Quarterly Environment Report - Terramin Australia Limited · This is the second QER for 2016 and represents the period from April to June 2016 (Quarter 2). This report is prepared

1

Quarter 2: 2016

Environment and Community

Terramin Australia Ltd

April - June: 2016

Quarterly Environment Report

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This quarterly Environment Report (QER) for the Angas Zinc Mine (AZM) summarises the results of the

environmental monitoring program between April to June 2016, undertaken as part of the Mine’s Program for

Environmental Protection and Rehabilitation (PEPR).

Terramin Australia Ltd ceased mining operations at AZM on September 30th, 2013, with the site placed into a

Care and Maintenance phase.

This QER reflects the environmental monitoring requirements outlined in the Mine Care and Maintenance Plan

(MCMP), which has been approved by the Department for State Development (DSD) on the 23rd March 2015.

The Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) standing water surface area remains at approximately 7,000m2, under the

compliance limit of 15,000m2. Whilst the reduced level of the TSF decant pond surface is no longer a

compliance limit, the level was surveyed at 67.591m RL, as of the 25th June.

There are no non-compliances against Lease Condition Outcomes for Quarter 2, 2016.

The Annual Compliance Report was submitted at the beginning of the quarter and accepted by DSD on the 2nd

of May with minor feedback. DSD conducted a quarterly compliance visit on 19th May and deemed the site to

be compliant.

The quarter has largely been centred on fortnightly meetings with the DSD regarding Closure Outcomes and

Outcome Measurable Criteria. These meetings have involved the EPA, DEWNR, DSD, DPTI and Terramin and

Terramin’s hydrogeology consultants Australian Groundwater Technologies. Closure designs and mitigation

strategies continue to be refined and contrasted against the EPA’s processes to ensure all regulatory

frameworks are being captured in the Closure Plan.

An SCCC meeting was held on Thursday, 5th May and reported on the site’s compliance over quarter 1.

Cover photo: A juvenile Barking Gecko (Underwoodisaurus milii) onsite in June 2016. Photo taken by James

Baylis.

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 2

Background ............................................................................................................................................................. 5

1. Mining and Mine Void Acid and Metalliferous Drainage ............................................................................... 5

2. Surface Water ................................................................................................................................................ 6

3. Groundwater .................................................................................................................................................. 8

4. Noise .............................................................................................................................................................. 9

5. Public Health and Nuisance ........................................................................................................................... 9

High Volume Sampler – Compliance Criteria ................................................................................................... 10

Dust Deposition Gauges – Leading Indicator Criteria....................................................................................... 10

6. Waste Disposal and Hazardous Substances ................................................................................................. 10

7. TSF Water / Acid Mine Drainage .................................................................................................................. 10

TSF Decant Pond .............................................................................................................................................. 10

TSF Seepage Drain Flows .................................................................................................................................. 10

TSF Surface Area .............................................................................................................................................. 11

TSF Groundwater Monitoring Bores ................................................................................................................ 11

TSF PAF testwork results .................................................................................................................................. 11

8. Weeds and Pests .......................................................................................................................................... 13

9. Community Engagement ............................................................................................................................. 13

Strathalbyn Community Consultation Committee (SCCC) ............................................................................... 14

Complaints Register ......................................................................................................................................... 14

10. Summary.................................................................................................................................................. 14

11. References ............................................................................................................................................... 15

12. Appendix A – Angas Zinc Mine – Filled and unfilled voids ...................................................................... 16

13. Appendix B – Water Monitoring Locations ............................................................................................. 17

14. Appendix C – Surface Water Monitoring Data ........................................................................................ 18

15. Appendix D – Groundwater Monitoring Data ......................................................................................... 19

Groundwater Quality Raw Data ....................................................................................................................... 19

Groundwater Quality Graphs ........................................................................................................................... 20

4

16. Appendix E – Groundwater Standing Water Levels ................................................................................. 25

17. Appendix F – Dust Monitoring Locations ................................................................................................ 26

18. Appendix G – Dust Leading Indicator Data – Dust Deposition Gauges ................................................... 27

Total Insoluble Matter...................................................................................................................................... 27

Offsite Lead Measurements ............................................................................................................................. 28

Onsite Lead Measurements ............................................................................................................................. 29

19. Appendix H - Dust Leading Indicator Data – HiVol .................................................................................. 30

Total SolId Particulate Measurements ............................................................................................................. 30

PM10 measurements ....................................................................................................................................... 31

Lead measurements ......................................................................................................................................... 32

20. Appendix I – TSF ...................................................................................................................................... 33

Decant Pond reduced level throughout Care and Maintenance ..................................................................... 33

Seepage Drain Flows ........................................................................................................................................ 34

21. Appendix J – TSF Monitoring Bores ......................................................................................................... 35

22. Appendix K – TSF Seepage Drains ............................................................................................................ 39

23. Appendix K – TSF PAF TESTWORK ........................................................................................................... 40

5

BACKGROUND

This is the second QER for 2016 and represents the period from April to June 2016 (Quarter 2). This report is

prepared for the Strathalbyn Community Consultative Committee (SCCC), the Department of State

Development (DSD) and the Terramin Board of Directors. This document reports on Terramin’s status against

the measurable criteria outlined in the approved Mine Care and Maintenance Plan (23rd March 2015)

submitted as an addendum to the PEPR in July 2014.

1. MINING AND MINE VOID ACID AND METALLIFEROUS DRAINAGE

Production ceased at the Angas Zinc Mine (AZM) on the 30th of September 2013. As part of the ongoing Acid

and Metalliferous Drainage management strategy the mine void has been allowed to refill with groundwater

seep. In order to speed up the process of filling the void and mitigate potential oxidisation, additional water,

sourced from onsite bores was pumped into the mine void.

During this time the water has been monitored for level and pH.

The water level of the mine void measured 55.3m AHD on the 25th June 2016. An increased from 54.72m AHD

on the 25th March 2016. A sample obtained from the Pasteline 140 bore (which targets the mine void) on the

7th June revealed a pH of 7.90 and a sulfate concentration of 914mg/L (Figure 1). The latest sample obtained

from the pastefill line which targets the 140RL demonstrates that AMD generation at the source has remained

relatively stable, as predicted by AGT closure groundwater modelling (Figure 2). Monitoring water levels of

bores both near the mine void, DH2, DH3 and the Pastefill line (which targets the 140m RL decline void), as

well as the regional groundwater bores continues. This allows for monitoring of the cone of depression over

the mining lease.

Figure 1 PF140 sulfate levels obtained to date (mg/L)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

PF140 SO4 (mg/L)

PF140 SO4 (mg/L)

6

Figure 2 Tailings Column Test and PF140 Void Samples (AGT, 2016)

2. SURFACE WATER

Surface water sampling was undertaken at Hogben and Croser in April 2016. Statistical paired t-testing for

means revealed no significant difference between upstream (Hogben) and downstream (Croser).

7

Table 1: Surface water assay results and t-test values

Date Apr-16

Site Units Croser

1 Croser

2 Croser

3 Mean Croser

Hogben 1

Hogben 2

Hogben 3

Mean Hogben

p-value t-value

pH pH 7.83 7.84 7.79 7.82 7.97 8.03 8.02 8.006667 0.018902 4.302653

EC-L us/cm 4830 4780 4830 4813.333 5540 5580 5590 5570 0.001182 4.302653

TDS-180 mg/L 2650 2740 2580 2656.667 3210 3050 2980 3080 0.028551 4.302653

Turbidity NTU 312 101 342 251.6667 14.2 17.9 32.3 21.46667 0.088878 4.302653

SO4-D mg/L 119 118 118 118.3333 161 163 164 162.6667 0.000734 4.302653

As-T mg/L 0.006 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.002333 0.29986 4.302653

Cd-T mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 UNDER DETECTION

LIMITS

Cu-T mg/L 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.004 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.002333 0.370059 4.302653

Pb-T mg/L 0.007 0.004 0.001 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.678366 4.302653

Mn-T mg/L 0.811 0.327 0.262 0.466667 0.116 0.17 0.124 0.136667 0.212437 4.302653

Se-T mg/L 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 UNDER DETECTION

LIMITS

Zn-T mg/L 0.074 0.048 0.017 0.046333 0.017 0.031 0.065 0.037667 0.803604 4.302653

Fe-T mg/L 4.9 1.2 0.84 2.313333 0.58 0.92 0.66 0.72 0.363061 4.302653

NOX-N mg/L 0.33 1.24 0.42 0.663333 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.056667 0.169858 4.302653

TKN-N mg/L 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.433333 2.1 1.2 1.7 1.666667 0.053148 4.302653

N-T mg/L 0.6 1.3 1.3 1.066667 2.2 1.3 1.8 1.766667 0.276722 4.302653

P-T mg/L 0.22 0.16 0.3 0.226667 0.37 0.25 0.24 0.286667 0.438049 4.302653

Under detection limits

8

3. GROUNDWATER

The environmental monitoring plan outlined in the Care and Maintenance Plan for Angas Zinc Mine requires,

where access is possible, quarterly monitoring of RG1, RG2, RG3, RG4, RG5, RG7 and RG8. The weekly water

level monitoring of DH2 for three months after water has been detected in the well has been completed,

however, regular monitoring of DH2, DH3 and the 140 RL Pastefill line has continued throughout the quarter.

RG1, RG4 and RG8 did not exceed the drawdown beyond a one-metre band of 2006 levels, which is shown in

Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5 below. Water levels in RGs 1, 4 and 8 in April all showed a decrease in water

level, which is consistent with the dry summer and lack of recharge into the aquifer.

Water quality measurements undertaken in April for the quarter demonstrate a continuity of the patterns of

most parameters from previous quarters in RG1, RG4 and RG8, and are all significantly within leading indicator

limits and thus also PEPR compliance limits.

Land access was not available for RG2 and RG3. RGs 5 and 7 remain dry.

Figure 3 Standing Water Level for RG1

8

8.2

8.4

8.6

8.8

9

9.2

9.4

9.6

9.8

Jan-15 Apr-15 Jul-15 Oct-15 Jan-16 Apr-16

Me

tre

s b

elo

w g

rou

nd

leve

l

RG1 Baseline SWL Criteria

9



4. NOISE

As outlined in the Care and Maintenance addendum to the PEPR (approved March 2015), noise monitoring has

ceased through the Care and Maintenance phase. There were no noise related complaints received

throughout the quarter.

5. PUBLIC HEALTH AND NUISANCE

The HVS measures lead, TSP and PM10 levels over a 24 hour period every three days. In addition to the HVS,

twelve Dust Deposition Gauges (DDGs) remain installed both onsite and offsite and sampled monthly for Total

Insoluble Matter (TIM) and lead. Locations of all dust monitors can be seen in Appendix F.

26.5

27

27.5

28

28.5

29

29.5

Apr-15 Jul-15 Oct-15 Jan-16 Apr-16M

etr

es

be

low

gro

un

d le

vel


6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

9

Apr-15 Jul-15 Oct-15 Jan-16 Apr-16

Me

tre

s b

elo

w g

rou

nd

leve

l


10

Compliance criteria remains as per the PEPR criteria. Leading indicators require an investigation as to the

source of the dust and remain as per the PEPR requirements.

Throughout the quarter there has been no public health or nuisance PEPR non-compliances (Appendix H).

HIGH VOLUME SAMPLER – COMPLIANCE CRITERIA

Throughout the quarter there has been no instance of particulate lead, PM10 or TSP levels above the PEPR

compliance criteria (Appendix H).

DUST DEPOSITION GAUGES – LEADING INDICATOR CRITERIA

Acknowledging that the dust deposition gauges are not a compliance measure, results are reported for

complentness. Throughout the quarter there were 5 instances of Total Insoluble Matter exceeding the leading

indicator criteria. DDG 12 in both May and June, and DDGs 2, 3 and 6 in June. The wind data from the onsite

meteorological station in June indicated an average direction of 204°, indicating the wind, on average, blew

towards the north east. DDGs 3 and 12 are located on the west of the AZM operational area and alongside

agricultural paddocks, indicating it is unlikely the dust has emanated from AZM activities. Terramin expect that

this dust production has emanated from local agricultural activities, as it is seeding time and heavy machinery

is used in the region. DDG 6 is also located west of the AZM operational area, on an unsealed access driveway

to Terramin rental properties. DDG2 is located due north of a recycling depot, and with less than 0.001% lead

content, it is unlikely the dust has emanated from the TSF or AZM ROM pad.

There is one instance of lead particulates exceeding the leading indicator criteria, 150mg/kg in gauge 10, near

the railway line to the north. In gauge 10, 238.86mg/kg was recorded in May, the Hi vol sampler located

between AZM and the gauge did not record any instance of lead particulates during May.

All DDG dust data is located in Appendix G.

6. WASTE DISPOSAL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES

There was no waste removed from site throughout the quarter outside of normal roadside council collection

bins.

7. TSF WATER / ACID MINE DRAINAGE

TSF DECANT POND

The reduced water level of the decant pond was surveyed to be 67.591m RL on the 25th June 2016. Details in

Appendix I.

TSF SEEPAGE DRAIN FLOWS

The seepage drain flows in the TSF have remained significantly lower when compared to the operational phase

of the mine. This pattern can be expected to continue while AZM remains in Care and Maintenance and the

TSF water volumes are low. As seen in Figure 6 below, flows remained relatively stable through the quarter,

ranging from 2.59L/min in April, to 2.42L/min in June. It is predicted that seepage drain flow rates will increase

slightly over the winter months, as rainfall increases the decant pond size.

Seepage drain flows since the TSF was commissioned are located in Appendix I.

11

Figure 6 Seepage drain flows for TSF through the Care and Maintenance phase to date

TSF SURFACE AREA

The surface area of the TSF decant pond has remained below the compliance limit of 15,000m2 throughout the

quarter, and was estimated to be approximately 7000m2 in late June. This increase is due to the rainfall

received in June. The reduced water level of the decant pond was surveyed to be 67.591m RL on the 25th June

2016.

TSF GROUNDWATER MONITORING BORES

TSF bores were sampled and analysed monthly through quarter 2.

Sampling in June recorded corresponding higher concentrations of all reportable total metals for TSFA, with

arsenic returning a result slightly higher than the leading indicator criteria.

As has previously been the case (February 2015) arsenic groundwater numbers vary with climatic conditions

and tend to be higher when a dry period occurs. TSF bores were sampled on the 7th of June, prior to the heavy

rainfall events, with TSFA recording 0.023mg/L. Leading indicator criteria is 0.0161mg/L for the TSF bores.

Resampling of TSFA occurred on the 6th of July 2016 resulted in an arsenic reading of 0.012 mg/L. It is

important to note that the regional groundwater compliance limit for arsenic is 0.09mg/L, as arsenic is

naturally elevated in the region, with compliance limits being based upon pre-mining maximum concentration

observed. Terramin have send data from the TSF bores, seepage drains and TSF decant pond to groundwater

experts Australian Groundwater Technologies for review and will continue to monitor water quality in TSF A

closely.

TSF PAF TESTWORK RESULTS

The acid testwork on the tailings dam surface advised by O’Kane Consultants (Review of Terramin’s AZM

MCMP, 2013) was undertaken in June 2016. O’Kane advised quarterly testwork for the initial 12 months, and

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Oct

-13

No

v-1

3

No

v-1

3

No

v-1

3

De

c-1

3

Jan

-14

Jan

-14

Feb

-14

Feb

-14

Mar

-14

Mar

-14

Ap

r-1

4

Jun

-14

Au

g-1

4

Oct

-14

De

c-1

4

Feb

-15

Ap

r-1

5

Jun

-15

Au

g-1

5

Oct

-15

De

c-1

5

Feb

-16

Ap

r-1

6

Jun

-16

Jul-

16

Litr

es/

min

ute

Drain 1 Drain 2 Drain 3 Drain 4 Drain 5 Total Flow (L/min)

12

on the basis of the results have now revised the testwork regularity to be undertaken biannually. The next

round of test work will be completed in December.

The methodology requires a 2:1 paste to be made from the tailings with either distilled water (pH(field)) or

hydrogen peroxide (pH(fox)) and a pH reading taken after any reactions have taken place. Specifically, the

procedure provides:

A core of tailings material to be taken from settled tailings;

Samples required from the top 100mm and bottom 700mm of the core;

Any rainfall in the days prior to sampling to be recorded;

Monitor the locations every quarter for the first year post operations and every six months

thereafter;

Provide all data in a spreadsheet to DSD upon completion of each monitoring round.

The testwork is covered by an Occupational Health and Safety risk assessment and an approved Job Hazard

Analysis is in place to ensure sampling is conducted safely. Only locations which can safely be accessed are

included in each monitoring round.

Results of the testwork undertaken in June showed a slight increase in pH(field) levels between December

2015 and June 2016, while pH(fox) levels returned results over a larger range (0.81 – 4.18 in June 2016,

compared to 1.28 – 2.11 in December 2015), however, on average, no material difference – see Figure 7 and

Figure 8. Samples were unable to be taken from sample locations 1, 2 and 3, located on the northern side of

the TSF, as the crust has become impenetrable. Results are reported in Appendix 2.

Figure 7 PAF testwork for pH(field) between December 2015 and June 2016

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

18/12/15 23/06/16

pH

un

its

pH (field)

1 - 100 1 - 700 2 - 100 2 - 700 3 - 100

3 - 700 5 - 100 5 - 700 6 - 100 6 - 700

7 - 100 7 - 700 8 - 100 8 - 700 9 - 100

9 - 700 10 - 100 10 - 700 11 - 100 11 - 700

12 - 100 12 - 700 13 - 100 13 - 700 16 - 100

16 - 700 Average Linear (Average)

13

Figure 8 PAF testwork for pH(fox) between December 2015 and June 2016

8. WEEDS AND PESTS

Fuel reduction works, including weed spraying and slashing, was undertaken early in the quarter in

preparation for the winter growth rates. Rabbits and hares were also baited near the boxcut with pindone. A

weed survey will be undertaken in Q3 and used to inform the next 12 months of weed and pest strategies.

9. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

General Manager Joe Ranford hosted 14 TAFE SA lecturers on the 20th June 2016 at AZM, giving a guided tour

of the facilities. This visit was to develop industry exposure, particularly mine site with the intention of

incorporation some practical elements into TAFE training programmes. Terramin was asked to be involved in

the TAFE mining for non-miners program run by SACOME.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

18/12/2015 23/06/2016

pH

un

its

pH (fox)

1 - 100 1 - 700 2 - 100 2 - 700 3 - 100

3 - 700 5 - 100 5 - 700 6 - 100 6 - 700

7 - 100 7 - 700 8 - 100 8 - 700 9 - 100

9 - 700 10 - 100 10 - 700 11 - 100 11 - 700

12 - 100 12 - 700 13 - 100 13 - 700 16 - 100

16 - 700 Average Linear (Average)

14

Figure 9 General Manager Joe Ranford with TAFE SA Lecturers

STRATHALBYN COMMUNITY CONSULTATION COMMITTEE (SCCC)

An SCCC meeting was held on the 5th May 2016 and reported to the SCCC AZM’s status against Outcome

Measurable Criteria, derived from lease conditions for ML6229.

Questions regarding dust compliance criteria limits were clarified by Environment and Community

Superintendent Matt Daniel, who provided a memo on compliance limits for the site and regional dust levels

for Q1.

COMPLAINTS REGISTER

No complaints were received through Terramin’s hotline or lodged with the Environmental and Community

Superintendent throughout Q1 of 2016.

10. SUMMARY

Angas Zinc Mine continued to be maintained through the Care and Maintenance period:

The continuation of the Environmental Monitoring Plan;

The process plant, including crusher, mill and floatation areas, received regular maintenance;

Hillgrove staff remained onsite 1-2 days per week to load lime;

Onsite water management, plant upkeep, rehabilitation vegetation and SEB areas maintained,

15

11. REFERENCES

Australian Groundwater technology, 2016; Summary Report – Groundwater risk Assessment for the Angas Zinc

Mine Closure and Completion Plan.

16

12. APPENDIX A – ANGAS ZINC MINE – FILLED AND UNFILLED VOIDS

17

13. APPENDIX B – WATER MONITORING LOCATIONS

18

14. APPENDIX C – SURFACE WATER MONITORING DATA

Date Apr-16

Site Units

Croser 1

Croser 2

Croser 3

Mean Croser

Hogben 1

Hogben 2

Hogben 3

Mean Hogben p-value t-value

pH pH 7.83 7.84 7.79 7.82 7.97 8.03 8.02 8.006667 0.018902 4.302653

EC-L us/cm 4830 4780 4830 4813.333 5540 5580 5590 5570 0.001182 4.302653

TDS-180 mg/L 2650 2740 2580 2656.667 3210 3050 2980 3080 0.028551 4.302653

Turbidity NTU 312 101 342 251.6667 14.2 17.9 32.3 21.46667 0.088878 4.302653

SO4-D mg/L 119 118 118 118.3333 161 163 164 162.6667 0.000734 4.302653

As-T mg/L 0.006 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.002333 0.29986 4.302653

Cd-T mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 UNDER DETECTION

LIMITS

Cu-T mg/L 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.004 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.002333 0.370059 4.302653

Pb-T mg/L 0.007 0.004 0.001 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.678366 4.302653

Mn-T mg/L 0.811 0.327 0.262 0.466667 0.116 0.17 0.124 0.136667 0.212437 4.302653

Se-T mg/L 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 UNDER DETECTION

LIMITS

Zn-T mg/L 0.074 0.048 0.017 0.046333 0.017 0.031 0.065 0.037667 0.803604 4.302653

Fe-T mg/L 4.9 1.2 0.84 2.313333 0.58 0.92 0.66 0.72 0.363061 4.302653

NOX-N mg/L 0.33 1.24 0.42 0.663333 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.056667 0.169858 4.302653

TKN-N mg/L 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.433333 2.1 1.2 1.7 1.666667 0.053148 4.302653

N-T mg/L 0.6 1.3 1.3 1.066667 2.2 1.3 1.8 1.766667 0.276722 4.302653

P-T mg/L 0.22 0.16 0.3 0.226667 0.37 0.25 0.24 0.286667 0.438049 4.302653

____ Under detection limits

19

15. APPENDIX D – GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA

GROUNDWATER QUALITY RAW DATA

Date Criteria Leading

Indicator

April 2016

Site Units RG1 RG4 RG8

pH pH 8.70 8.15 7.66 7.71 7.77

EC-L uS/cm 68500 53670 11800 10800 30500

TDS mg/L 25000 24843 6330 5890 17100

As-T mg/L 0.090 0.038 0.002 0.002 0.001

Cd-T mg/L 0.0100 0.004 0.0003 <0.0001 0.0002

Pb-T mg/L 0.820 0.262 0.006 <0.001 0.013

Zn-T mg/L 4.400 1.704 0.016 0.013 0.026

Se-T mg/L 0.130 0.088 0.04 0.03 <0.01

Fe-T mg/L 232.00 69.02 2.69 <0.05 4.23

20

GROUNDWATER QUALITY GRAPHS

5.50

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

8.00

8.50

9.00Ja

n-1

5

Ap

r-1

5

Jul-

15

Oct

-15

Jan

-16

Ap

r-1

6

pH

RG1 RG4 RG8 PEPR Criteria

pH

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

Jan

-15

Ap

r-1

5

Jul-

15

Oct

-15

Jan

-16

Ap

r-1

6

EC (

us/

cm)

EC


21

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000


mg/

LTDS


0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

Jan

-15

Ap

r-1

5

Jul-

15

Oct

-15

Jan

-16

Ap

r-1

6

Arsenic


As

(mg/

L)

22

0.0000

0.0020

0.0040

0.0060

0.0080

0.0100

0.0120

Jan

-15

Ap

r-1

5

Jul-

15

Oct

-15

Jan

-16

Ap

r-1

6

Cadmium


Cd

(mg/

L)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Jan

-15

Ap

r-1

5

Jul-

15

Oct

-15

Jan

-16

Ap

r-1

6

Pb

(m

g/L)

Lead


23

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Jan

-15

Ap

r-1

5

Jul-

15

Oct

-15

Jan

-16

Ap

r-1

6

Zinc


Zin

c (m

g/L)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Jan

-14

Mar

-14

May

-14

Jul-

14

Sep

-14

No

v-1

4

Jan

-15

Mar

-15

May

-15

Jul-

15

Sep

-15

No

v-1

5

Jan

-16

Mar

-16

Iron


Fe(m

g/L)

24

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14


mg/

LSe


25

16. APPENDIX E – GROUNDWATER STANDING WATER LEVELS

PEPR criteria is no drawdown further than 1m from baseline data values obtained in 2006 (outlined below)

PEPR Criteria (m)

RG1 9.64 RG4 29.15 RG8 8.56

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Oct-13 Jan -14 April-14 Aug-14 Oct-14 Jan-15 Apr-15 Jul-15 Oct-15 Jan-16 Apr-16

met

res

bel

ow

gro

un

d le

vel

Standing Water Levels

RG1 RG1 PEPR criteria RG4 RG4 PEPR Criteria RG8 RG8 PEPR Criteria

26

17. APPENDIX F – DUST MONITORING LOCATIONS

27

18. APPENDIX G – DUST LEADING INDICATOR DATA – DUST DEPOSITION GAUGES

TOTAL INSOLUBLE MATTER

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

7 5 4 2 8 1 6 9 11 3 12 10

g/m

2.m

on

th

Gauge number

Total Insoluable Matter

Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16

28

OFFSITE LEAD MEASUREMENTS

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

Lead

de

po

siti

on

(m

g/kg

)

Offsite Lead Measurements

2 3 10 11 12

29

ONSITE LEAD MEASUREMENTS

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

Lead

de

po

siti

on

(m

g/kg

)

Onsite Lead Measurements

1 4 5 6 7 8 9

30

19. APPENDIX H - DUST LEADING INDICATOR DATA – HIVOL

TOTAL SOLID PARTICULATE MEASUREMENTS

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.005

/04

/20

16

11

/04

/20

16

17

/04

/20

16

23

/04

/20

16

29

/04

/20

16

5/0

5/2

01

6

11

/05

/20

16

17

/05

/20

16

23

/05

/20

16

29

/05

/20

16

4/0

6/2

01

6

10

/06

/20

16

16

/06

/20

16

22

/06

/20

16

28

/06

/20

16

ug/

m3

PEPR Criteria Western Unit

31

PM10 MEASUREMENTS

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

ug/

m3

PEPR Criteria Pm10 ug/m3

32

LEAD MEASUREMENTS

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

µg/

m³

Lead

PEPR criteria Northern Unit

33

20. APPENDIX I – TSF

DECANT POND REDUCED LEVEL THROUGHOUT CARE AND MAINTENANCE

66.00

67.00

68.00

69.00

70.00

71.00

72.00

73.00

74.00

75.00

76.00

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

1/1

1/2

013

1/1

2/2

013

1/0

1/2

014

1/0

2/2

014

1/0

3/2

014

1/0

4/2

014

1/0

5/2

014

1/0

6/2

014

1/0

7/2

014

1/0

8/2

014

1/0

9/2

014

1/1

0/2

014

1/1

1/2

014

1/1

2/2

014

1/0

1/2

015

1/0

2/2

015

1/0

3/2

015

1/0

4/2

015

1/0

5/2

015

1/0

6/2

015

1/0

7/2

015

1/0

8/2

015

1/0

9/2

015

1/1

0/2

015

1/1

1/2

015

1/1

2/2

015

1/0

1/2

016

1/0

2/2

016

1/0

3/2

016

1/0

4/2

016

1/0

5/2

016

1/0

6/2

016

RL

(m)

Rain

fall (

mm

)

Angas Mine Rainfall Records

Rainfall Actual Water level RL(m) Spillway RL (m) Target RL

34

SEEPAGE DRAIN FLOWS

0

5

10

15

20

25

05

/09

/08

17

/10

/08

28

/11

/08

08

/01

/09

20

/02

/09

03

/04

/09

11

/05

/09

26

/06

/09

07

/08

/09

18

/09

/09

06

/11

/09

18

/12

/09

22

/01

/10

05

/03

/10

16

/04

/10

28

/05

/10

09

/07

/10

20

/08

/10

01

/10

/10

12

/11

/10

23

/12

/10

04

/02

/11

18

/03

/11

13

/05

/11

24

/06

/11

05

/08

/11

23

/09

/11

18

/11

/11

13

/01

/12

09

/03

/12

11

/05

/12

29

/06

/12

17

/08

/12

05

/10

/12

23

/11

/12

04

/01

/13

08

/03

/13

26

/04

/13

14

/06

/13

09

/08

/13

10

/10

/13

29

/11

/13

24

/01

/14

07

/03

/14

10

/06

/14

13

/12

/14

01

/06

/15

03

/12

/15

01

/06

/16

Litr

es/

min

ute

Drain 1 Drain 2 Drain 3 Drain 4 Drain 5 Total Flow (L/min)

35

21. APPENDIX J – TSF MONITORING BORES

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

Jan

-15

Feb

-15

Mar

-15

Ap

r-1

5

May

-15

Jun

-15

Jul-

15

Au

g-1

5

Sep

-15

Oct

-15

No

v-1

5

De

c-1

5

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Mar

-16

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

pH

pH

TSFA TSFB TSFD Leading indicator Leading indicator

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

Jan

-15

Feb

-15

Mar

-15

Ap

r-1

5

May

-15

Jun

-15

Jul-

15

Au

g-1

5

Sep

-15

Oct

-15

No

v-1

5

De

c-1

5

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Mar

-16

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

EC (

uS/

cm)

EC

TSFA TSFB TSFD Leading Indicator

36

TSF B has recorded cadmium under detection limits since January 2010

0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Jan

-15

Feb

-15

Mar

-15

Ap

r-1

5

May

-15

Jun

-15

Jul-

15

Au

g-1

5

Sep

-15

Oct

-15

No

v-1

5

De

c-1

5

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Mar

-16

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

Cd

(m

g/L)

Cadmium

TSFA TSFB TSFD LeadingIndicator

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

Jan

-15

Feb

-15

Mar

-15

Ap

r-1

5

May

-15

Jun

-15

Jul-

15

Au

g-1

5

Sep

-15

Oct

-15

No

v-1

5

De

c-1

5

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Mar

-16

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

Pb

(m

g/L)

Lead

TSFA TSFB TSF D Leading Indicator

37

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Jan

-15

Feb

-15

Mar

-15

Ap

r-1

5

May

-15

Jun

-15

Jul-

15

Au

g-1

5

Sep

-15

Oct

-15

No

v-1

5

De

c-1

5

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Mar

-16

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

Zinc

TSFA TSFB TSF D Leading Indicator

Zn (

mg/

L)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Jan

-15

Feb

-15

Mar

-15

Ap

r-1

5

May

-15

Jun

-15

Jul-

15

Au

g-1

5

Sep

-15

Oct

-15

No

v-1

5

De

c-1

5

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Mar

-16

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

Mn

(m

g/L)

Manganese

TSFA TSFB TSFD

38

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Jan

-15

Feb

-15

Mar

-15

Ap

r-1

5

May

-15

Jun

-15

Jul-

15

Au

g-1

5

Sep

-15

Oct

-15

No

v-1

5

De

c-1

5

Jan

-16

Feb

-16

Mar

-16

Ap

r-1

6

May

-16

Jun

-16

Fe (

mg/

L)Iron

TSFA TSFB TSFD LeadingIndicator

39

22. APPENDIX K – TSF SEEPAGE DRAINS

40

23. APPENDIX K – TSF PAF TESTWORK

2

4

6

8

20/02/2014 6/04/2014 31/10/2014 19/12/2014 25/03/2015 19/06/2015 18/12/15 23/06/16

pH

un

its

dates samples collected

pH (field)

1 - 100 1 - 700 2 - 100 2 - 700

3 - 100 3 - 700 5 - 100 5 - 700

6 - 100 6 - 700 7 - 100 7 - 700

8 - 100 8 - 700 9 - 100 9 - 700

10 - 100 10 - 700 11 - 100 11 - 700

12 - 100 12 - 700 13 - 100 13 - 700

16 - 100 16 - 700 Average Linear (Average)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

31/10/2014 19/12/2014 25/03/2015 19/06/2015 18/12/2015 23/06/2016

pH

un

its

dates samples collected

pH (fox)

1 - 100 1 - 700 2 - 100 2 - 700

3 - 100 3 - 700 5 - 100 5 - 700

6 - 100 6 - 700 7 - 100 7 - 700

8 - 100 8 - 700 9 - 100 9 - 700

10 - 100 10 - 700 11 - 100 11 - 700

12 - 100 12 - 700 13 - 100 13 - 700

16 - 100 16 - 700 Average Linear (Average)

Documents

Quarterly Environment Report - Terramin Australia Limited · This is the second QER for 2016 and represents the period from April to June 2016 (Quarter 2). This report is prepared