Mount Owen Complex. Mining Operations Plan. January December Report Number March Mount Owen Pty Limited

Transcription

1 Mount Owen Pty Limited Version:

2 Page i Mount Owen Complex PREPARED BY: ABN Kings Road New Lambton NSW 2305 Australia (PO Box 447 New Lambton NSW 2305 Australia) T: F: newcastleau@slrconsulting.com DOCUMENT CONTROL Reference Status Date Prepared Checked Authorised Draft 1 16 November 2016 Mount Owen Complex (MOC) and Tracey Ball Chris Jones Chris Jones Draft 2 20 December 2016 MOC and Tracey Ball Submission 24 January 2017 MOC and Chris Jones Chris Jones Chris Jones Chris Jones Chris Jones Revised Submission 7 MOC and Chris Jones Chris Jones Chris Jones

3 Page ii Mount Owen Complex Name of Mine Mount Owen Complex MOP Commencement Date 01/1/2017 MOP Completion Date 31/12/2021 Name of Authorisation / Authorisation holder(s) Mining Authorisations (Lease/Licence No.) Name of Authorisation / Authorisation holder(s) Mining Authorisations (Lease/Licence No.) Name of Mine Operator (if different) Name and Contact Details of the Mine Manager (or equivalent) Name and Contact Details of Environmental Representative Name of Representative(s) of the Authorisation Holder(s) Title of Representative(s) of the Authorisation Holder(s) Mt Owen Pty Limited CL383, CL715, ML1355, ML1415, ML1419, ML1453, ML1475, ML1561, ML1608, ML1629, ML1694, AL8 (MLA 512), ML 1673 Glendell Tenements Pty Limited ML1410, ML1476, CL 358, MPL343 Mt Owen Pty Limited / Thiess Pty Ltd Ashley McLeod Glenn Cook Shane Holmes Technical Services Manager Signature of Representative(s) of the Authorisation Holder(s) Date 7 Version

4 Page iii Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION Brief History of Mining Operations at the MOC History of Ravensworth East Mine History of Glendell Mine History of Mount Owen Mine Mount Owen Complex... 3 Proposed activities within the MOC during the MOP term includes: Current Consents, Authorisations and Licences Development Consents Mining Titles Ancillary Licences and Approvals Land Ownership and Land Use Stakeholder Consultation Community Consultation Statutory Authorities Other Stakeholders MOP Consultation Revision of the MOP Following Government Consultation PROPOSED MINING ACTIVITIES Project Description Post Mining Land use - Asset Register Rehabilitation Cost Estimate Activities over the MOP Term Exploration Construction Mining Operations Land Preparation Soil Stripping and Stockpiling Waste Rock Removal and Emplacement Coal Stockpiling and Processing Coal Transport Coarse Rejects and Tailings Disposal Decommissioning and Demolition Activities Progressive Rehabilitation and Completion Material Production Schedule ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Environmental Risk Assessment Environmental Risk Management Flora and Fauna Final Landform Design...27

5 Page iv Table of Contents Heritage (Aboriginal and European) Erosion and Sediment Control Air Quality Visual and Lighting Blasting Noise Bushfire Hazardous Materials and Dangerous Goods Water Management Waste Management Weeds and Pests Operational Issues Which Affect Rehabilitation Mine Subsidence Settlement of Tailings Soils and Capping Materials Contaminated Land Spontaneous Combustion Geochemical Constraints Final Landuse Integration with Adjacent Operations POST MINING LAND USE Regulatory Requirements Post Mining Land Use Goal Open Woodland Open Forest Open Grassland Water Management Structures Final Voids Rehabilitation Objectives REHABILITATION PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT Domain Selection Domain Rehabilitation Objectives Rehabilitation Phases PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, AND COMPLETION / RELINQUISHMENT CRITERIA REHABILITATION IMPLEMENTATION Status at MOP Commencement Proposed Rehabilitation Activities during the MOP Term Rehabilitation Methodologies for Activities in the MOP Term Decommissioning Phase Landform Establishment Phase Growth Medium Development Phase...81

6 Page v Table of Contents Ecosystem and Landuse Establishment Ecosystem and Landuse Sustainability Phase Summary of Rehabilitation Areas during the MOP Term Relinquishment Phase Achieved during the MOP Term REHABILITATION MONITORING AND RESEARCH Rehabilitation Monitoring Program Monitoring Pasture Rehabilitation Monitoring of Native Vegetation Active Mining Records Rehabilitation Methodology Records Rehabilitation Inspections Rehabilitation Monitoring Research and Rehabilitation Trials Research and Trials Pre MOP Research and Trials This MOP period INTERVENTION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT Threats to Rehabilitation Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP) REPORTING Annual Review Incident Reporting REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MOP MOP Review Protocol Implementation REFERENCES TABLES Table 1 History of s for the MOC... 3 Table 2 MOC Consents... 5 Table 3 MOC Mining Tenements... 5 Table 4 Environment Protection Licences Relevant to the MOC... 6 Table 5 Groundwater Licences... 6 Table 6 Surface Water Licences... 7 Table 7 Creek Diversion Licences... 8 Table 8 Miscellaneous Emplacement Licences... 8 Table 9 High Risk Activity Notifications... 8 Table 10 Asset Register Table 11 Typical Mining and Key Ancillary Equipment Table 12 Status of Tailings Emplacements in the MOP Term... 20

7 Page vi Table of Contents Table 13 Mount Owen Material Production Schedule Table 14 Ravensworth East Material Production Schedule Table 15 Glendell Material Production Schedule Table 16 Summary of Risks to Rehabilitation MOP Risk Assessment (medium or higher ranking only) 23 Table 17 Indicative Soil Balance at Commencement of MOP Table 18 Regulatory Requirements Relating to Post Mining Land Use and Rehabilitation Table 19 Primary and Secondary Domains Table 20 Domain Rehabilitation Objectives Table 21 Summary of Rehabilitation Phases Proposed for Completion at end of the MOP Term.. 54 Table 22 Decommissioning Phase Table 23 Landform Establishment Phase Table 24 Growth Medium Development Phase Table 25 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Phase Table 26 Ecosystem and Landuse Sustainability Phase Table 27 Status of Primary and Secondary Domains at MOP Commencement Table 28 Proposed Rehabilitation Activities During the MOP Term Table 29 Typical Pasture Species for Open Grassland Table 30 The MOC Open Woodland Species and Seeding rates Table 31 Typical Native Revegetation Species Mix for Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest Table 32 Summary of Disturbance and Rehabilitation Proposed during the MOP Term Table 33 Data Summary of Rehabilitation Proposed during the MOP Term Table 34 Key Threats to Rehabilitation Updated According to MOP Risk Assessment Table 35 Trigger Action Response Plan Table 36 Responsibilities for Implementation of this MOP APPENDICES Appendix A MOP Plans Appendix B Land Ownership Register Appendix C MOP Rehabilation Risk Assessment Appendix D Tailings Management Plan Appendix E Government Consultation (DO NOT DELETE SECTION BREAK)

8 Page 1 1 INTRODUCTION This (MOP) describes the proposed mining operations and rehabilitation at the Mount Owen Complex (MOC) for the term (1 January December 2021). The MOC is located in the Hunter Coalfields at Hebden in the Hunter Valley of NSW, approximately 20 kilometres (km) northwest of Singleton and 24 km south east of Muswellbrook. Mount Owen Pty Limited (Mount Owen), a subsidiary of Glencore Coal Pty Limited, owns and operates the three existing open cut operations in the MOC: Mount Owen (North Pit), Ravensworth East (Bayswater North Pit [BNP]) and Glendell (Barrett Pit). The mining operations at the MOC include the integrated use of the Mount Owen coal handling and preparation plant (CHPP), coal stockpiles and the rail load out facility. The MOC is a large open-cut operation classified as a Level 1 Mine and consists of three mining areas: Mount Owen (North Pit) with an approved extraction rate of 10 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) of run of mine (ROM) coal, which is blended with Ravensworth East (approved 4 Mtpa) and Glendell (approved 4.5 Mtpa) ROM coal. The three operations feed the Mount Owen CHPP and associated infrastructure, which has a total approved capacity of 17 Mtpa of ROM coal. Processed coal, both semi soft and thermal, are primarily transported via the Main Northern Rail Line to the Port of Newcastle for export, or by conveyor or rail for domestic use as required. On 3 November 2016, Glencore gained development approval for the Mount Owen Continued Operations Project (SSD 5850) The approval allows the MOC operations to maintain the current North Pit and Ravensworth East pit extraction rates, with approximately 74 million tonnes (Mt) and 12 Mt of ROM coal to be extracted from the North Pit Continuation and BNP, respectively. Schedule 3 Condition 45 of SSD 5850 outlines requirements for a Rehabilitation Management Plan (RMP) for the site. The RMP is to be approved by the Division of Resources and Energy within the Department of Industry (DRE) and prepared with any relevant DRE guideline. This MOP has been prepared to meet the requirement of this condition. Further details of the statutory approvals relating to the MOC are outlined in Section 1.2. This MOP has been prepared in accordance with the NSW Trade and Investment Division of Resources and Energy (DRE) guideline ESG3: (MOP) Guidelines, September 2013 (ESG3) (DRE, 2013).

9 Page Brief History of Mining Operations at the MOC Mining operations at the MOC commenced at the Ravensworth East Mine (previously known as Swamp Creek Mine) and dates back to the early 1960s History of Ravensworth East Mine In 1997, a new mining lease (ML 1415) was issued to the former Swamp Creek Mine after a period of care and maintenance. Subsequently, DA was granted in March 2000 allowing the Ravensworth East Mine to produce up to 4Mtpa ROM coal. Ravensworth East Mine has continued to operate since that time and been subject to various modifications to approve integration with Mount Owen through changes to the transport and processing of Ravensworth East ROM coal through the Mount Owen CHPP and emplacement of tailings from the Greater Ravensworth Area under the Greater Ravensworth Area Water and Tailings Scheme (GRAWTS) within the Ravensworth East void History of Glendell Mine Glendell mine was originally approved in 1983 pursuant to DA 80/952. In 1997, DA 80/952 was modified to amend a number of mine plans and operational methods. Glendell was acquired by Xstrata in 2003, and in 2008 DA 80/952 was modified (in part) to increase the rate of ROM coal extraction to 4.5 Mtpa, and facilitate integration with the Mount Owen and Ravensworth East operations. Following earlier site preparation, mining commenced in DA 80/952 MOD 3 was approved in1 December 2016 to allow for the relocation of a 132 kv powerline from an area adjacent to the mining area. Under current mining schedules, operations are expected to continue at Glendell Mine until History of Mount Owen Mine Mining operations within the Mount Owen Mine commenced in 1993, pursuant to Development Consent (DA 63/91) granted in 1991, with an extraction limit of 1.4 Mtpa, under the management of Hunter Valley Coal Corporation Pty Limited (HVCC). Approval was granted in 2004 for the continuation to open cut mining operations at Mount Owen over a 17 to 21 year mine life with an increase in ROM coal production of 10 Mtpa (DA ). This approval also allowed for the integration of Glendell Mine into the MOC. Following approval of DA , Mining Lease (ML) 1561 was granted on 17 February 2005 to cover the additional mining areas at Mount Owen Mine. DA was modified in November 2010 to accommodate the rail refuelling facility on the Mount Owen Rail Spur, and again in November 2014 to increase the throughput at the Mount Owen CHPP to 17 Mtpa ROM coal. The Mount Owen Mine currently operates pursuant to State Significant Development (SSD) consent SSD 5850 (Development Consent), which was granted on 3 November This approval allows for the continuation of open cut operations at both Mount Owen and Ravensworth East Mine and extends the southern boundary of the North Pit by approximately 1.6 kilometres.

10 Page Mount Owen Complex Following the acquisition of Ravensworth East Mine by Glencore (formerly Xstrata) in 2002 and Glendell Mine in 2003, Ravensworth East, Mount Owen and Glendell mines were integrated into the MOC, under the management of Xstrata Mount Owen Pty Ltd. Thiess Pty Ltd currently operates the Mount Owen North Pit (excluding the CHPP and associated infrastructure) under a contractual agreement with Mount Owen. Glencore operates the Mount Owen CHPP, the Ravensworth East and the Glendell mines. Glencore have developed synergies between Mount Owen, Ravensworth East and Glendell, including: Integrated environmental management system; Shared use of infrastructure; Increased flexibility to meet market demand; Development of life of mine tailings disposal and water management strategies; Construction of haul roads to enable the Mount Owen CHPP to receive and process ROM coal from Ravensworth East and Glendell Mines; Use of the Mount Owen CHPP to process ROM coal from Mount Owen, Ravensworth East and Glendell mines; and Use of the MOC rail loop and train load-out facility for the filling of trains for coal transport to the Port of Newcastle. This culminated in the approval of SSD 5850 on 3 November 2016, which provided for a combined development consent for Mount Owen and Ravensworth East Mines. A history of MOP s for the MOC is outlined in Table 1 below: Table 1 History of s for the MOC Document Title Amendment Issue Date Expiry Date Status Mount Owen MOP September 2000 Original MOP September 2000 December 2004 MOP September 2000 Amendment A December 2004 December 2005 MOP September 2000 Amendment B June 2005 December 2005 Ravensworth East Amendment C November 2005 December 2006 MOP July 2000 Original MOP July 2000 December 2003 MOP July 2000 Amendment A December 2002 December 2003 MOP July 2000 Amendment B September 2003 December 2005 MOP July 2000 Amendment C October 2003 December 2005 Mount Owen and Ravensworth East MOP October 2006 Original MOP October 2006 December 2010 MOP October 2006 Amendment 1 August 2007 December 2010 Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded

11 Page 4 Document Title Amendment Issue Date Expiry Date Status MOP January 2009 Glendell Original MOP January 2009 January 2014 Superseded Amendment 1 August 2011 January 2014 Superseded Amendment 2 October 2012 January 2014 Superseded Amendment 3 September 2014 January 2016 Superseded MOP December 2007 Original February 2008 December 2012 Amendment 1 February 2009 December 2012 Amendment A June 2011 December 2012 Amendment B July 2012 December 2012 Superseded Superseded Superseded Superseded MOP Extension December 2012 May 2013 Superseded MOP March 2013 Original MOP May 2013 December 2019 Superseded MOP December 2014 Original MOP November 2014 June 2015 Superseded MOC MOP January 2015 Original MOP May 2015 December 2019 Proposed activities within the MOC during the MOP term includes: Current Open cut mining in the BNP Pit (within the Ravensworth East Mine), North Pit (within the Mount Owen Mine) and Barrett Pit (Glendell) at a combined rate of up to 18.5 Mtpa ROM coal; Continuation of the North Pit footprint to the south of the current approved North Pit mining limit; Overburden emplacement out of pit and in-pit; Co-disposal of coarse rejects with overburden within the North Pit Continuation and the West Pit / BNP as mining progresses; Continued use of the Ravensworth East voids for tailings emplacement; Continued participation (receipt and transfer of tailings and water) as part of the Greater Ravensworth Area Water and Tailings Scheme (GRAWTS); Continued utilisation of all existing mining infrastructure, including the existing crushing plant for the crushing of overburden, the product coal conveyor to Bayswater and Liddell power stations and the CHPP; Continuation of ROM coal processing at the CHPP at a capacity of 17 Mtpa ROM, to produce thermal and semi-soft coal product; Transportation of up to 2 Mtpa ROM coal and crushed gravel on an as required basis via the existing overland conveyor to Liddell Coal Operations and the Ravensworth Coal Terminal (RCT), in addition to maintaining the current approval to transport ROM coal to Bayswater and Liddell power stations; Upgrades to infrastructure, including the CHPP and Mine Infrastructure Area (MIA); and Progressive rehabilitation of tailings pits that have reached capacity and completed areas of overburden dumps.

12 Page Current Consents, Authorisations and Licences Development Consents Table 2 summarises the current federal approval, development consents and modification history, including key features approved. Table 2 MOC Consents Consent Details Issue Date Expiry Date Mount Owen and Ravensworth East SSD 5850 Approved the continuation of Ravensworth East and Mount Owen Mines, including extension of the North Pit to the south. 3 November December EPBC Act Approval 19 January December 2037 Glendell DA 80/952 Approval for Glendell Mine. 2 May May 2013 DA 80/952 MOD 1 DA 80/952 MOD 2 Approval to amend original mine plans and mining methods. Approval to amend mine sequence to a north south progression, alter the out of pit dump footprints and increase ROM extraction rate to 4.5 Mtpa. 17 February 1997 DA 80/952 MOD 3 Approval for relocation of a 132 kv powerline. 1 December Mining Titles Table 3 lists the mining titles applicable to the MOC. 2 May 2013 February June June 2024 Table 3 MOC Mining Tenements Mining Title Company Issue Date Expiry Date CL 358 Glendell Tenements Pty Limited 27 Mar Mar 2032 CL 383 Mount Owen Pty Limited 12 Nov Nov 2033 CL 715 Mount Owen Pty Limited 26 Apr Sep 2019 ML 1355 Mount Owen Pty Limited 26 Jul Jul 2015 (renewal sought) ML 1410 Glendell Tenements Pty Limited 12 May Jul 2020 ML 1415 Mount Owen Pty Limited 7 Aug Jul 2020 ML 1419 Mount Owen Pty Limited 28 Apr Nov 2012 (renewal sought) ML 1453 Mount Owen Pty Limited 8 May Jul 2020 ML 1475 Mount Owen Pty Limited 24 Nov Nov 2021 ML 1476 Glendell Tenements Pty Limited 24 Nov Nov 2021 ML 1561 Mount Owen Pty Limited 17 Feb Feb 2026 ML 1608 Mount Owen Pty Limited 19 Dec Dec 2028 ML 1629 Mount Owen Pty Limited 9 Mar Mar 2030 ML 1694 Mount Owen Pty Limited 22 Oct Oct 2034

13 Page 6 Mining Title Company Issue Date Expiry Date AL8 (MLA 512) Mount Owen Pty Limited 11 Jul July 2013 (renewal sought) MPL 343 Glendell Tenements Pty Limited 17 June Jan 2026 ML 1673 Mount Owen Pty Limited 26 Sept Nov Ancillary Licences and Approvals Environment Protection Licences The MOC currently operates under three separate Environment Protection Licences (EPLs) detailed in Table 4. Table 4 Environment Protection Licences Relevant to the MOC Site EPL Mount Owen July Ravensworth East July Glendell Mine April Anniversary Date Comments EPL 4460 outlines water quality, air quality, noise and blast monitoring criteria and results are reported to the EPA in the Annual Return EPL outlines water quality, air quality and blast monitoring criteria and results are reported to the EPA in the Annual Return EPL outlines water quality, air quality, noise and blast monitoring criteria and results are reported to the EPA in the Annual Return During the term of the MOP, Mount Owen will seek to vary EPL 4460 to incorporate the Ravensworth East operations and align with SSD Following approval of the variation, Mount Owen will surrender EPL Groundwater Licences Groundwater licences are regulated by DPI-Water, with those in place at the MOC shown in Table 5. Table 5 Groundwater Licences Licence Expiry Date Details Area (Lot/Section/DP) 20BL March 2020 Groundwater excavation 37// // // // // // // // // // // BL Awaiting Reissue Saline water excavation bore 353// BL May 2017 Groundwater excavation 17//6830

14 Page 7 Licence Expiry Date Details Area (Lot/Section/DP) 5// // // // BL May 2017 Groundwater excavation Pt32// Pt9//6842 Pt11//6842 Pt232// Pt3// Pt2// //6842 Pt2// BL February 2017 Saline water excavation bore 353// Surface Water Licences Surface water licences are regulated by DPI-Water. Those in place at the MOC are shown in Table 6. Table 6 Surface Water Licences Water Access Licence (WAL) Work + Use Approval (WA / CA) Allocation (units/year) Hunter Regulated River Water Source (Glennies Creek) High Security Expiry Date (WA / CA) Land Parcels (Lot/Section/DP) WAL CA June // WAL CA June // WAL WA ,00W0 3 January // WAL WA June // General Security WAL CA February // WAL613 20CA June // WAL CA June // WAL CA June // // WAL CA June // WAL CA June // Supplementary Licences WAL CA June // WAL CA February // Domestic and Stock WAL CA June //850054; 111// WAL WA October // WAL WA January // WAL CA December //752499; 622// WAL WA June // Jerrys Water Source (Bowmans Creek)

15 Page 8 WAL WA July //6830; 26//6830; 190// Creek Diversion Approvals Creek diversion approvals are regulated by DPI-Water. Those in place at the MOC are listed in Table 7 below. Table 7 Creek Diversion Licences Works Approval Expiry Date 20WA July 2022 Swamp Creek upper diversion 20WA July 2022 Swamp Creek middle diversion 20WA July 2022 Swamp Creek lower diversion 20WA May 2023 Yorks Creek Diversion Details 20WA October 2022 Bettys Creek upper and middle diversion 20WA February 2023 Bettys Creek lower diversion Tailings Emplacement Approvals Tailings emplacement approvals held for operations at the MOC are listed in Table 8 below. Table 8 Miscellaneous Emplacement Licences Instrument Authority Issue Date Expiry Date Section 126 Emplacement Approval (Stages 1 (NVS1) and 2 (NVS2)) Section 126 Emplacement Approval (Stages 3 and 4 (TP1)) S100 Approval Eastern Rail Pit & RW Pit Tailings Emplacement S100 Approval West Pit Tailings Emplacement S101 Approval North Void Stage 1 Discontinue Tailings Emplacement DMR/DRE 6 Nov 1996 N/A DPI/DRE 23 Dec 2003 N/A DRE 28 Oct Oct 2016 (process of being replaced) DRE 11 Aug Aug 2021 DRE 28 Oct October 2016 (process of being replaced) Table 9 includes details regarding high risk activity notifications for tailings facilities. Table 9 High Risk Activity Notifications Tailings Dam Authority Commencement Date Expiry Date Stage 2 Tailings Dam DRE 12 May 2015 N/A RW Tailings Pit DRE 1 January 2017 N/A

16 Page Land Ownership and Land Use The area within and surrounding the MOC is dominated by open cut and underground mining activities, as illustrated on Plan 1C. Other land uses in the vicinity include the Ravensworth State Forest to the north of the MOC and power generation at the Bayswater and Liddell power stations to the west. The nearest private residences are located to the east and south east of the Complex, in the Middle Falbrook locality approximately 1 km from the boundary of the MOC. Glencore or its subsidiaries own all land within the area approved for disturbance at the MOC and large areas of land within the surrounding area. Most of the land outside of operational areas is managed for cattle grazing and breeding by Colinta Holdings Pty Limited, a Glencore subsidiary. A number of small parcels of Crown land and Crown roads are located outside of disturbance areas. A large portion of the land to the south and south east of the Complex is owned by Ashton Coal Mines Pty Limited (Ashton Coal Project) and Bloomfield Coal (Rix s Creek North). Land to the west and south-west of the MOC is predominately owned by Glencore and Macquarie Generation. Land ownership and land use is illustrated on Plan 1C and detailed in Appendix B. 1.4 Stakeholder Consultation Glencore has a public commitment to effective environmental management in all its operations, both domestically and internationally. One of the key focus areas for ongoing dialogue with stakeholders is progress with the mine closure and rehabilitation planning and the implementation process. Proposed consultation activities for this MOP term are summarised in the sections below and further detailed in the MOC Stakeholder Engagement Plan available on the Mount Owen website ( Community Consultation The MOC has an ongoing community engagement program which includes regular engagement with both individuals and groups from the local and regional communities via a range of mechanisms including: Operation of a 24-hour Community Response Line; Maintenance of a MOC website, which provides on line access to approvals, environmental management plans, environmental monitoring data and other community information; Contribution to biannual Greater Ravensworth Area newsletters to update the community on the existing operations, environmental performance and MOC initiatives; Face to face meetings with individuals and/or groups as required/requested, including any meetings required in response to complaints; Regular meetings with the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Working Group, allowing for ongoing consultation and involvement of Aboriginal stakeholders in the conservation and / or management of Aboriginal cultural heritage on site; Regular forums with nearby neighbours, focussing on land management issues, such as pest and weed control, rehabilitation, biodiversity conservation and cultural heritage management; Regular meetings with the MOC Community Consultative Committee (CCC). The MOC hosts a joint CCC with the neighbouring Integra Underground Mine, and comprises community representatives and Singleton Council and MOC representatives; and

17 Page 10 Engaging local residents through Glencore s regular 3-yearly Community Survey Statutory Authorities The MOC regularly engages with various government agencies to report on its environmental performance, including: Singleton Council representation on the CCC; Regular consultation with relevant government agencies in relation to reviews and revisions of site environmental management plans and the requirements under those plans; Provision of the Annual Review to relevant government agencies; Liaison and reporting to the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) in relation to the EPLs, including provision of Annual Returns; and Provision of the National Pollution Inventory (NPI) to Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Energy. The statutory authorities that are relevant to the MOC are identified in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan available on the MOC website ( Other Stakeholders An electronic database of all identified external stakeholders is maintained at the MOC, which includes, but is not limited to; Nearby residents; Mount Owen Property Tenants; MOC CCC; Mount Pleasant Schools; Workforce at the MOC; Singleton Council; Regulators (i.e. NSW Department of Planning and Environment, OEH, DRE, DPI Water, Dams Safety Committee), Forestry corporation of NSW; Local Land Services NSW; ARTC and Hunter Valley Coal Chain Coordinator; Infrastructure owners, including Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) and AusGrid; Neighbouring mining operations including Ashton and Rix s Creek North; Non-governmental organisations; and Registered Aboriginal parties and Knowledge Holder groups. ARTC are consulted in relation to blasting impacts on the Main Northern Railway to the south of Glendell. Similarly, AusGrid are consulted in relation to blasting impacts on electricity transmission towers located to the west of the Glendell mine. The MOC will continue consultation with nearby mining operations in relation to management of regional cumulative aspects of mining, such as noise, blasting, air quality, water and tailings management and any other issues that arise from time to time.

18 Page MOP Consultation In accordance with Schedule 3, Condition 45(a) of SSD 5850, Mount Owen consulted with the DP&E, OEH, DPI Water, DPI, Council and the CCC during the preparation of this MOP (Rehabilitation Management Plan), prior to the final draft MOP being submitted to the DRE for approval. A meeting was held on 6 th August 2016 with the DRE (Neil McElhinney) to discuss the scope of this MOP. Key discussion points include proposed activities, rehabilitation and tailings management. A presentation on the draft MOP, focussing on rehabilitation and final landform, was made to the MOC CCC on 11 November 2016 and feedback recorded at that meeting. Subsequently, a copy of the draft MOP was provided to all members of the CCC, along with all the required government agencies on 25 th January A meeting was also held with Singleton Council on 10 th February 2017 to provide a briefing on the draft MOP Revision of the MOP Following Government Consultation Following receipt of responses from the government agencies listed above, revision was made to the MOP to address comments where appropriate. A copy of the response from these government agencies and how they queries have been addressed is outlined in Appendix E.

19 Page 12 2 PROPOSED MINING ACTIVITIES 2.1 Project Description The MOC has development consent to carry out mining operations at Glendell Mine (Barrett Pit) until 30 th June 2024 and Mount Owen (North Pit and BNP) until 31 st December During the MOP term open cut mining will be carried out at CL 383, ML 1355, ML 1694, ML 1415, ML 1475, CL 358, ML 1476 and ML Mining will continue in a south eastern direction in the northern area of Ravensworth East (BNP) and northerly in the Barrett Pit (Glendell). Open cut mining will continue in a south eastern direction in the North Pit (Mount Owen). Key mining activities to be undertaken in the MOP term include: Open cut mining in the BNP, Barrett and North Pits; ROM coal processing at the CHPP to produce thermal and semi-soft coal product; Overburden emplacement out of pit and in-pit; Co-disposal of coarse rejects with overburden in-pit; Continued tailings emplacement at the West Pit void; Continued use of the rail loading facility and product coal conveyor to Bayswater and Liddell power stations; and Progressive rehabilitation of tailings pits that have reached capacity and completed areas of overburden dumps. Proposed activities in the MOP term are further discussed in Section Post Mining Land use - Asset Register The asset register (Table 10) provides a summary of the key features of each primary domain (refer to Section 2.3), and principal activities required for rehabilitation. This asset register is intended to provide a suitable level of context for the Rehabilitation Cost Estimate (RCE). The register below includes the activities required for closure based on the maximum disturbance footprint throughout the MOP period. In addition to the detail contained within Table 10 below, the RCE prepared and submitted with the MOP includes specific detail relating to the lengths, volumes and size of individual assets that are intended to be decommissioned as part of the eventual closure of the mine. The areas for each secondary domain represent the total disturbance footprint for each domain in Plan 3A. Table 10 Asset Register Major Assets Decommissioning/ Rehabilitation Activities Approvals Required Area/ Length Domain 1 - Active Mining Bayswater North Pit Barrett Pit North Pit Progressively backfill open cut pit with overburden Develop Final Void design Regrade final void highwalls and lowwalls, and cap all exposed coal, in Final Void Detailed Design and Management Plan ha

20 Page 13 Major Assets Domain 2 Water Management Water management system including dams, drains, pumping infrastructure and monitoring bores Domain 3 Infrastructure Decommissioning/ Rehabilitation Activities accordance with design. Rehabilitate De-silt and stabilise dirty water dams to be retained Remove pumping infrastructure Seal open bores Rehabilitate Approvals Required EDG01 Borehole Sealing Requirements on Land Area/ Length 39.9 ha Removal of site services (electricity, telecommunications etc.) Demolish buildings and fixed plant Remove roadways around the CHPP Fill open drains Mount Owen CHPP Dismantle sewage treatment plant Drain and remove raw water dam Remove product stockpile area and seal reclaim tunnel Undertake minor earth works to ensure site is stable and free draining to local watercourses Radiation licence/s Demolition certificates Phase 1 and, if required, Phase 2 Contamination Assessments Undertake contamination assessment and remediate any contaminated areas Rehabilitate with appropriate vegetative cover Mount Owen Mining Infrastructure Area (MIA) Removal of site services (electricity, telecommunications etc.) Demolish buildings and fixed plant ha Remove light and heavy vehicle wash pads Rav East MIA Remove roadways and car parks Fill open drains Remove fuel farms & waste oil/lubricant storage areas/in-pit refuelling station Undertake contamination assessment and remediate any contaminated areas Demolition certificates Phase 1 and, if required, Phase 2 Contamination Assessments Glendell MIA Undertake minor earth works to grade landform to be free draining to local watercourses Rehabilitate with appropriate vegetative cover Rail line loop and load out Removal of site services (electricity, telecommunications etc.) Demolition certificate Phase 1 and, if required, Phase 2 Contamination

21 Page 14 Major Assets Domain 4 Tailings Storage Facility Stage 2 Tailings Dam TP1 RW Void Eastern Rail Pit Decommissioning/ Rehabilitation Activities Dismantle rail load out Remove rail loop track and formation Remove locomotive refuelling facility Undertake contamination assessment and remediate any contaminated areas Undertake earth works where required to grade landform to be free draining to local watercourses Rehabilitate West Pit Domain 5 Overburden Emplacement Area Remove pumping infrastructure Desiccation / settlement Develop approved detailed capping design and High Risk Activity application Cap tailings 1 Rehabilitation 2 Approvals Required Assessments High Risk Activity notification De-list TP1 from Schedule of Prescribed Dams De-list Stage 2 Tailings Dam embankments from Schedule of Prescribed Dams Footprint of overburden emplacements including areas of active dumping. Areas of rehabilitated overburden are covered under Domain 7. Domain 6 Soil Stockpiles Area/ Length ha ha Soil Stockpiles Rehabilitation as per the MOP None 13.2ha Domain 7 Current Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Rehabilitation as per the MOP None ha Rehabilitation Cost Estimate The Rehabilitation Cost Estimate (RCE) has been calculated to undertake the necessary works to achieve the desired final land use (refer to Section 4 and Plan 4). The RCE provides for third party rates to undertake the following: Decommissioning and demolition of all surface infrastructure; Rehabilitation of all areas disturbed by mining as depicted in Plan 2, with the exception of some dams that will be retained for post mining use; and Mobilisation costs, project management and contingencies. A copy of the RCE was submitted to DRE with this MOP for approval. 2.3 Activities over the MOP Term The following section outlines the operational activities that are proposed within the term of the MOP Exploration The MOC will continue to undertake exploration and prospecting activities across the approved lease areas for the purposes of geotechnical, geological, hydrogeological and gas investigations. These

22 Page 15 leases include CL 358, ML 1355, ML 1415, ML 1475, ML 1476, ML 1561, ML 1629 and ML More specifically, exploration work will involve core and/or open holes for structural definition, coal quality sampling, geotechnical assessment, groundwater monitoring and greenhouse gas assessment. The techniques used for exploration and prospecting may include, but are not limited to: Aerial photograph interpretation; Field assessments (soil, vegetation, etc); Drilling allowing for lithological and geophysical logging and / or coal quality sampling; Drilling associated with collecting gas concentration samples, Geophysical investigations; Magnetic surveys; Seismic surveys; and Excavation and bulk samples. Any exploration or prospecting activities undertaken will comply with DRE EDG 10 Surface Disturbance Notice for exploration activities or other relevant guidelines Construction Construction activities proposed in the MOP term are: Construction of a water transfer pipeline and associated infrastructure from Integra Underground Mine to the MOC; Construction of tailings pipeline network and to allow for the receipt of tailings from Ravensworth CHPP and Liddell CHPP, as part of the GRAWTS; Construction of a flocculent plant within the vicinity of the West Pit Void at Ravensworth East, to allow flocculants to be mixed with tailings immediately prior to deposition in the emplacement area; Various refurbishment works within the Mount Owen MIA, including upgrades to the existing fuel and lubrication system, augmentation works to the existing raw water system and vehicle wash facilities, upgrades to the fire water system, and civil/earthworks associated with upgrades to the existing light vehicle access road and lighting; Ongoing development and construction of water management structures as depicted on Plan 3A to Plan 3E to support the mining operation; Drainage improvement works at targeted locations within the Yorks Creek catchment; Product stockpile extension and improvements to increase processing capacity at the Mount Owen CHPP; Construction of CHPP stores shed (maximum 300 square metres in size); Construction of additional demountable offices at Glendell; Relocation of 132 kv power lines to the south-west of Glendell; and The addition of three bays to the existing maintenance workshop and additional offices at Glendell Mine. No additional disturbance is required for the extension of the Maintenance Workshop and additional administrative offices.

23 Page Mining Operations Open cut mining at the MOC is undertaken using similar mining methods across all operations. The mining sequence involves land preparation to salvage suitable vegetative matter and soils that are suitable for rehabilitation resources, removal of overburden and interburden and excavation of coal using excavators and trucks. The typical mining equipment fleet and ancillary equipment for each operation is listed in Table 11. The MOC will continue to review the mining fleet in the MOP term to ensure that efficient, productive and commercially viable mining activities are undertaken. There may be changes to the mining fleet where it is appropriate to ensure efficient and viable operations, however this will be undertaken in accordance with approvals and regulatory requirements. Key stages of the mining sequence are described in the sections below. Table 11 Typical Mining and Key Ancillary Equipment Equipment Type Mount Owen Mine Ravensworth East Mine Glendell Mine 250 t Excavator t Excavator t Excavator t Excavator t Excavator Bulldozers (both wheeled and tracked) Rear dump truck (Overburden) Rear dump truck (Coal) Drill Scraper 1-1 Grader Water cart Fuel and service truck Loaders Land Preparation Land preparation is the process of clearing vegetation and salvaging rehabilitation resources including suitable topsoils, subsoils, mulched vegetation and habitat features such as large rocks, woody debris and hollow bearing timber. Land preparation works will be undertaken in accordance with the site clearing and topsoil stripping procedures. Prior to any disturbance, the Environment and Community Manager (or delegate) will approve a Ground Disturbance Permit (GDP) that defines the limits of disturbance (clearing limits) and identifies

24 Page 17 environmentally sensitive features such as heritage site locations, and documents mitigation and management measures such as exclusion zones and required erosion and sediment controls. During the MOP term land will be cleared ahead of mining in progressive campaigns to minimise the total area of disturbance at any one time. The majority of vegetation proposed to be cleared is Derived Native Grassland located in the southern portion of the North Pit (Plan 1B) and small areas of Central Hunter Bulloak Forest Regeneration in the western extent of the Barrett Pit. Additional details regarding land preparation works and procedures of are included in the MOC Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) (Umwelt 2016b) Soil Stripping and Stockpiling All topsoils and suitable subsoils (that are not determined to be dispersive in nature) will be stripped and salvaged for rehabilitation purposes. Topsoil stripping closely follows clearing operations and, if vegetation has been mulched, the mulch is incorporated into the topsoil during the stripping operation. Topsoil activities are closely monitored to ensure that only the top layer of topsoil or suitable sub soils is taken (nominally 100 mm to 150 mm). Research and observation of rehabilitated areas at Mount Owen has shown that an approximate 100 mm of topsoil spread over an area is sufficient for germination and growth of vegetation. In some instances, there may be a requirement to disturb areas that have previously been rehabilitated. Where this is planned to occur, the site Environment and Community Manager or delegate will undertake an assessment of the areas and where appropriate, require that the topsoil be stripped for re-use. This would generally not occur where the soil is assessed as containing weeds, or it is too shallow to effectively strip without taking with it the underlying overburden material. Stripped soils are preferably spread directly onto prepared rehabilitation areas where available. Where direct spreading is not practicable, the stripped soil will be stockpiled for future use in accordance with the stripping and stockpiling procedures below: Topsoil will be stripped using appropriate equipment (e.g. dozer or scraper) to the appropriate depths identified ion the Agricultural Impact Assessment (Umwelt, 2014a) for the MOC operation or in accordance with the outcomes of further investigations undertaken as required; Soils will be stripped when in a moist condition (when possible) to minimise loss of soil structure and dust generation; Stockpiles will be established away from traffic areas and at an appropriate distance from watercourses; Appropriate sediment controls will be installed around topsoil stockpiles; Where possible stockpiles will be windrowed no more than 3 m high to maximise surface exposure and retain biological activity; Stockpiles retained longer than three months will be shaped, ripped and seeded with a suitable cover crop to minimise soil erosion, the invasion of weed species and dust generation, and maintain biological health, and preserve the soil seed bank; Topsoil and subsoil stripping activities are to be restricted during adverse weather conditions to minimise the potential for dust generation; Where required, machinery used to handle and transport topsoil shall be washed down prior to and at the completion of works to minimise the transfer of weeds; Weed growth (such as Kikuya) will be monitored and subsequently controlled if necessary; Prior to re-spreading, any weed growth will be scalped from the top of stockpiles to minimise the transport of weeds into rehabilitated areas; and

25 Page 18 Stockpiles will be appropriately identified to minimise the potential for inadvertent use or disturbance Waste Rock Removal and Emplacement Following progressive removal of vegetation and soils, overburden will generally be blasted, stripped and emplaced in-pit behind mining and out of pit. Blasting is undertaken in accordance with the MOC Blast Management Plan. Blast management is discussed in Section Overburden will continue to be emplaced in-pit and out of pit in the MOP term as shown on Plan 3A to Plan 3E. Overburden will be emplaced on CL 383, ML 1355, ML 1419, ML 1694, ML 1415, ML 1475, ML 1608, CL 358, ML 1410, ML 1476, ML 1673, and MPL 343. The Ravensworth East emplacement area receives overburden from BNP and has an approved maximum height of 160 m Australian Height Datum (AHD). The Barrett Pit emplacement area has an approved maximum height of 160 m AHD. The Western-Out-of-Pit (WOOP) emplacement area, which receives overburden from the North Pit, has an approved maximum height of 190m AHD, while the North Pit in-pit emplacement area has approval to a maximum height of 230m AHD. Apart from the selective handling of carbonaceous material for the prevention of spontaneous combustion and the avoiding of placing excessively blocky material near the finished surface, no other overburden materials require selective placement in the overburden tip areas. General principles for overburden emplacement at spoil dumps are: Limit the height of dump to within the final landform design; Dump any carbonaceous material in discrete, separate and compacted layers that will be capped; and Grade dumps to direct water away from the tip face to maintain face stability. The current landform design been constrained by the available space and are typical of other post mining landforms in the Hunter Valley. Notwithstanding, the MOC has recognised the need to consider landforms that have a more natural design and as such has undertaken some preliminary work in this area that was included as part of the Stage 2 rehabilitation area. Further, the landforms planned as part of the MOC have been designed to incorporate natural landform principles to increase the topographic variation and reduce the need for engineered drainage structures. For example areas of micro relief will be incorporated in Mount Owen and Ravensworth East Mine landform. Forecast volumes of waste rock for each year of the MOP are provided in Table 13, 14 and Coal Stockpiling and Processing ROM coal extracted from all pits is hauled via internal haul roads to ROM stockpiles at the Mount Owen CHPP. When required ROM coal is stored in-pit prior to being transported to the CHPP. The existing Ravensworth East (domestic) ROM pad, located within the Ravensworth East MIA will be used on an as required basis for the transportation of ROM coal and crushed gravel to either Liddell Coal Operations, the RCT and / or Bayswater and Liddell power stations. The 30,000 tonne domestic ROM pad receives domestic coal to be crushed and conveyed directly to Bayswater and Liddell Power Stations via an overland conveyor system without any additional processing. The CHPP consists of a South ROM stockpile and North ROM stockpile of an approximate 350,000 and 300,000 tonne capacity respectively. Raw coal is passed through three stages of sizing using

26 Page 19 Abon sizers, and the sized ROM coal is then conveyed to a 2,000 tonne surge bin that feeds the CHPP. ROM coal is crushed, sized, screened, separated and dewatered. Rejects comprise approximately 60% coarse rejects (particles greater than 2 mm) and 40% tailings (fines less than 2mm). Product coal is conveyed to the product stockpile that has an approximate capacity of 600,000 tonnes with the assistance of dozer push-out. Coal is placed on the stockpile via a luffing stacker and is recovered via a system of eight valves beneath the stockpile that load a 5,000 tonne per hour conveyor that feeds the 700 tonne rail load out bin. The valves are fed through dozer assist Coal Transport Product Coal for export is transported via rail from the MOC to the Port of Newcastle. Trains travel on a rail loop and spur line that joins the Main Northern Rail Line. The rail loader is approved to operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. The MOC has approval to transport up to 2 Mtpa coal directly to Bayswater and Liddell Power Stations. Crushed coal is loaded at the Ravensworth East domestic ROM pad. A network of overland conveyors transports the coal (approximately) 9 km to the power stations Coarse Rejects and Tailings Disposal Forecast coarse and fine rejects volumes for each year of the MOP term are provided in Table 12 below. The management of coarse rejects and tailings is outlined in the sections below. Coarse Rejects Coarse rejects will be co-disposed with overburden in-pit. Reject is back loaded from the ROM area using the coaling trucks and is either placed within the active dumps or used as fill material on running surfaces. Rejects are emplaced at depth to avoid coaliferous material being exposed on final rehabilitation surfaces. Tailings Active tailings emplacements at the commencement of the MOP term is West Pit, located in a former open cut void (Plan 2). Tailings were previously pumped to the ERP, RW, TP1, Stage 1 and Stage 2 tailings dams however these emplacement areas and are in various stages of capping and rehabilitation. In February 2016, a modification of the Ravensworth East Mine Development Consent (DA MOD 6) was approved to permit the receival and emplacement of piped tailings from Ravensworth Operations and Liddell Coal Operations CHPPs within the West Pit void at Ravensworth East for the period 2017 to This linked system of tailings infrastructure and storage, known as the GRAWTS, forms part of the approved modification which specifically provides for: Construction of approximately 11 kilometre tailings pipeline network connecting both the Ravensworth CHPP and Liddell CHPP to the West Pit Void at Ravensworth East; and Construction of a Flocculent Plant within the vicinity of the West Pit Void at Ravensworth East, to allow for flocculants to be mixed with tailings immediately prior to deposition in the emplacement area, a process known as secondary flocculation; and The staged emplacement of tailings generated from Ravensworth Operations (approximately 12.5 million cubic metres of wet tailings between approximately 2017 and 2021) and Liddell Coal Operations (approximately 2 million cubic metres wet tailings between approximately 2018 and 2020) within the West Pit at Ravensworth East.

27 Page 20 Given the recent approval of the Mount Owen Continued Operations Project, DA MOD 6 has been incorporated into the consolidated development consent. The staging of tailings capping and rehabilitation works is depicted on Plan 3A to 3E. In this MOP term, tailings emplacement will continue in the West Pit void in accordance with the Section 100 approval. The status or tailings emplacements is summarised in Table 12. Table 12 Status of Tailings Emplacements in the MOP Term Tailings Dam Current Status Decommissioning Status Capping Status Stage 1 Capped, final landform works underway Decommissioned in 2004 Capped 2013 Stage 2 Tailings Dam Inactive / Partially Rehabilitated Decommissioned in 2015 Commenced 2015 Planned Completion 2018 TP1 Inactive Decommissioned in 2015 Commenced 2016 Planned Completion 2019 RW Pit Void Inactive Decommissioned in 2015 To be Commenced 2017 Planned Completion 2018 Eastern Rail Pit Inactive Decommissioned in 2015 To be Commenced 2018 Planned Completion 2020 West Pit Active End of Mine Life End of Mine Life Further details regarding tailings management, including rehabilitation and capping management, are provided in the MOC Tailings Management Plan (Appendix D). Capping timing of tailings dams is dependent on geotechnical testing of tailings crust to enable safe capping methodology to be developed Decommissioning and Demolition Activities Decommissioning activities in the MOP term are associated with the rehabilitation of tailings emplacements as outlined in Section Stage 2, TP1, RW Pit Void and Eastern Rail Pit tailings emplacements will be capped and rehabilitated in accordance with Section 101 or High Risk Activity notifications. Tailings Pit 1 and the Stage 2 embankments are prescribed dams under the Dams Safety Act 1978 and the rehabilitation will be completed in consultation with the Dam Safety Committee. Progressive decommissioning and rehabilitation of the tailings emplacement areas is depicted on Plan 3A to 3E. In addition, exploration bore holes will be decommissioned in accordance with DRE requirements Progressive Rehabilitation and Completion Rehabilitation at the MOC is undertaken progressively over the life of the mine, with overburden emplacements and backfilled pits shaped and rehabilitated as areas become available. At the commencement of the MOP, approximately ha of mined land have been rehabilitated at the MOC.

28 Page 21 Rehabilitation progress in the MOP term is depicted on Plans 3A to 3E. It is anticipated that at the end of the MOP term approximately ha of land disturbed my mining will be undergoing rehabilitation. It is not anticipated that any rehabilitation areas will be relinquished in the MOP term Material Production Schedule The material production schedule during the MOP term at the Mount Owen, Ravensworth and Glendell is provided in Table 13, 14 and 15. Any proposed changes to this schedule will be outlined in the Annual Review. Table 13 Mount Owen Material Production Schedule Material Unit Rock/overburden Mbcm ROM Coal Mt Coarse Reject Material Tailings Reject Material Mt Mt Product Mt Table 14 Ravensworth East Material Production Schedule Material Unit Rock/overburden Mbcm ROM Coal Mt Coarse Reject Material Tailings Reject Material Mt Mt Product Mt Table 15 Glendell Material Production Schedule Material Unit Rock/overburden Mbcm ROM Coal Mt Coarse Reject Material Tailings Reject Material Mt Mt Product Mt

29 Page 22 3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 3.1 Environmental Risk Assessment The MOC undertook a risk assessment in accordance with the MOP Guidelines on 18 August 2016 (See Appendix C), which had a focus on closure and rehabilitation related issues. The risk assessment addressed a number of key aspects and how they related specifically to the success of the rehabilitation. During this rehabilitation MOP risk assessment 20 key risks were identified. Of these risks, 13 were ranked as low and 7 were ranked as medium. There were none ranked as being high risk. Table 16 below is a summary of those items that were determined to be a medium risk where in the MOP document risk mitigation has been addressed. Eighteen risks were identified as having current controls that are managing the risk at a satisfactory level whilst two of the risks were identified as requiring improvement and have been added to a works program. A copy of the Risk Register developed for the MOP risks to rehabilitation workshop is attached as Appendix C.

30 Page 23 Table 16 Summary of Risks to Rehabilitation MOP Risk Assessment (medium or higher ranking only) Key Element Issue Caused By Consequence Mine Subsidence and Settlement Soil Type(s) and Suitability Spontaneous Combustion Failure to achieve the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in the MOP Inadequate volume and/or quality of topsoil to achieve the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in the MOP Spon com impedes rehabilitation Settlement of tailings dams Inadequate topsoil available Less Than Adequate (LTA) topsoil quality Sacrificing weed infested topsoil Poor recovery of topsoil in rehab areas Poor management of materials with propensity for spon com. Settlement of rehabilitation landform resulting in ponding on tailings capped surfaces Inability to reach closure and relinquishment of the lease Cost of sourcing ameliorants and alternatives Inability to complete rehab. Impact on established rehabilitation Cost of managing spontaneous combustion Current Controls (are in place ) Capping design considers potential settlement Inspection and maintenance Topsoil mass balance estimate (stockpile quantities generally known and material ahead of operations is estimated) Conservative estimate of in situ topsoil reserves Biosolids have been trialled Selective use of sub-soil has been successfully used Spontaneous Combustion Management Plan Bayswater North Mining Project will remove legacy site issues Consequence Category Expected Risk Consequence Risk Likelihood Current Risk Rating Where addressed in the MOP Environment 2 B M Section Financial Impact 2 B M Section Environment 2 C M Section 3.3.5

31 Page 24 Key Element Issue Caused By Consequence outbreak Current Controls (are in place ) Consequence Category Expected Risk Consequence Risk Likelihood Current Risk Rating Where addressed in the MOP Flora Failure to achieve the rehabilitation commitment s prescribed in the MOP Not considering requirements in rehabilitation planning Failure to manage weeds Inability to reach closure and relinquish lease Endemic species used in rehabilitation Mining Operations Plan Annual Weed Plan Biodiversity Management Plan Environment 3 C M Section Pest species / grazing pressures (kangaroos, rabbits etc.) Rehabilitation Monitoring Program Research and development on rehabilitation outcomes Final Landform Design Tailings crust does not consolidate sufficiently to allow capping to progress as planned Poor water management with respect to recovering water from the tailings surface LTA management of rise during tailings deposition Inability to reach closure and relinquishment of the lease Delayed capping Surface water management GRAWTS Management Strategy including pipehead floc Financial Impact 3 D M Section LTA

32 Page 25 Key Element Issue Caused By Consequence understandin g of material properties with respect to GRAWTS Current Controls (are in place ) Consequence Category Expected Risk Consequence Risk Likelihood Current Risk Rating Where addressed in the MOP Contaminated Land Contaminate d land occurring on the site at closure Long term use of the site Spills, leaks etc. Impact on environment Constraint for future land use Financial issue Contaminated Sites Register Incident and Spill response process (PIRMP) Bioremediation area (Glendell & Mount Owen) Environment 3 D M Section Hydrocarbon Management Plan Cultural Heritage Disturbance of cultural heritage site (Aboriginal or European) Unintended interaction with Aboriginal site due to lack of awareness Prosecution Loss of culturally significant site Loss of historic site/s MOC ACHMP & Historic Heritage Management Plan Ground Disturbance Permits Legal & Compliance 2 C M Section Closure or rehabilitation activities

33 Page Environmental Risk Management The MOC maintains an Environmental Management System (EMS) as a means to facilitate compliance with environmental standards and requirements. The EMS provides a framework for managing all environmental and community aspects, impacts and performance of the mining operations. The MOC s EMS has been developed generally in accordance with ISO 14001, and is consistent with the Glencore Coal Assets Australia Environmental Management Framework. As part of the EMS, management plans, procedures and standards have been developed to meet statutory requirement, manage activities on site to minimise the risks of impact to the environment and to continually improve the performance of operations. The following management plans are in place for the MOC: Environmental Management Strategy; Rehabilitation Strategy; Water Management Plan (including Site Water and Salt Balance, Surface Water Management Plan, Groundwater Management Plan, Bettys & Swamp Creek Diversion Plans, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan); Air Quality Management Plan; Greenhouse Gas Monitoring Plan (Glendell only); Noise Management Plan; Blast Management Plan; Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan; Historic Heritage Management Plan; and Biodiversity Management Plan. These management plans will be updated as required with the approval of the DP&E. Copies of the current versions of these management plans are available on the MOC website ( Future revisions to any environmental management plan will be reported in the Annual Review Flora and Fauna Existing vegetation communities and recorded occurrences of threatened species are shown on Plan 1B. Management strategies to minimise impacts to flora and fauna are documented in the Biodiversity Management Plan and are summarised in this MOP. Regular flora and fauna monitoring has been in place since 1995 is conducted seasonally in accordance with the requirements outlined in the Biodiversity Management Plan.

34 Page 27 Surveys have recorded the following vegetation communities found in the immediate surrounds of the MOC area: Barrington Footslopes Dry Spotted Gum Forest; Hunter Lowlands Red Gum Forest; Central Hunter Swamp Oak Forest; and Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest. The management of biodiversity within offset areas is managed under the Biodiversity Management Plan. These areas (shown on Plan 2) form key habitat linkages between native vegetation rehabilitation areas proposed in the final landform (refer to Section 4.2). In addition to offset areas and conservation areas, the Ravensworth State Forest is located within the northern extent of the project boundary. The Ravensworth State Forest area is managed by Forests NSW. Flora and fauna management strategies for rehabilitation and offset areas at the MOC are outlined in the Biodiversity Management Plan and include: Management of the remnant vegetation and fauna habitat on the site and in the offset areas; Implementation of the biodiversity offset strategy; Integration of the biodiversity offset strategy to the greatest extent possible with the rehabilitation of the MOC; Monitoring and management of pests and weeds in rehabilitation and offset areas; Endemic species used in rehabilitation; and Ongoing monitoring and reporting to facilitate shared learnings in the application of regeneration and rehabilitation techniques. Further detail regarding flora and fauna monitoring program is provided in Section Final Landform Design Controls in place to ensure stable final landforms are achieved at the MOC are: Surface water management (ref to Section ); Rehabilitation drainage designed to consider shorter intervals on contour banks; GRAWTS Management Strategy, including pipehead flocculants and Stage 2 of the strategy to utilise additional voids; Geotechnical engineering input into final landform design; Implementation of the Slope Stability Management Plan; Rehabilitation monitoring; and Slope and rehabilitation design (micro relief). Further details on micro-relief are outlined in Section 5.2 of the PAC Report (Umwelt 2016). The final landform progressively developed through the life of the MOC will incorporate micro-relief features. The process of designing the micro-relief landform features and incorporating them into the rehabilitated landform is closely linked to the detailed mine planning process. Due to the need to develop the micro-relief features around discrete catchment areas, the detailed design and incorporation of the micro-relief features in the landform is heavily dependent upon mine development. The actual elevation and size of overburden emplacements at the scale that can influence detailed micro-relief designs can alter in practice due to such variables as overburden swell factor, changes to detailed mine plan sequencing due to marketing requirements, the performance of different plant and

35 Page 28 equipment and operational constraints from weather conditions. Based on learning s from Glencore s Mangoola project, the successful implementation of micro-relief in rehabilitated landforms is best achieved by developing the detailed design of the micro-relief features progressively as part of the detailed mine planning process undertaken for each mining sequence. It is important however to incorporate the conceptual final landform designs into the bulk overburden emplacement designs to ensure sustainable final design outcomes can be achieved Heritage (Aboriginal and European) Aboriginal Heritage Aboriginal Cultural Heritage for the MOC is managed in accordance with the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan that includes management strategies for registered Aboriginal sites within the colliery holding. The MOC has an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Working Group that includes representatives of the three knowledge holder groups (Plains Clans of the Wonnarua People, Wonnarua Nation Aboriginal Corporation, Wonnarua Traditional Custodians) and the Wonnarua Local Aboriginal Land Council. The Working Group provides strategic overview and input during the development and implementation of management measures including: Development of an Aboriginal cultural heritage awareness training package incorporated into the mine and contractor induction process; Use of a spatial data system to manage Aboriginal Heritage sites; Protection of sites remaining in situ and sensitive areas outside the Proposed Disturbance Area; Ongoing management of the Yorks Creek Voluntary Conservation Area (VCA), which has been set aside for the management of cultural heritage, however this is outside the MOP area; and Implementation of the management commitments as part of development consent processes. During the term of the MOP, artefact salvage within the Mount Owen Continued Operations Project disturbance areas will be undertaken. Historic Heritage The documented history of the surrounding region indicates that the land has predominantly been utilised by graziers, agriculturists and in more recent times the mining industry. The historic heritage resources within the MOC includes evidence of former house sites, sheds, yards and other rural structures that demonstrate the pattern of land use and historical development of the area. There are several listed heritage items within the vicinity of the MOC (refer to Plan 1C), including: Ravensworth Homestead; Former Chain of Ponds Inn; Middle Falbrook Bridge (over Glennies Creek); Greylands and Outbuildings; Ravensworth Public School (former); and St Clements Anglican Church. The management of these sites and historic heritage across the MOC is undertaken in accordance with the Historic Heritage Management Plan.

36 Page Erosion and Sediment Control Erosion and sediment control at the MOC is managed in accordance with the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan: Provides a framework for the management of erosion and sedimentation during the construction, operation and rehabilitation phases at the MOC; Is consistent with the requirements of Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction, Volume 2E, or its latest version; Identifies activities that could cause soil erosion, generate sediment or affect flooding; Describes measures to minimise soil erosion and the potential for the transport of sediment to downstream waters, and manage flood risk; Describes the location, function, and capacity of erosion and sediment control structures and flood management structures; and Describes what measures would be implemented to maintain these structures over time. Monitoring and inspections associated with erosion and sediment control include: Monitoring of water quality in sedimentation dams if the dams have the potential to discharge dirty water off site, including ph, EC and TSS in accordance with the Surface Water Management and Monitoring Plan; Regular inspections of water levels, silt build-up, scouring or erosion and the presence of hydrocarbons; Rehabilitation monitoring; Annual creek stability monitoring; and Annual inspections (walkover) of creek diversions and rehabilitation areas. Additional inspections will be carried out after high rainfall events to assess the effectiveness of all controls. Sediment and erosion control measures will be implemented for the life of the operations to minimise impact on the surrounding environment, including: Locating soil stockpiles on relatively flat ground away from concentrated flows; Establish erosion and sediment controls prior to site disturbance; Progressive rehabilitation of disturbed land as soon as practicable; Construction of catch drains to capture runoff from disturbed areas and rehabilitation areas that direct runoff into sedimentation dams; Construction of all temporary drains as earthen drains at typical grades no steeper than 5% (giving maximum peak velocities in the order of 1.5 m/s) to minimise scouring; Regular inspections and maintenance of all sedimentation controls and rehabilitation areas; and Designing and constructing diversions to engineering standards (Blue Book) Air Quality Air quality at the MOC is managed in accordance with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) which includes the following measures: Engineering controls (e.g. enclosure of conveyors); Operational control measures routinely implemented (e.g. road dust suppression);

37 Page 30 Mitigation measures implemented as residences afforded mitigation rights; Acquisition upon request of properties afforded acquisition rights; and Operation of a comprehensive air quality management system that uses a combination of predictive meteorological forecasting and real-time air quality monitoring data to guide the day to day planning of mining operations. Air quality monitoring is undertaken per the AQMP and includes a combination of E-BAM, depositional dust gauges, high volume air samplers (HVAS), and continuous PM 10 monitoring units (TEOM s). Air quality compliance monitoring results are reported in the Annual Review, EPL Annual Return, the MOC website and to the CCC Visual and Lighting Throughout the MOP term, the MOC will continue to employ measures to minimise the visual impacts of operations on its nearest receptors including: Rehabilitating disturbed areas as soon as practical after mining; Prioritising rehabilitation works in areas that are most visually prominent at private residences; and Orientating lights on site away from sensitive receptors where practical Blasting Blasting is undertaken in accordance with the Blast Management Plan. Blasting controls have been implemented as required by the relevant consents and EPL s. During the MOP term, the MOC will: Design and undertake blasts to ensure that vibration and air-blast limits are met, including consideration of wind speed and direction prior to blasting to minimise impacts on neighbours; Provide detailed monitoring of blasts over the life of the mine to inform the detailed design of blasts and modification of blast designs as necessary; Train all relevant personnel on environmental obligations in relation to blasting controls; Document the date and location of blast holes and quantity of explosive used; A blasting protocol has been developed in consultation with the Integra Underground Mine with this outlined in the Blast Management Plan. The Protocol provides consultation requirements across the two sites;.and Conduct periodic review of blast management procedures to evaluate performance and identify corrective action, if required. Blast monitoring results are presented at the CCC meetings and are also made publically available on the MOC website. All blasting activities for the MOC are reported annually as per the requirements of the relevant Annual Return Noise Noise management at the MOC is undertaken in accordance with the Noise Management Plan. The main sources of noise at the MOC are associated with coal and overburden excavation, dump truck movements, coal handling and processing and rail movements. Noise monitoring is undertaken in accordance with EPL and Development Consent Conditions, which specify required methods of sampling, analysis and frequency of monitoring. The Noise Management Plan includes a combination of continuous and supplementary attended monitoring measures.

38 Page 31 Attended noise monitoring is conducted in accordance with the NSW Government Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH), Industrial Noise Policy (INP) (2000) guidelines and the Australian Standard AS , Acoustics Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise, Part 1 General Procedures. Noise management initiatives and noise monitoring performance is reported in the Annual Review and EPL Annual Return Bushfire The objectives of bushfire management on the site are to: Reduce fire ignition potential; Prevent the spread of fire within and beyond the site; Protect the flora and fauna within the MOC from unplanned fire events; and Prevent damage to rehabilitated areas. The MOC maintains resources for firefighting including maintaining access to water sources, providing water carts fitted with firefighting points and committing to providing earthmoving equipment to establish fire breaks and trails Hazardous Materials and Dangerous Goods Hazardous materials and dangerous goods used at the MOC include sealed radiation sources, gases for cutting and welding, explosive precursors and diesel fuels. Dangerous goods and explosives are managed in accordance with the relevant legislation. For Glendell and Ravensworth East all bulk explosives are stored at the offsite explosives depot. Detonators and cords are located at the Glendell magazine facility. For Mount Owen bulk explosives are stored at the onsite explosives depot. Detonators and cords are located at the Mount Owen magazine facility. Radiation sources at the CHPP are fully sealed and managed by an appointed radiation safety officer in accordance with radiation licences issued under the Radiation Control Act Bulk diesels are stored and managed as described in Section below. Hard copies of the Safety Data Sheets are held at each site and in locations nominated by the respective Safety Management Plans. In addition, a Hazardous Substances Register is used at for the MOC and demolition standards are followed to ensure hazardous materials and dangerous goods do not remain on the site at closure Water Management Surface and groundwater is managed in accordance with the approved Water Management Plan. The Mount Owen, Ravensworth East and Glendell Mines are managed together within an integrated Water Management System (WMS). In addition, the MOC is an integral part of the GRAWTS with Ravensworth and Liddell mining operations, with connection to Integra Underground Mine to proceed during the term of this MOP. The GRAWTS allows greater flexibility in water and tailings management across the mines in the Greater Ravensworth Area. The principal sources of operational water at the MOC are: Dirty / mine water from operations within the GRAWTS;

39 Page 32 Surface runoff from disturbed catchments; Groundwater make in the open cut pits; and Surface water allocations from Glennies Creek. The major uses of water at the MOC are process water at the CHPP and dust suppression. During periods of water surplus, excess water from the MOC is managed through the GRAWTS network. Key aspects of the erosion and sediment control system are outlined in Section Surface Water Monitoring Surface water monitoring at the MOC includes a program to monitor and report on: Effectiveness of the water management system; Impacts on downstream water user supplies; Surface water flows and quality, as well as stream and riparian vegetation health in the watercourses that could be affected by the development; and Downstream flooding impacts. Surface water quality monitoring is undertaken at locations onsite and in the surrounding catchment area including locations at Bowmans Creek, Yorks Creek, Swamp Creek, Bettys Creek, Main Creek and onsite dams. Water quality parameters including ph, electrical conductivity (EC), total suspended solids (TSS) and total dissolved solids (TDS) are evaluated by a NATA accredited laboratory. Results of surface water monitoring undertaken are reported in the Annual Review. Full details of the MOC surface water monitoring program are outlined in the Surface Water Management and Monitoring Plan. Groundwater Monitoring The MOC has established a substantial network of groundwater monitoring and testing bores to monitor groundwater characteristics at the complex. Groundwater levels and quality have been monitored and assessed since Results of all groundwater monitoring undertaken are reported in the Annual Review. Full details of the MOC groundwater monitoring program are outlined in the Groundwater Management and Monitoring Plan Waste Management Waste streams that will be generated in the MOP term include general wastes and hydrocarbon wastes. Waste will be managed in accordance with the following waste management hierarchy principles: Waste avoidance; Waste re-use; Waste recycling; and Waste removal and disposal. A summary of the management of specific waste streams anticipated to be generated during the MOP term is provided in the sections below.

40 Page 33 General Waste The MOC disposes of general waste as follows: All fuel and oil filters are removed by a licensed contractor for recycling; All large tyres are disposed of in pit, and small tyres are disposed off-site by a licensed contractor; Batteries are stockpiled in covered areas and removed periodically by a licensed contractor; Scrap metal is collected and stored in maintenance areas until periodic recycling by a licensed contractor; Paper and cardboard is regularly collected from workshop and office areas for recycling by a licensed contractor; and All domestic waste is disposed of to an approved landfill site by a licensed contractor. Hydrocarbons Fuel, lubricants and waste oils are stored in the bulk fuel area and workshops. All hydrocarbons are stored in designated bunded storage areas. Bulk diesel fuel storage area is designed to hold 110% of the largest fuel storage tank in accordance with AS The Storage and Handling of F lammable and Combustible Liquids. Bulk diesel located at Glendell is stored in four 100,000 litre bunded above-ground storage tanks and in-pit mobile re-fuellers. The Mount Owen CHPP is licensed to store 100,000 litres of diesel in an above ground tank at the Rail Loadout facility for refuelling trains. In addition Mount Owen is licenced to store 920,000 litres of diesel in four bulk storage above ground tanks, each with a storage capacity of 230,000 litres. Waste oils (including oils collected in oil water separators) and waste chemicals are removed by licenced waste disposal contractors) Weeds and Pests A number of environmental and noxious weed and feral animal species have been identified at the MOC and active programs of control have been implemented since The main weeds of concern include Galenia, Acacia Saligna, lantana, St John s Wort, Coolatai Grass, African Boxthorn, African Olive, Pampas grass and Mother of Millions. Procedures used to manage the spread of weeds include: Where required machinery used to handle and transport topsoil is washed down prior to and at the completion of works to minimise the transfer of weeds; Monitoring weed growth on the MOC lands and controlling where required; and Scalping weeds from topsoil stockpiles prior to re-use in rehabilitation areas. Management strategies for weeds and pests across the MOC are outlined in the Biodiversity Management Plan. The MOC also controls feral animals including wild dogs, feral pigs and foxes which appear intermittently on the landholdings.

41 Page Operational Issues Which Affect Rehabilitation Mine Subsidence Mine subsidence has the potential to prevent the achievement of the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in this MOP. Mine subsidence could potentially be caused by the Integra Underground Mine. Mine subsidence would cause the settlement of active and rehabilitated landforms to such an extent that drainage is impacted on. Controls in place to manage subsidence risks include: Management measures included in the Integra Subsidence Management Plan (SMP)/Extraction Plan; Consultation between Integra and the MOC operations; Detailed geotechnical assessment of predicted subsidence; and Surcharge of landform in predicted subsidence areas Settlement of Tailings Settlement of rehabilitated tailings pits resulting in ponding on capped tailings surfaces was considered a medium risk in the MOC MOP Risks to Rehabilitation Risk Assessment (2016) (Appendix C). Appendix D outlines tailings management relating to settlement and rehabilitation at the MOC. The MOC undertake regular inspections and maintenance (as required) to undertake earthworks to avoid the risk of ponding occurring on the rehabilitated tailings surface. During the MOP term, the MOC will utilise survey information to quantify any settlement of capped tailings to inform the continual improvement process regarding capping methodology for the remaining active tailings emplacements Soils and Capping Materials Soils The MOC have undertaken a review of the soil and growing medium balance for the preparation of this MOP. It is anticipated that the volumes of soil material currently stockpiled, and soil resources available to be salvaged ahead of mining will likely result in a soil deficit for the rehabilitation works up to and including closure. A summary of volumes of soil currently stockpiled, resources in-situ to be stripped, and volumes required for rehabilitation are summarised in Table 17. The soil budget is based on the current proposal to respread 100 mm of topsoil on all rehabilitation areas and has been based on a conservative estimate of the available soil resources in situ to be stripped. There may be additional suitable soil resources available in the MOP term. Table 17 Indicative Soil Balance at Commencement of MOP Stockpiled (m 3 ) Estimated In situ Soil to be stripped (m 3 ) LOM Rehabilitation Requirement (based on 100mm depth) (m 3 ) Potential Deficit (m 3 ) 341, , , ,000

42 Page 35 During the MOP term the MOC will revise the soil balance periodically and investigate appropriate soil substitutes to address any anticipated soil deficit. In addition, a soil deficiency can be managed through the selective use of ameliorants such as the use of biosolids and other alternatives. Biosolids and a consistent seed mix have been used across the MOC for many years and this same approach is proposed during the MOP period. The MOC will continue to monitor the effectiveness of topsoil substitutes as part of the rehabilitation monitoring program. Capping Materials As outlined in Table 12, it is anticipated that all active tailings disposal facilities other than the West Pit tailings facility will be decommissioned and capped in the MOP term. Rehabilitation works at NVS2 and TP1 are well underway, in accordance with detailed capping design submitted to the DRE for approval in accordance with Schedule 3, High Risk Activities, Part 5, Clause 27 Emplacement areas of the Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulation During the MOP term, the MOC will develop and submit further applications to the DRE including detailed tailings capping designs prior to commencing decommissioning and capping of each facility. In the course of overburden characterisation activities, the MOC will identify overburden materials suitable for capping decommissioned tailings pits that meet specifications documented in the detailed capping design. During operation, the discharge spigots will be located so that surface water is pushed to the decant pump allowing the surface of the tailings to be dewatered and to encourage evaporative drying, and hence shear strength development of the tailings surface, in preparation for future rehabilitation of the storage. The emplacement of tailings will be monitored throughout the life of the tailings storage facility with respect to the density of the emplaced material and the nature of the surface of the tailings. This will be achieved through the use of quarterly LiDAR survey Contaminated Land The risk of having contaminated land onsite at closure as a result of long term use of the site (i.e. spills and leaks) was considered a medium risk in the MOC MOP Risks to Rehabilitation Risk Assessment (2016) (Appendix C). Hazardous materials including bulk diesel fuels and chemicals are contained in bunded storage areas to minimise the potential for accidental spills as described in Section Additional management measures include: The MOC to complete Phase 1 contamination assessments during the MOP period. Additional contamination investigations may be undertaken based on the results of the Phase 1; Inspecting and maintaining equipment and plant including the conveyor networks regularly to minimise potential for leaks associated with equipment failures; Maintaining the existing bioremediation areas and establishing additional bioremediation areas as required to treat soils contaminated by hydrocarbon spills; and Maintaining a Contaminated Sites Register Spontaneous Combustion The MOC recognises that spontaneous combustion presents a potential threat to rehabilitation and long term public safety unless appropriate controls are maintained and spontaneous combustion is considered in the final landform design.

43 Page 36 There has historically been no evidence of spontaneous combustion from consolidated tailings at the MOC. Analysis of rejects samples (coarse and fine) typically shows no recoverable quantities of coal material and where coal material is detected, less than 1% coal material. The issue of spontaneous combustion and the potential liability for mine closure will continue to be evaluated and managed (if required) throughout the MOP term. Where required, material that is potentially prone to spontaneous combustion will be placed at a suitable depth to minimise any potential interference to rehabilitation establishment as well as minimise the potential for spontaneous combustion or ignition of carbonaceous material in the event of bushfire occurring within the revegetated landscape. General practices designed to minimise oxygen exposure pathways to potentially prone material will include the following: Capping of tailings emplacement areas; Co-disposing coarse reject material with overburden material at a suitable depth into the final landform; and Selectively handling and burying at depth overburden/interburden material that is identified through the routine sampling program as being prone to spontaneous combustion. Additional management measures are included in the Spontaneous Combustion Procedures Geochemical Constraints Geochemical analysis of waste rock and coal at the MOC by Environmental Geochemistry International Pty Ltd (EGI) was undertaken in 2013 to assess geochemical constraints for rehabilitation including the potential for acid rock drainage (ARD), salinity and sodicity. Further column leachate testing for overburden materials was conducted in Geochemical constraints for rehabilitation are discussed in the sections below. Acid Rock Drainage EGI s assessment concluded that the bulk of the overburden/interburden and coal seam materials represented by the samples tested are likely to be non-acid forming (NAF), with a significant excess of acid neutralising capacity and low leachable salinity. Whilst there was the occasional thin zone (0.2 metres) of interburden with elevated Sulfur (S) close to coal seams that were considered potentially acid forming (PAF), these represented only (approximately) 1% of the total volume of waste rock and it is considered that mixing and co-disposing PAF and NAF materials in overburden emplacements will effectively mitigate any ARD generation (EGI 2013). The floor of the final voids is anticipated to consist of materials associated with the Bayswater Seam, and therefore the void floors are anticipated to be NAF, with possible portions of low capacity potential acid forming (PAF-LC) materials (EGI 2013). Similarly, testing indicates that the bulk of coarse rejects and tailings are anticipated to be NAF. This supports the history of mining at the MOC that has no previous indications of ARD associated with leachate from tailings emplacements. The ph of the tailings material is approximately 6.3. Testing of the water existing voids and piezometers adjacent to existing TSFs indicates that it has a ph that ranges from 6.8 to 8.0. As all water associated with the emplacement areas will be contained on site, there are no adverse impacts expected. The tailings from Mount Owen CHPP have been subject to geochemistry analysis which has found that they are largely non-acid forming and have excess acid neutralising capacity. Regardless, tailings are managed in accordance with site procedures. Existing management processes are in place to ensure ARD material is managed appropriately.

44 Page 37 Sodicity and Dispersitivity Fifty representative overburden samples were tested by EGI (2013) for soluble and exchangeable cations and dispersion percent. The material testing indicated that the weathered sandstones present are likely to be sodic and dispersive and may exhibit surface crusting and high erosion rates if they are incorporated into the surface of the final rehabilitated landform. Most (80%) of the weathered sandstone samples were sodic to highly sodic, while fresh waste rock was partly sodic. Material characterisation of surface spoils will be undertaken prior to rehabilitation works commencing to determine the need for any amelioration required to mitigate sodicity or dispersivity (e.g. treatment with coarse gypsum or lime). ph and Salinity Testing of overburden, interburden and coal seams indicate that salinity and acidity do not present a risk to rehabilitation. The bulk (98%) of samples showed no inherent acidity with ph greater than 6, and EC values (ds/m) in the non-saline to slightly saline range (EGI 2013). Consequently overburden dumping operations do not require any selective handling or other management measures to mitigate salinity or acidity risks for spoils near the rehabilitated surface of emplacement areas Final Landuse Integration with Adjacent Operations The MOC are committed to a rehabilitation strategy that complements the proposed rehabilitation at the adjacent Glencore operated Liddell Coal Operations, and meets the final landuse goals for the MOC including enhancing regional habitat connectivity (refer to Section 4.2). The proposed final landform and landuse for the MOC (Plan 4) includes woodland habitat corridors that complements proposed native vegetation rehabilitation at Liddell Coal Operations. The MOC will continue through the MOP term to liaise with Liddell Coal Operations to ensure native vegetation rehabilitation objectives at the operations are compatible and achieve the desired outcome of habitat connectivity.

45 Page 38 4 POST MINING LAND USE 4.1 Regulatory Requirements Regulatory requirements for post mining land use and rehabilitation are listed below in Table 18. In accordance with Schedule 3 Condition 43 a separate Rehabilitation Strategy has been prepared for the MOC. Table 18 Regulatory Requirements Relating to Post Mining Land Use and Rehabilitation Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Mount Owen and Ravensworth East - SSD-5850` Schedule 3, Condition 42. Rehabilitation Objectives The Applicant must rehabilitate the site to the satisfaction of DRE. This rehabilitation must be generally consistent with the proposed rehabilitation activities described in the documents listed in condition 2(a) of Schedule 2 (and shown conceptually in the Rehabilitation Plans in Appendix 7), and comply with the objectives in Table 10. Table 10: Rehabilitation Objectives Feature Objective Mine site (as a whole) Final voids Safe, stable and nonpolluting Final landforms (including final voids) designed to incorporate micro-relief and integrate with surrounding natural landforms Constructed landforms maximise surface water drainage to the natural environment (excluding final void catchments) Minimise long term groundwater seepage zones Minimise visual impact of final landforms as far as is reasonable and feasible Final landforms designed in consideration of water licensing requirements, as calculated through consultation with DPI Water Designed as to ensure sufficient freeboard at all times to minimise the risk of discharge to surface waters Minimise to the greatest extent practicable: the size and depth of final voids; the drainage catchment of final voids; any high wall instability risk; and the risk of flood Life of mine/closure Throughout document

46 Page 39 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Schedule 3, Condition 43 Schedule 3, Condition 43 (a) Rehabilitation areas and other vegetated land interaction for all flood events up to and including the Probable Maximum Flood Restore at least 2037 ha of selfsustaining woodland ecosystems, characteristic of vegetation communities found in the local area, as shown conceptually in Figure 7A in Appendix 7 b Establish areas of self-sustaining: riparian habitat, within any diverted and/or reestablished creek lines and retained water features; potential habitat for threatened flora and fauna species; and wildlife corridors, as far as is reasonable and feasible, and as shown conceptually in Figure 7B in Appendix 7 Agricultural land Rehabilitate grassland areas identified in Appendix 7 as being potential grazing areas to support sustainable grazing activities Creek restoration works Engineered to be hydraulically and geomorphologically stable Incorporate erosion control measures based on vegetation and engineering revetments Incorporate structures for aquatic habitat Revegetate with suitable native species Surface infrastructure To be decommissioned and removed, unless DRE agrees otherwise Community Ensure public safety Minimise adverse socio-economic effects associated with mine closure Rehabilitation Strategy The Applicant must prepare a Rehabilitation Strategy for the Mount Owen Complex to the satisfaction of the Secretary. This strategy must: be prepared in consultation with DRE and Council, and be submitted to the Secretary for approval prior to the commencement of development under this consent, unless the Secretary agrees otherwise; Life of mine Life of mine Separate Rehabilitation Strategy document Rehabilitation Strategy Schedule 3, build upon the Rehabilitation Objectives in Table 10 and Life of mine Rehabilitation

47 Page 40 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Condition 43 (b) Schedule 3, Condition 43 (c) Schedule 3, Condition 43 (d) Schedule 3, Condition 43 (e) Schedule 3, Condition 43 Schedule 3, Condition 44 Schedule 3, Condition 45 Schedule 3, Condition 45 (a) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (b) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (c) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (d) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (e) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (f) the Rehabilitation Plans shown in Appendix 7, including identification of opportunities for increasing the areas of woodland and habitat connectivity within the rehabilitated landscape; include details of the canopy, sub-canopy, understorey and ground strata species to be established in the rehabilitation areas, with a particular focus on ensuring the achievement of an appropriate level of diversity and mix of functional groups within each target community; identify opportunities for the incorporation of preferred feed trees, foraging resources and habitat for threatened fauna species identified in condition 28; and include an indicative schedule for the staged rehabilitation of the development. The Applicant must implement the approved Rehabilitation Strategy as approved from time to time by the Secretary. Progressive Rehabilitation The Applicant must rehabilitate the site progressively as soon as reasonably practicable following disturbance. All reasonable and feasible measures must be taken to minimise the total area exposed for dust generation at any time. Interim stabilisation and temporary vegetation strategies must be employed when areas prone to dust generation cannot be permanently rehabilitated. The Applicant must prepare a Rehabilitation Management Plan for the Mount Owen Complex to the satisfaction of DRE. This plan must: be prepared in consultation with the Department, DPI Water, OEH, DPI, Council and the CCC, and submitted to DRE for approval prior to the commencement of mining operations under this consent, unless the Secretary agrees otherwise; be prepared in accordance with any relevant DRE guideline; describe how the rehabilitation of the site would achieve the objectives identified in Table 10, the outcomes described in the Rehabilitation Strategy in condition 45 and be integrated with the Biodiversity Offset Strategy described in condition 27; include a detailed Tailings Management Plan for the development; include a detailed soil and growing medium balance for the development; include a detailed plan for the reinstatement and review of the proposed: agricultural land capability of grassland areas in the final landform, including a protocol for periodic trials to demonstrate that the land capability is being achieved; and Life of mine Life of mine Life of mine Life of mine Life of mine 7.3 Life of mine Strategy Rehabilitation Strategy Rehabilitation Strategy Rehabilitation Strategy Rehabilitation Strategy This Plan Life of mine Life of mine 1.0 Life of mine 4.3, 5.2 Life of mine Appendix D Life of mine Table 17 Life of mine Section 6.0 and Section 8.2

48 Page 41 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Schedule 3, Condition 45 (g) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (h) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (i) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (j) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (k) Schedule 3, Condition 45 (l) Schedule 3 Glendell - DA 80/952 Schedule 2, Condition 1 Schedule 3, Condition 26 rehabilitated woodland areas and fauna habitat, including a protocol for periodic trials to demonstrate that the target vegetation community is being achieved; include detailed performance and completion criteria for evaluating the performance of the rehabilitation of the site, and for triggering remedial action (if necessary); describe the measures that would be implemented to ensure compliance with the relevant conditions of this consent, and address all aspects of rehabilitation including mine closure, final landform (including final voids), final land uses and water management in the final landform; include procedures for the use of interim stabilisation and temporary vegetation strategies, where reasonable and feasible to minimise the area exposed for dust generation; identify how rehabilitation activities will implement the findings of any previous Mount Owen Research programs, research commitments identified in the EIS and the Hunter Ironbark Research Program being undertaken at the Ravensworth Complex; include a program to monitor, independently audit and report on the effectiveness of the measures in paragraph (h) above, and progress against the detailed performance and completion criteria in paragraph (g) above (at a minimum these reporting requirements must be included as part of the annual review referred to in condition 5 of Schedule 5); and build on and integrate with the other management plans required under this consent. The Applicant must implement the approved Rehabilitation Management Plan as approved from time to time to the satisfaction of DRE. In addition to meeting the specific performance criteria established under this consent, the Applicant shall implement all practical measures to prevent and/or minimise any harm to the environment that may result from the construction, operation, or rehabilitation of the development. Bettys Creek and Swamp Creek Diversions The Applicant must design, construct, maintain, and rehabilitate the proposed diversion of Bettys Creek and Swamp Creek, to the satisfaction of the Secretary. Life of mine Section 6.0, Life of mine Life of mine Life of mine 8.2 This Table (Table 18) Life of mine 8.1, 10.0 Life of mine 3.2 Life of mine Life of mine Life of Mine Post MOP approval Throughout document Bettys Creek Diversion Plan, MOP Section Schedule 3, Condition 37 Schedule 3, Condition 37A The Applicant must progressively rehabilitate the site in a manner that is generally consistent with the final landform set out in the EA (Mod 2) to the satisfaction of DRE and the Secretary. The final landform shall provide for at least 250 hectares of treed vegetation, in a manner generally consistent with that shown conceptually in Appendix 6. The Applicant must rehabilitate the site progressively as soon as reasonably practicable following disturbance. All reasonable and feasible measures must be taken to minimise the total area exposed for dust generation at any time. Interim stabilisation and temporary vegetation Life of mine Life of mine , Appendix A

49 Page 42 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Schedule 3, Condition 39 Schedule 3, Condition 39 a) Schedule 3, Condition 39 b) Schedule 3, Condition 39 c) strategies must be employed when areas prone to dust generation cannot be permanently rehabilitated. Landscape Management Plan The Applicant must prepare and implement a detailed Landscape Management Plan for the development to the satisfaction of the DRE and Secretary. This plan must: Be prepared in consultation with EPA, DPI Water, DPI, OEH and Council by suitably qualified expert/s whose appointment/s have been approved by the Secretary; Be submitted to the Secretary for approval by the end of April 2008; and Include a: Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan; Final Void Management Plan; and Mine Closure Plan. Life of mine/closure Life of mine/closure Life of mine/closure Life of mine/closure Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan The Applicant must implement the approved plan as approved from time to time by the Secretary. The Final Void Management Plan and Mine Closure Plan will remain to meet this condition for Glendell only. Schedule 3, Condition 40 Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan The Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan must include: Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 40 a) The objectives for rehabilitation of the site and offset area; Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 40 b) A detailed description of how the rehabilitation of the site and implementation of the Offset Strategy would be integrated with the rehabilitation and offset strategies of the Mount Owen, Ravensworth East and Ashton mines to ensure there is a comprehensive strategic framework for the restoration and enhancement of the landscape over time; Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 40 c) A description of the short, medium and long term measures that would be implemented to: Rehabilitate the site; Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Implement the Offset Strategy;

50 Page 43 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Manage the remnant vegetation and habitat on the site and in the offset areas; Maximise effective linkages to the offset areas at Mount Owen, Ravensworth East and Ashton Mines; and Implement the New England Highway tree screens. Schedule 3, Condition 40 d) Detailed performance and completion criteria for the rehabilitation of the site and implementation of the Offset Strategy and New England Highway tree screens; Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 40 e) A detailed description of how the performance of the rehabilitation of the mine, the offset areas and the New England Highway tree screens would be monitored over time to achieve the stated objectives; Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 40 f) A detailed description of what measures would be implemented over the next three years to rehabilitate the site, and implement both the Offset Strategy and the tree screens along the new England highway including the procedures to be implemented for: Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Progressively rehabilitating areas disturbed by mining Implementing revegetation and regeneration within the disturbance areas and offset areas, including establishment of canopy, sub-canopy (if relevant), understorey and ground strata; Reducing the visual impacts of the development; Protecting areas outside the disturbance areas; Rehabilitating creeks and drainage lines on the site, to ensure no net loss of stream length and aquatic habitat; Undertaking pre-clearance surveys; Managing impacts on fauna; Landscaping the site to reduce visual impacts; Conserving and reusing topsoil; Collecting and propagating seed for rehabilitation works; Salvaging and reusing material from the site for habitat enhancement; Controlling weeds and feral pests; Controlling access; Bushfire management; and Managing any potential conflicts between the offset strategy and Aboriginal cultural heritage; Schedule 3, Condition 40 g) A description of the potential risks to successful rehabilitation and/or revegetation, and a description of the contingency measures that would be implemented to mitigate these risks; and Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 40 h) Details of who is responsible for monitoring, reviewing, and implementing the plan Rehabilitation Superseded by the MOP and the Biodiversity Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 40 i) a description of riparian revegetation and maintenance works associated with EA (Mod 3), that have been prepared generally in accordance with DPI Water s Guidelines for Controlled Activities on Waterfront Land; Rehabilitation Biodiversity Management Plan

51 Page 44 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Schedule 3, Condition 40 j) Schedule 3, Condition 41 Schedule 3, Condition 42 and a description of revegetation and rehabilitation measures that would be implemented during the construction and maintenance of the realigned transmission line. Final Void Management The Final Void Management Plan Must: a. Justify the final location and future use of the final void; b. Incorporate design criteria and specifications for the final void based on verified groundwater modelling predictions and a re-assessment of post-mining groundwater equilibrium; c. Assess the potential interactions between creeks on the site and the final void; and d. Describe what actions and measures would be implemented to: Minimise any potential adverse impacts associated with the final void; and Manage and monitor the potential impacts of the final void. Mine Closure Plan The Mine Close Plan must: Define the objectives and criteria for mine closure; Investigate options for the future use of the site, including the final void; Investigate ways to minimise the adverse socio-economic effects associated with the mine closure, including reduction in local employment levels; Describe how the performance of these measures would be monitored over time. Statement of Commitments (EIS) Mount Owen and Ravensworth East Section 11.0 Section 11.0 Section 11.0 Section 11.0 Section 11.0 Section 11.0 Section 11.0 Temporarily treat disturbed areas if prompt rehabilitation is not feasible, for example on some topsoil stockpiles Rehabilitation of disturbed areas with species characteristic of extant vegetation communities Use of native species in revegetation, and the linkage and integration of rehabilitation areas with existing vegetated areas to improve ecological function and provide appropriate fauna habitat, except in areas identified for improved pasture Ongoing monitoring and maintenance of revegetation works and habitat enhancement activities Mount Owen will implement mine rehabilitation which will provide native vegetation communities and Fauna habitat augmentation. Mount Owen will undertake additional revegetation works in the Additional Active Revegetation Area located in the South East Corridor Offset (refer to Figure 4.3 of the Response to PAC Review Report) commencing within 12 months of Project. The proposed closure plan, final landform and final land use will include rehabilitation of land to ensure sustainable post mining land use options including some areas Rehabilitation 7.4 Mine closure Mine Closure Life of mine Life of mine Life of mine 4.3 Life of mine 8.1, 9.0 Life of mine 4.3 Life of mine Mine closure 4.2 Mine Closure and Final Void Management Plan for Glendell to remain to meet this condition. MOP and Final Void Management Plan for Glendell Plan 3a

52 Page 45 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed suitable for sustaining potential future agricultural activities such as grazing, as outlined in Section of the EIS. Section 11.0 The existing Landscape Management Plan for Mount Owen will be revised to reflect the Project and be submitted to the DP&E within 12 months of approval being granted Life of mine This Plan Section 11.0 The revised Landscape Management Plan will include a Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan for the Project developed in consultation with DRE, DP&E, OEH and Singleton Council which will include: development of a rehabilitation and revegetation strategy for the Project to re-establish native vegetation communities consistent with the concept strategy described in this EIS a Conceptual Closure Plan Completion criteria, determined in consultation with relevant agencies that will be utilised to demonstrate achievement of rehabilitation objectives. The achievement of the completion criteria will be monitored and reported within the Annual Review and Life of mine 6.0, 7.3, 8.1, This document covers the requirement Monitoring of rehabilitated areas on at least an annual basis over the life of the Project. The monitoring findings and resulting actions will be reported in the Annual Review. Mount Owen will commence development of a detailed Mine Closure Plan at least five years prior to the anticipated mine closure date (i.e. cessation of mining) and be submitted to the relevant regulatory Authorities at a minimum of 2 years prior to the planned cessation of mining operations. The detailed Mine Closure Plan is to include consideration of water licensing requirements, social impacts associated with closure and potential future land uses and be developed with relevant stakeholders, including DRE, DP&E DPI Water and Singleton Council. Section 11.0 Closure Detailed Mine Closure Plan to be prepared Section 11.0 Rehabilitation will be undertaken progressively in accordance with an updated (MOP) to be approved by DRE. Life of Mine 7.3 Section 11.0 Details of the micro-relief features to be incorporated into the rehabilitated Landform will be identified in the MOP. Life of Mine Appendix A Glendell (DA 80/952 Appendix 3) The Applicant will minimise areas disturbed by mining activities and undertake prompt rehabilitation of disturbed areas following completion of mining. Life of mine The Applicant will implement a Rehabilitation Strategy that aims to create a stable final landform that is dominated by pastures with a minimum of 30 per cent native tree lots and corridors for the purpose of stock shade and shelter, and habitat restoration The specific rehabilitation strategies to be implemented at the Glendell Mine will be detailed within the revised Mining Operations Plan and will be consistent with the rehabilitation practices employed at the Mount Owen Life of mine Life of mine 7.3, Appendix A This Plan

53 Page 46 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Complex, where relevant The Applicant will obtain approval from the DRE for any final landform design that exceeds 10 degrees Shaping, stabilisation and rehabilitation of the out of pit overburden emplacement area will be undertaken as soon as practicable as part of progressive mining to minimise the impact of the proposed Glendell operations on the visual amenity of the surrounding area Environmental management of Glendell Mine will be integrated into an updated Mount Owen Complex environmental management strategy and environmental monitoring program. Life of mine Life of mine 7.3 Life of mine 3.0

54 Page Post Mining Land Use Goal The primary post mining land use goal is to provide a mix of native vegetation corridors across the MOC to enhance regional fauna habitat connectivity, and areas of open grassland that are capable of sustaining a grazing land use. The MOC propose to link open woodland and open forest rehabilitation areas with native remnant vegetation, biodiversity offset areas and proposed native vegetation rehabilitation areas at adjacent operations including Ravensworth Operations and Liddell Coal Operations. Open grassland will be established predominantly on rehabilitation areas at Glendell to provide opportunities for future agricultural land uses such as sustainable grazing. This post mining land use goal has been developed to meet the expectations of stakeholders, and support the objectives of key regional strategic land use policies, particularly the: Singleton Local Environment Plan 2013 (Singleton LEP); Synoptic Plan: Integrated landscapes for Coal Mine Rehabilitation in the Hunter Valley of NSW (Synoptic Plan) (DMR, 1999): and Strategic Regional Land Use Plan for the Upper Hunter (DP&I, 2012). The proposed post mining landform has been designed to maintain consistency with the natural topography of the local area and as such will predominantly consist of undulating landforms. The proposed final landform and final land uses are depicted on Plan 4 and are outlined in the sections below. Features of the proposed final landform and final land uses are discussed further in Section 2.3 and Section 4, respectively. Plant species for rehabilitation will be chosen to improve plant function. These species are based on outcomes from previous rehabilitation monitoring at site and other Glencore operations in the region. The function role of species to be used in rehabilitation is outlined in Appendix 5 of the Response to PAC Review Report (Umwelt 2016). This report outlines key species and the role they have relating to life form, resilience and ecosystem services Open Woodland Open woodland corridors will be established on areas disturbed by mining for the majority of the footprint of the MOC. Woodland rehabilitation areas will contain flora assemblages compatible with adjacent open forest rehabilitation and rehabilitation at adjacent operations, and will include species predominantly representative of the Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest vegetation community. The proposed location of woodland corridors have been determined in consultation with Ravensworth Operations and Liddell Coal Operations to maximise opportunities for habitat connectivity in accordance with the objectives of the Synoptic Plan Open Forest Open forest rehabilitation areas will be established at the MOC to reinstate the dominant vegetation community impacted by mining in the Ravensworth State Forest area (Plan 1B). Open forest rehabilitation areas will have flora assemblages that are commensurate with Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest Open Grassland Open grassland rehabilitation areas will be established using a mix of exotic and native pasture species on the top of waste emplacement areas at the Glendell and Ravensworth East mines, in a small section to north of the north pit continuation, and on capped tailings emplacements. Open

55 Page 48 grassland rehabilitation areas will be rehabilitated to demonstrate a minimum Rural Land Capability Class VI, suitable for a grazing post mining land use Water Management Structures The final landform will also include permanent water bodies and drainage structures constructed to manage surface water flows and provide water resources for native fauna and stock. Some operational water management structures will be retained in the final landform including mine water dams and sediment dams and these will be converted to farm dams with structures (contour banks and rock drop structures) to manage surface run off from constructed slopes. In addition there will be creek diversions remaining in the post mining landform. The floors of the three final voids are also anticipated to partially inundate to produce permanent water bodies. Water management structures proposed to be retained in the final landform are depicted on Plan Final Voids The final landform at the MOC will contain three final voids, associated with the Mount Owen, Ravensworth East and Glendell Mines. The final voids will be designed and constructed in accordance with a detailed Mine Closure MOP to be developed prior to closure. The main objectives of final void management will be to: Minimise the area of disturbance and maximise the area of land restored to its former land capability; Construct a landform that is geotechnically stable; Minimise risks to public safety; and Minimise interactions between the creek diversions and the final voids. 4.3 Rehabilitation Objectives Rehabilitation objectives are outlined in Schedule 3, Condition 42 of SSD The overall objectives of the proposed post-mining land use design of the MOC are: Establish a vegetation community consistent with the Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest on the post mining landform; Plant function is considered when selecting species for rehabilitation; Contribute to effective regional native corridors that promote fauna movements between the MOC, Ravensworth Surface Operations, Liddell Coal Operations, Lake Liddell and the Liddell and Ravensworth Operations Hillcrest Offset Area; Maintain and provide additional suitable habitat for a range of threatened fauna species including the spotted-tailed quoll (Dasyurus maculatus maculatus); Provide opportunities for future agricultural activities such as sustainable grazing; Improve the visual amenity of the area; and Not preclude other potential post mining land use should they be determined to be viable and preferable as part of the detailed mine closure planning process that will commence at least five years prior to the planned cessation of mining. In addition to the above, Table 19 below provides rehabilitation commitments for the domains.

56 Page 49 5 REHABILITATION PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 5.1 Domain Selection In accordance with ESG3, the MOC has been categorised into a series of primary (operational) domains and secondary (post mining land use) domains as outlined in Table 19. Primary domains at the commencement of the MOP term are depicted on Plan 2. Primary domains have been defined on the basis of existing land management units within the mine site which have similar operational purposes and therefore similar geophysical characteristics. Secondary domains have been defined as land management units characterised by similar post mining land use objectives. Table 19 Primary and Secondary Domains Primary Domain Code Secondary Domain Code Active Mining the footprint of the MOC active mining areas including: Pre-strip areas ahead of mining; Active pit faces; and Voids and inactive in-pit areas prior to commencement of backfilling Water Management Area the network of dams and associated water management structures. Infrastructure Area all existing and proposed built infrastructure and facilities (other than water management structures). Includes the MIA, workshops, administration buildings, access roads, haul roads, hardstand/laydown areas, topsoil stockpiles, and open boreholes Tailings Storage Area the footprint of current tailings emplacement areas and associated tailings infrastructure, and the partially rehabilitated tailings emplacements. Overburden Emplacement Area the footprint of all in-pit and out of pit waste rock emplacements (overburden and coarse rejects). Soil Stockpiles and Capping Source Material the footprint of soil stockpiles and tailings capping material borrow areas (located on formerly rehabilitated overburden dumps adjacent to the Stage 2 Tailings Disposal Facility). Current Rehabilitation existing rehabilitated areas at the MOC. 1 Final Voids the footprint of the three open cut voids not backfilled in the final landform. Final voids will create permanent water bodies. Highwalls above pit water level will be vegetated with woodland vegetation communities. 2 Water Management Area the network of dams and surface water management structures to be retained in perpetuity. 3 Rehabilitation Areas Open Grassland Pasture rehabilitation areas, generally situated on the flatter areas of overburden emplacements and footprint of tailings emplacements. 4 Rehabilitation Areas Open Woodland Native vegetation corridors established predominantly on the slopes of overburden emplacements and final voids, Woodland areas will be vegetated with species to provide suitable habitat for native fauna including the Spotted-tailed Quoll 5 Rehabilitation Areas Open Forest the footprint of rehabilitation coincident with the Ravensworth State Forest. Open Forest rehabilitation areas will be vegetated with species consistent with Central Hunter Ironbark Communities. 6 7 A B C D E

57 Page Domain Rehabilitation Objectives Rehabilitation domains require specific management objectives to realise the desired final land use outcome due to the distinct geophysical features associated with the current land function. The rehabilitation objectives for the domains identified in Section 5.1 are defined in Table 20. Table 20 Domain Rehabilitation Objectives Domain Rehabilitation Objectives Primary Domains Domain 1 - Active Mining Domain 2 Operational Water Management Area Domain 3 - Infrastructure Area Domain 4 - Tailings Disposal Facilities Areas disturbed for open cut mining will be progressively backfilled and rehabilitated. Open cut pit shells will be backfilled to the maximum extent possible to minimise the area and depth of final voids. Mine sequencing will be designed to optimise the opportunities to progressively backfill and rehabilitate open cut areas. Open cut pit highwalls will be benched and stabilised progressively in accordance with geotechnical design (as required). Clean water will be diverted around operational areas, where practical. Mine water and sediment laden (dirty) water runoff from disturbance areas will be captured and diverted to mine water and dirty water dams. Mine water and dirty water will be preferentially used for operational requirements such as dust suppression and earthworks. Mine water will only be discharged in accordance with the EPL and rules of the Hunter River Salinity Trading Scheme. Dirty water management structures will be designed and constructed in accordance with Best Practice and the Blue Book. Mine water dams will be designed and constructed for 1% annual exceedance probability (AEP) 24 hour storm event. Sediment dams and associated water management structures will remain in place until the catchment is rehabilitated and discharge water quality is similar to comparable undisturbed landforms. Built infrastructure (including administration buildings and workshops) fixed plant and services will be progressively decommissioned and rehabilitated when no longer required. All hazardous and/or contaminated materials will be identified and removed or appropriately remediated. Disturbed areas will be re-graded to produce free draining landforms. Drainage structures will be designed and constructed where required in accordance with Blue Book requirements. Infrastructure areas will be rehabilitated with Open Woodland and Open Grassland communities compatible with reference site communities. All tailings pumping infrastructure will be decommissioned and removed. Tailings emplacements will be back filled, capped and rehabilitated to produce a geotechnically stable, free draining, and non-polluting landform. Tailings will be backfilled and capped with at least: o 3 m of select material (clays and/or select weathered rock); and o 100 mm of topsoil or suitable topdressing medium (unless otherwise agreed following geotechnical assessments and detailed capping design). The tailings capping will be designed and constructed to minimise the potential for ARD or spontaneous combustion. Progress of rehabilitation and restoration will be monitored as part of the Rehabilitation Monitoring Program for the Complex. The rejects and tailings emplacement area will be rehabilitated to open grassland, comparable to appropriate reference sites.

58 Page 51 Domain Domain 5 - Overburden Emplacement Area Domain 6 Soil stockpiles and Capping Material Borrow Areas Domain 7 Current Rehabilitation Secondary Domains Rehabilitation Objectives Active emplacement areas will be progressively dumped to the final design height, shaped and rehabilitated to minimise the disturbance footprint to the maximum extent practical. Overburden emplacements will be designed and constructed to be geotechnically stable and compatible with the surrounding landscape. Outer batters of overburden emplacement areas will generally be constructed to 10 degrees unless otherwise approved. Overburden emplacement areas will be adequately drained and incorporate drainage structures designed and constructed in accordance with the Blue Book. Overburden emplacements will be designed and constructed to drain away from final voids. Vegetation communities will be established on overburden emplacements generally in accordance with the conceptual final landform depicted on MOP Plan 4. Soil stockpiles will be constructed and managed to preserve the biological, physical and chemical properties of the soil resource. Stockpiled soils and capping material will be characterised prior to re-use to develop ameliorant specifications (as required) Rehabilitated areas will be designed and constructed to be geotechnically stable and compatible with the surrounding landscape. Outer batters of rehabilitated overburden emplacement areas will generally be constructed to 10 degrees unless otherwise approved. Rehabilitated areas will be adequately drained and incorporate drainage structures designed and constructed in accordance with the Blue Book. Rehabilitated areas will be designed and constructed to drain away from final voids. Domain A Final Voids Final voids will be constructed in accordance with an approved Final Void Management Plan. Domain B Water Management Area Final voids will be made safe, profiled for long term stability, and nonpolluting. Low walls will be battered back generally to between 10 and 18 degrees. Lower portions of the lowwalls (<40 m AHD) and the void floors will be stabilised with pasture species prior to anticipated inundation to the final void equilibrium level. Highwall benches and upper low walls (>40 m AHD) will be rehabilitated with suitable vegetation species to improve stability and visual amenity. Final landform drainage will integrate with surrounding catchments and will achieve long term geomorphic stability and minimise erosion. Final landform drainage structures will be designed and constructed in accordance with Best Practice and the Blue Book. Design of final landform drainage and water management structures will be within the licensable allocation that exists at the completion of rehabilitation. The conceptual framework to achieve this is outlined in the Water Management Plan. Sediment dams identified for retention in the final landform will be decontaminated and preserved as clean water farm dams or water sources for native fauna. Creek diversions will be designed and constructed in accordance with an approved Creek Diversion Management Plan and design. Creek diversions will be rehabilitated with appropriate riparian vegetation and include habitat enhancement features (e.g. woody debris).

59 Page 52 Domain Domain C Open Grassland Domain D Open Woodland Domain E Open Forest Rehabilitation Objectives Open Grassland areas will be rehabilitated with a minimum land capability of Rural Land Capability Class VI, capable of supporting sustainable grazing. Open Grassland rehabilitation areas will be top-dressed with at least 100 mm of appropriate topsoil (or topsoil substitutes), rock raked (where required) and ameliorated (where required) to produce a growing media with properties capable of sustaining pasture growth. Open Grassland will be vegetated with a mix of native and exotic perennial pasture species, and include stands of trees (where appropriate). Management inputs required to sustain grazing will not be significantly greater than those of reference sites. Open woodland rehabilitation areas will contribute to habitat corridors and provide suitable habitat for threatened species including the Spotted tailed Quoll. Open Forest rehabilitation will be consistent with the dominant vegetation community at Ravensworth State Forest (RSF), being Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Grey Gum Grey Box Forest EEC. Open Forest rehabilitation areas will contribute to habitat linkages with the adjacent RSF and proposed rehabilitation at adjacent mining operations.

60 Page Rehabilitation Phases The ultimate rehabilitation objective for the MOC is to create stable, non-polluting post mining landforms that are cognisant of site constraints and allow the achievement of the agreed post mining land uses. This will be achieved by demonstrating completion of a series of conceptual phases of rehabilitation which are described as: 1. Decommissioning decommissioning of all on-site infrastructure, including the CHPP, administration buildings and train loading facilities; removal of haul road, rail crossings and hard stand areas, the completion of contamination studies for relevant areas and subsequent decontamination where required, removal of hazardous materials; 2. Landform Establishment incorporates slope, aspect, drainage, substrate material characterisation and morphology; 3. Growth Medium Development incorporates physical, chemical and biological components of the growing media and ameliorants that are used to optimise the potential of the media in terms of the preferred vegetative cover; 4. Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment incorporates revegetated lands and habitat augmentation, species selection, species presence and growth together with weed and pest animal control /management and establishment of flora; 5. Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability incorporates components of floristic structure, nutrient cycling recruitment and recovery, community structure and function which are the key elements of a sustainable landscape; and 6. Land Relinquishment completion criteria for rehabilitation are met and the land is determined to be suitable to be relinquished from the mining tenement. Table 21 provides a summary of the expected completion of rehabilitation phases for each primary domain at the end of the MOP period as depicted on Plan 3E.

61 Domain 1 - Active Mining Domain 2 - Water Management Area Domain 3 - Infrastructure Domain 4 - Tailings Emplacement Domain 5 - Emplacement Areas Domain 6 - Soil Stockpile and Capping Source Material Domain 7 - Current Rehabilitation Mount Owen Complex Page 54 Table 21 Summary of Rehabilitation Phases Proposed for Completion at end of the MOP Term Domain Rehabilitation Phase Active Phase 1 Decommissioning Phase 2 Landform Establishment Phase 3 Growth Medium Development Phase 4 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Phase 5 Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Phase 6 Land Relinquishment

62 Page 55 6 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, AND COMPLETION / RELINQUISHMENT CRITERIA The completion criteria are objective target levels or values assigned to a variety of indicators (i.e. slope, species diversity, groundcover etc.), which can be measured against to demonstrate progress and ultimate success of rehabilitation. As such, they provide a defined end point, at which point in time rehabilitation can be deemed successful and the lease relinquishment process can proceed. The rehabilitation completion criteria for the MOC are listed in Table 22 to Table 26. Completion criteria have been developed considering site specific issues and objectives, Glencore s standards and the outcomes of the 2005 ACARP study entitled Development of Rehabilitation Completion Criteria for Native Ecosystem Establishment on the Coal Mines in the Hunter Valley. Criteria have been updated where required based on the MOCO Project EIS. Given the life of the mine, these completion criteria, which may be subject to refinement as the mining operation progresses, including through consultation with the relevant stakeholders, will be utilised to demonstrate achievement of rehabilitation objectives. The achievement (or otherwise) of the completion criteria will be monitored and reported within the annual reports to be submitted to relevant government agencies. Several of the rehabilitation and closure commitments in the superseded Landscape Management Plan for the MOC have been included within Section 6.

63 Page 56 Table 22 Decommissioning Phase Domain Objective Final landforms are safe, stable, nonpolluting and freedraining All infrastructure that is to remain as part of the future land use is made safe through the use of fencing and/or bunding Public Safety Performance Indicator Landform Stability Site Security Site Security Completion Criteria All Domains Any final void and associated highwall has been assessed by a qualified geotechnical engineer to validate that it is stable and does not pose any safety risk. Potential hazards (i.e. electrical, mechanical etc.) have been effectively isolated The structural integrity of the infrastructure has been inspected by a suitable qualified engineer and determined to be suitable and safe as part of the intended final land use A public safety risk assessment to be completed with all identified actions implemented and closed out. Appropriate security measures (e.g. adequate fencing) has been implemented (where required) prior to commencing decommissioning and demolition works Justification/Source Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Yes 4, 16 Commenced Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No No n/a n/a Not commenced Not commenced

64 Page 57 Domain Objective Performance Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP All infrastructure that is not to be utilised as part of the future intended land use are removed to make the site safe and free of hazardous materials Hazardous materials All surface infrastructure which does not have a potential future use associated with the post mining land use will be removed, unless such removal has a greater environmental impact than rehabilitating the area with the infrastructure remaining in place Services: removal of all services (power, water, communications), which don t have potential future uses Mount Owen CHPP and associated infrastructure: removal of the CHPP and lull associated conveyors and structures Rail provisioning facility, train loading facility and loop: removal of all infrastructure, rail provisioning facility, train loading system and loop, including ballast material, should a suitable alternative future use for the rail infrastructure not to be identified Office and Workshop: demolition and removal of all offices and workshop related facilities including refuelling facilities Pumps, pipes and power: removal of water management infrastructure. Where underground pipelines are to remain in situ, the location of the infrastructure has been marked on the final landform plan and suitable caveat developed to provide that they are readily identifiable for future land holders Lay down areas: removal of all plant and equipment Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) No n/a Not complete All hazardous and/or contaminated materials will be removed or remediated in-situ such that the land is suitable for the intended post mining landuse Hazardous materials Hazardous materials are identified and removed from site including hydrocarbons, chemicals, explosive products, asbestos containing materials (ACMs), lead paints, synthetic mineral fibres (SMFs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (verified by Certificates of disposal) This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No n/a Not complete

65 Page 58 Domain Objective Landform suitable for final land use and compatible with surrounding landscape as sustainable native ecosystem Performance Indicator Hazardous materials Completion Criteria Surface layer is free of hazardous materials Justification/Source Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Complete (Yes/No) No TARP Element N/A Progress at Start of MOP Not commenced There is no residual soil contamination on site that is incompatible with intended land use or that poses a threat of environmental harm Soil contamination Contamination will be appropriately remediated if required, so that appropriate guidelines for land use are met Where practicable, exposed carbonaceous material will be removed and co-disposed within the overburden emplacement areas or suitable capped in situ Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) No n/a Not complete Infrastructure, fixed plant and services will be progressively decommissioned and rehabilitated when no longer required Groundwater monitoring bores All groundwater monitoring bores are decommissioned (piezometers and standpipes removed) and sealed in accordance with EDG01 Borehole Sealing Requirements on Land. EDG01 Borehole Sealing Requirements on Land. No n/a Not commenced Domain 1 Active Mining / Domain A Final Voids Public safety is maintained Final voids will be constructed in accordance with an approved Final Void Management Plan Public safety Final Void Management Plan Exposed Coal Seams A safety berm and/or security fence is constructed at the void crest (highwalls and endwalls) that provides an adequate engineered barrier for vehicles. A Final Void Management Plan and Final Void Design has been developed in consultation with stakeholders and approved by the DRE (or contemporary equivalent) at least 5 years prior to closure. Exposed coal seams will be capped with at least 3 m benign material where required to prevent spontaneous combustion, supported by survey. Domain 2 Water Management Area This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. DA 80/952 Schedule 3 Conditions 39, 41 This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No n/a Active No n/a No 6 Not commenced Not complete

66 Page 59 Domain Objective Performance Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP Mine water dams and sediment dams are dewatered and desilted prior to being converted to clean water farm dams. Pumping Infrastructure Hazardous materials Obsolete water management structures All pumps and associated infrastructure is decommissioned and removed from site. Sediments accumulated in mine water and sediment dams is removed from the dam floor and emplaced in the final void as documented by records. This material will be buried under a minimum of 2m on inert overburden material. All dams, drains and banks not required in the final landform have been demolished and accumulated sediment removed and disposed in the final void. Domain 3 - Infrastructure Area This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No n/a Active No n/a Active No n/a Active Demolition All demolition work has been carried out in accordance with AS : The Demolition of Structures or its latest version. AS No n/a Not commenced. Built infrastructure and fixed plant and services will be progressively decommissioned and rehabilitated when no longer required Removal of infrastructure Disconnection of Services Seal exploration holes All surface infrastructure that is not required as part of the post-mining land use has been demolished and removed from the site (unless otherwise agreed by the DRE. All services are disconnected and infrastructure removed (or marked on plans where left in-situ by agreement with the DRE and/or landholder). All drill holes (and excavations that remain abandoned from previous mining or exploration), have been backfilled and sealed in accordance with EDG01 Borehole Sealing Requirements on Land. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. EDG01 Borehole Sealing Requirements on Land No No No n/a n/a n/a Not commenced. Not commenced. Not complete All hazardous and/or contaminated materials will be Carbonaceous material All carbonaceous material has been removed (where practical) from the footprint of the CHPP, conveyors and associated structures, and disposed of in the final void. This material will be buried under a minimum of 2m on inert overburden material. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No 7 Active

67 Page 60 Domain Objective removed or remediated in-situ such that the land is suitable for the intended post mining landuse. Performance Indicator Contaminated materials Completion Criteria A contamination assessment for infrastructure exposed to contaminants including the CHPP, workshops and rail loaded has been undertaken prior to demolition. Any contaminated soil has been removed from site in accordance with legislation or relocated to the bioremediation area until testing indicates the material is suitable for disposal in the spoil dump. Justification/Source This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP No n/a Active No n/a Commenced Domain 4 Tailings Disposal Facility All tailings pumping infrastructure will be decommissioned and removed. Tailings infrastructure Tailings Storage Facility Capping Design All tailings infrastructure (pipelines, pumps and related infrastructure) is decommissioned and removed. A Detailed Tailings Capping Design has been developed and approved by the DRE (or contemporary equivalent) prior to closure. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Schedule 3, High Risk Activities, Part 5, Clause 27 Emplacement Areas. Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulation 2014 No n/a Active No 16 Active Final landforms are safe, stable, nonpolluting and freedraining. Appropriate Depth Tailings will be capped by a minimum of 3m of benign material where practical. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No 6, 7, 16 Commenced

68 Page 61 Domain Objective Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and freedraining. Performance Indicator Appropriate Depth Completion Criteria Domain 5 - Overburden Emplacement Area Net acid generating materials will be capped by a minimum of 5 m inert material Justification/Source This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP No 6, 7, 16 Commenced

69 Page 62 Table 23 Landform Establishment Phase Domain Objective All Domains Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and free-draining. Indicator Slopes Landform Stability Erosion As built survey Landform Stability Domain 1 Active Mining / Domain A Final Void Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and free-draining. Slopes Water Balance Completion Criteria Rehabilitated slopes are generally less than 10 degrees unless otherwise agreed with the DRE (or contemporary equivalent). Landforms are assessed to be stable and free draining to local watercourses. There is no evidence of slumping or uncontrolled erosion that would cause a safety issue or compromise the land capability. Monitoring verifies there are no gully or tunnel erosion features, or rill erosion >200mm deep; as supported by site record form GCAA SD FRM 0596 Rehabilitation establishment and methodology record form Landform survey verifies constructed landform is generally in accordance with the approved landform design, including heights detailed in the EIS. Drainage structures (including drainage lines established in the final landform) are stable and there is no evidence or overtopping of significant scouring as a result of runoff. Low walls are graded (where required) to less than 18 degrees unless otherwise agreed with the DRE (or contemporary equivalent). Water balance and groundwater monitoring indicates void water balance is correct. Justification/ Source This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. DECC 2008 (Blue Book) DECC 2008 (Blue Book) This MOP, the MOC Rehabilitation Strategy and the MOC BMP Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP Yes 1 Commenced Yes 4, 16 Commenced Yes 3 Commenced Yes 3 Commenced No n/a Commenced Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Yes 4, 16 Commenced This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No 2 Active No 17 Active

70 Page 63 Domain Objective Indicator Domain 2 Water Management Area Final landform drainage will integrate with surrounding catchments and will achieve long term geomorphic stability and minimise erosion. Final landform drainage will reinstate premining catchment flows (to the maximum extent practical) to Main Creek, Yorks Creek, Bettys Creek and Swamp Creek catchments Creek diversions will be designed and constructed in accordance with an approved Creek Diversion Management Plan and design. Final landform drainage design Geomorphic stability Catchment flows Approved Detailed Creek Diversion Design Geomorphic stability Domain 3 Tailings Storage Area Final landforms are safe, stable, Drainage Condition Completion Criteria Final landform drainage structures including drains, banks, drop structures and dams have been designed and constructed in accordance with an approved detailed drainage design, EPL and the Blue Book Vol 2E. Monitoring verifies that drainage structures stable with no active gully heads, tunnel erosion or bank failure. Final landform drainage reinstates pre-mining catchments in accordance with the approved final landform detailed drainage design. Creek diversions are constructed in accordance with the approved Detailed Creek Diversion Design. Creek Diversions are assessed to be stable as defined by the CSIRO Ephemeral Stream Assessment. Tailings and reject emplacements areas will be capped and reshaped and be free draining. Justification/ Source DECC 2008 (Blue Book)ACARP C13048 DECC 2008 (Blue Book)ACARP C13048 This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. DA 80/952 Schedule 3 Condition 30 Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP No n/a Commenced No 4 Commenced No n/a Commenced Yes n/a Complete CSIRO 2008 Yes n/a Complete Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) No 4 Commenced

71 Page 64 Domain Objective non-polluting and free-draining. Indicator Tailings Capping Completion Criteria Tailings storage areas have been capped in accordance with an approved Detailed Capping Design outlined in the Tailings Facility Emplacement Application. Preliminary design criteria are to cap tailings with at least: 3.0 m inert material (being clay/select weathered rock) 100 mm topsoil. Justification/ Source Schedule 3, High Risk Activities, Part 5, Clause 27 Emplacement Areas. Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulation 2014 Complete (Yes/No) No 16 TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP Operations ongoing Free Draining Capped tailings storage facilities are confirmed by survey to be free draining following the expected settlement period. Part 2 Division 4 Subdivision 1 Clause 33 (Notification of High Risk Activities) No 16 Operations ongoing Work Health and Safety (Mines and Petroleum Sites) Regulations 2014 Spontaneous Combustion AMD Domain 4 Infrastructure Area Monitoring records verify that there is no evidence of spontaneous combustion. Capped tailings geotechnical analysis indicates there is no evidence of AMD generation as indicated by acidic ph, high EC or high sulphate content (>1%) This MOP, s100 Tailings Emplacement Application This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No 6 No 16 Not completed Not completed

72 Page 65 Domain Objective All hazardous and/or contaminated materials will be removed or remediated in-situ such that the land is suitable for the intended post mining landuse. Indicator Carbonaceous Material Domain 5 - Overburden Emplacement Area Overburden areas are geotechnically stable and blend in with the surrounding landscape Inert Capping Maximum height Undulating Profiles Final Landform Survey Domain 7 Current Rehabilitation Completion Criteria ROM and product stockpiles coal bedding layers are capped with inert material and shaped to a free draining landform. Net acid generating and carbonaceous materials will be capped by a minimum of 5m of benign material where practical. Overburden emplacements will be constructed no higher than the maximum approved height, supported by survey (WOOP dump: 190m AHD, Barrett Pit and Ravensworth East emplacement area: 160m AHD, North Pit Dump: 230m AHD). Overburden emplacements will be shaped to include informal undulations, supported by survey. Final landform survey is generally in accordance with the approved final landform design. Justification/ Source This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Complete (Yes/No) No 4, 6 TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP Not commenced No n/a Commenced MOP Section No N/A Commenced This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No N/A Commenced No N/A Commenced

73 Page 66 Domain Objective Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/ Source Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP Pasture rehabilitation areas will be capable of sustainable grazing. Surface rock density Rehabilitation records verify that surface spoils and soils are rock raked (where required) to remove rocks and produce a friable surface. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No n/a Not Commenced Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and free-draining. Slopes Rehabilitated slopes are generally less than 10 degrees unless otherwise agreed with the DRE (or contemporary equivalent). This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Yes 1 Commenced Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and free-draining. Erosion Erosion There is no evidence of slumping or uncontrolled erosion that would cause a safety issue or compromise the land capability. Monitoring verifies there are no gully or tunnel erosion features, or rill erosion >200mm deep; as supported by site record form GCAA SD FRM 0596 Rehabilitation establishment and methodology record form DECC 2008 (Blue Book) DECC 2008 (Blue Book) Yes 3 Commenced Yes 3 Commenced As built survey Landform survey verifies constructed landform is generally in accordance with the approved landform design, including heights detailed in the EIS. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No n/a Commenced Landform suitable for final land use and compatible with surrounding landscape as sustainable native ecosystem Slopes Landform Stability Rehabilitated slopes are generally 10 degrees. However, to allow for the creation of,local relief in topography on the top of overburden dumps as well as the creation of alternative stable slope designs (i.e. of concave profiles are utilized), slope angles may exceed this criteria. Drainage structures (including drainage lines established in the final landform) are stable and there is no evidence or overtopping of significant scouring as a result of runoff. Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Yes 1 Commenced Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Yes 4, 16 Commenced

74 Page 67 Table 24 Growth Medium Development Phase Domain Objective All Domains Evaluate performance of the Biodiversity Offset Strategy Growing media is capable of supporting sustainable vegetation growth Erosion is minimised All Secondary Domains Growing media appropriate for the intended final land use is reinstated at all rehabilitation areas. Erosion is minimised Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Biodiversity Growing media development Temporary ESC Topsoil depth Topsoil characterisation Amelioration Temporary ESC Monitoring program completed and reported on each year undertaken. The rehabilitation surface is a suitable growing medium Soil ph to be in the range of analogue sites Monitoring demonstrates soil profile development in rehabilitated areas (e.g. development of organic layer, litter layer) Rehabilitation records verify that temporary ESCs are installed prior to topsoil re-spreading. Rehabilitation records verify that topsoiled rehabilitation areas are sown with either the approved pasture mix or a non-persistent cover crop promptly following topsoil spreading. Topsoil or a suitable alternative has been spread uniformly at the depth of 100mm; as supported by site record form XCN SD FRM 0596 Rehabilitation establishment and methodology record form. Topsoil s and topsoil substitutes have been tested to assess suitability for post mining land use Rehabilitation records verify that appropriate soil ameliorants (e.g. gypsum, fertilisers, mulch) have been applied (where required) in accordance with specifications. Rehabilitation records verify that temporary ESCs are installed prior to topsoil re-spreading. Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP SSD-5850 No 14 Commenced Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. DECC 2008 (Blue Book) This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No N/A Commenced No n/a Commenced No n/a Commenced No 8 Commenced No 7 Commenced No 7 Commenced No n/a Commenced

75 Page 68 Domain Objective Domain C Open Grassland Pasture rehabilitation areas will be capable of sustainable grazing. Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Surface rock density Rehabilitation records verify that topsoiled rehabilitation areas are sown with either the approved pasture mix or a non-persistent cover crop promptly following topsoil spreading. Rehabilitation records verify that surface spoils and soils are rock raked (where required) to remove rocks and produce a friable surface. DECC 2008 (Blue Book) This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP No n/a Commenced No n/a Commenced

76 Page 69 Table 25 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Phase Domain Objective All Secondary Domains Weeds and feral animal species do not present a risk to rehabilitation. Revegetation is sustainable for the long term and only requires maintenance that is consistent with the intended final land use Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Weed presence Feral animal density Species composition Vegetation health Monitoring verifies there are no significant weed infestations and weeds do not comprise a significant proportion of the species in any stratum. Records indicate that noxious weeds are controlled in accordance with legislation and the MOP. Records indicate that feral animal pests are controlled in accordance with legislation and the MOP. Revegetation areas contain flora species assemblages characteristic of the desired native vegetation communities More than 75 percent cent of trees are healthy and growing as indicated by the long term monitoring program during this phase of rehabilitation This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP No 11 Ongoing No 11 No No No n/a 12 n/a Ongoing Ongoing Not Complete Not Complete Weed presence There is no significant weed infestation such that weeds do not compromise a significant proportion of species in any stratum Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) No 11 Not Complete Soil fertility and soil structure is comparable between rehabilitation EC Testing verifies that EC of surface soils is below 1000 ms/cm at Year 5. Tongway & Hindley 1996 No 7 Not Complete

77 Page 70 Domain Objective areas and reference sites Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Nutrients Soil carbon Surface cover Domain B Water Management Area Final landform drainage will integrate with surrounding catchments, achieve long term geomorphic stability and minimise erosion. Discharge water quality Domain C Open Grassland Land capability of grazing areas will be comparable to pre-mining land capability. Erosion and Sediment Control Species composition Ground Cover Nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus are within 20% of analogue sites at Year 5. Testing indicates that organic carbon levels are broadly trending toward 20% of levels at reference sites at Year 5. Rehabilitation monitoring verifies that ground cover (vegetation, leaf litter, mulch) is greater than 70% at Year 5. Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 Complete (Yes/No) No 7 No 7 No 9 Records indicate that discharge water quality meets EPL requirements. EPL No 5 Rehabilitation monitoring indicates that there is no significant erosion is present that constitutes a safety hazard or compromises the capability of the supporting the end land use. At least 75% of species surveyed are representatives of the specified perennial pasture species mix. Two years following revegetation to grassland, species composition consist of grasses and legumes appropriate to the district and recognised as suitable for beef cattle grazing, consistent with analogue sites. Twelve months following revegetation to grassland, vegetative cover is at least 80% over a minimum of 95% of areas treated. Tongway & Hindley 1996 This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No 3 No 13 TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP Not Complete Not Complete Not Complete Not Complete Not Complete Not Complete No 13 No Complete No 10 Not Complete

78 Page 71 Domain Objective Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Domain D Open Woodland / Domain E Open Forest Woodland rehabilitation areas species diversity is comparable to analogue native vegetation community. Native Vegetation / Woodland (Non- EEC) Vegetation health Species composition Vegetation Density More than 75 percent cent of trees are healthy and growing as indicated by the long term monitoring program during this phase of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation monitoring verifies species diversity for each stratum (canopy, mid storey and ground cover) is comparable to analogue sites at Year 5. Plant function should be considered in the selection of species for rehabilitation. Minimum total tree/shrub densities for seeded areas to be: Year 1-1,000 stems/ha, Year stems/ha and Year stems/ha, as confirmed by rehabilitation monitoring Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 Generic criteria GCAA negotiated with DRE Complete (Yes/No) No TARP Element n/a No 12 No n/a Progress at Start of MOP Operations ongoing. Not Complete Not Complete

79 Page 72 Table 26 Ecosystem and Landuse Sustainability Phase Domain Objective All Domains Agricultural land capability of grasslands areas is achieved in the final landform Weeds are controlled on Mount Owen lands. Feral animal pests are controlled on mount Owen lands. Revegetation is sustainable for the long term and only requires maintenance that is consistent with the intended final land use Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Agricultural land capability Weed presence Feral animal density Second generation trees Bushfire risk management Rehabilitation monitoring verifies weed presence does not present a risk to rehabilitation and noxious weeds are controlled in accordance with legislation. Rehabilitation monitoring verifies weed presence is broadly comparable to analogue sites and does not present a risk to rehabilitation. Records indicate that feral animal pests are controlled in accordance with legislation and the MOP. Second generation trees are present or likely to be, based on monitoring in comparable older rehabilitation sites (i.e. evidence of fruiting of native species observed) Appropriate bushfire hazard controls have been implemented on the advice from the NSW Rural Fire Service SSD-5850`Schedule 3 Condition 45 DPI Control Category Regional Weed Management Plan Complete (Yes/No) No Link to TARP n/a Progress at Start of MOP Not Complete No 11 Ongoing Biodiversity Management Plan No n/a Ongoing Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) No n/a No 15 Not Complete Not Complete

80 Page 73 Domain Objective Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Complete (Yes/No) Link to TARP Progress at Start of MOP Management measures will be implemented to minimise bushfire risks in rehabilitation areas. Monitoring demonstrates soils are selfsustaining Bushfire risk management Access Soil Quality Soil Quality Surface cover Nutrient Recycling Bushfire mitigation actions have been implemented including managing fuel loads, maintaining fire breaks and access roads. Firefighting access is maintained across rehabilitation areas and to water storages (dams). Rehabilitation monitoring verifies soil characteristics (ph, EC and ESP, nitrogen and phosphorus) vary no more than 20% from relevant analogue site after 5 years. Soil testing indicates soil organic carbon is no less than 20% of levels in adjacent analogue site after 10 years. Rehabilitation monitoring verifies ground cover (vegetation, leaf litter, mulch) is in the range of analogue sites at Year 10. Rehabilitation monitoring indicates evidence of nutrient recycling (e.g. presence of fungi). Biodiversity Management Plan Biodiversity Management Plan This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 No 15 Ongoing No 15 No 7 No No 9 n/a Not complete Not Complete Not Complete Not Complete No n/a Commenced Landform suitable for final land use and compatible with surrounding landscape as sustainable native ecosystem Management Inputs Water quality Rehabilitation records verify that management inputs (e.g. ameliorants, fertilizers) required to maintain vegetation health are comparable to analogue sites. Runoff water quality from rehabilitation areas is within the range of water quality data recorded from analogue sites and does not pose a threat to downstream water quality. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) No n/a Commenced Yes 5 Commenced

81 Page 74 Domain Objective Habitat features are salvaged and re-used in native vegetation rehabilitation areas to provide fauna habitat resources. Revegetation areas will provide habitat value in the future Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and freedraining. Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Habitat features Habitat value Landform Stability Domain B Water Management Area Final landform drainage will integrate with surrounding catchments, achieve long term geomorphic stability and minimise erosion Habitat features, including structures suitable for arboreal species, amphibians and the Spotted tailed Quoll are incorporated into native vegetation rehabilitation areas (including within watercourses) where appropriate. Rehabilitated areas provide a range of vegetation structural habitats (e.g. eucalyptus, shrubs, ground cover, developing litter layer, etc.) to encourage use by native fauna species. Landforms are assessed to be stable and free draining to local watercourses. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Mount Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015) This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Complete (Yes/No) Link to TARP Progress at Start of MOP No 14 Not Commenced No 14 Not Complete Yes 4, 16 Commenced Water Quality Discharge water quality meets EPL requirements. EPL No 5 Commenced Geomorphic stability Domain C Open Grasslands Drainage structures are assessed to be stable at Year 10. DECC 2008 (Blue Book) ACARP C13048 No 3 Not commenced

82 Page 75 Domain Objective Land capability of grazing areas will be comparable to pre-mining land capability. Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Erosion and sediment control Species composition Land Capability Productivity/ Yields Domain D Open Woodland / Domain E Open Forest Woodland rehabilitation areas species diversity and structure is comparable to analogue native vegetation community. Vegetation health Species composition Projected foliage cover Structure Reproduction No significant erosion is present that constitutes a safety hazard or compromises the capability of the supporting the end land use. At least 75% of species surveyed consist of grasses and legumes appropriate to the district and recognised as species suitable for grazing. Rehabilitation monitoring verifies there is evidence of second generation pasture plants. Grazing areas are assessed to have a Rural Land Capability Class VI or better. Pasture production is comparable to similarly managed analogue site yields within 5 years. Rehabilitation monitoring verifies more than 75% of trees are healthy and growing as indicated by rehabilitation monitoring. Rehabilitation monitoring verifies species diversity for each stratum (canopy, mid storey and ground cover) is comparable to analogue sites at Year 10. Projected foliage cover for each stratum is comparable to analogue sites. Native vegetation rehabilitation areas provide a range of structural habitats (e.g. eucalypts, shrubs, ground cover, developing litter layer etc.). Rehabilitation monitoring verifies second generation tree seedlings are present or likely to be, based on monitoring in comparable older rehabilitation sites. DECC 2008 (Blue Book) This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. DA80/952 Schedule 3 Condition 37 This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 Tongway & Hindley 1996 Complete (Yes/No) Link to TARP Progress at Start of MOP No 3 Commenced No 13 Commenced No n/a Commenced No n/a Commenced No n/a Commenced No n/a Commenced No 12 Commenced No n/a Commenced No 14 Commenced No n/a Commenced

83 Page 76 Domain Objective Open Forest and Open Woodland Rehabilitation Areas will contribute to habitat linkage objectives of the Synoptic Plan. Habitat features are salvaged and re-used in native vegetation rehabilitation areas to provide fauna habitat resources. Indicator Completion Criteria Justification/Source Connectivity Woodland rehabilitation area Native fauna resources Habitat features Woodland rehabilitation area features are considered compatible with adjacent operations rehabilitation objectives and the objectives of the Synoptic Plan-Integrated Landscape for Coal Mine Rehabilitation in the Hunter Valley of NSW, to the satisfaction of the DRE. Final landform must provide for at least 250 hectares of treed vegetation in a matter generally consistent that is shown in Appendix 6 (DA80/952). Rehabilitation monitoring verifies that habitat resources for target species including the Spotted-tailed Quoll (e.g. food sources, denning and shelter resources) are comparable to analogue sites. Habitat features, including structures suitable for arboreal species, amphibians and the Spotted tailed Quoll are incorporated into native vegetation rehabilitation areas (including within watercourses) where appropriate. Complete (Yes/No) Link to TARP Progress at Start of MOP DMR 1999 No 14 Commenced DA80/952 No n/a Commenced This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. This MOP SSD-5850, Schedule 3 Condition 31e No 14 Commenced No 14 Not Commenced

84 Page 77 7 REHABILITATION IMPLEMENTATION 7.1 Status at MOP Commencement The status of each operational Primary and Secondary Domain at the commencement of this MOP period is shown on Plan 2. Rehabilitation status at the commencement of the MOP for each domain is summarised in Table 27. Table 27 Status of Primary and Secondary Domains at MOP Commencement Domain Primary Domains Domain 1 Active Mining Domain 2 Water Management Area Domain 3 Infrastructure Area Domain 4 Tailings Storage Facility Domain 5 Overburden Emplacement Area Domain 6 Soil Stockpiles and Capping Source Material Domain 7 Current Rehabilitation Secondary Domains Domain A Final Void Domain B Water Management Rehabilitation Area Domain C Open Grassland Rehabilitation Area Domain D Open Woodland Rehabilitation Area Domain E Open Forest Rehabilitation Area Status at MOP Commencement This domain is active and subject to ongoing operations. Active mining areas are BNP, Mount Owen (North Pit) and at the Barrett Pit. Mined areas within the pit have been progressively backfilled and rehabilitated as depicted on Plan 2. At MOP commencement 275.9ha is classified as Active Mining. This domain is currently active and subject to ongoing operations. All areas disturbed for infrastructure are active and subject to ongoing operations. At the commencement of the MOP the TP1, and Stage 2 Tailings Dams are undergoing rehabilitation. The remainder of Domain 4 is active, and subject to on-going operations. The domain consists of the west pit that receives tailings from the MOC, the Ravensworth and Liddell mining operations under the Greater Ravensworth Area Water and Tailings System (GRAWTS). Active dump areas are depicted on Plan 2. This domain is active, and subject to on-going operations. Long term stockpiles are stabilised with vegetation and maintained to minimise disturbance. This domain includes all rehabilitated areas at MOP commencement. Mining has not progressed to the location of the final voids at MOP commencement. Final landform drainage structures have been constructed for rehabilitation areas as shown on Plan 2 Plan 2 outlines areas of current grassland rehabilitation at MOP commencement. Plan 2 outlines areas of current open woodland rehabilitation at MOP commencement. Plan 2 outlines areas of current open forest rehabilitation at MOP commencement.

85 Page Proposed Rehabilitation Activities during the MOP Term Short to medium term mining and rehabilitation progression for the MOP term are shown on Plans 3A - 3E and Table 28. Table 28 Proposed Rehabilitation Activities During the MOP Term Domain Primary Domains Domain 1 Active Mining Domain 2 Water Management Area Domain 3 Infrastructure Area Domain 4 Tailings Storage Facility Domain 5 Overburden Emplacement Area Domain 6 Soil Stockpile and Capping Source Material Domain 7 Current Rehabilitation Secondary Domains Domain A Final Void Domain B Water Management Domain C Open Grassland Rehabilitation Area Domain D Open Woodland Rehabilitation Area Domain E Open Forest Rehabilitation Area Proposed Rehabilitation Activities Pit areas will continue to be progressively back filled with overburden and coarse rejects through the MOP term as depicted on Plan 3A to Plan 3E. Mining will occur in the North Pit, Barrett Pit and BNP Pit during the MOP period. This domain will remain active in the MOP term. No operational dams are proposed to be decommissioned or converted to clean water dams for post mining land use in the MOP term. This domain will remain active in the MOP term. No proposed decommissioning of infrastructure during the MOP period. Tailings pits Stage 1 and 2, ERP, TP1 and RW Pit will be decommissioned and capped in the MOP term as shown on Plan 3A to Plan 3E, and summarised in Table 12. Capped tailings emplacements will be rehabilitated to establish Open Grassland. Domain 5 will be progressively rehabilitated during the MOP term as emplacement areas are dumped to the final height. Landform Establishment activities include grading batter slopes to (generally) 10 degrees or less, grading informal undulations on the top of dumps where appropriate, constructing surface water drainage structures and ameliorating the substrate (where required). Shaped emplacement areas will be topsoiled and vegetated to establish an Open Woodland and Open Grassland communities. Methodologies are described in Section 7.3. Following re-spreading on rehabilitation areas, soil stockpile area and capping material borrow areas will be de-compacted and vegetated as depicted on Plan 3A to Plan 3E. At the end of the MOP there would be an estimated ha under a rehabilitation phase. No final voids will be formed during the MOP term, with all pits (BNP, Barrett Pit and North Pit) remaining active. This domain refers to the surface water management structures (dams) that will be retained in the final landform following mine closure. This domain is active and subject to on-going operations. The locality of these structures that will retained in the final landform have been shown on Plan 4. Plan 3E outlines areas of grassland rehabilitation at the end of the MOP. Plan 3E outlines areas of open woodland rehabilitation at the end of the MOP. Plan 3E outlines areas of open forest rehabilitation at the end of the MOP.

86 Page Rehabilitation Methodologies for Activities in the MOP Term Decommissioning Phase Primary Domains 1 (Active Mining), 2 (Water Management Area), 3 (Infrastructure Area), 5 (Overburden Emplacement Area) or 7 (Current Rehabilitation) There are no decommissioning activities proposed in Primary Domains 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 in the MOP term. Primary Domain 4 Tailings Storage Facility All tailings storage facilities within the MOC have been decommissioned except for the West Pit Tailings Dam. This tailings dam will remain active during the entire MOP period. The decommissioning status of the tailings pits is provided in Table 12 and depicted on Plan 3A to Plan 3E. Decommissioning activities include removal of all pumping infrastructure including pumps, pipelines and foundation pads. The decommissioning phase also includes a period of desiccation prior to commencing capping (Landform Establishment Phase). The MOC will undertake monitoring and material testing to assess the surface strengths and likely magnitude of settling prior to commencing capping. Domain 6 - Soil Stockpile and Capping Source Material During the MOP term soil stockpiles and capping material borrow areas will be decommissioned when the stockpile / borrow area is depleted. Decommissioning activities in Domain 6 are limited to removing any obsolete erosion and sediment controls and undertaking visual inspections to verify there are no waste materials Landform Establishment Phase Primary Domains 1 (Active Mining) and 3 (Infrastructure Area) There are no landform establishment activities proposed in Primary Domains 1 and 3 in the MOP term. Primary Domain 2 - Water Management Area Surface water runoff at rehabilitation areas are managed through a series of contour furrows, graded banks, waterways and flumes. Surface runoff will be staged through the water management system in order to minimise peak flows, thereby reducing the required size of the structures and the erosive potential of the flows. This involves the construction of some water detention structures that allow a controlled release of runoff. Structures are sized for the final rehabilitation profile and vegetation and some major structures will not be finalised until the contributing catchment has been fully rehabilitated. Contour drains are generally constructed on slopes of overburden emplacements with a % longitudinal grade and spaced every m (depending on velocity calculations.). Contour banks are designed to comply with the Earth Bank designs described in The Blue Book. The contour drains run to natural ground or into the drop structures depicted in Plan 4. Drop structures may be required to facilitate the movement of water from the dump crest to a point where it will be capable of discharging into the clean water system once water quality criteria are achieved. These structures are designed to flow at less than the erosive velocity of the rock armouring.

87 Page 80 For specifics on designs and strategies to minimise channel and slope erosion: refer to the MOC Water Management Plan. The final landform drainage design is shown on Plan 4. Creek Diversions Since 2004, there have been several creek diversions constructed at the MOC to divert flows from operational areas including the: Bettys Creek Upper Diversion; Bettys Creek Middle Diversion; Bettys Creek Lower Diversion; Lower Swamp Creek Diversion; and Swamp Creek Diversion. All creek diversions have been constructed to contain a 1 in 100 year 72 hour storm event in accordance with development consents and approved creek diversion designs. The MOC undertakes stream stability assessments for each diversion and undertakes maintenance in accordance with the recommendations of the assessments to remediate any erosion features or sedimentation. The Bettys Creek Lower Diversion was constructed in 2013 ahead of mining at the Barrett Pit. The diversion was constructed in accordance with the Lower Bettys Creek Diversion Approval. The 1.2 km channel was vegetated by aerial seeding and tubestock planting to stabilise the channel. Monitoring demonstrated that the channel is competent to receive flows without eroding the channel bed or banks and the diversion is now receiving flows. The MOC will continue monitoring erosion and the vegetative cover and undertake any maintenance earthworks required. There are no further creek diversions proposed to be constructed in the MOP term. Primary Domain 4 Tailings Storage Facility During the MOP term, decommissioned tailings storage pits will be progressively capped in a three stage capping operation following sufficient desiccation. Capping will be completed in accordance with an approved capping design developed to support approvals to decommission tailings storage facilities. Proposed methodology to cap tailings includes emplacing a minimum of 3 m of inert capping material comprising select overburden. The capping will be graded to produce a free draining landform accounting for anticipated settling. Capping of TP1 and TP2 will incorporate micro-relief features. Capping materials will be tested to determine if any amelioration is required (e.g. gypsum or lime) to mitigate sodicity or dispersivity. Primary Domain 5 - Overburden Emplacement Area Landform establishment activities in Primary Domain 5 are associated with: Ongoing progressive earthworks to shape backfilled areas of the open cut pits and out of pit dump areas that have reached the final design height; Construction of drainage structures; Substrate preparation including surface spoil characterisation and amelioration where required; and Establishment of micro-relief landforms.

88 Page 81 Shaping works at overburden dumps includes bulk push and trimming dump slopes using dozers and excavators to achieve slopes generally 10 degrees or less. Overburden emplacements will generally be graded to produce free draining landforms that incorporate informal undulations where appropriate to improve visual amenity (Plan 4). Dumps will be graded to achieve the design catchments and generally direct flows away from the direction of the final void locations. Representative samples will be taken to characterise the nature of the spoil materials at the surface of shaped overburden emplacements to confirm the geochemical properties (e.g. sodicity, acidgenerating potential, etc.) and determine any potential limitations to rehabilitation and sustainable plant growth. Test results will be used to determine specific amelioration techniques (e.g. addition of gypsum, lime, organic matter etc.) that may be required for spoil to overcome potential limitations for landform stability, vegetation establishment and growth. Soil ameliorants will be applied where appropriate in accordance with the recommendations of the geochemical and agronomic assessment and incorporated into the substrate during ripping operations. Native vegetation areas are deep ripped using dozers parallel to the contour. Open grassland areas are rock raked to remove large rocks and shallow tilled to avoid bringing additional rocks to the surface of the landform. Primary Domain 6 - Soil Stockpile and Capping Source Material Landform establishment activities for Domain 6 are anticipated to be limited to minor trimming to achieve a free draining landform and deep ripping the footprint of decommissioned stockpile locations to de-compact the substrate prior to rehabilitation. Primary Domain 7 Current Rehabilitation There are no planned landform establishment activities in this Primary Domain Growth Medium Development Phase Soil Amelioration Soils will be characterised prior to stripping (where directly re-spread), or prior to re-handling from long term topsoil stockpiles. Representative samples will be taken to characterise the nature of the soil material and determine specific ameliorant specifications to overcome potential limitations and enhance vegetation establishment. Soil Spreading Topsoil and/or subsoil will be spread directly onto the prepared substrate at a nominal depth of 10 cm following installation of appropriate erosion and sediment controls. Soils will be spread whenever possible to minimise structural damage. Soils and ameliorants will be spread evenly along the contour, commencing at the top of slopes and working downwards. Following application of soils and required ameliorants, the rehabilitation area is re-ripped along the contour. This allows for the partial mixing of topsoil, ameliorants and overburden, and provides surface roughness to improve infiltration and seed/soil contact. Habitat Augmentation Where appropriate and practical, structures such as tree hollows, logs and other woody debris will be incorporated into the final landform to augment the habitat value of the native vegetation corridors. Logs and large rocks will be emplaced in piles where appropriate to construct denning habitat for fauna.

89 Page 82 In addition, the MOC will construct minor drainage depressions or ponds to create amphibian habitat where practical. The MOC will also establish flora communities that will help establish habitat and/or foraging resources for threatened species in accordance with the relevant Development Consents Ecosystem and Landuse Establishment Methodologies to establish appropriate vegetation communities for the intended final landuse are outlined in the sections below. Species to be used in rehabilitation are outlined in Tables For future rehabilitation consideration may be given to additional species from the region Seed Collection Vegetation establishment in native vegetation rehabilitation areas will preferentially use local provenance seed for direct seeding or tubestock propagation. Native seed is collected from indigenous native grasses, herbs shrubs and trees located at offset areas remnant native vegetation areas in accordance with the principles documented in the Biodiversity Management Plan (including the Flora and Fauna Management Plan and Offset Management Plan). This plan includes a seed collection program The seed collection program is undertaken by suitably qualified persons in general accordance with Florabank Seed Collection Guidelines (Greening Australia 1999). Where adverse seasonal conditions (i.e. drought) affect the availability of local provenance seed, supplementation with non-local provenance seed may be required. Alternatively, revegetation works may be delayed until sufficient stocks of local provenance species are available. Species Selection Domain C Open Grassland Revegetation may involve the use of both native and suitable exotic pasture species for the establishment of grasslands (ground strata species), with pockets of native vegetation, which may ultimately be utilised as shelter for livestock. Vegetation techniques will be consistent with local agricultural practices and will involve broadcast seeding with grasses and legumes appropriate to the district and recognised as suitable for grazing. A similar mix may also be used in areas with steeper slopes, utilising aerial seeding where required, preventing scouring and subsequent soil loss. Typical species and recommended sowing rates for establishing grassland rehabilitation areas are listed in Table 29. There are areas where open grassland is adjacent to open woodland and open forest rehabilitation. Kikuya is to be omitted from pasture mix adjacent to forest and woodland vegetation to reduce the potential for spread into these rehabilitation domains.

90 Page 83 Table 29 Typical Pasture Species for Open Grassland Species (kg/ha) Japanese millet 20 Oats 20 Couch 10 Kikuyu 3 Perennial rye 8 Wimmera rye 8 Sub clover 3 Lucerne 5 Phalaris 5 Green panic 3 Species used for rehabilitation at the MOC are based on the comprehensive species list provided in the Annual Flora Report. Domain D Open Woodland Species selection for Domain D incorporates species representative of analogue sites to create woodland corridors that will link with remnant vegetation and rehabilitation areas at adjacent operations. Typical woodland species mixed for the MOC are listed in Table 30. Table 30 The MOC Open Woodland Species and Seeding rates Woodland Species Acacia amblygona 0.1 A.decora 0.1 A. decurrens 0.4 A. implexa 0.2 A. falcata 0.4 A. filicifolia 0.1 A. longifolia 0.2 A. salicina 0.3 Corymbia maculata 1.5 Cymbopogon refractus 0.5 Eucalyptus. albans 0.3 E. fibrosa 0.3 E. crebra 0.4 E. punctata/canaliculata 0.4 E. moluccana 0.2 E. tereticornis/blakelyii 0.5 Echinochloa esculenta 0.5 Kunzea ambigua 0.2 (kg/ha)

91 Page 84 Pasture Species Japanese Millet 7 Couch 1 Perennial Rye 1 Sub Clover 1 (kg/ha) Tube stock planting may also be undertaken in woodland rehabilitation areas and grasslands to provide tree clumps for stock shelter. Typical species propagated for tube stock planting includes: E tereticornis; E fibrosa; E crebra; Corymbia maculata; Aamblygona; A decora; A decurrens; A falcata; Aparvipinnula; and A implexa.

92 Page 85 Domain E Open Forest Revegetation in Domain E will generally focus on establishing flora species assemblages characteristic of Central Hunter Box Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest. Typical species are listed in. Table 31 Typical Native Revegetation Species Mix for Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest Stratum Species Seeding Rates Canopy Casuarina glauca or Allocasuarina leuhmannii 0.15 Sub-canopy (Upper middle) Sub-canopy (Lower middle) Understorey (Herbs and Subshrubs) Corymbia maculata 0.3 Eucalyptus crebra 0.25 Eucalyptus moluccana 0.15 Eucalyptus punctata 0.2 Eucalyptus tereticornis 0.15 Acacia decurrens 0.15 Acacia decora 0.15 Acacia falcata 0.15 Acacia implexa 0.15 Acacia parvipinnula 0.1 Dodonea viscosa 0.1 Indigofera australis 0.1 Jacksonia scoparia 0.05 Acacia amblygona 0.15 Daviesia ulicifolia or D. genistifolia 0.1 Hardenbergia violacea 0.1 Pultenaea cunninghamii 0.1 Calotis lappulacea 0.05 Desmodium varians 0.05 Dianella caerula 0.05 Eremophila debilis 0.05 Glycine clandestina G. latifolia complex 0.05 Kennedia prostrata 0.1 Pultenaea retusa 0.1 Swainsonia galegifolia 0.05 Wahlenbergia sp 0.05 (kg/ha)

93 Page 86 Timing of Revegetation Rehabilitation areas will be vegetated as soon as practicable after shaping and topsoiling. Generally rehabilitation campaigns will be timed so that seeding coincides with favourable conditions in spring and autumn. Opportunistic sowing may occur in summer and winter if areas become available due to changes or delays in the mining schedule, and weather conditions are predicted to be favourable for germination Similarly, the timing of seeding may be postponed to avoid seeding and planting in adverse conditions or where sufficient provenance seed is not available. Where seeding with the final seed mix is delayed, prepared rehabilitation areas will be sown with a suitable cover crop to minimise dust generation and erosion. Key species for cover crops in the Hunter Valley include Japanese Millet (in Spring and Summer) and Oats (in Autumn and Winter). Cover crops can be sown by themselves for short term erosion / dust control and / or increased organic matter in poor structured and / or infertile soils / spoils. Cover crops are commonly included in perennial pasture mixes to provide initial (rapid) cover, increased organic matter and mulching (moisture conservation) whilst the long term species are establishing; and tree / shrub mixes (using a very low sowing rate) to provide short term erosion control Ecosystem and Landuse Sustainability Phase Activities associated with the ecosystem sustainability phase of rehabilitation are generally ongoing maintenance and land management activities and rehabilitation monitoring. Maintenance at rehabilitated areas will include, but not be limited to: Weeds and pest animal control as described in Section ; Managing bushfire risks as described in Section 3.2.9; Minor earthworks to remediate any significant erosion features, including contour banks and diversion channels; Infill planting and/or seeding to meet vegetation community requirements; and Maintaining erosion and sediment controls as described in Section The MOC have developed a formal rehabilitation monitoring program to assess the progress of rehabilitation areas toward the nominated completion criteria. Rehabilitation monitoring will be undertaken throughout the ecosystem sustainability phase until it can be demonstrated that rehabilitation areas have met all conditions for relinquishment. Rehabilitation monitoring for the MOP term is discussed in Section Summary of Rehabilitation Areas during the MOP Term Disturbance in this MOP period is generally associated with clearing ahead of mining as depicted on Plan 3A to Plan 3E. There will also be some disturbance associated with the North Pit Continuation and infrastructure upgrades as outlined in Section During this MOP term rehabilitation will continue on overburden emplacements and decommissioned tailings facilities as outlined in Section 7.3 above. Table 32 outlines rehabilitation and disturbance rates across the MOP period (MOP Plans). Table 33 details the progress of rehabilitation areas in each domain during the MOP term as depicted on Plan 3A and Plan 3E.

94 Page 87 Table 32 Summary of Disturbance and Rehabilitation Proposed during the MOP Term Year Disturbance (ha)* Rehabilitation (Ha)** Cumulative Rehabilitation (Ha)# Start of MOP Plan End of 2017 Plan 3A End of 2018 Plan 3B End of 2019 Plan 3C End of 2020 Plan 3D End of 2021 Plan 3E (End of MOP Period) * Covers disturbance area for that year of the MOP. This covers any land within the Active and Decommissioning phases in that year of the MOP. The total disturbance area has decreased over the MOP period due to rehabilitation. ** Covers rehabilitation area for that year of the MOP (any new rehabilitation). # Covers cumulative rehabilitation over the period of the MOP. Table 33 Data Summary of Rehabilitation Proposed during the MOP Term Primary Domain Active Mining (1) Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Final Void (A) 1A Active Decommissioning 0 0 Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha) Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total

95 Page 88 Primary Domain Active Mining (1) Active Mining (1) Active Mining (1) Active Mining (1) Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Water Management (B) 1B Active 0 0 Rehabilitation - Open Grassland (C) Rehabilitation - Open Woodland (D) Rehabilitation - Open Forest (E) Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total - - 1C Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total D Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total E Active - - Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total - - Active Mining Total (Ha) Water Management Water Management (2) Final Void (A) 2A Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 Water Water Management (B) 2B Active Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha)

96 Page 89 Primary Domain Management (2) Water Management (2) Water Management (2) Water Management (2) Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Rehabilitation - Open Grassland (C) Rehabilitation - Open Woodland (D) Rehabilitation - Open Forest (E) Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total C Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total D Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total E Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Water Management Total (Ha) Infrastructure Infrastructure (3) Infrastructure (3) Final Void (A) 3A Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Water Management (B) 3B Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha)

97 Page 90 Primary Domain Infrastructure (3) Infrastructure (3) Infrastructure (3) Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Rehabilitation - Open Grassland (C) Rehabilitation - Open Woodland (D) Rehabilitation - Open Forest (E) Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 3C Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total D Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total E Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Infrastructure Total (Ha) Tailings Storage Area Tailings Storage Area Active (A) Tailings Storage Area (4) Final Void (A) 4A Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 Water Management (B) 4B Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha)

98 Page 91 Primary Domain Tailings Storage Area (4) Tailings Storage Area (4) Tailings Storage Area (4) Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Rehabilitation - Open Grassland (C) Rehabilitation - Open Woodland (D) Rehabilitation - Open Forest (E) Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 4C Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total D Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total E Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 Tailings Storage Area Total (Ha) Overburden Emplacement Area Overburden Emplacement Area Active (A) Overburden Emplacement Area (5) Final Void (A) 5A Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 Water Management (B) 5B Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha)

99 Page 92 Primary Domain Overburden Emplacement Area (5) Overburden Emplacement Area (5) Overburden Emplacement Area (5) Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Rehabilitation - Open Grassland (C) Rehabilitation - Open Woodland (D) Rehabilitation - Open Forest (E) Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 5C Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total D Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total E Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Overburden Emplacement Area Total (Ha) Topsoil Stockpile Area Topsoil Stockpile Area Active (6) Final Void (A) 6A Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha) Topsoil Stockpile Area (6) Total Water Management (B) 6B Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0

100 Page 93 Primary Domain Topsoil Stockpile Area (6) Topsoil Stockpile Area (6) Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Rehabilitation - Open Grassland (C) Rehabilitation - Open Woodland (D) Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total 0 0 6C Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total D Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha) Topsoil Stockpile Area (6) Rehabilitation - Open Forest (E) 6E Active Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Topsoil Stockpile Area Total (Ha) Current Rehabilitation Area (7) Current Rehabilitation Area (7) Final Void (A) 7A Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Water Management (B) 7B Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land 0 0

101 Page 94 Primary Domain Secondary Domain Code Rehabilitation Phase Total Area at Plan 3A (Ha) Use Establishment Area at end of MOP - 3E (Ha) Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability 0 0 Current Rehabilitation Area (7) Rehabilitation - Open Grassland (C) Total 0 0 7C Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Current Rehabilitation Area (7) Rehabilitation - Open Woodland (D) Total D Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Current Rehabilitation Area (7) Rehabilitation - Open Forest (E) Total E Active 0 0 Decommissioning 0 0 Landform Establishment 0 0 Ecosystem and Land Use Establishment Ecosystem and Land Use Sustainability Total Current Rehabilitation Area Total (Ha) Current Total of All Domains (Ha) Total Relinquishment Phase Achieved during the MOP Term No areas within the MOP boundary are anticipated to be relinquished during the current MOP period. The MOC will investigate future areas for relinquishment and implement a targeted rehabilitation monitoring program against the completion criteria as described in Section 8.

102 Page 95 8 REHABILITATION MONITORING AND RESEARCH 8.1 Rehabilitation Monitoring Program The MOC undertakes a rehabilitation monitoring program in accordance with Glencore Standard Completion Criteria and Rehabilitation Monitoring (GCAA ). The program aims to: Provide the scientific basis for defining: i. Rehabilitation Objectives; ii. Completion Criteria; and iii. Rehabilitation Works Program (including landform design and construction). Facilitate continuous improvement in rehabilitation practices through appropriate monitoring and remedial action; and Assess the long term stability and functioning of rehabilitation areas that will facilitate progressive rehabilitation certification and eventual lease relinquishment following mine closure. The objective of the rehabilitation monitoring program is to: Assess the long term stability and functioning of re-established ecosystems on mine affected land; Assess rehabilitation performance against the closure criteria; and Facilitate continuous improvement in rehabilitation practices. The monitoring program will be continued within rehabilitated as well as non-mined areas until it can be demonstrated that rehabilitation has satisfied the closure criteria. Information from this monitoring program will also be used to refine closure criteria as required. Further details on the proposed rehabilitation monitoring are outlined below. To complement the annual inspections, a rehabilitation monitoring program will be continued. The objective of this monitoring program is to evaluate the progress of rehabilitation towards fulfilling long term land use objectives. The monitoring program will also include non-mined areas for reference (analogue) sites. The monitoring results will provide the basis to measure the success of the rehabilitation against the closure criteria. Information from this monitoring program will also be used to refine closure criteria as required. The monitoring program for areas being rehabilitated back to native ecosystems may not commence until revegetation has demonstrated satisfactory growth, which may take a number of years (i.e. >3 years). Broadly, the long term rehabilitation monitoring program will include vegetation monitoring, habitat assessment and fauna monitoring. Whilst the program will be designed to be comparable between monitoring periods, the program will also be flexible to enable the incorporation of a range of industry accepted techniques that will enable sites to be tracked against meeting the closure criteria Monitoring Pasture Rehabilitation Permanent pasture monitoring transects will be established in rehabilitation and unmined (reference site) areas. Further detail regarding pasture rehabilitation monitoring is included in the BMP and Glencore Standard Completion Criteria and Rehabilitation Monitoring (GCAA ).

103 Page Monitoring of Native Vegetation Monitoring of native vegetation is undertaken at the MOC. A standard monitoring plot design for native vegetation is used that is consistent with the BioBanking Assessment Methodology 2014 (NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, 2014). Annual monitoring in years 1-3 following seeding is undertaken to focus on the initial emergence and establishment of seedlings, to detect early signs of erosion and weed growth. Additional details regarding monitoring of native vegetation is included in the BMP and Completion Criteria and Rehabilitation Monitoring (GCAA ) Active Mining Records During active mining operations, the MOC will maintain active records as to mining activities and processes that may impact upon the rehabilitation and closure of the site. These records will provide the basis for developing rehabilitation strategies and interpretation of later rehabilitation monitoring outcomes. The types of records to be maintained include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: Detailed rehabilitation procedures; Register of contaminated sites including bioremediation areas; Records of production wastes and other waste streams and where they are located, including where adverse overburden material layers are buried; Environmental monitoring records, including surface and groundwater quality and results of past remediation programs; A register of topsoil and or soil substitute stockpiles (e.g. biosolids), which includes information such as the date in which they were formed and maintenance works undertaken (e.g. weed control, planting with native legumes to maintain microbes etc.); and Environmental incident records Rehabilitation Methodology Records The MOC will record the details of each rehabilitation campaign so that they are available for later interpretation of rehabilitation monitoring results with the aim of continually improving rehabilitation standards. Amongst the key monitoring parameters to be included in the program relate to the following: Landform design details; Drainage design details; Substrate characterisation; Site preparation techniques (e.g. topsoil and source, time of sowing, soil ameliorants used etc.); Revegetation methodologies (e.g. rate and type of fertiliser, cover crop and rate, seed viability including watering and weed management); Weather conditions; Photographic records; and Initial follow-up care and maintenance works (including watering and weed management).

104 Page Rehabilitation Inspections Following the completion of each rehabilitation campaign, an initial establishment inspection will be conducted within 6 months to determine whether issues have occurred or are emerging, which have the potential to delay revegetation establishment. Such issues may include erosion that has occurred due to storm events, failure of drainage structures and a lack of germination or establishment of ground cover etc. The objective of this process will be to identify potential issues early in order to minimise the extent of areas affected as well as develop mitigation strategies in a timely and cost effective manner. As a minimum, annual inspections of rehabilitated areas will be undertaken over the life of the Project to assess soil conditions and erosion, drainage and sediment control structures, runoff water quality, revegetation germination rates, plant health and weed infestation. Outcomes of the annual rehabilitation inspection will be recorded and any required management actions that are identified as part of the inspection implemented as soon as practical as part of the rehabilitation care and maintenance program (refer to Section 4.7). Where necessary, rehabilitation procedures will be amended accordingly with the aim of continually improving rehabilitation standards Rehabilitation Monitoring Flora Monitoring Flora monitoring is conducted seasonally to assess development of regenerating forest (the New Forest, see Plan 2) and rehabilitation areas. Areas of remnant vegetation are used as control sites for comparison with rehabilitation areas. Information obtained from this monitoring is used to guide and continuously improve rehabilitation efforts at the mine. Monitoring the diversity of flora species in Ravensworth State Forest and within the rehabilitation sites has been conducted since 2000 and through this benchmarking process the success of the strategies can be assessed against the existing community. This is an important tool for developing completion criteria for the rehabilitation. Opportunistic and systematic surveys are undertaken, with the objective of developing a complete list of the species present\these reference sites are surveyed annually and provide evidence over time of changes occurring in Ravensworth State Forest and within the rehabilitation areas. Fauna Monitoring Fauna monitoring is conducted to assess the impacts of mining on local fauna populations, including birds, reptiles, mammals and frogs. Monitoring is also undertaken in rehabilitation areas and on other land set aside for conservation purposes to look at colonisation rates of native species in these areas. Monitoring techniques include trapping, spotlighting, echolocation call analysis (for woodland bat species) and inspection of artificial roost sites. Monitoring of protected and threatened fauna species and their habitat has been undertaken at the MOC since 1996 in accordance with approval conditions and the relevant management plans.

105 Page Research and Rehabilitation Trials Research and Trials Pre MOP Past research has been undertaken through a joint initiative by Mount Owen and the University of Newcastle. The research program included: Rehabilitation techniques and processes; The Ravensworth State Forest Vegetation Complex Monitoring and Research Program; Research into topsoil Substitutes and Reconstructing Forest Topsoils; Forest Regeneration on Pastures research; and Assessment of ecological outcomes of mine rehabilitation, regeneration and revegetation. Rehabilitation Techniques and Processes Research into rehabilitation techniques and processes has been undertaken at Mount Owen Mine since 1996, initially through The University of Newcastle and now CSER Research. Four key themes are present in this research, relating to sustainable rehabilitation issues important for the mine to achieve its consent conditions and relinquishment. The four themes are: Sustainable Plant Nutrition; Topsoil Substitutes; Reconstructing Soil Function; and Diversification and Success of Rehabilitation Areas. This research (some of these results of which are detailed in Establishment of Native Vegetation (Nussbaumer, Castor & Cole, 2012) has focussed on the establishment and development of growing mediums which are capable of maintaining woodland communities with little or no external management inputs. A key focus of this research has been soil biota and its role in nutrient cycling. Ravensworth State Forest Vegetation Complex Monitoring and Research Program A number of Honours PhD projects have been completed that have utilised rehabilitation areas and the Ravensworth State Forest at Mount Owen Mine. These covered issues associated with rehabilitation and native forest establishment including: Dormancy mechanisms; The effect of long term stockpiling on soil microbial populations; The positive effects of the inoculation of pasture soil with mycorrhizal fungi on the growth of the dominant over storey tree Eucalyptus maculata; Specificity of rhizobial isolates for a range of native peas and wattles; and Anatomical responses of a possible indicator species for phosphorus nutrition. Topsoil Substitutes and Reconstructing Forest Topsoils The Topsoil Substitutes and Reconstructing Forest Topsoils trial aimed to establish the most effective surface growing medium for establishing a native forest community in the absence of topsoil derived from existing forest areas, and provided a reference site for sustainable biodiversity research and provided long term research and teaching field rehabilitation facility. An initial goal of this program was to re-establish sustainable nutrient acquisition and cycling using natural root microbe associations. This was then expanded to include research into the use of available bulk materials and amelioration

106 Page 99 techniques to develop soil substitutes to meet the anticipated deficit in available forest topsoil for rehabilitation. Forest Regeneration on Pastures In conjunction with the University of Newcastle further targeted research at the MOC was conducted on Forest Regeneration on Pastures to assist with the implementation of the Biodiversity Offset Strategy by restoring forest communities on lands cleared for grazing. The implementation of the Biodiversity Offset Strategy seeks to establish the offset areas through experimental intervention. The research programme provided the impetus for forest regeneration in offset areas both from natural sources and from seeded or planted sources. The research had the primary aim of determining best practice methods for the restoration of pastureland to a forest woodland ecosystem. The research outcomes and the resultant restoration techniques are freely available to the community for adoption in other similar projects. Assessment of ecological outcomes A recent assessment of ecological outcomes of mine rehabilitation, regeneration and revegetation at Mount Owen (Umwelt, 2014b) has indicated that rehabilitation areas sampled are trending very strongly towards the Central Hunter Ironbark Spotted Gum Grey Box Forest in the NSW North Coast and Sydney Basin Bioregions EEC. In addition, other key findings included: Natural recruitment of canopy species is present across the rehabilitation areas; and Rehabilitation communities provide known habitat for a range of threatened fauna species including small terrestrial mammals, birds and micro-bats Research and Trials This MOP period During this MOP period regular flora and fauna monitoring will be undertaken at the MOC. Rehabilitation monitoring results will be compared with Liddell mines results where trails are being undertaken. Work to be undertaken relating to the inoculation of pasture soil with mycorrhizal fungi on the growth of the dominant over storey tree Eucalyptus maculata will continue into this MOP period, with results to be used to improve future rehabilitation. Key learnings from previous rehabilitation trials will be incorporated into rehabilitation planning during the MOP term, including landform design, seed mix and the use of ameliorants (eg biosolids). Other rehabilitation trials continue at other Glencore operations in the Hunter Valley, with this information to be shared across Glencore operations.

107 Page INTERVENTION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT Where rehabilitation monitoring indicates that rehabilitation outcomes are not trending toward the nominated completion criteria MOC will instigate early intervention and adaptive management to minimise the potential for rehabilitation failure. Identification of threats to rehabilitation and the subsequent intervention is discussed in the sections below. 9.1 Threats to Rehabilitation Where rehabilitation performance is not trending to the nominated completion criteria this may indicate that there is a threat to long term rehabilitation success. Threats to rehabilitation may include events such as periods of drought, bushfire events, or pressures from weeds and feral animals. 34 provides examples of key threats to rehabilitation. Where rehabilitation monitoring indicates that there is a significant threat to rehabilitation, MOC will undertake adaptive management in accordance with the Rehabilitation Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP) described in Section 9.2 below. Table 34 Key Threats to Rehabilitation Updated According to MOP Risk Assessment Threat Erosion and Sediment Control Mine Subsidence and Settlement Soil Type(s) and Suitability Spontaneous Combustion Flora Geotechnical Acid Mine Drainage Mine Subsidence and Settlement Geology and Geochemistry Contaminated Land Bushfire Caused by Rainfall events Lack of appropriate vegetation cover Failure of water management structures Settlement of tailings dams Settlement of overburden emplacement dumps Mine subsidence due to Integra Inadequate topsoil available Poor topsoil quality Weed infested topsoil Poor recovery of topsoil from currently rehabilitated areas Poor management of materials with propensity for spontaneous combustion Not considering requirements in rehabilitation planning Failure to manage weeds Pest species / grazing pressures (kangaroos, rabbits etc.) Geotechnical failure Poor knowledge of material that may result in AMD. Poor management of the materials that have a propensity to AMD Mine subsidence due to other mining operations. Poor knowledge of material and its geochemistry Inappropriate placement of materials Long term use of the site Spills, leaks etc. Proximity to state forest Regional fire Lightning strike

108 Page Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP) The following TARP for rehabilitation has been developed to identify required management actions in the event of impacts to rehabilitation, or where rehabilitation outcomes are not achieved in an acceptable timeframe. Where necessary, rehabilitation procedures will be amended accordingly with the aim of continually improving rehabilitation standards. The MOC will notify the DRE and other relevant stakeholders of any incident resulting in major impacts to rehabilitation. The responses specified within the TARP have been based upon the rehabilitation completion criteria developed during the preparation of the MOP and the current rehabilitation monitoring program. Monitoring of the TARP will be undertaken as outlined in the rehabilitation monitoring program (refer to Section 8.1). The rehabilitation monitoring program will trigger response actions, as specified in the TARP to ensure that threats to rehabilitation do not become unmanageable. The TARP is provided as Table 35 below, and will be reviewed and may be revised as conditions at the MOC change or new threats to rehabilitation are identified.

109 Page 102 Table 35 Trigger Action Response Plan Aspect/ Category Key Element Element Number Trigger Response Condition Green Condition Amber Condition Red Trigger Rehabilitated overburden areas have slopes that are generally <10. Rehabilitated overburden areas have slopes >10 but <14. Rehabilitated overburden areas have slopes >15. Slope gradient 1 Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. Undertake regrading and revegetation of the area, if it is not designed to be >10. Undertake a review of the landform design, including survey if required. Undertake regrading and revegetation of the area, if required. Trigger Low walls have slopes <18. Low walls have slopes =18. Low walls have slopes >18. Landform stability 2 Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. Undertake a review of the landform design, including survey if required. Undertake a review of the landform design, including survey, in consultation with the DRE (or contemporary equivalent). Undertake regrading and revegetation of the area if required. Trigger No gully or tunnel erosion. No rilling present. Minor gully or tunnel erosion present and/or rilling <200 mm deep. Significant gully or tunnel erosion present and/or rilling >200 mm deep. Erosion control 3 Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. A suitably trained person to inspect the site. Investigate opportunities to install water management infrastructure to address erosion. Remediate as appropriate. Undertake a review of the drainage of the area and provide recommendations to appropriately remediate the erosion. Remediate as soon as practicable. Drainage Condition 4 Trigger Drainage condition is in accordance with the design criteria established within this document. Landforms exhibiting minor drainage issues but does not threaten to cause rehabilitation failure. Landforms exhibiting significant drainage issues, threatening or causing rehabilitation failure.

110 Page 103 Aspect/ Category Key Element Element Number Trigger Response Condition Green Condition Amber Condition Red Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. A suitably trained person to inspect the site. Investigate opportunities to address issues. Remediate as appropriate. Undertake a review of the drainage design and provide recommendations to appropriately remediate the area. Remediate as soon as practicable. Trigger Surface water quality of runoff from rehabilitation areas is within EPL criteria and rehabilitation performance criteria established within this document. Water quality exceeds EPL or performance criteria but does not indicate a long-term rehabilitation issue. Water quality exceeds criteria, indicating a long term rehabilitation liability. Water Quality Monitoring parameters 5 Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. Review and investigation of water quality monitoring and management where appropriate. Implement relevant remedial measures where required. Reporting as per PIRMP and all statutory reporting requirements. Implement relevant responses and undertake immediate review to determine source of issues and implement remediation measures identified as soon as practicable. Trigger No evidence of spontaneous combustion in rehabilitation areas. Isolated incidence of heating in rehabilitation areas. Widespread or repeated incidences of ignition in rehabilitation areas. Spontaneous Combustion Evidence of Spontaneous Combustion 6 Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. Investigate sources of potential ignition. Excavate material with propensity for spon com in proximity to rehabilitated surface. Review overburden / coarse reject emplacement practices. Consult with regulators to develop remediation plan to mitigate spon com such as increased capping. Review Spon Com Management Plan and material emplacement practices. Soil/spoil Quality Monitoring parameters 7 Trigger Properties of soil/spoil are within 20% from relevant analogue site after 5 years. Properties of soil/spoil are more than 20% from results at relevant analogue site after 5 years; however area is able to sustain selected vegetation species. Properties of soil/spoil are more than 20% from results at relevant analogue site after 5 years; however area is not able to sustain selected vegetation species.

111 Page 104 Aspect/ Category Key Element Element Number Trigger Response Condition Green Condition Amber Condition Red Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. Investigate application of additional soil, and/or use of appropriate soil ameliorants or management options to address soil/spoil quality if deemed necessary. Consultant to be engaged to assist with recommendations to appropriately remediate soil/spoil quality and depth. Remediate as soon as practicable. Topsoil Availability Topsoil quantity 8 Trigger Response Sufficient topsoil identified for rehabilitation over the MOP term and for the Life of the Mine. No response required. Topsoil balance indicates a deficiency in topsoil available for rehabilitation over the Life of the Mine. Investigate options and alternatives (e.g. OGM) to be able to meet future topsoil requirements Continue direct seeding on spoil where possible and approved. Deficiency significant enough to delay rehab progression the MOP term Source and budget for purchasing topsoil for use in rehabilitation. Investigate use of alternatives such as OGM. Vegetation Ground cover 9 10 Trigger Response Trigger Response Five years following revegetation to woodland, a minimum of 70% total ground cover (vegetation, leaf litter, mulch) is present within rehabilitated areas. No response required. Continue monitoring program. Twelve months following revegetation to grassland, vegetative cover is at least 80% over a minimum of 95% of areas treated. No response required. Continue monitoring program. Five years following revegetation to woodland, total ground cover (vegetation, leaf litter, mulch) of between 55-70% in rehabilitated areas. Review procedures where required to increase vegetation cover. Twelve months following revegetation to grassland, vegetative cover is between 65-80% over a minimum of 95% of areas treated. Review procedures where required to increase vegetation cover. Five years following revegetation to woodland, total ground cover (vegetation, leaf litter, mulch) is <55% within rehabilitated areas. A suitably trained person to inspect the site. Investigate use of appropriate management options to remediate. Remediate as appropriate. Twelve months following revegetation to grassland, vegetative cover is <65% over a minimum of 85% of areas treated. A suitably trained person to inspect the site. Investigate use of appropriate management options to remediate. Remediate as appropriate.

112 Page 105 Aspect/ Category Key Element Element Number Trigger Response Condition Green Condition Amber Condition Red Trigger Twelve months following revegetation, no significant weed infestations present. Twelve months following revegetation, >10% but <25% cover of undesirable species present. Twelve months following revegetation, >25% cover of undesirable species present. Weed presence 11 Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. Engage weed management contractor to remove introduced species from the site. Engage weed management contractor to remove introduced species from the site as soon as practicable. Investigate management measures to assist native plant establishment including use of ameliorants and implement as appropriate. 12 Trigger Response Five years following revegetation to woodland, species composition comprises native tree and shrub species consistent with analogue site. No response required. Continue monitoring program. Five years following revegetation to woodland, native tree and shrub species composition comprises <75% consistent with analogue site. Review native seed mix and amend accordingly. Consider remedial actions such as tubestock planting or re-seeding to achieve required species composition. Five years following revegetation to woodland, native tree and shrub species composition comprises <60% consistent with analogue site. An inspection of the site will be undertaken by a suitably trained person. Investigate remedial options to achieve required species composition. Species composition 13 Trigger Two years following revegetation to grassland, species composition consists of grasses and legumes appropriate to the district and recognised as suitable for beef cattle grazing and consistent with analogue site. Two years following revegetation to grassland, <75% of grasses and legumes in the area are consistent with analogue site and rehabilitated areas are being utilised for their intended final land use. Five years following revegetation to grassland, species composition comprises <50% consistency with analogue site and landform is not being utilised for its intended final land use.. Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. Investigate additional weeding and reseeding where required and ensure seed mix utilised is consistent with desired species composition. An inspection of the site will be undertaken by a suitably trained person. Investigate remedial options to achieve required species composition.

113 Page 106 Aspect/ Category Biodiversity Key Element Habitat Corridors Element Number 14 Bushfire Fuel Load 15 Tailings Inadequate capping Trigger Response Trigger Response Trigger Response 16 Trigger Condition Green Condition Amber Condition Red Monitoring indicates corridors are successfully established and consistent with the desired vegetation community composition and being utilised for fauna species movement. No response required. Continue monitoring program. Fuel loads are assessed and managed as required (including maintaining fire-breaks) and there is firefighting access across rehabilitation areas and water resources available for fighting fires. No response required. Continue monitoring program. The capped tailings landform is constructed in accordance with the approved capping design and is freedraining and no ponding is present. Habitat corridors are successfully established and consistent with the desired vegetation community composition however are not being utilised for fauna species movement. Investigate whether sufficient habitat features (rock piles, felled hollow bearing trees, nest boxes etc.) are available and have been incorporated into the corridors. Monitoring indicates fuel loads have not been managed and fire breaks have not been maintained. In the event of a fire, this would result in firefighters not being able to access the site or water resources. Reduce fuel loads and ensure access tracks are cleared. Inspect water sources are and ensure sufficient water is available. Inspections indicate some temporary ponding on the tailings landform, however settlement is within the range considered in the detailed capping design. Monitoring indicates that vegetation corridors do not contain the desired vegetation community composition and are not being utilised for the movement of fauna species. Engage ecologist to recommend remedial rehabilitation works such as additional planting or seeding, soil amelioration, or weed reduction. Ensure sufficient habitat features are available for fauna. A fire on site damages rehabilitated areas. Review and update (if required) the Biodiversity Management Plan to ensure monitoring and maintenance is completed for fuel loads and access tracks. Landform is exhibiting permanent or significant ponding issues.

114 Page 107 Aspect/ Category Key Element Element Number Trigger Response Condition Green Condition Amber Condition Red Response No response required. Continue monitoring program. A suitably trained person to inspect the site. Investigate opportunities to improve landform drainage. Remediate as appropriate. Undertake a review of the capping and drainage design and provide recommendations to appropriately remediate the area. Remediate as soon as practicable. Groundwater Void water balance 17 Trigger Response Water balance and groundwater monitoring indicate void water balance is correct No response required. Continue monitoring program. Groundwater monitoring indicates that inflows into the void may be higher than the water balance assumptions which in combination with high surface runoff could result in the voids filling higher than predicted. Undertake additional groundwater monitoring and review water balance Groundwater inflows are significantly higher than predicted in the water balance and in combination with high surface runoff could result in overtopping of the voids. Engage a qualified groundwater specialists and engineers and consider amending the final void design.

115 Page REPORTING 10.1 Annual Review The Annual Review, which is submitted to relevant government agencies and made publically available on the MOC website ( reports on the following information relating to rehabilitation: An overview of rehabilitation undertaken each year; Overview of adaptive management and key learnings from rehabilitation; Results of annual rehabilitation inspections; Outcomes of the annual ecological monitoring; and Progress against the projected rehabilitation in the approved MOP Incident Reporting Non compliances and incidents will be reported within EPL Annual Returns. If an incident causes or threatens serious environmental harm, then incident management and reporting will be completed as per the Pollution Incident Response Management Plan.

116 Page REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MOP 11.1 MOP Review Protocol This section provides the protocol for periodic review of this MOP. Reviews are conducted to assess the effectiveness of the procedures against the objectives of MOP. The MOP may be reviewed, and if necessary revised, following the submission of the following: EPL Annual Return Annual Review; Incident report; Audit; or Any modification to the conditions of the Development Consents. This MOP may also be revised due to: Deficiencies being identified; Results from the monitoring and review program; Recommendations resulting from the monitoring and review program; Changing environmental requirements; Improvements in knowledge or technology become available; Change in legislation; Where a risk assessment identifies the requirement to alter the MOP; and Change in the activities or operations associated with the MOC. Any major amendments to the MOP that affect its application will be undertaken in consultation with the appropriate regulatory authorities and stakeholders. Any amendments would be completed in accordance with the latest MOP guidelines.

117 Page Implementation Table 36 defines the personnel who are responsible for the monitoring, review and implementation of this MOP. Table 36 Responsibilities for Implementation of this MOP Mine Manager Implement the procedures referenced in this MOP; Environment and Community Coordinator Undertake training in relevant Management Plans and procedures as required; Provide resources required and support to implement these procedures; Implement the procedures referenced in this MOP; Undertake training in relevant Management Plans and procedures as required; and Develop mine plans to allow for progressive rehabilitation of mined land. Ensure the relevant Management Plans are prepared; Implement, monitor and review the programs and procedures linked to this MOP; Consult with regulatory authorities as required; Undertake monitoring as required; Undertake maintenance as required; Provide measures for continual improvement to this MOP and procedures; Ensure all personnel undertaking works in relation to this MOP are trained and competent; and Report the progress of any rehabilitation and monitoring of biodiversity in the Annual Review.

118 Page REFERENCES ATC Williams (2014) Tailings Management Concept to Closure Reference Document. Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) (2008) Managing Urban Stormwater Soils and Construction, Volume 2E Mines and Quarries. DMR (1999) Synoptic Plan-Integrated Landscape for Coal Mine Rehabilitation in the Hunter DTIRIS (2013), ESG3 - (MOP) Guidelines. DTIRIS (2012a), EDG01 - Borehole Sealing Requirements on Land: Coal Exploration. DTRIS (2012b), MDG 6001 Guideline for the Permanent Filling and Capping of Surface Entries to Coal Seams. Environmental Geochemistry International Pty Ltd (EGI) (2013) Environmental Geochemistry International Pty Ltd (EGI) (2014) Environmental Geochemistry International Pty Ltd (2013) Geochemical Assessment of the Mount Owen Optimisation Project Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) (1998), Managing Land Contamination: Planning Guidelines SEPP 55 Remediation of Land. EPA (2000), NSW Industrial Noise Policy. Glencore Coal Assets Australia (2015) Guideline Annual Rehabilitation and Land Management Planning. Hansen Bailey (2015) Tailings Pipeline Modification Environmental Assessment. Landcom (2004) Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils & Construction, Volume 1, 4th Edition, March. Hansen Bailey (2015) Greater Ravensworth Area. Tailings Pipeline Modification Environmental Assessment. Mount Owen Complex (2014) Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Mount Owen Complex (2014) Blast Management Plan Mount Owen Complex (2014) Environmental Monitoring Program Mount Owen Complex (2014) Landscape Management Plan Mount Owen Complex (2015) Noise Monitoring Program Nussbaumer, Y., Castor, C. & Cole, M. (2012) Establishing Native Vegetation: Principles and Interim Guidelines for Spoil Placement Areas and Restoration Lands. A report prepared by the Centre for Sustainable Ecosystem Restoration the University of Newcastle for Xstrata Coal NSW Peake, TC. (2006), The Vegetation of the Central Hunter Valley, New South Wales. A report on the findings of the Hunter Remnant Vegetation Project. Hunter- Central Rivers Catchment Authority, Paterson. Roads and Traffic Authority (1993), Road Design Guide. Singleton Shire Council (2007), Development Control Plan Standards Australia (1984), AS Ambient Air Particulate Matter Determination of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) High Volume Sampler Gravimetric Method Standards Australia (1989), AS Methods of testing soil for engineering purposes Part B - Soil moisture content tests - Establishment of correlation between a subsidiary method of moisture content determination and the standard method AS 1289.B1.1

119 Page 112 Standards Australia (1993), AS Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids. Standards Australia (1997a), AS 1055 Acoustics, Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise. Standards Australia (1997b), AS Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting. Standards Australia (1998), AS Water Quality Sampling Guidance on Sampling of Groundwater Standards Australia (2003), AS Methods for Sampling and Analysis of Ambient Air Determination of Particulate Matter Deposited Matter Gravimetric Method Standards Australia (2009), AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and Guideline Sustainable Ecosystem Restoration the University of Newcastle for Xstrata Coal NSW. Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2014) Mount Owen Agricultural Impact Assessment Tongway, D. and Hindley, N. (1996) Landscape Function Analysis. Understanding more about your landscape. A method for monitoring landscape productivity. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems. Canberra, ACT Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2015a) Mount Owen Continued Operations Project, Environmental Impact Statement, January 2015 Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2015b) Mount Owen Continued Operations Project, Environmental Impact Statement, Response to Submissions Report A, June 2015 Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2016a) Mount Owen Continued Operations Project, Response to Submissions to PAC Review Report Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2016b) Mount Owen Continued Operations Project, Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP).

120 Appendix A January 2017 Page 113 APPENDIX A MOP PLANS Due to file size, MOP Plans have been provided on a CD and to DRE in hardcopy

121 Appendix B Page 114 APPENDIX B LAND OWNERSHIP REGISTER

122 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Government 119// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 2// State Forest 195// State Forest 199// State Forest 191// State Forest 200// State Forest 205// Other Mine Freehold 128// State Forest 197// State Forest 201// State Forest 206// Glencore Freehold 56// Glencore Freehold 63// State Forest 203// Glencore Freehold 64// Glencore Freehold 88// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 1// Government 1032// State Forest 194// Glencore Freehold 1// Private 3// Government 2// Government 1// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 2// Utility 3// Glencore Freehold 11// Private 5// Glencore Freehold 2// Government 3// Other Mine Freehold 233// State Forest 192// Glencore Freehold 3// Government 1// Government 2// Government 27//6842 Government 26//6842 Government 20A//6842 Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 5// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 4// Utility 13// Owner Lot/Sec/DP Glencore Freehold 6// Government 120// Government 116// Private 355// Government 118// Government 179// Government 1// Private 352// Utility 2// Glencore Freehold 232// Glencore Freehold 311// Glencore Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 13// Government 7// Utility 2// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 228// Glencore Freehold 135// Glencore Freehold 310// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 96// Utility 1// Government 24// Glencore Freehold 4// Government 2// Glencore Freehold 2//48556 Glencore Freehold 6// Glencore Freehold 1//48556 Government 2// Glencore Freehold 354// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 6// Glencore Freehold 1// Private 2// Government 2// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 3// Government 6// Glencore Freehold 353// Glencore Freehold 81// Glencore Freehold 1// Government 5// Government 1// Government 2// Glencore Freehold 3//231880

123 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Government 1// Glencore Freehold 4// Private 38//6842 Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 25// Glencore Freehold 36// Private 34//6842 Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 26// Government 5// Glencore Freehold 22// Glencore Freehold 9//6842 Government 2// Glencore Freehold 11//6842 Glencore Freehold 43// Government 356// Glencore Freehold 31// Glencore Freehold 33// Glencore Freehold A// Private 10// Glencore Freehold 201// Glencore Freehold 32// Glencore Freehold 180// Private 353// Glencore Freehold 355// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 35// Glencore Freehold 80// Government 8// Utility 1// Glencore Freehold 105// Glencore Freehold 11// Utility 1// Glencore Freehold 40/B/6842 Glencore Freehold 21//6842 Glencore Freehold 202// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 352// Private 351// Glencore Freehold 2//48536 Glencore Freehold 1//48536 Private 31//6842 Private 39//6842 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Other Mine Freehold 11// Private 101// Glencore Freehold 12// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 106// Government 2// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 2// Private 354// Glencore Freehold 225// Glencore Freehold 32// Glencore Freehold 229// Government 10// Glencore Freehold 7// Glencore Freehold 6// Government 9// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 181// Government 1// Glencore Freehold 102// Government 150// Utility 1000// Utility 1// Utility 2012// Utility 1// Glencore Freehold 201// Glencore Freehold 202// Glencore Freehold 42/B/6842 Government 4// Glencore Freehold 2// Utility 15// Other Mine Freehold 219// Glencore Freehold 23// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 221// Other Mine Freehold 184// Government 2// Other Mine Freehold 9// Other Mine Freehold 192// Other Mine Freehold 10// Utility 100// Other Mine Freehold 217// Other Mine Freehold 6// Glencore Freehold 24// Glencore Freehold 12//825904

124 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 183// Other Mine Freehold 211// Daracon Mining 1// Other Mine Freehold 182// Glencore Freehold 15// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 32// Other Mine Freehold 218// Glencore Freehold 100// Glencore Freehold 14// Other Mine Freehold 7// Other Mine Freehold 212// Glencore Freehold 13// Other Mine Freehold 8// Government 4// Other Mine Freehold 11// Glencore Freehold 11// Other Mine Freehold 193// Glencore Freehold 31// Glencore Freehold 20//38725 Glencore Freehold 5//38725 Other Mine Freehold 101// Glencore Freehold 9//38725 Utility 14// Glencore Freehold 15//38725 Glencore Freehold 11//38725 Glencore Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 14//38725 Glencore Freehold 2//38725 Glencore Freehold 16//38725 Glencore Freehold 21// Glencore Freehold 19//38725 Glencore Freehold 6//38725 Glencore Freehold 3//38725 Glencore Freehold 13//38725 Glencore Freehold 10//38725 Glencore Freehold 8//38725 Glencore Freehold 2//6842 Glencore Freehold 21//38725 Glencore Freehold 602// Glencore Freehold 4//38725 Glencore Freehold 7//38725 Glencore Freehold 12//38725 Glencore Freehold 2A//6842 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Government 1// Glencore Freehold A// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 22// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 1210// Glencore Freehold 1// Utility 601// Glencore Freehold 21// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 3// Utility 1// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 8// Glencore Freehold 5// Other Mine Freehold 103// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 3// Private 70// Glencore Freehold 3// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 1002// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 11// Glencore Freehold 701// Glencore Freehold 34// Glencore Freehold 33// Other Mine Freehold 91// Other Mine Freehold 92// Government 2// Other Mine Freehold 174// Other Mine Freehold 237// Other Mine Freehold 240// Government 3// Other Mine Freehold 22// Other Mine Freehold 3// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 4// Other Mine Freehold 2391// Other Mine Freehold 2362// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 6//

125 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Government 1// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 6// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 4// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 71// Private 8// Other Mine Freehold G//37613 Other Mine Freehold 70// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 96// Other Mine Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 5// Other Mine Freehold 11// Other Mine Freehold 22// Government 7004//93630 Other Mine Freehold 1// Government 4// Other Mine Freehold 91// Other Mine Freehold 21// Other Mine Freehold 12// Glencore Freehold 2// Government 15// Other Mine Freehold 3// Other Mine Freehold 12// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 7// Government 6// Other Mine Freehold 10// Wanaruah Local Aboriginal Land Council 175// Government 176// Other Mine Freehold 232// Glencore Freehold 3// Private 1// Private 3// Other Mine Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 4// Owner Lot/Sec/DP Other Mine Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 1// Private 31// Other Mine Freehold 1/13/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 2/12/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 3/12/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 5// Other Mine Freehold 51// Other Mine Freehold 3// Other Mine Freehold 5// Other Mine Freehold 8// Other Mine Freehold 11/9/ Other Mine Freehold 9/13/ Private 30// Other Mine Freehold 1// Private 8/9/ Other Mine Freehold 2/13/ Other Mine Freehold 12/9/ Other Mine Freehold 3/10/ Other Mine Freehold 9/4/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 1/6/ Other Mine Freehold 4// Glencore Freehold 112// Private 102// Other Mine Freehold 231// Private 6/9/ Other Mine Freehold 8/7/ Other Mine Freehold 5/4/ Private 9/9/ Other Mine Freehold 1/12/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Private 7/9/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 19/6/ Other Mine Freehold 10/9/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 3// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 4// Other Mine Freehold 2//120193

126 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Private 1// Other Mine Freehold 3// Other Mine Freehold 11/13/ Other Mine Freehold 12/7/ Government 7/13/ Other Mine Freehold 5// Other Mine Freehold 1// Government 3// Other Mine Freehold 92// Other Mine Freehold 10/13/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 4/10/ Other Mine Freehold 8/13/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 91// Government 1// Other Mine Freehold 1/2/ Other Mine Freehold 101// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 234// Other Mine Freehold 235// Private 3// Private 2// Government 7300// Government 4// Other Mine Freehold 1701// Private 75// Government 7300// Government 89// Private 1// Government 109// Government 1// Private 5// Private 4// Private 10// Private 11// Government 1031// Government 7339// Other Mine Freehold 2361// Government 1/10/ Government 10/5/ Government 1/5/ Government 2/5/ Government 2/10/ Owner Lot/Sec/DP Government 3/5/ Government 4/5/ Government 6/13/ Government 8/5/ Government 5/13/ Government 7/5/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Private 2/8/ Private 102// Glencore Freehold 1// Private 5/9/ Other Mine Freehold 18/7/ Glencore Freehold 59// Government 7002//93629 Other Mine Freehold 10/4/ Other Mine Freehold 100// Other Mine Freehold 11/6/ Other Mine Freehold 2/6/ Private 103// Other Mine Freehold 15/7/ Other Mine Freehold 9/6/ Other Mine Freehold 82// Other Mine Freehold 15/6/ Other Mine Freehold 13/6/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 7// Other Mine Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 1// Private 103// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 3// Private 5// Glencore Freehold 10//6830 Glencore Freehold 71// Private 106// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 12// Other Mine Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 111// Private 3// Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 710// Other Mine Freehold 4// Other Mine Freehold 1//701939

127 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Private 4// Private 1// Glencore Freehold 6// Private 105// Private 8// Glencore Freehold 1// Government 7003//93629 Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 2/4/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Government 58// Other Mine Freehold 17/7/ Private 2/9/ Other Mine Freehold 8/6/ Private 64// Government 6/5/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 13/8/ Government 173// Other Mine Freehold 4/4/ Other Mine Freehold 11/2/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 10/6/ Other Mine Freehold 12/8/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 1/4/ Private 510// Other Mine Freehold 7/4/ Other Mine Freehold 5/6/ Other Mine Freehold 9/7/ Other Mine Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 16/7/ Private 3/9/ Government 7001//93629 Other Mine Freehold 18/6/ Other Mine Freehold 13/7/ Other Mine Freehold 17/6/ Other Mine Freehold 16/6/ Other Mine Freehold 16/8/ Other Mine Freehold 15/8/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 1// Owner Lot/Sec/DP Other Mine Freehold 19/7/ Private 1// Other Mine Freehold 2/16/ Other Mine Freehold 12/2/ Private 1// Government 9/5/ Other Mine Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 532// Other Mine Freehold 4/6/ Other Mine Freehold 8/4/ Other Mine Freehold 3/4/ Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 14/6/ Private 104// Private 2// Other Mine Freehold 12/6/ Other Mine Freehold 20/6/ Other Mine Freehold 6/4/ Government 5/5/ Other Mine Freehold 11/7/ Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 792// Other Mine Freehold 10/7/ Private 1/8/ Other Mine Freehold 102// Other Mine Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 4// Glencore Freehold 8//6830 Other Mine Freehold 6/6/ Other Mine Freehold 2/2/ Other Mine Freehold 14/8/ Other Mine Freehold 791// Other Mine Freehold 7/6/ Other Mine Freehold 3/6/ Private 65// Other Mine Freehold 81// Glencore Freehold 12//6830 Other Mine Freehold 93// Other Mine Freehold 14/7/ Private 4/9/ Other Mine Freehold 11/8/ Private 2// Glencore Freehold 2// Other Mine Freehold 2// Private 621//

128 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Private 622// Private 11// Private 560// Glencore Freehold 1// Private 79// Other Mine Freehold 1030// Glencore Freehold 1// Other Mine Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 123// Glencore Freehold 100// Glencore Freehold 11//6830 Government 7001//93635 Glencore Freehold 924// Glencore Freehold 103// Glencore Freehold 121// Private 53// Glencore Freehold 104// Glencore Freehold 926// Glencore Freehold 30// Glencore Freehold 7// Private 44// Glencore Freehold 8// Glencore Freehold 925// Glencore Freehold 1//48490 Glencore Freehold 102// Private 13//6830 Private 73// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 4// Glencore Freehold 923// Glencore Freehold 333// Glencore Freehold 330// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 332// Glencore Freehold 921// Glencore Freehold 4// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 922// Glencore Freehold 57// Glencore Freehold 32// Glencore Freehold 5// Glencore Freehold 331// Glencore Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 531// Glencore Freehold 101// Owner Lot/Sec/DP Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 43// Glencore Freehold 212// Glencore Freehold 12// Glencore Freehold 11// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 6// Glencore Freehold 1221// Glencore Freehold 100// Glencore Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 17//6830 Private 83// Glencore Freehold 211// Private 104// Glencore Freehold 25A// Glencore Freehold 511// Glencore Freehold 42// Glencore Freehold 31// Glencore Freehold 4// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 2// Private 1// Private 2// Government 7302// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 3// Glencore Freehold 4// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 21//6830 Glencore Freehold 4// State Forest 207// Glencore Freehold 5// Glencore Freehold 101// Glencore Freehold 58// Private 36// Private 233// Glencore Freehold 57// Private 62// Glencore Freehold 162// Private 5// Glencore Freehold 37// Glencore Freehold 235// Private 1//186396

129 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Private 119// Private 35// State Forest 217// State Forest 193// Private 118// Glencore Freehold 6// Glencore Freehold 234// Glencore Freehold 60// Private 385// Private 115// Private 389// Private 390// Private 116// Glencore Freehold 27//6830 Private 3// Private 384// Private 231// Private 117// Private 109// Glencore Freehold 161// Private 31//6830 State Forest 190// State Forest 204// State Forest 208// State Forest 198// Private 61// Glencore Freehold 166// Private 26// Private 1// Glencore Freehold 4// Private 2// Private 114// Private 4// Private 232// Private 4// Private 5// Glencore Freehold 98// Private 34// Private 1// Government 2// Private 4// Glencore Freehold 5// Glencore Freehold 1// Glencore Freehold 163// Glencore Freehold 23//6842 Owner Lot/Sec/DP Private 102// Glencore Freehold 2// Private 104// Glencore Freehold 11// Private 120// State Forest 12// Private 112// Private 113// Glencore Freehold 383// Glencore Freehold 107// Glencore Freehold 2// Glencore Freehold 165// Glencore Freehold 33//6830 Private 103// Glencore Freehold 386// Glencore Freehold 108// Private 2// Private 1// Private 59// Glencore Freehold 24//6830 Private 40// Glencore Freehold 2// Private 16// Glencore Freehold 25//6830 Glencore Freehold 14// Private 1// Government 25//6842 Glencore Freehold 15// Private 391// State Forest 7303// Glencore Freehold 26//6830 Glencore Freehold 3// Private 6// Private 387// Private 392// Glencore Freehold 20// Macquarie Freehold 7//

130 Appendix C Page 115 APPENDIX C RISK REGISTER

131 Risk Assessment Detail Title: MOC Environmental Risk Assessment Date: Background: SLR Consulting Australia (SLR) was engaged by Mt Owen to facilitate an Environmental Risk Assessment workshop for Mount Owen Complex. In accordance with the NSW Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (NSW Trade & Investment) ESG3: (MOP) Guidelines (2013) SLR understands that as part of this new MOP, the Mt Owen Complex is required to undertake a risk assessment to identify specific environmental issues associated with activities conducted under relevant mining leases as well as specific measures to be implemented to mitigate those risks. It is understood that it will have a key focus on mine closure and rehabilitation based issues, but will also meet the general requirements of the MOP Guidelines. This was an update to the 2014 MOC Risk Assessment Objective: The purpose of the Risk Assessment is to: To identify risks to the continued operation of the mine through the facilitation of a Risk Assessment at the Mt Owen Complex; To identify risks for all work areas; Identification of risks for all work areas on other tenements and landholdings; Identify the specific nature of the risk/hazard; Identify the existing controls that are in place to manage the risk/hazard; Evaluate the consequence and likelihood of the risk/hazard; Develop a series of controls/actions to reduce all risk/hazard to an acceptable level Scope: Facilitation of a one day environmental risk assessment workshop that identifies environmental risks and issues associated with the mine. The issues identified in the risk assessment will then be covered in the MOP along with information of how those issues will be managed SLR applied the following steps during the Risk Assessment process including: Identification of risks, including what could happen, when and where; Analysis of the risks using a qualitative risk approach (i.e. identifying existing controls, determining specific consequences / likelihoods and then determining the level of risk); Evaluation of the risks to determine the significant issues. The purpose of risk evaluation is to make decisions based on the outcomes of the risk assessment about which risks need control or a mitigation strategy and to assign priorities; and Establishment of controls to mitigate/treat the risks identified as part of the process. Procedure/Method: Standards Australia, September 2009, AS/NZS 31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines; Glencore Coal Assets Australia, Risk Management Standard (CAA FIN STD 0001) Risk Management Handbook for the Mining Industry (MDG1010); and

132 Environmental Risk Assessment: Mount Owen Complex August 2016 Key Element Issue Caused By Consequence Erosion within creek Erosion and Sediment diversions Rainfall events Control Erosion within rehabilitation Insufficient controls areas Mine Subsidence and Settlement Soil Type(s) and Suitability Spontaneous Combustion Flora Geotechnical Failure to achieve the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in the MOP Inadequate volume and/or quality of topsoil to achieve the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in the MOP Spontaneous combustion impedes rehabilitation Failure to achieve the rehabilitation commitments prescribed in the MOP Failure of highwall or slumping of dumps around final void Settlement of tailings dams Inadequate topsoil available Less Than Adequete (LTA) topsoil quality Sacrificing weed infested topsoil Poor recovery of topsoil in dehab areas Additional maintenance required Downstream impacts Financial/legal/reputation Current Controls (are in place ) Annual creek stability monitoring Diversions designed and constructed to engineering standard (Blue Book) Inspections/annual walkover Rehabilitation monitoring Maintenance as required Continued implementation of 5 year remediation plan for creek diversion Settlement of rehabilitation Capping design considers potential settlement landform resulting in ponding on Inspection and maintenance tailings capped surfaces Inability to reach closure and relinquishment of the lease Cost of sourcing ameliorants and alternatives Topsoil mass balance estimate (stockpile quantities generally known and material ahead of operations is estimated) Conservative estimate of in situ topsoil reserves Biosolids have been trialled Selective use of sub-soil has been successfully used Inability to complete rehabilitation Poor management of materials Impact on established Spontaneous Combustion Management Plan with propensity for spontaneous rehabilitation Bayswater North Mining Project will remove legacy site issues combustion Cost of managing spontaneous combustion outbreak Not considering requirements in rehabilitation planning Failure to manage weeds Pest species / grazing pressures (kangaroos, rabbits etc.) Geotechnical failure Inability to reach closure and relinquish lease Inability to reach closure and relinquishment of the lease Additional costs for rework Safety concerns Endemic species used in rehabilitation Annual Weed Plan Biodiversity Management Plan Rehabilitation Monitoring Program Research and development on rehabilitation outcomes Slope Stability Management Plan Geotechnical engineering input into design Risk Control Effectiveness Consequence Category Expected Risk Consequence Risk Likelihood Current Risk Rating Proposed Additional Controls / Actions Satisfactory Environment 2 D L Nil Satisfactory Environment 2 B M Nil Satisfactory Financial Impact 2 B M Nil Satisfactory Environment 2 C M Nil Satisfactory Environment 3 C M Nil Satisfactory Financial Impact 3 E L Nil Task Owner Due Date % Complete Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) Failure to achieve the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in the MOP LTA knowledge of material that may result in AMD Inability to reach closure and relinquishment of the lease Requirement to treat material and water long term Impact on environment Geochemical Assessment did not identify any significant issues as part of the MOCO Project Material has high buffering capacity Operating history suggests no significant issues Coarse rejects and tailings managed in accordance with site procedures Existing management plans in place (e.g. water management plan) Satisfactory Environment 2 E L Nil Mine Subsidence and Settlement Fauna Geology and Geochemistry Failure to achieve the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in the MOP Failure to achieve the rehabilitation commitments in relation to habitat corridors Failure to achieve the rehabilitation outcome prescribed in the MOP Mine subsidence due to Integra Not meeting commitment to corridor Failure to manage pests LTA knowledge of material and its geochemistry Inappropriate placement of materials Settlement of rehabilitation landform to an extent that impacts on drainage Inability to reach closure and relinquish lease Inability to reach closure and relinquishment of the lease Integra SMP Consultation between Integra and Glencore Surcharge of landform in predicted subsidence areas Biodiversity Management Plan MOP Geochemical Assessment did not identify any significant issues Operating history suggests no significant issues Coarse rejects managed in accordance with site procedures Existing management plans in place (e.g. water management plan) Groundwater sampling for heavy metal content Satisfactory Environment 2 E L Nil Satisfactory Environment 2 D L Nil Satisfactory Environment 2 D L Nil

133 Final Landform Design Final Landform Design Other Risks Contaminated Land Air Quality Visual Amenity & Lighting Blasting Noise Bushfire Hazardous Materials and Dangerous Goods Cultural Heritage GHG & Methane Drainage Groundwater Surface Water Steep slopes and dump heights above approved final landform Tailings crust does not consolidate sufficiently to allow capping to progress as planned Contaminated land occurring on the site at closure Rehabilitation not completed in accordance with the MOP schedule Some rehabilitation and closure works at elevated locations Blast impacts LTA slope design or constraints to working room to achieve <14 Inability to reach closure and degrees relinquishment of the lease Dump heights not within approved limits Poor water management with respect to recovering water from the tailings surface Inability to reach closure and LTA management of rise during relinquishment of the lease tailings deposition Delayed capping LTA understanding of material properties with respect to GRAWTS Long term use of the site Spills, leaks etc. Exposed areas Delays in being able to commence rehabilitation Rehabilitation failure Drought Lighting plant visible during bulk earthworks Exposed areas visible Stage 1 highwall will need blasting to achieve final landform Impact on environment Constraint for future land use Financial issue Increased dust above criteria Complaints Complaints Rehabilitation drainage designed to consider shorter interval on contour banks Rehabilitation monitoring Slope and rehabilitation design (micro relief) Surface water management GRAWTS Management Strategy including pipehead floc and Stage 2 of strategy to utilise additional voids Contaminated Sites Register Incident and Spill response process (PIRMP) Bioremediation area (Glendell & Mt Owen) Hydrocarbon Management Plan Air Quality Management Plan Rehabilitation per MOP Air quality & rehabilitation monitoring Current operational procedures Complaints procedure Blast Management Plan Current operational procedures Satisfactory Financial Impact 2 D L Nil Requires Improvement Financial Impact 3 D M Complete detailed assessment of GRAWTS tailings properties and emplacement schedule Satisfactory Environment 3 D M Nil Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Rehabilitation causing noise Noise caused by LTA controls Complaints Noise Management Plan Satisfactory greater than criteria Damage to rehabilitation Regional fire Lightning strike Hazardous materials and dangerous goods remaining Failure to identify HAZMAT at on the site at closure (e.g. closure radiation source) Disturbance of cultural heritage site (Aboriginal or European) Not considered an issue by the group No additional issues identified (see above Geochem, ESC and AMD) No additional issues identified (see above Geochem, ESC and AMD) Unintended interaction with Aboriginal site due to lack of awareness Closure or rehabilitation activities Loss of established rehabilitation Additional costs for rework of rehabilitation Exposed areas (erosion, sediment, dust) Breach of licence Prosecution Loss of culturally significant site Loss of historic site/s Fire trails maintained Water cart/water supply Radiation licences Hazardous Substances Register Demolition standards MOC ACHMP & Historic Heritage Management Plan Ground Disturbance Permits Image & Reputation / Community Image & Reputation / Community Image & Reputation / Community Image & Reputation / Community 2 D L Nil 2 D L Nil 2 D L Nil 2 D L Nil Satisfactory Environment 1 C L Nil Satisfactory Requires Improvement Legal & Compliance Legal & Compliance 2 E L Nil 2 C M Update spatial data system with known archaeological & historic heritage sites SH Q GC End Q4 2016

134 Regional Asset Finance Standard Risk Management Document Number: CAA FIN STD 0001 Status: Approved Version: 2.0 Effective: 26/09/2014 Review: 26/09/2017 Owner: Commercial Manager Group Assurance

135 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management Table of Contents 1 Purpose Scope Risk Management Process Communication and Consultation Type of Risk Assessment Glencore 12 Steps Risk Management Process STEP 1 - Establishing the Context STEP 2 - Selecting the Risk Assessment Type STEP 3 - Identifying the risks, causes and potential consequences STEP 4 - Identifying the existing controls STEP 5 - Determining the Risk Control Effectiveness STEP 6 - Determine the Expected Consequence STEP 7 - Determine the Likelihood STEP 8 - Determine the Current Level (rank and rating) of Risk STEP 9 - Determine the Priority for Risk Treatment and the Authority for Continued Toleration of Risk STEP 10 - Potential Maximum Consequence STEP 11 - Treat the Risks STEP 12 - Monitor and Review Risk Management Plans Management of Change Definitions Accountabilities Document Information Related Documents Reference information Change information Appendix A - Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk management Matrix Appendix B - Considering the Design of Controls when Evaluating the Effectiveness of Risk Treatment Plans Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 2 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

136 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management 1 Purpose To pro-actively manage risks within the business including those associated with change, and to meet requirements of legislation and the Glencore Risk Management Framework. 2 Scope The Risk Management Standard is applicable to Glencore Coal Assets Australia and its operations*. The requirements apply to all personnel, including managers, employees, contractors and visitors, at all levels, unless specifically excluded. Where additional requirements or obligations are identified by an operation they must be included in their Risk Management System and maintained to an equivalent standard. Where a Level 4 Risk Assessment is conducted AND the outcome is to be reported directly to Glencore plc, that assessment will refer to the Glencore Corporate Risk Matrix in document G HSEC POL Glencore Corporate Risk Management Framework. Note The term Glencore Coal Assets Australia and its operations includes all mines, ports, projects and administrative support services operating as part of Glencore Coal Assets Australia. 3 Risk Management Process Management must systematically assess, monitor and review risks. An appropriate risk assessment must be performed for relevant business activities and identify controls critical to the achievement of the overall objectives of the relevant activity. This risk assessment is to be monitored and reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it continually reflects the existing situation with respect to the specific business activity, i.e. the risk profile has been updated if necessary and the existing controls are adequate and effective. Figure 3-1 shows the overall Risk Management Process outlined by ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and guidelines. Glencore Coal Assets Australia has adapted the ISO 31000:2009 process for use throughout its operations/projects. Following is a description of the way in which the methodology will be applied and the criteria against which risks will be evaluated. It provides STEP details of the Risk Management Process which encompasses identification, analysis and evaluation of risks including rating and ranking systems, requirements for risk treatment and levels of authority for continued toleration of an existing risk. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 3 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

137 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management Figure 3-1 Risk Management Process (adapted from ISO 31000) 3.1 Communication and Consultation It is vital to communicate and consult with internal and external stakeholders as appropriate at each stage of the risk management process and concerning the process as a whole. It should involve dialogue with stakeholders with efforts focused on consultation, rather than a one-way flow of information from the decision maker to other stakeholders. Effective internal and external communications are important to ensure that those responsible for implementing risk management, and those with a relevant interest, understand the basis on which decisions are made and why particular actions are required. It is therefore important to develop a Communications and consultation Plan early in the process. A participative approach is useful: a) To help identify risks effectively. b) For bringing different areas of expertise together in analysing risks. c) For different views to be appropriately considered in evaluating risks. d) To gain ownership of the risk, the controls and any further treatment by certain stakeholders. Consultation also facilitates the engagement of stakeholders and the ownership of risk issues by managers. It allows those parties to appreciate the benefits of particular controls and the need to endorse and support a risk treatment plan. Stakeholders are likely to make judgments about risk issues based on their perception of the risk. Since the views of stakeholders can have a significant impact on the decisions made, it is important that their perceptions of risk are identified, recorded and integrated into the decision making process. 3.2 Type of Risk Assessment Risk assessments appropriate to the context and situation must be undertaken including: a) Pre-task risk assessments (Level 1) and where appropriate with the aid of simple tools such as SLAM prior to tasks. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 4 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

138 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management b) Job Safety Analysis (JSA Level 2) prior to conducting more complex tasks, or tasks in an unfamiliar environment and/or process, or where there is a substantial change to work conditions (in the absence of an approved Safe Work Procedure SWP or Safe Work Method Statement - SWMS). c) Formal team-based risk assessments (Levels 3 and 4) for: i. Management of change, including but not limited to changes to business, operations or processes. ii. iii. New equipment and processes. Operations and business activities, e.g. business strategy and budgets. iv. Meeting the requirements for risk assessments, as stated within Glencore policies/procedures e.g. Fatal Hazard Protocols, Catastrophic Hazard Management Plans, Crisis Management Plans or legislation. 3.3 Glencore 12 Steps Risk Management Process The risk management process is set out in the following 12 steps (see Figure 3-2). This process is used for Risk Assessment Type level 3 and 4 (see Table 3-2). Figure 3-2 The 12 Steps Risk Management process STEP 1 - Establishing the Context Establishing the context defines the parameters within which risks will be managed and sets the scope for the balance of the risk management process. The context includes the financial, operational, health, safety, environmental, community, competitive, political (public perceptions and image), social, client, cultural and legal aspects. Criteria against which risk will be evaluated should also be established and the structure of the analysis defined. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 5 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

139 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management The starting point for establishing the context is to clearly define the project and its objectives. It should also document the following: a) Exclusions - any areas that are not being considered in the risk assessment, and b) Assumptions - baseline conditions, existing parameters that are known and not stated within the controls for the risk assessment. There are three elements (External, Internal and The Risk Based Management Process) to establishing the context as described below External Context This defines the environment in which the Division/Department and its Operations operate. The relevant, external stakeholders should be identified, their objectives considered, and their perceptions, values and potential actions taken into account when developing the risk criteria Internal Context Before the risk assessment commences it is necessary to understand the internal environment. Key considerations include: a) Glencore culture. b) Relevant plans, goals and objectives. c) Governance, organisational structure, roles and accountabilities. d) Capabilities in terms of available or required resources, e.g. people, systems, processes, financial. e) Who is involved and affected Context for the Risk Management Process This defines the goals, objectives, responsibilities, scope, methodology and other parameters of the risk management activity. The methods to be used, the resources required and the manner in which the results will be recorded should also be specified. Setting the scope and boundaries of a risk assessment involves: a) Defining the organisational part, project, activity or change and its goals and objectives. b) Specifying the nature of the decisions that have to be made based on the risk assessment results. c) Defining the extent of the change or activity or function in terms of time and location. d) Identifying any scoping studies needed and their scope, objectives and the resources required. e) Defining the depth, breadth and rigour of the risk assessment, including specific inclusions and exclusions Key Elements To make it comprehensive and effective, the risk assessment should be structured according to key elements. These are a set of topics to be considered one by one during risk identification. Each topic is somewhat narrower than the project or activity as a whole, allowing those performing the identification to focus their attention and go into more depth than they would if they tried to deal with broader issues. A well-designed set of key elements will stimulate creativity, and ensure that all the important issues are put before those responsible for identifying risks. The key element structure depends on the objectives and the key issues of concern to Glencore Coal Assets Australia and its stakeholders. Using an inappropriate structure can lead to significant items Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 6 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

140 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management being omitted inadvertently, with potentially serious consequences, as well as making the process inefficient. Table 3-1 provides bases for selection and references for examples of key elements. Table 3-1 Examples for selection of key elements Basis for selecting the elements Major project Life of mine Safety Community Reference for examples of key elements Refer to the Project Management System Portal CAA BD GDL 0006 Approval Gate Guideline Refer to the Technical Services Portal CAA BD PRO 0017 Life of Mine Risk Assessment Protocol Refer to GCAA Framework CAA HSEC FWK 0001 HSEC Management Framework Refer to GCAA Framework CAA HSEC STD 0010 Community and Stakeholder Engagement Standard Defining Risk Criteria Risk criteria define the terms of reference against which the significance of a risk is evaluated, based on the Business or Operations objectives and internal and external contexts. These criteria are identified in the various Tables utilised throughout this Standard STEP 2 - Selecting the Risk Assessment Type Risk assessment types can be classified as levels 1 to 4 depending upon such factors as the potential consequence on the business, the level of expenditure, the familiarity with, or complexity of, the operation and reputational issues. The type of the risk assessment is to be determined in accordance with Table 3-2 below. Table Guideline for selecting risk assessment type and type of facilitation Level Application Type of risk assessment Conducted by 4 Major projects and expenditure requiring Board approval; business plan (budget), life of mine, Broad Brush/Baseline for an operation or project etc, or as mandated by CE/COO. Team based formal risk assessment often involving both quantitative and qualitative analysis An approved second party or third party facilitator with stakeholder participants including risk specialist: e.g. financial, mining, health & safety, geology, legal. 3 New or change to equipment, process or operation, material impacts (financial, human, reputation etc.) on operations, development of hazard management plans. Team based formal risk assessment using a systematic method and qualitative risk analysis Competent facilitator with stakeholder participants. 2 Complex tasks or work in an unfamiliar environment and/or process, change in work conditions. Risk assessment using a documented process. e.g.: Job Safety Analysis (JSA), or Work Permit. Competent person with internal stakeholder participants. 1 Prior to tasks or when the task condition change and may be supported by a simple check sheet Simple risk assessment. e.g.: pre-task risk assessment (e.g. SLAM). All employees Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 7 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

141 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management The diagram in Figure 3-3 can also be used as a guide to distinguish between the need to undertake a level 3-4 risk assessment as distinct from a level 1 to 2 risk assessment. Figure 3-3 Risk assessment level determination STEP 3 - Identifying the risks, causes and potential consequences The aim of this step is to generate a comprehensive list of events or circumstances that might have an impact on the achievement of the objectives identified in STEP 1. It involves the identification of what, where and when events that might create, enhance, prevent, degrade, accelerate or delay the business achieving their objectives. Having identified what might happen, it is necessary to consider possible causes and understand the consequences if the event happens. Identification should also consider knock-on/indirect effects of particular consequences. All significant causes and consequences should be considered. Suitably competent and experienced people must be utilised to systematically identify all the risks. Techniques for the identification process include Brainstorming, SWIFT, WRAC, BOWTIE ANALYSIS, HAZOP, FMEA, Fault Tree Analysis, and the like. Comprehensive identification using a well-structured systematic process is critical, because risks not identified at this stage are excluded from further analysis and treatment. Identification should include risks whether or not they are under the control of the operation STEP 4 - Identifying the existing controls Having considered the range of potential causes and consequences of a risk event in STEP 3, identify the existing controls and their perceived adequacy and effectiveness in modifying consequences and the probability of those events. Controls should be aligned to causes and/or consequences in order to identify potential gaps in controls. Refer to STEP 11 Hierarchy of Controls (Figure 3-4) for more information. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 8 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

142 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management STEP 5 - Determining the Risk Control Effectiveness Risk Control Effectiveness (RCE) is a relative assessment of the actual level of control that is currently present and effective compared with what is reasonably achievable for that particular risk. It is a measure of the completeness, relevance and efficiency of those current risk controls to prevent the risk occurring or mitigate the consequences. RCE is an indicator as to whether the existing controls are doing all that they could or should to manage the risk issue. Where the RCE is less than satisfactory a risk treatment plan is required to address the control deficiency. An assessment must be made of the relative effectiveness of the controls as Table 3-3 below. Table Risk Control Effectiveness (RCE) RCE Poor or no existing controls Require improvement Guide Significant control gaps or no credible control; Either controls do not treat root causes, are non-existent or, if they exist, they are ineffective; Management has no confidence that any degree of control is being achieved due to poor control design; Very limited or no operational effectiveness. Most controls are designed correctly and are in place and effective; Controls may only treat some of the root causes of the risk, and/or are not currently effective and/or there may be an over-reliance on reactive controls; Management has doubts about operational effectiveness and reliability; More work is required to improve operating effectiveness. Satisfactory Controls are well designed and appropriate for the risk; Controls are largely preventative and address the root causes; Management believes that they are effective and reliable at all times; Nothing more to be done except review and monitor the existing controls. Controls that must be effective at all times to preserve human life, licence to operate, access to the market and other aspects essential to the business are referred to as critical controls. It is important that control monitoring by management review and assurance is focussed on those risks which, if the controls are absent or have failed, the operations would be exposed to high and unacceptable consequences (i.e. critical controls). In those cases assurance activity, such as audit or independent specialist review, provides assurance that critical controls are both adequate and effective STEP 6 - Determine the Expected Consequence Having identified the risks, their causes and potential consequences, the existing controls and their adequacy and effectiveness in controlling the risk, determine the expected consequence by referring to the Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk Matrix shown in Appendix A - Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk management Matrix. Note Only the approved GCAA Risk Matrix, shown in Appendix A, is to be used to determine consequence and likelihood. No other risk matrix is to be used. Where the expected consequence is a financial or an investment return impact, consideration should be given to the total financial cost, i.e.: EBIT or NPV lost, legal liability or compensation payments made and any opportunity costs. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 9 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

143 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management The range of expected consequences for a particular risk should be considered and, in each case, the consequence rating for the expected level should be selected. The risk rating should be based on the worst of these expected consequences STEP 7 - Determine the Likelihood A likelihood rating should be determined on the basis of the probability of the occurrence of the expected consequence according to the Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk Matrix, shown in Appendix A - Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk management Matrix STEP 8 - Determine the Current Level (rank and rating) of Risk Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk Matrix must be used to determine the relative level (rank and rate) of the risk by taking the combination of Expected Consequence and its Likelihood of occurrence STEP 9 - Determine the Priority for Risk Treatment and the Authority for Continued Toleration of Risk Utilising the results from STEP 8 determine where the priority for treatment and authority for continued toleration of this level of current risk lies. Once this is understood, and where necessary, take action to implement the required Risk Treatment Plans (STEP 11) according to the timing in Table 3-4 below. Current risk rank Table Priority for risk treatment authority for continued toleration of risk (applicable for risk assessment level 3 and 4) Action Timing for authority Authority for continued toleration of current level of risk 23 to 25 The activity must be stopped immediately until action to reduce the level of risk to less than 23 is undertaken or authority to continue is received. Immediately to within 24 hours. CE/COO Notification to CE prior to granting of authority to continue 17 to 22 The activity must be stopped immediately until action to reduce the level of risk to less than 17 is under taken or authority to continue is received. The activity must be stopped immediately until action to reduce the level of risk to less than 17 is under taken or authority to continue is received. Directors/COO Notification to COO prior to granting of authority to continue 10 to 16 Take action to reduce the level of risk to less than 10 or authority to continue is received. Within 1 month. General Managers / Operations Managers / Project Managers 7 to 9 Take action to reduce the level of risk to less than 7 or authority to continue is received. 1 to 6 Tolerable risk unless circumstances change Within 1 month. Ongoing control as part of a management system. Superintendents/ Managers / Project Team N/A Where authority for continued toleration of level of risk is identified (a higher level of approval is required), risk toleration approval is to be completed. Complete GCAA form CAA FIN FRM 0004 Risk Toleration Approval. Refer to GCAA procedure CAA FIN PRO 0001 Risk Toleration Approval Process for additional details. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 10 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

144 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management STEP 10 - Potential Maximum Consequence Having identified a risk, its causes and potential range of consequences in STEP 3, an individual risk should be assessed for its Potential Maximum Consequence (PMC). PMC is the plausible worst case impact to Glencore Coal Assets Australia and its operations arising from a risk where all active risk controls, including insurance and hedging contracts, are assumed to be ineffective. It does not consider the likelihood of the event occurring. PMC may not be the absolute worst case conceivable. PMC will be identified as the consequence level in the risk being considered taken from the Consequence Criteria provided in Appendix A - Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk management Matrix. PMC will be used as the primary measure on which to focus and plan assurance activities including further risk analysis, Internal Audit and independent specialist reviews STEP 11 - Treat the Risks The primary consideration here is whether the risk can be further treated in a way that is reasonable and cost effective. In general this involves considering: a) Whether the risk is already at a level that is reasonably achievable or practicable. b) Whether it would be cost-effective to further treat the risk. c) The Department/Division's willingness to tolerate risks of that type. It will usually not be cost-effective or even desirable to implement all possible risk treatments. It is, however, necessary to prioritise and implement the most appropriate combination of risk treatments. A Treatment Plan or a combination of Actions are selected by considering factors such as costs and benefits, timeframes for implementation, effectiveness, available technology and other criteria of relevance to Glencore Coal Assets Australia. Factors such as legal, social, political and economic considerations may need to be taken into account. Development of effective risk treatment requires consideration of three pieces of information that come from the risk identification and analysis steps: a) The causes particularly the root causes. b) The existing controls and the assessment of their effectiveness. c) The relative importance of consequences or likelihood to the risk rating. Risk treatment options are to be resolved into a number of tasks and these will be allocated to named individuals (task owners) who are accountable for their completion. These tasks are recorded in Risk Treatment Plans which will contain: a) The tasks to be completed and the risks they address. b) Who has responsibility for implementation of certain tasks. c) The timetable for implementation. d) Details of the mechanism for and frequency of review of the status of the treatment plan Treatment Plan Options The starting point for identifying options is often a review of existing guides for treating that particular type of risk. For example, for many safety, environmental and community risks there are requirements prescribed in relevant legislation, standards, codes and other external requirements. For many risks, such guides don t exist and treatment options will need to be developed from first principles in order to be effective. One treatment option available is to avoid the risk entirely i.e. to eliminate it by deciding not to proceed with an activity. This will remove possibilities of harm but will also often eliminate the opportunity. More usually risk treatment involves changing either the likelihood or the consequences of the risk, or both. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 11 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

145 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management Selecting the most appropriate treatment option will involve comparing the cost of implementing each option against the benefits derived from it. Generally the cost of managing risk needs to be commensurate with the benefits obtained. Decisions must take into account the need to consider carefully, rare but severe risks that may warrant risk treatment actions that are not justifiable on strictly economic grounds. Legal, reputation and community requirements may override simple financial cost benefit analysis and in these cases a qualitative Cost Benefit Analysis should be used Hierarchy of Treatments Risk treatment options are not necessarily mutually exclusive or appropriate in all circumstances. The options can include the following: a) Avoid the risk by deciding not to start or continue with the activity that gives rise to the risk. b) Taking or increasing the risk in order to pursue an opportunity. c) Removing the risk source. d) Changing the likelihood. e) Changing the consequences. f) Sharing the risk with another party or parties. g) Retaining the risk by informed decision. Treatment Plans should aim to create controls that prevent or eliminate the cause and/or mitigate the consequences. Controls that eliminate the risk are the most effective. When performing this part of the analysis, certain controls should be identified utilizing the hierarchy of controls presented in Figure 3-4 below Hierarchy of Controls. For recording purposes a control may be identified as per this Hierarchy and its criticality to assist with determining effectiveness of controls. Figure 3-4 Hierarchy of control The Control Design Effectiveness Method (CDEM), shown in Appendix B - Considering the Design of Controls when Evaluating the Effectiveness of Risk Treatment Plans, may be used to further analyse risk treatment plans and resulting controls for certain control types. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 12 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

146 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management STEP 12 - Monitor and Review Assurance and Monitoring To provide for an effective risk management process, it is essential that ongoing monitoring and review of the risk management plan occurs. Changing global and market conditions and significant changes to processes can affect the likelihood and consequence of risks resulting in regular reviews of existing controls and updates to risks. In addition lessons learnt from the risk management process need to be incorporated into existing risk management plans. This will be provided by a planned schedule of: a) Monitoring & reviewing risks, e.g. within a regular management team meeting. b) Assuring controls, e.g. Critical Control assurance processes. c) Learning lessons and communicating relevant information, e.g. sharing of Glencore and industry fatality or other serious event investigation outcomes. Comprehensive annual risk reviews should form part of the Budget and Planning process, Life of Mine Planning and individual Project phases. They are required in response to any significant planned or unplanned change. As a result, risk management becomes dynamic and changes as the organisation changes. Systems to monitor and review risks require careful selection, targeting and planning. They should target high risks and credible failure of treatment strategies that would result in high or frequent consequences. Monitoring and review practices will be of three types: a) Continuous monitoring through routinely measuring or checking particular parameters to provide ongoing assurance that risk treatments are effective. b) Control self-assessment involving regular review of risks and their treatments to ensure that new risks have not arisen and treatment strategies are effective and appropriate. c) Auditing utilising both internal and external audit staff. Audits should, as much as practical, test systems rather than conditions, be selective in scope and lower in frequency than the first two measures. Generally the audit process will provide assurance that the systems and processes are working however findings of audits may indicate systemic weakness and therefore the response should focus on remedying the systemic issues, not just the symptoms Performance Indicators Performance indicators are a measure of the level of performance of a given item or activity. They need to be measurable and appropriate to Glencore Coal Assets Australia and hold individuals accountable while forming the basis for continuous improvement. They should reflect a range of key objectives defined when the context is established at the start of the risk management process and apply greatest effort and focus to: a) The highest risks. b) The most critical treatments or other processes. c) Those treatments or processes with the greatest potential for improvements in efficiency. Some examples of useful risk management performance indicators are: a) Progress towards a specific objective. b) The extent to which recommendations for risk treatment are implemented Post-event Analysis Reviews of causes of successes, failures and near misses are important for every area of Glencore Coal Assets Australia to gain insight into the risk management process and how it can be improved. The lessons learnt from these reviews should be recorded and actions taken to ensure that the causes are treated such that subsequent failures are prevented and successes are repeated. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 13 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

147 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management When analysing successes and failures the following questions need answers: a) Was the risk involved previously identified and analysed? b) Were the actual causes identified in risk identification process? c) Were the risks and controls rated and assessed correctly? d) Did the controls operate as intended? e) Were the treatment plans effective? f) If not, where could improvements be made? g) Were the monitoring and review processes effective? h) How could the risk management process in general be improved? i) Who needs to know about these learning s and should they be disseminated to ensure learning s are most effective? j) What should be done to ensure that failure events are not repeated but that successes are? Recording and Reporting The outputs of the risk management process should be recorded to: a) Preserve the results of the discussions, agreements analyses and conclusions. b) Provide the basis for the allocation and tracking of further risk treatment. c) Provide the basis for control assurance. d) Satisfy corporate governance requirements. The following information for each risk identified will be kept in a risk register: a) A description of the risk. b) The name of the risk owner. c) The causes; the nature and extent of the potential consequences associated with the risk, normally in terms of the objectives affected. d) The existing controls. e) The name(s) of the control owner(s). f) The Risk Control Effectiveness. g) The current risk rating taking account of existing controls. h) The Potential Maximum Consequence. i) Additional treatment actions required to further control risk to an acceptable level, task owner and due date. To capture the results of the risk assessment workshop facilitators can use either CURA, or an appropriate MS Excel spreadsheet risk register or MS Word table. Ultimately, all risk information for risk assessment level 4 will be stored in the Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk Register. Governance reporting of all significant risks is required regularly: a) Risk Management Plan and Progress. b) Outstanding Risk Treatment Plans. c) Performance against specified performance measures. d) Risk Assurance Profile. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 14 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

148 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management e) Significant changes to risks and details of tasks completed and outstanding since the last report. Reports are to be forwarded as requested from the Internal Audit or Health, Safety, Environment and Community Departments. 3.4 Risk Management Plans Each operation must develop, implement and maintain a suitable Risk Management Plan. A Risk Management Plan must include: a) Specific actions, tasks and measures to be adopted that will further risk management within the business, operation or project concerned. b) A timetable for implementation. c) Details of the mechanism for and frequency of review of the status of the Risk Management Plan. d) Risk management database can be used for this purpose. 3.5 Management of Change Management of change is addressed as part of the Health, Safety, Environment and Community Standard Management System, refer to GCAA Standard CAA HSEC STD 0012 Change. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 15 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

149 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management 4 Definitions Terms/abbreviations ALARA ALARP Assurance Broad Brush Risk Assessment (BBRA) Bowtie Analysis Catastrophic hazard Cause Consequence Control Control owner Control Self-Assessment Cost Cost Benefit Analysis Critical control Event Expected Consequence Fatal Hazard FMEA Hazard HAZOP Likelihood Material impact Monitor Potential Maximum Consequence (PMC) Residual risk Risk Risk analysis Risk assessment As Low As Reasonably Achievable. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. As Low As Reasonably Practicable. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. HAZard and OPerability study. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Definitions Significant change with 10% effect on the financial impact or investment return or a consequence rating of 4 or above according to the Glencore Corporate Risk Management Matrix. Where the effect of the significant change is between 5% and 10% of the financial impact or investment return, a subjective assessment of the significant change should be made to determine if it is a material impact. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. The total plausible maximum impact on a Department/Division or its operations/ projects arising from a risk without regard to controls. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 16 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

150 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management RCE Terms/abbreviations Risk criteria Risk evaluation Risk identification Risk management Risk management database Risk Management Plan Risk owner Risk register Risk treatment Risk Treatment Plan Root cause Root cause analysis Significant decision, change or event SLAM SWIFT Task owner WRAC Risk Control Effectiveness Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Definitions The database operated by the Division/Department that holds risk management information including risk registers, risk treatment plans and risk management plans. The scheme that specifies the approach, the management components and resources to be applied to satisfy the requirements of G HSEC POL Glencore Corporate Risk Management Framework Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Stop, Look, Assess, Manage Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Structured What-IF. A form of advanced facilitated risk identification study. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Refer to HSEC Definitions and Terms. Workplace Risk Assessment and Control Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 17 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

151 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management 5 Accountabilities Table 5-1 Accountabilities Role Chief Operating Officer Directors All General Managers Group Risk Champion Operation Risk Champion Accountabilities for this document Lead the development of Risk Management plans to align with the Glencore Risk Management Framework; Provide strategic leadership and facilitation of optimal outcomes in achievement of objectives for business planning processes through effective risk management; Monitor and evaluate risk reporting on the implementation of the Risk Management Standard and governance; Resource the business to meet the Risk Management Plan; and Report to the Chief Executive, HSEC and the Internal Audit Committees on key strategic risks. Implement and maintain the Risk Management Standard within their various areas of responsibility; Monitor the effectiveness of the Risk/Control Management and treatment plans to see accurate and effective reporting of risk issues; and Report to the COO on key risk issues. Implement and maintain the Risk Management Standard within their various areas of responsibility; Monitor the effectiveness of the Risk/Control Management and treatment plans to see accurate and effective reporting of risk issues; and Report to the COO on key risk issues. Assist with development, implementation and maintenance of a risk management system which promotes timely identification, proper understanding and effective management of significant risks and accurate and meaningful reporting of Risk/control Management status within the business; Co-ordination of risk management related reporting to the Leadership Team, and Audit Committee; Facilitation of risk assessment workshops; Guiding management in driving and embedding risk management practices; Facilitating relevant training in risk management processes and the use of related tools; Engaging with operation/project risk champions to ensure continual progress on the Risk Management Plan and advise on issues as and when required Assist with development, implementation and maintenance of a project risk management system which promotes timely identification, proper understanding and effective management of significant risks and accurate and meaningful reporting of Risk/control management status within the global coal business; Facilitation of risk assessment workshops; Assisting Group Risk Champion in driving and embedding project risk management practices; and Facilitating relevant training in project risk management processes and the use of related tools. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 18 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

152 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management 6 Document Information Relevant legislation, standards and other reference information must be regularly reviewed and monitored for updates and should be included in the site management system. Related documents and reference information in this section provides the linkage and source to develop and maintain site compliance information. 6.1 Related Documents Related documents, listed in Table 6-1 below, are internal documents directly related to or referenced from this document. Number G HSEC POL 0001 CAA HSEC STD 0010 CAA HSEC STD 0012 CAA BD GDL 0006 CAA HSEC REG 0001 CAA BD PRO 0017 CAA FIN PRO 0001 CAA FIN FRM 0004 TEMPLATES TEMPLATES Title Glencore Corporate Risk Management Framework Community and Stakeholder Engagement Standard Change Approval Gate Guideline HSEC Definitions and Terms Life of Mine Risk Assessment Protocol Risk Toleration Approval Procedure Risk Toleration Approval Form Risk Assessment Template-excel Risk Assessment Report (MDG1010 compliant) Template-word Table 6-1 Related documents 6.2 Reference information Reference information, listed in Table 6-2 below, is information that is directly related to the development of this document or referenced from within this document. Reference Title ISO 31000: 2009 Risk Management Principles and guidelines. Table 6-2 Reference information Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 19 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

153 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management 6.3 Change information Full details of the document history are recorded in the document control register, by version. A summary of the current change is provided in Table 6-3 below. Version Date Change Details August 2014 Implementation of Glencore Corporate Risk Management Framework 2.0 Added reference for Approval Gate Guidelines. Moved figure 3-2 to before STEP 1. Changed reference to Health, Safety, Environment and Community from Sustainability. Referred definitions to CAA HSEC REG 0001 HSEC Definitions and Terms Table 6-3 Change information Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 20 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

154 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management Appendix A - Glencore Coal Assets Australia Risk management Matrix GLENCORE COAL ASSETS AUSTRALIA RISK MATRIX CONSEQUENCE [potential foreseeable outcome of the event] LIKELIHOOD [of the event occurring with that consequence] Basis of Rating E - Rare D - Unlikely C - Possible B - Likely A Almost Certain Health & Safety Environment Financial Impact Image & Reputation / Community Legal & Compliance LIFETIME OR PROJECT OR TRIAL OR FIXED TIME PERIOD OR NEW PROCESS / PLANT / R&D Unlikely to occur during a lifetime OR Very unlikely to occur OR No known occurrences in broader worldwide industry Could occur about once during a lifetime OR More likely NOT to occur than to occur OR Has occurred at least once in broader worldwide industry Could occur more than once during a lifetime OR As likely to occur as not to occur OR Has occurred at least once in the mining / commodities trading industries May occur about once per year OR More likely to occur than not occur OR Has occurred at least once within Glencore May occur several times per year OR Expected to occur OR Has occurred several times within Glencore 5 Catastrophic Multiple fatalities Multiple cases of permanent total disability / health effects Environmental damage or effect (permanent; >10 years) Requires major remediation >$600M investment return >$100M operating profit >$20M property damage Negative media coverage at international level Loss of multiple major customers or large proportion of sales contracts Loss of community support Major litigation / prosecution at Glencore corporate level Nationalisation / loss of licence to operate 5 Catastrophic 15 (M) 19 (H) 22 (H) 24 (H) 25 (H) Significant negative impact on the share price 4 Major Fatality or permanent incapacity / health effects Long-term (2 to 10 years) impact Requires significant remediation $60-600M investment return $20-100M operating profit $2-20M property damage Negative media coverage at national level Scrutiny from government and NGOs Complaints from multiple final customers Loss of major customer Loss of community support Negative impact on share price Major litigation / prosecution at Division level 4 Major 10 (M) 14 (M) 18 (H) 21 (H) 23 (H) 3 Moderate Lost time / disabling injury / occupational health effects / multiple medical treatments Medium-term (<2 years) impact Requires moderate remediation $6-60M investment return $2-20M operating profit $200K-2M property damage Negative media coverage at local / regional level over more than one day Complaint from a final customer Off-spec product Community complaint resulting in social issue Major litigation / prosecution at Operation level 3 Moderate 6 (L) 9 (M) 13 (M) 17 (H) 20 (H) 2 Minor Medical Treatment Injury (MTI) / occupational health effects Restricted Work Injury (RWI) Short-term impact Requires minor remediation $600K-6M investment return $200K-2M operating profit $10-200K property damage Complaint received from stakeholder or community Negative local media coverage Regulation breaches resulting in fine or litigation 2 Minor 3 (L) 5 (L) 8 (M) 12 (M) 16 (M) 1 Negligible First Aid Injury (FAI) / illness No lasting environmental damage or effect Requires minor or no remediation <$600K investment return <$200K operating profit <$10K property damage Negligible media coverage Regulation breaches without fine or litigation 1 Negligible 1 (L) 2 (L) 4 (L) 7 (M) 11 (M) Consequence Category Consequence Type Ownership Action Cat. 5 Catastrophic Hazard Divisional / Functional / Operational / Asset Leadership Quantitative or semi-quantitative risk assessment required. Capital expenditure will be justified to achieve ALARP ('As Low As Reasonably Practicable'). Catastrophic Hazard Management Plans (CHMP) must be implemented where practical, Crisis Management Plans (CMP) tested and Catastrophic Event Recovery Plans (CERP) developed. Cat. 4 (Health & Safety consequence) Fatal Hazard Divisional / Functional / Operational / Asset Leadership Glencore SafeWork Fatal Hazard Protocols or appropriate management plans must be applied. Capital expenditure will be justified to achieve ALARP. Risk Rank Risk Rating Ownership Action 17 to 25 High Risk 7 to 16 Medium Risk 1 to 6 Low Risk Divisional / Functional / Operational / Asset Leadership Operational / Asset Leadership Operational / Asset Leadership Install additional HARD and SOFT controls to achieve ALARP. Capital expenditure will be justified to achieve ALARP. install additional HARD and SOFT controls if necessary to achieve ALARP. Capital expenditure may be justified. Install additional controls if necessary to achieve ALARP. Capital expenditure is not usually justified. Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26 September /09/2017 Page 21 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

155 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management Appendix B - Considering the Design of Controls when Evaluating the Effectiveness of Risk Treatment Plans When implementing the controls as part of Risk Treatment Plans either the controls are effective or they can reduce the level of risk to ALARP or ALARA. In addition, a cost benefit analysis is performed as the organisation may be better served by discontinuing the action. Using the Control Design Effectiveness Method (CDEM) the effectiveness of a proposed control is determined by the following steps: 1. Assess the quality of the control by estimating the overall impact of the control: i. A: % of the time; ii. iii. Against iv. B: 50-80% of the time; C: 30-50% of the time; or D: less than 30% of the time v. Availability; vi. vii. Reliability; and Effectiveness. The overall impact (average score) represents the overall quality of the safety control as shown in Figure B1 below: Figure B1 Control design effectiveness calculation Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26 September /09/2017 Page 22 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

156 Glencore Coal Assets Australia Standard Risk Management 2. Identify the type of control based on the hierarchy of controls, shown in Figure 3-4- Hierarchy of Control, and plot the overall quality from STEP 1 against the type of safety control giving a colour based ranking as shown in Figure B2 below. 3. The more green controls the better. The absence of green controls means that there is a need to review the controls that are proposed and seek to improve them by changing the type of control or its effectiveness. Figure B2 Control design effectiveness matrix Number: Owner: CAA FIN STD 0001 Commercial Manager Group Assurance Status: Version: Approved 2.0 Effective: Review: 26/09/ /09/2017 Page 23 of 23 Uncontrolled unless viewed on the intranet

157 Appendix D Page 116 APPENDIX D TAILINGS MANAGEMENT PLAN

158 Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Mt Owen Complex PO Box 320 SINGLETON, NSW 2330 Version: v0.1

159 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page i Tailings Management Plan PREPARED BY: ABN Kings Road New Lambton NSW 2305 Australia (PO Box 447 New Lambton NSW 2305 Australia) T: F: newcastleau@slrconsulting.com This report has been prepared by with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the timescale and resources allocated to it by agreement with the Client. Information reported herein is based on the interpretation of data collected, which has been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid. This report is for the exclusive use of Mt Owen Complex. No warranties or guarantees are expressed or should be inferred by any third parties. This report may not be relied upon by other parties without written consent from SLR. SLR disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the work. DOCUMENT CONTROL Reference Date Prepared Checked Authorised Draft 13 December 2016 Tracey Ball Chris Jones Chris Jones Submission 24 January 2017 Chris Jones Chris Jones Chris Jones

160 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page ii Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION Tailings Areas Tailings Pipeline Project and Modification 2 2 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Development Consent Requirements Glencore Standards 6 3 TAILINGS MANAGEMENT DURING OPERATIONS MOC Tailings Characteristics Pumping Water Management Final tailings layer (last 5m) Monitoring of Tailings Deposition Inspection 8 4 PROPOSED REHABILITATION AND CAPPING Settlement of Rehabilitated Tailings Pits Capping Materials Capping Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Objective Rehabilitation Methods 10 5 TAILINGS MANAGEMENT CRITERIA 11 6 REFERENCES 14 TABLES Table 1 Status of Tailings Emplacements for the MOC 1 Table 2 Development Consent Requirements around Tailings Management 4 Table 3 Tailings Management Criteria for Tailings Areas 12 FIGURES Figure 1 Greater Ravensworth Tailings Management Infrastructure 3

161 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 1 1 INTRODUCTION This Tailings Management Plan includes details regarding the management, decommissioning and rehabilitation of tailings areas while the Mount Owen Complex (MOC) operates. This Plan outlines the environmental management of the MOC tailings areas and in particular focuses on rehabilitation aspects. It is not an engineering and design document rather it should be used as a guide for decommissioning and rehabilitating tailings areas within the MOC. This document has been prepared to meet Schedule 3, Condition 45 (d) of the Development Consent (SSD-5850). 1.1 Tailings Areas The active tailings emplacement area at the MOC as of the end of the 2016 is West Pit, which is located in a former open cut void. Tailings were previously pumped to the ERP, RW, TP1, Stage 1 and Stage 2 tailings dams however these emplacement areas have been capped, are being capped or prepared for capping and rehabilitation The status of decommissioning, capping and rehabilitation during of the tailings emplacements at the MOC is provided in Table 1 below. Capping timing of tailings dams is dependent on geotechnical testing of tailings crust to enable safe capping methodology to be developed. Table 1 Status of Tailings Emplacements for the MOC Tailings Dam Current Status Decommissioning Status Capping Status Stage 1 Capped, final landform works underway Decommissioned in 2004 Capped 2013 Stage 2 Tailings Dam Inactive / Partially Rehabilitated Decommissioned in 2015 Commenced 2015 Planned Completion 2018 TP1 Inactive Decommissioned in 2015 Commenced 2016 Planned Completion 2019 RW Pit Void Inactive Decommissioned in 2015 To be Commenced 2017 Planned Completion 2018 Eastern Rail Pit Inactive Decommissioned in 2015 To be Commenced 2018 Planned Completion 2020 West Pit Active End of Mine Life End of Mine Life

162 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page Tailings Pipeline Project and Modification In February 2016, a modification of the Ravensworth East Mine Development Consent (DA MOD 6) was approved to Ravensworth Operations Pty Limited, Liddell Coal Operations Pty Limited and Mount Owen Pty Limited to under section 75W of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to permit the receival and emplacement of piped tailings from Ravensworth Operations and Liddell Coal Operations Coal Handling and Processing Plant (CHPP) within the West Pit void at Ravensworth East. This linked system of tailings infrastructure and storage, known as the GRAWTS, forms part of the approved modification which specifically provides for: Construction of approximately 11 kilometre tailings pipeline network connecting both the Ravensworth CHPP and Liddell CHPP to the West Pit Void at Ravensworth East; and Construction of a Flocculant Plant within the vicinity of the West Pit Void at Ravensworth East, to allow for flocculants to be mixed with tailings immediately prior to deposition in the emplacement area, a process known as secondary flocculation; The staged emplacement of tailings generated from Ravensworth Operations (approximately 12.5 million cubic metres of wet tailings between approximately 2017 and 2021) and Liddell Coal Operations (approximately 2 million cubic metres wet tailings between approximately 2018 and 2020) within the West Pit at Ravensworth East; and Interim utilisation of the Narama Void as a central water storage facility for the Greater Ravensworth Area prior to it being backfilled as per the existing approved Ravensworth Operations final landform. This Modification will not increase the overall amount of tailings material emplaced in the West Pit Void at Ravensworth East, which will in turn not alter the final landform currently approved. With the approval of the MOCO project Mount Owen surrendered the existing Ravensworth East development consent with all ongoing operations to be undertaken in accordance with a single consolidated development consent for the Project. With the incorporation of the approved GRAWTS emplacement as part of the MOCO, tailings from the Mount Owen CHPP will be emplaced into the southern portion of West Pit. The Greater Ravensworth Tailings Management Infrastructure, including tailings pipeline network is depicted in Figure 1 below.

163 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 3 Figure 1: Development Layout Greater Ravensworth tailings management infrastructure Figure 1 Greater Ravensworth Tailings Management Infrastructure

164 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 4 2 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS 2.1 Development Consent Requirements Regulatory requirements for tailings management are listed below in Table 2. Table 2 Development Consent Requirements around Tailings Management Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Mount Owen and Ravensworth East - SSD-5850 Schedule 3, Condition 25 Table 8 Water Management Performance Measures Life of mine Section 3.3 Feature Performance Measure Tailings storages Overburden emplacements Design and maintain tailings storage areas to encapsulate and prevent the movement of tailings seepage/leachate offsite Design, install and maintain emplacements to encapsulate and prevent migration of tailings, acid forming and potentially acid forming materials, and saline and sodic material Schedule 3, Condition 26 (c) (iv) Water Management Plan (c) In addition to the standard requirements for management plans (see condition 3 of Schedule 5), this plan must include a: (iv) Emplacement of tailings, acid forming and potentially acid forming materials, and saline and sodic materials. Life of mine Will be addressed in Water Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 26 (c) (v) Groundwater Management Plan, that includes (v) detailed plans, design objectives and performance criteria, for: emplacement of tailings, acid forming and potentially acid forming materials, and saline and sodic materials; Life of mine Will be addressed in the Groundwater Management Plan Schedule 3, Condition 45 (d) Glendell - DA 80/952 include a detailed Tailings Management Plan for the development; Life of mine This Plan

165 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 5 Condition Requirement Timing Section Addressed Statement of Commitments - Mount Owen and Ravenswood East Statement of Commitments - Glendell All rejects and tailings produced from the processing of coal produced by the proposed Glendell Mine operations will be incorporated into the Mt Owen Complex life of mine rejects sand tailings management strategy. Life of mine Section 1.1

166 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page Glencore Standards The following standards provide guidance on the management of tailings at Glencore coal sites, including the MOC: Annual Rehabilitation and Land Management Planning Guideline Addresses the management of tailings classified as legacy sites (GCAA ); Completion Criteria and Rehabilitation (GCAA ) Includes tailings as a rehabilitation indicator; Rehabilitation Planning and Management (GCAA ) Rehabilitation planning including capping of tailings; Mine Closure Planning (GCAA ) - Consideration of tailings as part of mine closure; Tailings Storage Management (GCAA ) Management of the life cycle of tailings storage facility s (TSFs) from conception through to closure such that safety, environmental and financial risks are managed appropriately; and In addition, to these standards other documentation used to prepare this Tailings Management Plan includes: ATC Williams (2014) - Tailings Management Concept to Closure DFAT (2016) recently released a Leading Practice Sustainable Development handbook on Tailings Management.

167 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 7 3 TAILINGS MANAGEMENT DURING OPERATIONS Tailings are managed in accordance with site procedures (SLR 2016). A summary of some of these procedures are provided below. 3.1 MOC Tailings Characteristics The ph of the tailings material at the MOC is approximately 6.3. Testing of the water existing voids and piezometers adjacent to existing TSFs indicates that it has a ph that ranges from 6.8 to 8.0. As all water associated with the emplacement areas will be contained on site, there are no adverse impacts expected The tailings from the Mount Owen CHPP have been subject to geochemistry analysis which has found that they are largely non-acid forming and have excess acid neutralising capacity. 3.2 Pumping Tailings will be pumped to the West Pit and then discharged into the void. Multiple discharge points into the TSF will be used so that the beaching effect from each discharge point move the tailings water in the direction of the decant point (Glencore 2016). Flowmeters should be installed along pipelines to monitor: The amount of tailings and return water that has been pumped to and (if required) from the TSF respectively; and The pressure / flow rate differential between the thickener tank and the discharge point such that any loss of flow can be detected and investigated for a breach of the pipeline (Glencore 2016). 3.3 Water Management Tailings storage areas will be designed and maintained to encapsulate and prevent the movement of tailings seepage/leachate offsite. Tailings will be placed in a manner that facilitates water run-off and dewatering of the material, which leads to improved consolidation. Discharge spigots will also be located so that surface water is pushed to the decant pump allowing the surface of the tailings to be dewatered and to encourage evaporative drying, and hence shear strength development of the tailings surface, in preparation for future rehabilitation of the storage. During operation, a target of less than 50% of the tailings surface covered by water will be maintained. A decant pump will be located in the void. As the void fills, the decant pump will be moved. Water decanted from the tailings facility is then returned to the mine water system for reuse in site operations. 3.4 Final tailings layer (last 5m) The last 5m of tailings deposition is critical to the effectiveness of the closure criteria being met (Glencore 2016). If the rate of rise and density of tailings is not managed well in this last 5m of deposition then the surface will have weak strength and will require longer drying times and may ultimately mean higher costs of capping due to the lower surface strength requiring smaller equipment and potentially the use of additional materials (i.e. geofabric) (Glencore 2016).

168 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 8 The actual beaching and deposition strategy in the final tailings layer is also critical to the final landform surface (Glencore 2016). Discharge points should be reviewed at this point to check that the location of the tailings beach(s) conform to the final landform design (Glencore 2016). The MOC must be aware that in some cases increasing the density of tailings in the final capping layers could cause displacement of weaker tailings beneath (Glencore 2016). 3.5 Monitoring of Tailings Deposition During the emplacement of tailings in the West Pit, monitoring of the tailings deposit should be undertaken on a routine basis to determine if design requirements are being achieved (ATC 2014; Glencore 2016). In the context of management to facilitate future closure of the tailings facility, tailings density is the critical characteristic that requires monitoring (ATC 2014). To allow an accurate estimate to be undertaken accurate records of the tailings production rate) should be kept during the period of deposition, and surveys of the facility undertaken on a routine basis (ATC 2014). This will enable the rate of rise to be monitored, and the tailings density to be calculated (ATC 2014). 3.6 Inspection The emplacement of tailings will be monitored throughout the life of tailings storage facilities with respect to the density of the emplaced material and the nature of the surface of the tailings. This will be achieved through the use of quarterly LIDAR survey. Where a structure is prescribed by the New South Wales (NSW) Dams Safety Committee (DSC) under the NSW Dams Safety Act 1978, as in the case of Tailings Pit 1 and the Stage 2 embankments, inspections must be completed as per the specific guidelines developed by DSC and ANCOLD (Australian National Committee on Large Dams). If a structure is not prescribed, it is usual to adopt these guidelines using criteria for a low risk level storage (ATC 2014). Every storage has its own unique physical characteristics and design criteria, hence inspection regimes need to be established on a case by case basis (ATC 2014).

169 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 9 4 PROPOSED REHABILITATION AND CAPPING 4.1 Settlement of Rehabilitated Tailings Pits Irrespective of the process adopted to maximise the tailings shear strength of the final 5.0 m for rehabilitation purposes, the final land form will still be subject to long term settlement as a consequence of on-going consolidation in the underlying tailings deposit. The time for consolidation to fully occur can be up to years for this type of deep deposit, dependant on the initial density state of the tailings. The strategy adopted by the MOC is to allow for initial overfilling of the covering material to compensate for expected consolidation settlement to allow for the effects of long term consolidation. Capping material will be sourced from adjacent mine operations. Sufficient material is available to provide the required profiles. Surface water management will also be undertaken to ensure that the tailings crust consolidates sufficiently to allow capping to progress as planned. In addition, the MOC undertake regular inspections and maintenance (as required) to undertake earthworks to avoid the risk of ponding occurring on the rehabilitated tailings surface. The MOC will utilise survey information to quantify any settlement of capped tailings to inform the continual improvement process regarding capping methodology for the remaining active tailings emplacements. 4.2 Capping Materials As outlined in Table 1, it is anticipated that all active tailings disposal facilities other than the West Pit tailings facility will be decommissioned and capped over the next five years. As of the end of 2016, TP1 and Stage 2 tailings storage facilities are progressively being capped in a series of stages. Sufficient suitable capping material for the TP1 tailings facility has been sourced from the BNP. Sufficient suitable capping material for the Stage 2 tailings facility has been sourced from adjacent overburden dumps. Rehabilitation works at Stage 2 and TP1 are well underway, in accordance with detailed capping design submitted to the DRE for approval in accordance with Schedule 3, High Risk Activities, Part 5, Clause 27 Emplacement areas of the Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulation Overburden from the BNP will be used as capping material for the RW Pit. Overburden from the adjacent overburden dump will be used as capping material for the ERP. The MOC will develop and submit further applications to the DRE including detailed tailings capping designs prior to commencing decommissioning and capping of each facility. Overburden characterisation activities will be undertaken by the MOC to identify overburden materials suitable for capping decommissioned tailings pits that meet specifications documented in the detailed capping design. 4.3 Capping For the MOC, decommissioned tailings storage pits will be progressively capped in a staged capping operation following sufficient desiccation. Capping will be completed in accordance with an approved capping design developed to support approvals to decommission tailings storage facilities. Proposed methodology to cap tailings includes emplacing a minimum of 2 m of inert (benign) capping material comprising select crushed overburden and/or clay materials. The capping will be graded to produce a free draining landform accounting for anticipated settling. Capping materials will be tested to determine if any amelioration is required (e.g. gypsum or lime) to mitigate sodicity or dispersivity.

170 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 10 Capping will be undertaken as per the schedule provided in Table 1. Capping of Stage 2 Tailings Dam and TP1 commenced in 2015 and 2016, respectively. Over the next two years capping will commence at RW Pit Void and Eastern Rail Pit. Tailings storage facilities will be capped and rehabilitated in accordance with Section 101 approvals. Tailings Pit 1 and the Stage 2 embankments are prescribed dams under the Dams Safety Act 1978 and the rehabilitation will be managed in accordance with the approved Management Plan developed in consultation with the DSC. 4.4 Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Objective The primary objective of closure and rehabilitation of a tailings storage facility are to: 1. Provide for containment of the tailings in a permanently stable state, both physically and chemically. 2. Provide a final landform that is inherently stable (both in terms of erode-ability, and overall stability) and is consistent with local topography and community or landowner expectations. 3. Require minimal ongoing management in the medium term (5 10 years) and no management after 10 years (ATC Williams, 2014) Rehabilitation Methods Once capping has been completed the surface of the TSF will be rehabilitated (Glencore, 2016). All TSF s will be covered with topsoil or a substitute (i.e. sub-soil, biosolids) and then sown with a pasture seed mix (Glencore, 2016). Once rehabilitation has been completed the TSF will be added to the site rehabilitation monitoring program such that it is inspected for; Landform sustainability; Water management; Erosion and sediment control; and Weed management (Glencore, 2016). Further details regarding rehabilitation of TSF s are provided in the Glencore Standards listed in Section 2.2.

171 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 11 5 TAILINGS MANAGEMENT CRITERIA Completion criteria are objective target levels or values assigned to a variety of indicators which can be measured against to demonstrate progress and ultimate success of rehabilitation. As such, they provide a defined end point, at which point in time rehabilitation can be deemed successful and the lease relinquishment process can proceed. The rehabilitation completion criteria for tailings areas at the MOC are listed below in Table 3. These criteria are specific to tailings management. Completion criteria have been developed considering site specific issues and objectives and Glencore s standards. Criteria have also been updated where required based on the MOCO Project EIS.

172 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 12 Table 3 Tailings Management Criteria for Tailings Areas Condition Requirement Timing Criteria Reference Decommissioning Phase All tailings pumping infrastructure will be decommissioned and removed. Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and free-draining. Landform Establishment Phase Final landforms are safe, stable, non-polluting and free-draining. Tailings infrastructure Tailings Storage Facility Capping Design Problematic material capping Tailings Capping Free Draining All tailings infrastructure (pipelines, pumps and related infrastructure) is decommissioned and removed, A Detailed Tailings Capping Design has been developed and approved by the DRE (or contemporary equivalent) prior to closure. Carbonaceous material will be capped by a minimum of 3m of benign material where practical Tailings storage areas have been capped in accordance with an approved Detailed Capping Design outlined in the Tailings Facility Emplacement Application. Preliminary design criteria are to cap tailings with at least: 3.0 m inert material (being clay/select weathered rock) 100 mm topsoil. Capped tailings storage facilities are confirmed by survey to be free draining following the expected settlement period. Criteria from the MOP Schedule 3, High Risk Activities, Part 5, Clause 27 Emplacement Areas. Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulation 2014 Criteria from the MOP Schedule 3, High Risk Activities, Part 5, Clause 27 Emplacement Areas. Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulation 2014 Part 2 Division 4 Subdivision 1 Clause 33 (Notification of High Risk Activities) Work Health and

173 Mt Owen Complex Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 13 Condition Requirement Timing Criteria Reference AMD Drainage Condition Capped tailings geotechnical analysis indicates there is no evidence of AMD generation as indicated by acidic ph, high EC or high sulphate content (>1%) Tailings and reject emplacements areas will be capped and reshaped and be free draining Safety (Mines and Petroleum Sites) Regulations 2014 Criteria from the MOP Mt Owen EIS (Umwelt, 2015)

174 Tailings Management Plan -R01 January 2017 Submission Page 14 6 REFERENCES ATC Williams (2014) Tailings Management Concept to Closure. Reference Document for Glencore Coal (NSW) Pty Ltd R08. Glencore Assets Australia (Glencore) (2016) Tailings Storage Management. Business Development and Technical Services Protocol. GCAA Hansen Bailey (2015) Modification Application MOD 6 And Accompanying Documents Titled Greater Ravensworth Tailings Pipeline Modification Environmental Assessment. SLR Consulting Pty Ltd (2016) Mount Owen Complex. January 2017 December Report Number: Rev 0. Umwelt (2015) Mount Owen Continued Operations Project Environmental Impact Statement. January 2015.

175 Appendix E Page 117 APPENDIX E GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION

176 Mt Owen Complex MOP Comments Government Agencies KEY Red Font change made in the MOP document. Black Font No change in MOP document. Clarification of the query. Government Comment DRE (17 February and 24 February 2017) Table 22 of the is to be amended to clarify capping depths described in correspondence dated 21 February 2017 (Our reference INW17/10254, Attachment 1) and the amended provided to the Department. Can you clarify whether the proposed construction activities that were not described in the previous MOP are proposed to be undertaken in the period the RCE covers? There is no change to the volumes and areas for the CHPP, ROM pad area, water management (pipelines) or workshop area. Also, what is the definition of problematic coarse reject? According to the MOP (Table 22, p.59-61), problematic coarse reject has a lesser capping requirement (1 m) compared to material that is acid forming (5 m), prone to spontaneous combustion (3 m) or carbonaceous (2 m). Can you confirm if the rehabilitation of creek diversions (eg upper Bettys Creek) is included in the RCE, and if not, whether NSW DP&E hold a bond? DP&E (20 February 2017) Description of disturbance activities - Section 7.4 of the MOP states that disturbance associated with the North Pit Continuation and infrastructure upgrades are outlined in section The MOP does not include a Section or a description of these disturbance activities. The description of construction activities in section does not include the Hebden Road upgrade works. Confirm whether this is proposed in the MOP term. Blasting Impacts and safety - The MOP describes consultation in relation to blasting impacts on rail and SLR/Mt Owen Complex Comment Table 22 updated accordingly to include a Performance Indicator of Appropriate Capping Depth. Response in dated 21 February The RCE is based on the infrastructure at end of 2017 (Plan 3A) as this is the greatest area of disturbance. There will be some additional construction (eg. GRAWTS scheme, MIA refurbishment) but this will take place after the first year of the MOP and be considered in future annual revisions of the RCE. No change to these areas (CHPP, ROM, water management pipelines, workshop areas) since previous RCE in Feb Area of the overall infrastructure domain (MOP Primary Domain 3) is included in the RCE and split across Mount Owen, Ravensworth East and Glendell. We agree that the word problematic is subjective and we therefore propose to amend Table 22 accordingly to include a Performance Indicator of Appropriate Capping Depth Yes, the rehabilitation of the Upper, Middle and Lower Bettys Creek Diversion are within Site Area 4 of the RCE. We have included rehabilitation under maintenance (a total of $4.26 million allocated). Referencing error to be updated by for revised MOP submission. Hebden road upgrades will be completed however this is not covered in the MOP. The MOC has been advised by the DRE in a pre MOP submission meeting to not include Hebden Road works in the MOP. New line added in Section A blasting protocol has

177 Government Comment electricity infrastructure, however, management of blasting and interactions with Integra Underground Mine to ensure the safety of workers at the Integra Underground Mine is not described. 3. Description of how the rehabilitation of the site would achieve the objectives identified in Table 10: a. Achieving the objective Final landforms (including final voids) designed to incorporate micro-relief and integrate with surrounding natural landforms is not adequately described in the MOP. The Mt Owen EIS (section ) describes final landform design considerations for a natural landform design approach which is not reflected in this MOP. The final landform design considerations described in the EIS should be described in the final landform design description (MOP Section 3.2.2) and considered in the relevant landform and drainage completion criteria for emplacement areas, as well as the landform stability triggers for slope gradient and drainage condition. b. Achieving the objective Minimise long term groundwater seepage zones is not adequately described in the MOP. The Department notes that DRE has included concerns regarding seepage management and long term seepage legacy in previous MOC Annual Review comments. 4. Soil and growing medium balance The MOP (Section 3.3.3) states that it is anticipated that the volumes of soil material currently stockpiled, and soil resources available to be salvaged ahead of mining will likely result in a soil deficit for the rehabilitation works up to and including closure. The Trigger Action Response Plan (MOC Table 36) states Topsoil balance indicates a deficiency in topsoil available for rehabilitation over the Life of the Mine as an Amber trigger with a response of Investigate options and alternatives (e.g. OGM) to be able to meet future topsoil requirements. Continue direct seeding on spoil where possible and approved. The MOP does not describe options and alternatives being investigated this MOP period (MOP Section 8.2.2) to be able to meet future topsoil requirements. The MOP does not describe direct seeding on spoil. The MOP also does not identify how rehabilitation activities this MOP period will implement the findings of previous research programs on the use of different growth mediums/topsoil substitutes and soil ameliorants (described in MOP Section 8.2.1). 5. Interim stabilisation and temporary vegetation strategies The MOP states that where seeding with the final seed mix is delayed, prepared rehabilitation areas will be sown with a suitable cover crop to minimise dust generation and erosion. More detail is required on the procedures for the use of interim stabilisation and temporary vegetation strategies, where reasonable and feasible, to minimise the area exposed for dust generation, in accordance with Schedule 3, Condition 45 (i). It is noted in the MOP plans that there are large areas of overburden emplacement. It is also noted that the Year 1 conceptual mine plan presented in the Mt Owen EIS shows areas of temporary rehabilitation. 6. How rehabilitation activities will implement the findings of previous research programs The MOP describes pre-mop research and trials (MOP section 8.2.1) but does not describe how rehabilitation activities during the term of this MOP will implement the findings of any previous Mount Owen Research programs, research commitments identified in the EIS and the Hunter Ironbark Research Program being undertaken at the Ravensworth Complex, in accordance with Schedule 3, Condition 45 (j). 7. Mining equipment fleet and ancillary equipment MOP Section states that the mining fleet (listed in MOP Table 11) will be reviewed in the MOP term and may change, however, this will be undertaken in SLR/Mt Owen Complex Comment been developed in consultation with the Integra Underground Mine with this outlined in the Blast Management Plan. This Management Plan provides consultation requirements across the two sites. Section of the MOP has been updated to include some more details on micro-relief landforms. The proposed final landform is outlined in MOP Plan 4. Biosolids will be used in some rehabilitation areas during the MOP period. Other seed will be directly seeded onto spoil. Biosolids and a consistent seed mix have been used across the MOC for many years and this same approach is proposed during the MOP period. Additional detail updated in the MOP Section Additional information has been added to Section of the MOP. Additional detail has been provided in the MOP in Section Some of the key findings from the Synopsis of Rehabilitation Research at Mt Owen will be summarised in the MOP document. Further detail is provided in the Noise Management Plan.

178 Government Comment accordance with approvals and regulatory requirements. A description of indicative equipment numbers from the relevant EA and EIS documents in Table 11 would be beneficial for reviewing mining equipment during the MOP term compared to indicative equipment numbers in the relevant EA and EIS documents for the same period. It is noted that the draft Mt Owen Complex Noise Management Plan (version 9.0 dated 6/2/2017) includes a commitment to undertake an assessment of the equipment fleet against the indicative equipment lists every 3 years to confirm that noise impacts have not significantly changed. A description of indicative equipment numbers from the relevant EA and EIS documents would build on and integrate with the Noise Management Plan, in accordance with Schedule 3, Condition 45 (l). OEH Comments (17 February 2017) Section Soil Stripping and Stockpiling OEH recommends that where top soil is stockpiled, and is to be used for woodland and forest rehabilitation, that it is treated for invasive exotic grasses, particularly Kikuyu (Cenchrus clandestinus). Such weeds can smother other plants and make achieving rehabilitation goals difficult. Section 'Weeds and Pests' OEH recommends that African Olive (Olea europaea ssp. cuspidata) is also considered as weed requiring targeted attention in the Biodiversity Management Plan. That is because this species will alter vegetation structure, function and composition, and may prevent rehabilitation outcomes being achieved. Section 4.2 Post Mining Land Use Goal OEH recommends that the function of rehabilitated and revegetated land to open woodland, open forest, and open grassland is considered in addition to species composition and structure. This is best achieved by selecting mixtures of plant species that provide a range of functions and resources; such as Eucalypts and Acacias that flower at different times of the year, the inclusion of Casuarinas or Allocasuarinas that fix nitrogen in the soil, and groundcover species of different forms (tussock grasses, herbs, forbs, ferns, climbers). In relation to the Open Grassland to be created which are to be grazed, OEH suggests that a broad species mix is considered which would offer more resilience under harsh conditions and over time (e.g. Sundstrom eta/., 2012). Section 4.3 Rehabilitation Objectives Similarly, OEH recommends that plant function is given consideration when selecting the plant species mix used for rehabilitated and re-created Central Hunter lronbark- Spotted Gum -Grey Box Forest on the post-mining landform. SLR/Mt Owen Complex Comment There are already dot points in Section stating that: Weed growth will be monitored and subsequently controlled if necessary; Prior to re-spreading, any weed growth will be scalped from the top of stockpiles to minimise the transport of weeds into rehabilitated areas; and The first dot point has been edited to state: Weed growth (such as Kikuyu) will be monitored and subsequently controlled if necessary; African Olive (Olea europaea ssp. cuspidata) has been added to the species list in this section. Some additional detail has been provided about selecting plant species for rehabilitation to improve plant function. A dot point has been added about diversity and plant function.

179 Government Comment Rehabilitation Completion Criteria (Table 25: Ecosystem and land Use Establishment Phase) Several of the completion criteria are vaguely worded, especially where words like 'characteristic of', 'no significant weed infestation', and 'no significant erosion' are used. Similarly some completion criteria appear to be arbitrary, such as 'greater than 75%', 'at least 75% of species are representative' etc which could make them tricky to implement. However, OEH notes that domain objectives are provided which paint a clearer picture of what the final objective will look like. OEH recommends that consideration of plant functional groups, and vegetation function is applied when creating specific vegetation groups. This will likely also require the use of adaptive management to selectively fill gaps in vegetation function as rehabilitation progressed, e.g. planting the occasional Port Jackson Fig (Ficus rubiginosa) around rocky sites, or Kurrajongs (Brachychiton populneus) in open woodland sites to provide food and shelter for a broader range of plants and animals in revegetation areas. Table 26 (Ecosystem and Landuse Sustainability Phase) Much thought has gone into the preparation of performance measures for rehabilitated vegetation. It is not always easy to define such measures, and once done things can be missed. Thus, as with the last point, OEH recommends that adaptive management is applied to refine outcomes, as necessary, particularly in relation to the function of the vegetation in whole and in part. Further, OEH recommends that any such adaptive management is described in the Annual Review covering the year it is implemented, and of the consequences in following years so that as much as possible can be learnt from this exercise- which may help with future decision making. Ecosystem and Landuse Establishment OEH acknowledges that the pasture species mix (Table 29) is intended to create pasture for sustainable grazing. However, given it includes Kikuyu in the seed mix OEH recommends that the Kikuyu is omitted from pasture land adjacent to areas of proposed forest and woodland recreation due to the potential of Kikuyu to outcompete seedlings and tubestock of native tree, shrub and groundcover species Monitoring of Native Vegetation OEH acknowledges that the proponent is using the BioBanking Assessment Methodology 2014 to monitor native vegetation. OEH recommends that the full species list per site is also provided. This is because site species composition provides an indication of current function and future vegetation structure that is not apparent from provision of the 10 site variables alone. 8.2 Research and Rehabilitation Trials The Mount Owen Mine has a long-running research projects and trials. It will be most-useful when those results are published, and thus that lessons learnt from Mount Owen can be applied elsewhere in the Hunter Valley, so that all rehabilitation efforts can build on knowledge. DPI Agriculture (Letter 23 February 2017) SLR/Mt Owen Complex Comment Criteria will be reviewed and some possible additions regarding plant function. The MOP will also be updated to add the sentence consideration may be given to additional species from the region (Added to section 7.3.4) Most of the criteria has been based on existing approved documentation and are consistent with other relevant Glencore operations. Section 9 outlines adaptive management. Section 10 has been updated to include details of describing adaptive management in the Annual Review. Information regarding seed mix of pasture near woodland/forest will be updated in the MOP. Kikuya to be omitted from pasture mix adjacent to forest and woodland vegetation. In Section This information is covered under the Biodiversity Management Plan. Establishing Native Vegetation CSER, University of Newcastle published in August 2012 and is a full public document. Learnings are shared between Glencore mine sites. Some of the key findings from the Synopsis of Rehabilitation Research at Mt Owen will be summarised in the MOP document.

180 Government Comment Change Weed presence Indicator completion criteria (Table 26 of MOP) to Rehabilitation monitoring verifies weed presence does not present a risk to rehabilitation and noxious weeds are controlled in accordance with legislation. SLR/Mt Owen Complex Comment To be updated. Weed management is to be practiced to increase rehabilitation outcomes and in accordance with legislation, not to be made comparable to analogue sites that may themselves be weed infested. Change Primary Domain 5 - Overburden Emplacement Area text (pg 81) to Soil ameliorants will be applied where appropriate in accordance with the recommendations of the geochemical and agronomic assessment and incorporated into the substrate during ripping operations. Soil ameliorants for vegetation growth and soil stability such as soil sodicity require an agronomic assessment in partnership with a general geochemical assessment. Provide DPI Agriculture a copy of Glencore Standard Completion Criteria and Rehabilitation Monitoring (GCAA ) to assess if the adequacy of the generic Glencore pasture rehabilitation monitoring methodology is suitable for this site. Provide details, including indicative timing, for the periodic trials to demonstrate that the land capability is being achieved (Schedule 3, Condition 45 (f)). Schedule 3, Condition 45 (f) (Table 18 of MOP) states to include a detailed plan for the reinstatement and review of the proposed agricultural land capability of grassland areas in the final landform, including a protocol for periodic trials to demonstrate that the land capability is being achieved. This has not been addressed in sections 6.0 and 8.2 as indicated. Singleton Council (12 February 2017) Satisfied with both the and Rehabilitation Strategy. To be updated. To be provided by Glencore to DPI Agriculture. There are no plans for rehabilitation trials during the MOP period. Rehabilitation and biodiversity monitoring will continue and lessons learnt from this monitoring will be incorporated into future rehabilitation. No further actions.

181 24 February 2017 OUT17/8907 MCV14/578#16 Shane Holmes Mt Owen Pty Limited PO Box 320 Singleton NSW 2330 Dear Shane Mining Authorisation Numbers CL383 (1973), CL715 (1973), ML1355 (1992), ML1415 (1992), ML1419 (1992), ML1453 (1992), ML1475 (1992), ML1561 (1992), ML1608 (1992), ML1629 (1992), ML1694 (1992), ML1673 (1992), AL8 (MLA 512), Mt Owen Pty Limited and ML1410 (1992), ML1476 (1992), ML 358 (1973) and MPL343 (1973), Glendell Tenements Pty Limited Request for Additional Information We refer to the Mt Owen Complex which was received by the NSW Department of Industry, Skills and Regional Development Division of Resources & Energy (DRE) on 25 January 2017 and allocated reference number INW17/3694. The detailed assessment has identified that further information is required to allow for the Environmental Sustainability Unit s assessment of the. In accordance with DRE s service delivery standards, this request for further information has stopped the clock on the processing of this application. Mt Owen Pty Limited and Glendell Tenements Pty Limited are required to provide the Required Information listed below and submit this information to the Environmental Sustainability Unit (at the address: minres.environment@industry.nsw.gov.au) by 13. Required Information: 1. Table 22 of the is to be amended to clarify capping depths described in correspondence dated 21 February 2017 (Our reference INW17/10254, Attachment 1) and the amended Mining Operations Plan provided to the Department. Assessment of the will only recommence once the Required Information is provided to the Environmental Sustainability Unit. If the Required Information is not received by the due date listed above, the may be refused. Further information on DRE s service delivery standards can be found at: Environmental Sustainability Unit PO Box 344 Hunter Region Mail Centre NSW High St MAITLAND NSW minres.environment@industry.nsw.gov.au Tel: Fax: Web: ABN

182 If you require additional information on this matter please contact the undersigned at the Environmental Sustainability Unit s Maitland office on Yours sincerely, Neil McElhinney Acting Senior Inspector Environment Environmental Sustainability Unit

183 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: RE: Mt Owen MOP & RCE Tuesday, 21 February :52:25 AM image001.png Good morning Neil Please see the text in blue below for answers to your queries. Please give me a call if you wish to discuss anything further. Regards, Vicki. Vicki McBride Approval Manager, Mount Owen Continued Operations Mobile: +61 (0) Vicki.McBride@glencore.com.au From: Neil McElhinney [mailto:neil.mcelhinney@industry.nsw.gov.au] Sent: Friday, 17 February :11 PM To: McBride, Vicki (Hunter Valley - AU) <Vicki.McBride@glencore.com.au>; Holmes, Shane (Mount Owen - AU) <Shane.Holmes@glencore.com.au> Subject: Mt Owen MOP & RCE Vicki, Shane, Can you clarify whether the proposed construction activities that were not described in the previous MOP are proposed to be undertaken in the period the RCE covers? The RCE is based on the infrastructure at end of 2017 (Plan 3A) as this is the greatest area of disturbance. There will be some additional construction (eg. GRAWTS scheme, MIA refurbishment) but this will take place after the first year of the MOP and be considered in future annual revisions of the RCE. There is no change to the volumes and areas for the CHPP, ROM pad area, water management (pipelines) or workshop area. No change to these areas (CHPP, ROM, water management pipelines, workshop areas) since previous RCE in Feb Area of the overall infrastructure domain (MOP Primary Domain 3) is included in the RCE and split across Mt Owen, Rav East and Glendell. Also, what is the definition of problematic coarse reject? According to the MOP (Table 22, p.59-61), problematic coarse reject has a lesser capping requirement (1 m) compared to material that is acid forming (5 m), prone to spontaneous combustion (3 m) or carbonaceous (2 m). We agree that the word problematic is subjective and we therefore propose to amend Table 22 accordingly to include a Performance Indicator of Appropriate Capping Depth (see below). Table 22 Decommissioning Phase Domain Objective All tailings pumping infrastructure will be decommissioned and removed. Performance Indicator Tailings infrastructure Tailings Storage Facility Capping Design Completion Criteria Domain 4 Tailings Disposal Facility All tailings infrastructure (pipelines, pumps and related infrastructure) is decommissioned and removed. A Detailed Tailings Capping Design has been developed and approved by the DRE (or contemporary equivalent) prior to closure. Justification/Source This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. Schedule 3, High Risk Activities, Part 5, Clause 27 Emplacement Areas. Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulation 2014 Complete (Yes/No) TARP Element Progress at Start of MOP No n/a Active No 16 Active Final landforms are safe, stable, nonpolluting and freedraining. Appropriate Capping Depth Tailings will be capped by a minimum of 3m of benign material where practical. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No 6, 7, 16 Commenced Final landforms are safe, stable, nonpolluting and freedraining. Appropriate Capping Depth Domain 5 - Overburden Emplacement Area Net acid generating materials will be capped by a minimum of 5 m inert material Problematic coarse rejects will be capped by a minimum of 1m of benign material. This MOP. Consistent with other Glencore Operations. No 6, 7, 16 Commenced Can you confirm if the rehabilitation of creek diversions (eg upper Bettys Creek) is included in the RCE, and if not, whether NSW DP&E hold a bond? Yes, the rehabilitation of the Upper, Middle and Lower Bettys Creek Diversion are within Site Area 4 of the RCE. We have included rehabilitation under maintenance (a total of $4.26 million allocated). Kind regards, Neil McElhinney Inspector Environment Environmental Sustainability Unit NSW Department of Industry Division of Resources And Energy 516 High Street Maitland NSW 2320 PO Box 344 Hunter Region Mail Centre NSW 2310 T: F: M: E: neil.mcelhinney@industry.nsw.gov.au W: Facebook: nswre The information in this , together with any attachments, is confidential and is intended only for the use of the above named recipient. In certain cases it is also legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this is unauthorised and strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by return and delete the message from your computer without making any copies. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and are not necessarily the views of NSW Trade & Investment. This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of their organisation.

184 ********************************************************************************* LEGAL DISCLAIMER. The contents of this electronic communication and any attached documents are strictly confidential and they may not be used or disclosed by someone who is not a named recipient. If you have received this electronic communication in error please notify the sender by replying to this electronic communication inserting the word "misdirected" as the subject and delete this communication from your system. *********************************************************************************

185

186 Attachment B 1. Description of disturbance activities - Section 7.4 of the MOP states that disturbance associated with the North Pit Continuation and infrastructure upgrades are outlined in section The MOP does not include a Section or a description of these disturbance activities. The description of construction activities in section does not include the Hebden Road upgrade works. Confirm whether this is proposed in the MOP term. 2. Blasting Impacts and safety - The MOP describes consultation in relation to blasting impacts on rail and electricity infrastructure, however, management of blasting and interactions with Integra Underground Mine to ensure the safety of workers at the Integra Underground Mine is not described. 3. Description of how the rehabilitation of the site would achieve the objectives identified in Table 10: a. Achieving the objective Final landforms (including final voids) designed to incorporate micro-relief and integrate with surrounding natural landforms is not adequately described in the MOP. The Mt Owen EIS (section ) describes final landform design considerations for a natural landform design approach which is not reflected in this MOP. The final landform design considerations described in the EIS should be described in the final landform design description (MOP Section 3.2.2) and considered in the relevant landform and drainage completion criteria for emplacement areas, as well as the landform stability triggers for slope gradient and drainage condition. b. Achieving the objective Minimise long term groundwater seepage zones is not adequately described in the MOP. The Department notes that DRE has included concerns regarding seepage management and long term seepage legacy in previous MOC Annual Review comments. 4. Soil and growing medium balance The MOP (Section 3.3.3) states that it is anticipated that the volumes of soil material currently stockpiled, and soil resources available to be salvaged ahead of mining will likely result in a soil deficit for the rehabilitation works up to and including closure. The Trigger Action Response Plan (MOC Table 36) states Topsoil balance indicates a deficiency in topsoil available for rehabilitation over the Life of the Mine as an Amber trigger with a response of Investigate options and alternatives (e.g. OGM) to be able to meet future topsoil requirements. Continue direct seeding on spoil where possible and approved. The MOP does not describe options and alternatives being investigated this MOP period (MOP Section 8.2.2) to be able to meet future topsoil requirements. The MOP does not describe direct seeding on spoil. The MOP also does not identify how rehabilitation activities this MOP period will implement the findings of previous research programs on the use of different growth mediums/topsoil substitutes and soil ameliorants (described in MOP Section 8.2.1). 5. Interim stabilisation and temporary vegetation strategies The MOP states that where seeding with the final seed mix is delayed, prepared rehabilitation areas will be sown with a suitable cover crop to minimise dust generation and erosion. More detail is required on the procedures for the use of interim stabilisation and temporary vegetation strategies, where reasonable and feasible, to minimise the area exposed for dust generation, in accordance with Schedule 3, Condition 45 (i). It is noted in the MOP plans that there are large areas of overburden emplacement. It is also noted that the Year 1 conceptual mine plan presented in the Mt Owen EIS shows areas of temporary rehabilitation. 6. How rehabilitation activities will implement the findings of previous research programs The MOP describes pre-mop research and trials (MOP section 8.2.1) but does not describe how rehabilitation activities during the term of this MOP will implement the findings of any previous Mount Owen Research programs, research commitments identified in the EIS and the Hunter Ironbark Research Program being undertaken at the Ravensworth Complex, in accordance with Schedule 3, Condition 45 (j). 7. Mining equipment fleet and ancillary equipment MOP Section states that the mining fleet (listed in MOP Table 11) will be reviewed in the MOP term and may change, however, this will be undertaken in accordance with approvals and regulatory requirements. A description of indicative equipment numbers from the relevant EA and EIS documents in Table 11 would be beneficial for reviewing mining equipment during the MOP term compared to indicative equipment numbers in the relevant EA and EIS documents for the same period. It is noted that the draft Mt Owen Complex Noise Management Plan (version 9.0 dated 6/2/2017) includes a commitment to undertake an assessment of the equipment fleet against the indicative equipment lists every 3 years to confirm that noise impacts have not significantly changed. A description of indicative equipment numbers from the relevant EA and EIS documents would build on and integrate with the Noise Management Plan, in accordance with Schedule 3, Condition 45 (l). 12

187

188

189

190 INT17/ February 2017 Vicki McBride Approval Manager, Mount Owen Continued Operations Glencore Dear Vicki Mt Owen Complex / Rehabilitation Management Plan Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on the Mt Owen Complex Mining Operations Plan / Rehabilitation Management Plan as per your correspondence dated 25 January Table 1 outlines comments from DPI Agriculture. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours Sincerely Helen Squires Resource Management Officer Agriculture Landuse Planning Table 1: DPI Agriculture comments Recommendation Change Weed presence Indicator completion criteria (Table 26 of MOP) to Rehabilitation monitoring verifies weed presence does not present a risk to rehabilitation and noxious weeds are controlled in accordance with legislation Justification Weed management is to be practiced to increase rehabilitation outcomes and in accordance with legislation, not to be made comparable to analogue sites that may themselves be weed infested. NSW Department of Primary Industries - Agriculture Locked Bag 21, Orange NSW Kite St, Orange NSW 2800 Tel: landuse.ag@dpi.nsw.gov.au ABN: