and March 2007 and presented in QER #3. The aim of the QER has shifted from collecting baseline environmental data, to keeping management and stakeholders informed of the overall status of the environment and the performance of control measures implemented to prevent environmental harm.

During this reporting period additional surface water sampling and dust deposition sites were added to the monitoring program and noise monitoring was included in the QER for the first time. These extra monitoring activities will give a more detailed description of the effect AZM has on the surrounding environment and provide a more transparent assessment of the performance of the environmental control measures implemented to protect the environment.


May to July 2007

3

2 Surface Water Quality

2.1 Introduction

The aim of the surface water quality monitoring program is to track Terramin’s performance in managing runoff from the property and generally to confirm that mining activities are not polluting water runoff into the Angas River.

2.2 Surface Water Sampling Locations

Table 1 describes the surface water sampling sites, while Figure 2 and Figure 3 show where they are located. During this monitoring period surface water was sampled and analysed at four monitoring sites on the Angas River at the Bridge, Hogben, Croser and the Ford, this also represents the direction of flow on the Angas (Bridge and Hogben before the mine and Croser and Ford at or downstream).

Four additional sites from the Burnside Creek catchment were sampled during this quarter; these sites were called CV1, CV2, SDam and SW1. SW1 was sampled prior to the construction of a silt retention dam designed to prevent runoff from the mine to neighbouring properties, this was replaced by SDam post-construction.

Table 1 Surface Water Quality Monitoring Sites

Site Site Description Flow

CV1

In Burnside Creek catchment at the Swamp Road culvert immediately up stream of the wastewater lagoons

Only flows after significant storm event.

CV2 In Burnside Creek catchment approx 200m downstream of CV1


SW1 Located in the south west corner of the Mine Lease.


SDam Located in the south west corner of the Mine Lease, in the silt retention dam.


Bridge In the Angas River under the Angas Bridge in Strathalbyn proper (Control site). Generally flows all year.

Hogben In the Angas River immediately downstream of Burnside Creek (Control site). Generally flows all year.

Croser In the Angas River immediately upstream of Burnside Creek (Impact site). Generally flows all year.

Ford In the Angas River downstream of Croser (Impact site) Generally flows all year.


May to July 2007

4

Figure 1 Angas River Surface Water Sampling Sites.

Figure 2 Mine Lease Surface Water Sampling Sites.


May to July 2007

5

2.3 Sampling Methodology

The Angas sites were sampled during the first week of May, June and July 2007. The samples were collected from the watercourse by directly filling the sample bottles with water, as detailed in the Terramin sampling protocol. The pre-labelled bottles were placed in an ice cooler with ice packs for temporary storage and the field record sheet was completed on site.

At the Terramin Strathalbyn Office the field record sheet was placed in the surface water sampling records folder, a Chain-of-Custody (CoC) form was completed and sent with the water samples to ALSE Laboratories (NATA accredited) for analysis. The samples were kept at around 4 oC using a combination of cooler boxes with icepacks (in the field and while in transport) and a refrigerator (during storage on site).

Surface water samples were tested for pH (protons), conductivity (salinity), turbidity, dissolved sulphate, total metals (iron, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, silver, thallium and zinc) and nutrients (forms of Nitrogen and Phosphorus). ALSE Laboratories confirmed that the samples arrived in timely and well preserved condition on each occasion and demonstrating good quality control.

2.4 Results and Discussion

The results of surface water monitoring are presented in Table 2 A and B. Crosier and Hogben can be compared to previous monitoring at these sites while data from the Bridge, Ford and the Mining Lease sites were collected for the first time. In general water quality from the Angas River sites was at or very near the laboratory method detection limit, while water quality from the mining lease sites particularly site SW1 were elevated.

Salinity was generally below the baseline data this is assumed to be a dilution effect due to higher rainfall during this reporting period than that observed during the baseline (August 2006 and March 2007). Turbidity and total iron content tended to be higher at the Bridge and Hogben than at the downstream sites. There were no clear patterns with metals or nutrients at the Angas River sites, although Hogben tended to have the highest values.

The ML surface water sites had higher turbidity levels than the river sites as would be expected during the construction phase. Metals were also higher in runoff from the ML, and some values at CV1 and SW1 exceeded the EPA Freshwater guidelines.


May to July 2007

6

The control sites on the Angas River upstream of the mine exceeding the 2.SD for metals on 14 counts and exceeding the EPA water quality guideline1 on 2 counts compared to the potential impact sites downstream of the mine, which exceeded the 2.SD on 4 counts and the EPA guideline on 1 count. This reflects on the variable nature of stream monitoring rather than any significant contamination happening upstream of the mine. This interpretation is supported by data from the Bureau of Meteorology which shows that the 27th of April was the wettest 24 hour period since 1997 at 32.6mm, and may easily explain the higher than usual turbidity and metal concentrations.

1 Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003 and Explanatory Report, Environment Protection Authority, May 2003; Schedule 2 Table 1.

Table 2 Surface Water Quality - Laboratory Results

A: Angas River Surface Water Sites

Site 2.SD EPA fw Units BRIDGE HOGBEN CROSER FORD

Date 06/06/07 04/07/07 02/08/07 27/04/07 06/06/07 04/07/07 02/08/07 27/04/07 06/06/07 04/07/07 02/08/07 06/06/07 04/07/07 02/08/07 pH 6.50 9 pH Unit 7.78 7.84 7.93 7.49 7.63 7.74 7.88 7.72 7.7 7.76 7.88 7.61 7.74 7.79 EC 5659 6916 µS/cm 2060 2540 2100 1960 2180 2340 2100 2850 2200 2450 2100 2090 2500 2120 TDS 3381 4132 mg/L 1260 1670 1220 1150 1440 1480 1250 1580 1300 1520 1240 1250 1580 1210 TURB 4.2 20 NTU 6.6 41.3 5.2 7.9 4.4 8 5.8 3.3 3.7 4.4 3 3.9 4.5 3.4 SO4-D 524.3 1000 mg/L 98 104 78 114 131 111 76 80 134 119 75 124 125 75 Fe-T 0.6 1 mg/L 0.81 2.14 0.48 0.65 0.61 0.42 0.38 0.28 0.47 0.27 0.4 0.4 0.22 0.32 As-T 0.0035 0.05 mg/L 0.002 0.002 <0.001 0.002 0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 <0.001 Cd-T 0.0001 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0003 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0003 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0003 <0.0003 <0.0001 0.0001 <0.0003 Cr-T 0.001 nc mg/L <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Cu-T 0.004 0.01 mg/L 0.003 0.004 <0.001 0.006 0.003 0.002 <0.001 0.002 0.003 0.002 <0.001 0.003 0.003 <0.001 Pb-T 0.001 0.005 mg/L <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Ni-T 0.002 0.15 mg/L 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Se-T 0.010 0.005 mg/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Ag-T 0.001 0.0001 mg/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Tl-T 0.001 0.004 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Zn-T 0.021 0.05 mg/L 0.017 0.037 0.016 0.023 0.016 0.01 0.019 0.055 0.013 0.01 0.018 0.015 0.017 <0.015 NOX-N 0.593 0.5 mg/L 0.31 0.056 <0.010 0.396 0.17 0.157 0.05 0.185 0.114 0.098 0.119 0.145 0.119 0.022 TKN-N 1.122 nc mg/L <0.1 0.6 0.4 0.5 <0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 <0.1 0.4 0.4 <0.1 0.4 0.3 N-T 1.420 5 mg/L 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.3 P-T 0.192 0.5 mg/L 0.07 0.05 0.1 0.23 0.06 0.01 0.53 0.12 0.06 <0.01 0.05 0.07 0.01 0.05

Cells highlighted in yellow show values that exceed the MARP Criteria of 2 standard deviations from the mean (2.SD) cells in highlighted in tan exceed the EPA freshwater criteria. T= total, D = dissolved.

B: Mining Lease Surface Water Site

Site 2.SD EPA fw Units CV1 CV2 SDAM SW1

Date 9/07/2007 17/07/2007 17/07/2007 17/07/2007 27/04/2007

pH 6.5 - 9 pH Unit 8.08 8.19 8.36 8.25 7.9

EC 5659 6916 µS/cm 465 378 203 558 247

TDS 3381 4132 mg/L 314 685 290 710 140

TURB 4.2 20 NTU 140 1600 680 4580 15700

SO4-D 524.3 1000 mg/L 21 14 4 18 5

Fe-T 0.6 1 mg/L 18.6 573

As-T 0.0035 0.05 mg/L 0.019 0.171

Cd-T 0.0001 0.002 mg/L <0.0001 0.0043

Cr-T 0.001 nc mg/L 0.013 0.772

Cu-T 0.004 0.01 mg/L 0.006 0.271

Pb-T 0.001 0.005 mg/L 0.006 0.744

Ni-T 0.002 0.15 mg/L 0.004 0.347

Se-T 0.010 0.005 mg/L <0.010 <0.050

Ag-T 0.001 0.0001 mg/L <0.010 0.014

Tl-T 0.001 0.004 mg/L <0.001 0.032

Zn-T 0.021 0.05 mg/L 0.021 0.926

Fe-D 0.139 1 mg/L 0.19 0.13 0.27

As-D 0.001 0.05 mg/L 0.015 0.006 0.005

Cd-D 0.000 0.002 mg/L <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001

Cr-D 0.001 nc mg/L 0.001 <0.001 0.001

Cu-D 0.003 0.01 mg/L 0.002 0.002 0.002

Pb-D 0.001 0.005 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Ni-D 0.001 0.15 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Se-D 0.010 0.005 mg/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010

Ag-D 0.001 0.0001 mg/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010

Tl-D 0.001 0.004 mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Zn-D 0.029 0.05 mg/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005

NOX-N 0.593 0.5 mg/L 1.56 0.902 1.65 0.647 0.998

TKN-N 1.122 nc mg/L 0.6 1.4 1.2 5.3 20.7

N-T 1.420 5 mg/L 2.2 2.3 2.9 6 21.6

P-T 0.192 0.5 mg/L 0.1 0.76 0.42 2.14 7.12

Cells highlighted in yellow show values that exceed the MARP Criteria of 2 standard deviations from the mean (2SD) cells in highlighted in tan exceed the EPA freshwater criteria.


May to July 2007

9

3 Groundwater Quality

3.1 Introduction

The long term aim of the groundwater monitoring program is to track Terramin’s performance in preventing pollution from mining activities entering the regional groundwater. Changes in groundwater quality will be evaluated by comparing monitoring results to natural background water quality levels as defined in QER#3, which reported the average and calculated the standard deviation used to derive the MARP criteria of 2.SD (that is 2 time standard deviation above the mean).

Ten peizometers (groundwater monitoring bores) were sampled between May and July 2007 to test water quality. Three additional groundwater monitoring bores have recently been installed and should be ready for sampling in the next quarter to build up some baseline data prior to commissioning the tailings storage facilities (TSF). Some bores were not sampled as scheduled due to technical problems with sampling equipment or accessibility to vehicles (equipped with sampling pump).

In the AZM MARP, Terramin committed to measuring water level (below the surface) and Pd, Zn, As, Cd, Fe, Mn, pH and TDS and to implementing control measures to ensure that the MARP groundwater quality criteria (2.SD) is met.

The data presented in this QER is essentially the first data set to be tested against the 2.SD Baseline. It is noted that no underground mining took place during this monitoring period but AZM did extend the footprint of the previous quarry to build the box cut and has continued with exploration drilling.


May to July 2007

10

3.2 Groundwater Sampling Locations

Groundwater monitoring sites sampled during this reporting period are described in Table 3 and shown in Figure 3.

Table 3 Groundwater Monitoring Wells

Bore Code Site Description Bore Depth (m) Type

AWE 1 South of the sewage effluent lagoons near the Callington Rd, completed to weathered Cambrian basement.

14.2 Mineralised area

LG1 Immediately south of the Effluent Lagoon completed to the unweathered Cambrian basement.


LG2 Immediately south of the Effluent Lagoon completed to the weathered Cambrian basement.


RG1 North of the mining lease boundary near the Victor Harbour - Adelaide railway line and completed in the weathered Cambrian basement.

21 Upstream

RG2 West of the mining lease boundary near Burnside Creek and completed in the shallow weathered Cambrian basement.

14.8 Potentially downstream

RG3 West of the mining lease boundary near Burnside Creek and completed in Quaternary sediments that overlie the unweathered Cambrian basement.

45 Potentially downstream

RG4 South of the mining lease boundary near Summerhill Road and completed in the unweathered Cambrian basement.

50 Potentially downstream

RG7 North eastern corner of the mine near the Callington Rd and completed in Tertiary sediment.

10 Upstream

RG8 North eastern corner of the mine near the Callington Rd and completed in unweathered Cambrian basement.

45 Upstream


May to July 2007

11

Figure 3 Ground Water Monitoring Sites


May to July 2007

12

3.3 Sampling Methodology

Bores RG1, RG2, RG3, RG4, RG7, RG8, LG1, LG2 and AWE1 are fitted with dedicated HDPE or LDPE tubing and foot valves, to reduce the potential for cross contamination between sites.

Depth to water was measured from a reference point (top of casing) using a calibrated dipmeter prior to purging the peizometers. A minimum of 3 bore volumes of water were removed from the peizometers prior to sampling.

A Waterra hydrolift pump was used for both purging and sampling. During purging, water was pumped into a container and the volume and time taken to purge the peizometers were recorded.

Finally water samples were collected by pumping directly into the pre-labelled and pre-treated polyethylene bottles supplied by the analytical laboratories. All sample bottles were supplied by ALS Laboratories with the appropriate preservative.

Other field measurements included water temperature, pH and EC, which were made using portable Hanna pH, temperature and conductivity metres. The meters were calibrated prior to each sampling trip and the pH.

Duplicate water samples were also collected for quality assurance by directly pumping into a clean large plastic container and decanted into two laboratory supplied bottles. The duplicate was designated as site RG9 and the bore number was recorded but not sent to the laboratory. A blank sample was made by decanting RO water into a sample bottle and labelled RG10.

The sample bottles were sealed with the lids provided and labelled on site. Separate sample bottles were used for metals, nutrients, major ions and microbiological work. At the end of the sampling round the field record sheet was completed and placed in the surface water sampling records folder and the samples were sent to ALSE Laboratories (NATA accredited) in an ice-cooler with ice packs by air freight accompanied by a Chain-of-Custody form.


Nine bore holes were sampled between May 2007 and July 2007. Sites LG1 and LG2 were not sampled in May due to vehicle access issues. RG3 and RG8 were not sampled in July because of ongoing problems with tubing and or foot valves. The field notes and results of field testing are presented in Table 4.


May to July 2007

13

Table 4 Field Groundwater Measurements

Site Date SWL Appearance

Water Temp

° C

pH EC mS/cm

Air Temp

°C

Purge Vol (L)

Comments

AWE1 5-Jun-07 8.44 18.9 6.92 19.3 15°C 40 AWE1 3-Jul-07 8.2 19.4 6.65 20 21°C LG1 4-Jun-07 1 17.2 6.49 21.6 5 LG1 2-Jul-07 1.3 15.5 6.78 22.3 14°C 8 LG2 4-Jun-07 1.3 Dirty 18 6.96 20.4 14°C 550 LG2 3-Jul-07 1.34 Dirty 18.2 6.59 21.6 23°C 550 RG1 1-May-07 10.18 Light Grey 18.3 6.85 10.3 19°C 265 RG1 4-Jun-07 10.14 18.3 6.84 10.4 10°C 265 RG1 2-Jul-07 10.13 Light Grey 18 6.72 10.2 13°C 265 RG2 2-May-07 8.49 Dirty 18.5 6.77 6.1 18°C 130 60mm 27/04/07 RG2 5-Jun-07 8.47 18.4 6.73 6.2 16°C 140 RG2 2-Jul-07 8:41 Dirty 18.4 6.81 6.3 14°C 130 RG3 2-May-07 8.33 19 7.11 6.4 19°C 900 60mm 27/04/07 RG3 5-Jun-07 8.3 Clear 18.7 6.92 6.6 16°C 900

RG3 2-Jul-07 8.26 18.9 7.12 6.8

Sulphur smell pump stopped at 11.31

RG4 1-May-07 28.4 Clear 20.5 7.49 8.9 26°C 490 60mm 27/04/07 RG4 5-Jun-07 28.34 Clear 18 7.04 9.2 6°C 490 RG4 3-Jul-07 28.23 Clear 19.9 7.08 9.2 13°C 490 RG7 1-May-07 8.24 19.5 6.9 29 21°C 2.5 RG7 5-Jun-07 8.25 18.5 6.56 29.6 11°C 3 RG7 3-Jul-07 8.2 19.4 6.56 29.2 19°C 2 Pumped dry RG8 7-Jun-07 7.81 Clear 18.9 6.37 26.2 16°C 265

The salinity of groundwater in the region has not changed over the reporting period; the same two distinct groups based on salinity were observed during this period. Sites RG1, RG2, RG3 and RG4 had salinity between 6.1 and 10.4 mS/cm, while sites AW1, LG1, LG2, RG7 and RG8 had salinities between 19.3 and 29.6 ms/cm, Table 4. Groundwater was generally neutral, reporting a pH range between 6.5 and 7.5.

Quality control tests for field replicate samples are presented in Table 5, which shows that all results were within standard quality control criteria (relative percent differences (RPD) of the duplicate samples are less than 50% RPD or within 3x the Limit of Reporting (LOR). Only 2 exception were noted; chromium and zinc in the May sampling round, which had RPD >50% and were more than 3x LOR. Therefore the interpretation of chromium and zinc in May will be treated with caution.


May to July 2007

14

Table 5 Quality Control (replicate samples)

Site LOR RG9 RG4 RPD RG9 RG3 RPD RG9 LG2 RPD

Date mg/L 01-May-07 01-May-07 05-Jun-07 05-Jun-07 3/07/2007 3/07/2007

D-Sulphate 1 509 498 2.2 459 474 -0.8 1950 1990 -0.5

T-Iron 0.01 0.3 0.3 0.0 1.42 1.28 2.6 59.9 53.6 2.8

T-Arsenic 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.0 0.003 0.002 10.0 0.017 0.018 -1.4

T-Cadmium 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 -66.7 0.0001 0.0001 0.0 0.005 0.0048 1.0

T-Chromium 0.001 0.006 0.001 142.9 0.003 0.003 0.0 0.175 0.189 -1.9

T-Copper 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.0 0.003 0.003 0.0 0.069 0.076 -2.4

T-Lead 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 0.004 0.004 0.0 0.057 0.066 -3.7

T-Nickel 0.001 0.003 0.001 100.0 0.001 0.001 0.0 0.074 0.085 -3.5

T-Selenium 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.0 0.011 0.01 2.4

T-Silver 0.001 0.012 0.017 -34.5 0.01 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.0

T-Thallium 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 0.001 0.001 0.0 0.003 0.003 0.0

T-Zinc 0.005 0.011 0.005 75.0 0.008 0.007 3.3 0.672 0.732 -2.1 *Note values below LOR were converted to LOR for statistical analysis.

Table 6 presents the results the field blanks collected during this monitoring period. All metals (and sulphate) were below the LOR with the exception of iron on one occasion, although this was only 2x the LOR and is within acceptable quality control criteria.

Table 6 Quality Control (field blank)

Locality RG10 RG10 Date 4-Jun-07 3-Jul-07D-Sulphate <1 <1 T-Iron 0.02 <0.01 T-Arsenic <0.001 <0.001 T-Cadmium 0.0001 <0.0001 T-Chromium <0.001 <0.001 T-Copper <0.001 0.001 T-Lead <0.001 <0.001 T-Nickel <0.001 <0.001 T-Selenium <0.010 <0.010 T-Silver <0.010 <0.010 T-Thallium <0.001 <0.001 T-Zinc <0.005 <0.005

< = below LOR, pink cell indicates at or above LOR.

The water samples were analysed by ALS laboratories (NATA certified) and a summary of the results for this reporting period are presented in Table 7.

Environmental Monitoring Quarterly Report – May to July 2007

15

Table 7 Ground Water Quality – Laboratory Results

Site Code Date SO4-D Fe-T As-T Cd-T Cr-T Cu-T Ni-T Pb-T Tl-T Zn-T MARP (2.SD) 3329.8 69.02 0.038 0.004 0.134 0.117 0.051 0.262 0.003 1.704 EPA (Fresh water) 1000 1 0.05 0.002 0.01 0.15 0.005 0.004 0.05 AWE1 01-May-07 1480 7.18 0.007 0.0001 0.017 0.013 0.005 0.008 <0.001 0.042 AWE1 05-Jun-07 1700 6.31 0.012 <0.0001 0.025 0.018 0.005 0.01 0.001 0.058 AWE1 03-Jul-07 1440 12.6 0.01 0.0002 0.026 0.016 0.006 0.015 0.001 0.065 LG1 04-Jun-07 2700 48.4 0.01 0.0002 0.015 0.023 0.013 0.075 <0.001 0.032 LG1 02-Jul-07 2500 68.4 0.056 0.0001 0.098 0.063 0.056 0.152 0.001 0.134 LG2 04-Jun-07 2050 91.8 0.01 0.0062 0.015 0.028 0.015 0.048 <0.001 0.57 LG2 03-Jul-07 1990 53.6 0.018 0.0048 0.189 0.076 0.085 0.066 0.003 0.732 RG1 01-May-07 722 0.66 <0.001 0.0002 0.002 0.003 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 0.007 RG1 04-Jun-07 782 3.94 0.002 0.0002 0.007 0.005 0.006 0.003 0.002 0.016 RG1 02-Jul-07 824 1.47 <0.001 <0.0001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.001 <0.001 <0.005 RG2 02-May-07 331 3.8 0.002 <0.0001 0.007 0.005 0.003 0.009 <0.001 <0.005 RG2 05-Jun-07 344 21.6 0.008 0.0003 0.034 0.018 0.014 0.023 <0.001 0.036 RG2 02-Jul-07 346 22.7 0.006 <0.0001 0.028 0.015 0.011 0.018 <0.001 0.023 RG3 02-May-07 472 1.13 0.002 <0.0001 0.002 0.002 <0.001 0.002 <0.001 <0.005 RG3 05-Jun-07 474 1.28 0.002 <0.0001 0.003 0.003 <0.001 0.004 <0.001 0.008 RG4 01-May-07 498 0.3 0.002 0.0002 <0.001 0.003 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.005 RG4 05-Jun-07 536 0.35 0.004 0.0002 0.002 0.003 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.008 RG4 03-Jul-07 492 0.36 0.002 0.0002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.005 RG7 01-May-07 2240 10.2 0.005 <0.0001 <0.001 0.012 0.003 0.007 0.002 0.11 RG7 05-Jun-07 2330 7.6 0.015 <0.0001 0.006 0.013 0.005 0.009 <0.001 0.017 RG7 03-Jul-07 2140 12.5 0.02 <0.0001 0.007 0.01 0.008 0.016 <0.001 0.08 RG8 07-Jun-07 2340 3.77 0.005 0.0003 0.003 0.013 0.004 0.031 <0.001 0.057 *Units in mg/L. Values highlighted in tan exceed SA EPA Fresh Water Quality Guidelines, numbers in yellow exceeded 2 standard deviations. T = “total” that is unfiltered samples; D = “dissolved” that is passing 45 micro filter. Please note chromium criterion is based on Cr VI


16

Table 7 highlights values that are higher than the EPA Freshwater Quality Criteria (tan) and higher than the MARP groundwater quality criteria (Yellow). The poorest groundwater quality was found in the bores within the mineralised area (AWE1, LG1, LG2, LG7 and LG8). Most bores exceed at least one EPA criteria, particularly for dissolved sulphate, reflecting the mineralised nature in the region. LG4 between the mineralised area and the Angas River is the only site that meets all EPA criteria.

Metal concentrations were found at similar levels reported previously and remain at naturally high levels, but generally within 2 standard deviations of the baseline values. This is the first reporting period that the MARP groundwater quality criteria has been used and caution should be used in interpreting the results presented in Table 4.

The MARP criteria of 2 standard deviations was based on all groundwater quality data collected during the baseline period, it is important to factor in the influence of the bores outside the mineralised area that tend to lower the overall average and that by definition 2 times standard deviation implies that 1 in 40 results will be higher than the criteria simply by chance. It is strongly suggested that the moving average is a better indicator of trends and over time this moving average should provide a reliable indicator of the performance of control measures implemented by AZM.

Three month moving averages (equivalent to one reporting period) of a selection of representative sites (AWE in the mineralised area, RG4 downstream of the ML and RG1 upstream of mining activities) and indicator parameters (sulphate, iron, lead and zinc) are shown in Figure 4. No increasing (or decreasing) trend has been observed.


May to July 2007

17

AWE

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

24-Mar-06 13-May-06 02-Jul-06 21-Aug-06 10-Oct-06 29-Nov-06 18-Jan-07 09-Mar-07 28-Apr-07 17-Jun-07 06-Aug-07

Log

scal

e (m

g/L)

SO4-DFe-TPb-TZn-T

RG4

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

02-Jul-06 21-Aug-06 10-Oct-06 29-Nov-06 18-Jan-07 09-Mar-07 28-Apr-07 17-Jun-07 06-Aug-07

Log

scal

e (m

g/L)

SO4-DFe-TPb-TZn-T

RG1

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

02-Jul-06 21-Aug-06 10-Oct-06 29-Nov-06 18-Jan-07 09-Mar-07 28-Apr-07 17-Jun-07 06-Aug-07

Log

scal

e (m

g/L)

SO4-DFe-TPb-TZn-T

Figure 4 Moving Averages of Selected Sites and Groundwater Quality Parameters


May to July 2007

18

3.5 Groundwater Levels

Graphs of groundwater levels over time were generated to evaluate seasonal trends, Figure 5. Three water level groupings were identified in previous reports and this observation remains current:

• Deep (between 27 and 29 m below the surface) at site RG4. • Shallow, less than 1 m below ground level around the ponds (LG1 and LG2); and • Intermediate, between 7 and 10 m below the surface at all other sites.

Figure 5 Groundwater Levels

Groundwater levels as evident from Figure 5 have not varied significantly over the monitoring period from the baseline levels. Terramin has installed three more peizometers to monitor groundwater levels after the tailing storage facility are commissioned. It is expected that a few months of groundwater levels will be measured before commissioning the TSF to establish a baseline groundwater level at these new sites.


May to July 2007

19

4 Noise Monitoring Program

4.1 Introduction

To evaluate the effectiveness of noise control measures particularly the new noise barriers (earth bunds), Terramin initiated the noise monitoring program at 5 locations, Figure 6. The distribution of noise monitoring equipment is intended to provide a reliable measure of the effectiveness of Terramin’s noise control measures and to demonstrate that they are in compliance with the MARP criteria. The MARP noise level criteria are 60dBA2 during the day and 45dBA during the night, in construction phase. Once mining commences the MARP noise level criteria will decrease to 47dBA during the day and 40dBA during the night.

Terramin has implemented several control measures to minimise nuisance noise levels outside the mining lease. These include the construction of noise bunds, providing residents on the boundary with double glazed windows and limiting operational hours to between 7.00am and 10.00pm. Additional control measures will be implemented during the construction phase prior to commissioning the mine.

4.2 Monitoring Methodology

Noise monitoring was carried out at five locations; one of the monitoring stations (Lot 8) was monitored continuously during the monitoring campaign, while a second noise recorder was rotated between the other sites for 24 hours of continuous noise level monitoring, Figure 6. This method enables direct comparisons of noise levels at each site with the base station. Monitoring is conducted in the first week of each new quarterly sampling period.

Monitoring Locations and Date monitored.

• Gilgen- 7th May to 9th May • Webb- 9th May to 10th May • AHR- 10th May to 11th May • Glover 11th May to 14th May • Lot 8 (Site office) 7th May to 14th May

2 The unit of measured noise levels is decibels (dB). This unit does will not reflect the actual human perception of how loud the noise is. A specific circuit is added to the sound level meter to correct for frequencies that are perceived as loud. The letter A is added to indicate the correction that was made in the measurement, therefore the noise level is reported in dBA.


May to July 2007

20

Figure 6 Noise Monitoring Locations


May to July 2007

21


At the base station (Lot 8) daytime noise levels vary between 45 and 53dBA with only one peak above the day time criteria of 60dBA. Noise level at night were generally below night time criterion of 45dBA, although noise levels between 7pm and 10pm on some days (including the weekend) were between 45 and 50 dBA. This increased the overall night time average for the week to between 46 and 47dBA, Figure 7.

The equivalent sound levels3 (Leq) reported during this monitoring period were typical to those that could be expected near country township communities, and were lower than the noise levels reported prior to mining activities.

Figure 7 Lot 8 Callington Rd, 7 Day Continuous Noise Monitoring.

The 24 hour monitoring locations were comparable to the observations at Lot 8 with daytime noise levels between 45 and 55dBA. The noted exceptions were recorded at Gilgen and Glover with noise levels averaging around 47dBA between 7pm and 10pm.

3 Equivalent sound level (Leq) is a steady-state sound that has the same energy and A-weighted level as the community noise over a given time interval.


May to July 2007

22

5 Dust Monitoring Program

5.1 Introduction

Terramin has implemented several control measures to ensure that no potentially harmful or nuisance dust leave the mining lease. These measures include the use of water trucks and hydro-mulching of exposed surfaces to suppress dust. Additional dust control measures will be implemented during the construction phase so that by the time the mine becomes operational all dust control measures are in place.

To evaluate the performance of the dust control measures Terramin is using two high volume samplers (HVS), to track Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels and particulate lead located between the mine and Strathalbyn, Figure 8 and described in Table 8.

Eleven dust deposition gauges (DDG) have been placed strategically around the property to measure dust and lead deposition, Figure 8 and described in Table 8. During this reporting period two new DDG at sites 11 and 12 were installed and monitored but the DDG at site 7 was accidentally damaged and not sampled.

The measurement criteria adopted by Terramin to assess performance on dust emission is the World Health Organisation (WHO) TSP standard of an average of 120µg/m3 within a 24 hour period or not higher than natural background levels. The particulate lead criterion adopted by Terramin is the National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC) 24 hour average criteria of 1.5µg/m3 or not higher than natural background levels. Note the NEPM for particulate lead is an average of 0.5µg/m3 per annum.

Deposition of lead bearing dust from mining activities has the potential to impact soil downwind of the mine. While there are no criteria for lead deposited in DDG, the criterion for soil lead content is 200 mg/kg.

5.2 Methods for Dust Monitoring

5.2.1 Total Suspended Particulates and Particulate Lead

The timers on the HVS were set to collect dust continuously for 24 hours on a six day rotation as specified by the EPA, this method ensures that every day of the week is equally represented sampled over time. The dust filters from the HVS were collected every six days and replaced with new pre-weighed filters. The filter papers were processed, weighed and analysed for particulate lead using NATA standardised laboratories procedures.


May to July 2007

23

Figure 8 Dust Monitoring Locations


May to July 2007

24

Table 8 Dust Monitoring Sites and Description

Site Code Easting Northing Description Monitoring LRGCAGE Old monitoring site TSP & particulate Pb SECGATE New site near security gate TSP & particulate Pb

LOT8 New site on Lot 8 Callington Rd TSP & particulate Pb 1 310484 6097562 North boundary Effluent ponds and ML DDG & depositional

Pb 2 310987 6097418 AHR South bank dam DDG & depositional

Pb 3 310002 6097157 North boundary Glover property DDG & depositional

Pb 4 310598 6097160 South Callington Rd near mine house DDG & depositional

Pb 5 310822 6097194 East boundary of ML DDG & depositional

Pb 6 310343 6096854 South east boundary Lot 8 DDG & depositional

Pb 7 310940 6096952 East boundary of ML DDG & depositional

Pb 8 310456 6096736 North east boundary of Jettner property DDG & depositional

Pb 9 310931 6096448 South boundary of ML DDG & depositional

Pb 10 310149 6098269 South of railway line and west of Creek

property DDG & depositional Pb

11 310047 6096873 300 m west of AZM Office (Lot 8) DDG & depositional Pb

12 310057 6097396 100 m west of the Strathalbyn STEDS Ponds DDG & depositional Pb

5.2.2 Ambient Dust and Lead Deposition

Eleven deposition gauge bottles were collected every 30 days ±2 days from the DDG and replaced with a new bottle. The labelled bottles were sent to a NATA certified laboratory for analysis according to AS/NZS 3580.10.1:2003 [5] for the following:

• Total solids • Soluble matter • Insoluble matter

• Combustible matter • Ash content • Particulate Lead


25

5.3 Results and Discussion of Dust Monitoring

5.3.1 Particulate Dust and Lead

The results of particulate dust monitoring during this reporting period are presented in Table 9. Particulate lead are analysed in three monthly batches and are currently out of synchronisation with the EQR periods, however the last of the baseline data was reported and these remain very low usually below the detection limit of the analytical levels used (1µ/m3) and on rare occasions at the detection limit. The first post baseline particulate lead data will be reported in the fifth QER.

Table 9 Results of HVS Monitoring

Site DATE TSP

ug/m³ Comments SECGATE 6/05/2007 45.4 SECGATE 12/05/2007 193.9 SECGATE 18/05/2007 29.9 SECGATE 24/05/2007 53.8 SECGATE 30/05/2007 28.8 SECGATE 5/06/2007 14.4 SECGATE 11/06/2007 30.3 SECGATE 17/06/2007 16.2 SECGATE 23/06/2007 24.3 SECGATE 29/06/2007 38.5 SECGATE 5/07/2007 26.0 SECGATE 11/07/2007 19.3 SECGATE 17/07/2007 24.2 SECGATE 23/07/2007 Sampler not set to run SECGATE 29/07/2007 31.1 LOT8 6/05/2007 16.0 LOT8 12/05/2007 59.4 LOT8 18/05/2007 30.4 LOT8 24/05/2007 45.5 LOT8 30/05/2007 15.7 LOT8 5/06/2007 8.7 LOT8 11/06/2007 24.2 LOT8 17/06/2007 13.4 LOT8 23/06/2007 12.2 LOT8 29/06/2007 14.2 LOT8 5/07/2007 14.6 LOT8 11/07/2007 11.7 LOT8 17/07/2007 17.5 Sampler ran for 19.1 hours LOT8 23/07/2007 33.5 LOT8 29/07/2007 23.8

* Values highlighted in pink represent exceedence of the World Health Organisation health guideline value of 120µg/m3.


May to July 2007

26

Dust levels during this reporting period only exceeded the WHO TSP guideline of 120µg/m3 on one occasion. This is a significant improvement on particulate dust levels observed prior to Terramin starting the construction phase. Figure 9 shows the levels of suspended particulates levels during the baseline monitoring period (purple) and during the construction phase on Lot 8 (yellow) and the Security Gate (light blue).

The highest dust levels were observed prior to Terramin starting the construction phase and were attributed to increased quarrying activities prior to handing over the site to Terramin.

Figure 9 Total Suspended Particulates

This graph shows baseline TSP data (purple) and the post baseline data at LOT8 (yellow) and SECGATE (light blue). The blue dot was the first sample after the site was handed over to Terramin.

5.3.2 Dust Deposition

The laboratory results for dust deposition gauges during this reporting period are presented in Table 10. Dust levels were relatively low throughout the sampling period except on the 9th May at site 9, which exceeded the baseline average by more than 2 standard deviations.

No lead analysis was conducted in May due to a laboratory error. Lead deposition exceeded the MARP criterion for depositional lead at site 12 between 14 June and 12 July 2007. As explained in the groundwater section, by definition 1 in 40 measurements can exceed 2 standard deviations simply by chance.


May to July 2007

27

Table 10 Results from Dust Deposition Gauges

Analyte Date

Collected Ash Content

Combustible Matter

Total Soluble Matter

Total Solids

Total Insoluble Matter Lead

SITE MARP criteria 5.1 3.9 5.7 12.5 8.4 37.3

1 9/05/2007 1.1 1.2 0.9 3.2 2.2 2 9/05/2007 2.8 2.2 <0.1 5 5 3 9/05/2007 0.9 0.2 0.4 1.5 1.1 4 9/05/2007 4.2 2 1.6 7.8 6.2 5 9/05/2007 0.4 <0.1 0.3 0.8 0.5 6 9/05/2007 2.1 0.4 1.9 4.4 2.5 8 9/05/2007 4 2.3 1.6 7.8 6.2 9 9/05/2007 20.7 5.5 4.3 30.6 26.3

10 9/05/2007 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.3 1.4 11 9/05/2007 0.5 0.7 1 2.2 1.2 12 9/05/2007 0.4 3.2 0.3 3.9 3.6 1 14/06/2007 0.6 1.2 1.4 3.2 1.8 <10.0 2 14/06/2007 0.8 1.3 1.2 3.3 2.2 <10.0 3 14/06/2007 0.5 0.6 1.1 2.2 1.1 32.34 14/06/2007 1.8 1 1.3 4.1 2.8 11.95 14/06/2007 1.4 0.7 2.2 4.3 2.1 17.96 14/06/2007 0.8 0.8 2 3.6 1.6 19.28 14/06/2007 1.4 1 2.5 5 2.4 <10.0 9 14/06/2007 4.2 2.9 3.8 11 7.1 11.4

10 14/06/2007 0.5 0.5 1.3 2.2 1 <10.3 11 14/06/2007 0.7 0.8 0.4 1.9 1.6 <10.0 12 14/06/2007 3.8 2 4.3 10.2 5.8 14.41 12/07/2007 1.5 1.7 2.1 5.3 3.2 22.42 12/07/2007 0.4 0.3 4.3 5.1 0.7 31.43 12/07/2007 0.5 0.8 0.2 1.6 1.3 <10.0 4 12/07/2007 0.5 3.2 1.7 5.4 3.7 20.25 12/07/2007 1.7 1.2 3.1 6 2.9 16.66 12/07/2007 2.1 1.9 2.6 6.6 4 <10.0 8 12/07/2007 2.5 2.2 3.8 8.5 4.7 13.29 12/07/2007 4 2.3 3.1 9.4 6.3 23.1

10 12/07/2007 0.4 0.8 0.2 1.4 1.2 14.911 12/07/2007 0.4 0.7 0.2 1.4 1.2 <10.0 12 12/07/2007 4.6 3.6 2.8 11 8.2 44.6

Units in g/m²/month, values shaded light yellow are at or above 2 standard deviations from baseline average. Site 7 was damaged and could not be monitored. No lead analysis was conducted in May.

The weights of insoluble material deposited in one month over a square metre at each DDG are shown in Figure 10, and the concentration of lead in this material is shown in Figure 11.


May to July 2007

28

Figure 10 Total Solids Deposition around the AZM Lease

* MARP Criteria (yellow line) is 2 standard deviations above the baseline average.

Figure 11 Total Lead Deposition

* MARP Criteria (yellow line) is 2 standard deviations above the baseline average.


May to July 2007

29

6 Blast Monitoring

This section will present the outcomes of blast monitoring. A permanent monitoring station was installed on 13th August test data has been sent to a blast specialist to confirm the monitoring station is working correctly. Data will be downloaded by AZM staff or remotely by the blast consultant. Daily blast monitoring will commence in late September or October.


May to July 2007

30

7 Flora and Fauna Monitoring

7.1 Visual Amenity Photopoints

Terramin established a series of permanent photopoints to track visual amenity and the establishment of vegetation. A sequence of panoramic shots taken in February/ March 2007 was presented as a baseline in the AZM MARP. In June/ July 2007 Terramin took another set of panoramic photos at the permanent locations to document construction stage. These will be presented in the next QER.

7.2 Flora and Fauna

Terramin routinely inspects its property visually for weeds and feral animals and takes appropriate action when required. Weeds were sprayed by a contractor in June and by July weed control was evident.

The tree planting and seeding of bunds and stockpile commenced in June. Terramin routinely inspects these revegetation sites and has applied water to seedlings during a long windy and dry period in late July. A vegetation monitoring program to evaluate the success of establishing native vegetation will be implemented at the end of spring. At the start of next winter a more detailed tree establishment/ growth rate survey will be undertaken.


May to July 2007

31

8 Rainwater Tank and Regional Topsoil Monitoring

At the request of the Strathalbyn community and PIRSA Terramin undertook a baseline survey of water quality in rainwater tanks and topsoil near the tanks. The Baseline survey conducted in August 2006 was presented in the AZM MARP. Terramin completed the 2007 survey and submitted the samples for analysis in August. The results will be reported in the next QER.

The sampling locations for the regional topsoil and rainwater tank survey are presented in Figure 12.

Figure 12 Regional Topsoil and Rainwater Tank Sampling Locations


May to July 2007

32

9 Interaction with the Strathalbyn Community

9.1 Strathalbyn Community Consultation Committee

The baseline Quarterly Environmental Reports and a summary of this report were presented to the SCCC. The meeting was well attended by the SCCC and members of the community and PIRSA mining specialists. This forum provided a good opportunity for questions and clarifications of methodology and the interpretation (and limitations) of the results. Comments and suggestions raised at the meeting have been incorporated in this new format of the QER; including an executive summary and adopting a higher level presentation of the complaints register to ensure anonymity of complainants.

A dedicated 24/7 complaints telephone line has been implemented by Terramin. The community requested the presentation of the environmental monitoring to become a routine agenda item at the quarterly SCCC meetings.

9.2 Complaints Register

Terramin has implemented a dedicated complaints answering service and established a complaints register to track community concerns regarding mining activities and how AZM Personnel addressed these concerns. The AZM Complaints Register records the date and time each complaint or concern was received; the nature of the complaint; the response and action taken to remedy the concern; the name of the AZM respondent; and tracks any follow-up actions until the complaint is addressed. Eight complaints were recorded during the last quarter down from 19 in the last quarter. The complaints register is treated confidentially by AZM and only PIRSA and the SCCC have access to it.

Table 11 presents the number of complaints by type and source. All complaints were attended to within the two working days. Noise is still the main complaint received by AZM, although there has been a reduction since the noise bunds and other control measures were implemented.

Table 11 Complaints Count by Type and Source

Complainant ID blasting lights noise safety vibration Total 1 1 2 1 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 6 1 1 7 1 1

Total 1 2 3 1 1 8


May to July 2007

33

10 Environmental Milestones

During this reporting period AZM completed or implemented the following environmental activities:

• Implementation of the facilities to recycle paper, cardboard and various metals. • Construction of the north, south, and west facing noise bunds. • Using a water truck for dust suppression. • Sweeping of dragout using a road sweeper and covering unsealed roads with

rubble. These are seen as temporary measures until the main entrance and road construction issue are resolved.

• Seeding of sterile rye grass, clover and native vegetation with hydro-mulching technique over the noise bunds, topsoil stockpile and accessible walls in the box cut.

• Planting of native tube-stock around the TSF. • Communication with local community:

o monthly newsletter, o press releases and local media involvement, o SCCC site visit.

• Visitors platform constructed and tours commenced (~140 people visited site in August)

• Weather station to be erected next quarter.


May to July 2007

34

11 Conclusion

The Fourth Quarterly Environmental Report presents the first results of water and dust quality monitoring that could be compared to the baseline data.

Monitoring of surface and ground water quality confirms that the mine is having no effect on the Angas River or the regional aquifers. Bores in the ore body remain mineralised but not significantly different to the natural levels observed during the baseline period. Therefore we conclude that water quality has not been affected by the construction activities.

Dust levels around the mine have diminished compared to the baseline surveys and were generally within MARP and EPA/ WHO criteria. This reduction in dust levels was reflected in the reduction in community complaints regarding dust. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of control measures implemented on site.

Noise levels have been reported for the first time in the QER, the results demonstrate that the control measures implemented by Terramin are effective in controlling noise during construction. Noise levels measured around the AZM site are generally compliant with the MARP criteria and EPP draft guideline for noise.

The next Quarterly Environmental Report will include blast monitoring, annual rainwater tank monitoring and regional soil monitoring.


May to July 2007

35

Abbreviations:

As arsenic

Cd cadmium

CoC Chain of Custody form

DDG Dust deposition gauges

EC electrical conductivity

Fe iron

HVS High Volume Sampler

Mn manganese

NATA National Association of Testing Authorities (private company)

Pd lead

pH inverse log 10 of proton (hydrogen ion) concentration

QER Quarterly Environmental Report

TDS total dissolved solids

TSP total suspended particles

Zn zinc

Compiled by

Date post:	31-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

QUARTERLY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT #4 · Quarterly Environmental Report #4 May to July 2007 Blast...

Documents