Territory Stories

Mount Peake Project

Details:

Title

Mount Peake Project

Other title

Notice of Intent - Mount Peake; Statement of Reasons - Mount Peake; Terms of Reference for the preparation of an EIS - Mount Peake; Notice of Intent variation - Mount Peake; Draft EIS - Mount Peake; Addendum to Draft EIS - Mount Peake; Supplement to Draft EIS - Mount Peake

Creator

GHD Pty Ltd; Animal Plant Mineral Pty Ltd; Australian Museum Consulting

Issued by

Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority

Collection

E-Publications; E-Books; PublicationNT

Date

2013-06-01

Abstract

TNG Ltd, under wholly owned subsidiary Enigma Mining Limited, is proposing to develop and operate the Mt Peake Project, a polymetallic (titanium, vanadium, iron) mine, located approximately 235 km north-northwest of Alice Springs in the Northern Territory (NT). GHD Pty Ltd (GHD) has been engaged by TNG to prepare the NOI and to progress environmental baseline studies and any approvals documentation for the Project.

Notes

Made available via the Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004 (NT).

Table of contents

Mount Peake Project Notice of Intent - NOI June 2013 -- Mount Peake Statement of Reasons - SOR November 2013 -- Mount Peake Terms of Reference for the preparation of an EIS - TOR March 2013 -- Mount Peake Notice of Intent variation - NOI Variation March 2015 -- Mount Peake Project Draft EIS Vol. 1 - Draft EIS February 2016 -- Assessment Report 85 -- Mount Peake Project Draft EIS Vol. 2 Appendices A - K Draft -- Mount Peake Project Draft EIS Vol. 3 Appendix L-O - Draft -- Mount Peake Project Addendum to Draft EIS Appendix 1-10 -- Mount Peake Project Supplement to Draft EIS - April 2017 -- Mount Peake Project Addendum to the Draft EIS - November 2017

Language

English

Subject

Environmental impact statement; Environmental assessment; Iron mines and mining; Environmental aspects

Publisher name

TNG Limited

Place of publication

Subiaco

Format

Volumes : colour illustrations, colour maps ; 30 cm.

File type

application/pdf

Use

Copyright

Copyright owner

TNG Limited

License

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00042

Related links

https://www.tngltd.com.au/project/mount-peake-v-ti-fe/ [Mount Peake V Ti Fe - TNG Limited]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396300 [Mount Peake Project Notice of Intent - NOI June 2013]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396301 [Mount Peake Statement of Reasons - SOR November 2013]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396303 [Mount Peake Terms of Reference for the preparation of an EIS - TOR March 2013]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396305 [Mount Peake Notice of Intent variation - NOI Variation March 2015]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396307 [Mount Peake Project Draft EIS Vol. 1 - Draft EIS February 2016]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396309 [Mount Peake Project Draft EIS Vol. 2 Appendices A - K Draft]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396311 [Mount Peake Project Draft EIS Vol. 3 Appendix L-O - Draft]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396314 [Mount Peake Project Supplement to Draft EIS - April 2017]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396315 [Mount Peake Project Addendum to the Draft EIS - November 2017]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396317 [Mount Peake Project Addendum to Draft EIS Appendix 1-10]; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396319 [Assessment Report 85]

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/294504

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396317

Related items

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396300; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396301; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396303; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396305; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396307; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396309; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396311; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396314; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396315; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396319

Page content

61/29057/08/162376 Revised groundwater modelling results 6 November 2017 To Sharon Arena, Animal Plant Mineral Copy to Paul Burton, TNG From Adam Osbaldeston Tel 6222 8469 Subject Revised groundwater modelling results Job no. 61/29057/08 1 Introduction A numerical groundwater model has been established for the Mount Peake Project (the Project) to undertake hydrogeological assessments to establish the likely baseline groundwater conditions and evaluate potential hydrogeological changes from Project groundwater abstraction. The model set-up, calibration and development of sensitivity analysis and predictive scenarios have been presented in the Mouth Peak Project Groundwater Supplementary Report (GHD, 2017). Since the completion of the Supplementary Report, the Project water balance has been revised due to use of a dry-stacking option for mine site tailings deposition. The revised water balance has resulted in less water being required for the Project, and as such a new groundwater modelling scenario was required to assess the potential groundwater drawdown impacts. The following sections present the results of the modelling reflecting the revised Project water requirements. 2 Simulation scenario Following successful calibration in steady state, the numerical groundwater model was used to predict the operation of the Project area, including mine pit development and operation of the borefield at a revised capacity following updates to the Project water balance. The aquifer parameters used in the predictive model were derived from the aquifer testing, steady state calibration and a likely range of the parameters based on past experience and literature values of similar formations (refer to Supplementary Groundwater Report, GHD 2017, for further discussion). The storage parameters used are presented in Table 2-1. The hydraulic conductivity and recharge values used in the prediction are the same as those used in the steady state calibration as presented in the Supplementary groundwater report (GHD, 2017). A transient prediction run was undertaken to model cumulative impacts from borefield operation and mine pit development. The scenario represents the operation of the borefield in the palaeovalley and development of the mine pit. The mine pit is modelled with incremental pit advancement between year 1 and 17. The transient prediction model was run for 100 years. This includes two stages of borefield operation and closure as presented in Table 2-2. Following cessation of mining, borefield abstraction stops and the model is run for a further 83 years to predict groundwater level recovery in the palaeovalley and surrounding the pit.