Frequently asked questions

The proposed realignment of the road will increase the distance travelled by road users by approximately 3.7km (two minutes at the current speed limit). The construction of the new sections of Panuara Road will be undertaken while maintaining use of the existing road. There will be times when traffic control will be in place when the new sections of road are joined to the old sections.

The map below shows early suggested options (1a and 1b), and, following community feedback, the current plan (1c) for the proposed realignment of Panuara Road.

The proposed realignment for Panuara Road has been changed several times based on community feedback. Three options were presented at the announcement of CCOP with majority feedback at the time indicating Option 1 was preferred. Further refinements to the proposed realignment continued, with Option 1A presented to the community in May 2023 and Option 1B presented to the CCOP residents workshop in March 2024. Further refinements have since been undertaken to:

• Firmly situate the road to the west of the ridgeline to separate the proposed road from Errowanbang;
• More closely align the road with the existing Meribah Rd in the east; and
• Minimise impact to sensitive vegetation and cultural areas.

Further detailed design will be undertaken to optimise the intersection of Panuara Rd with Cadia Rd.

Feedback gained from community members at community meetings, workshops and face-to-face conversations have influenced the proposed design. Understandably, requests have been made to align the design as close to the Cadia mine site as possible. It has taken time to seek feedback on proposed options as well as aligning the proposals with the Australian Standards for roads. The result is a realignment design that reduces visual and noise impacts for nearby residents, minimises vegetation removal and avoids impacts on culturally significant objects, such as scar trees.

The Panuara Road realignment continues to be revised following the recent workshop and feedback on the alignment. Further detailed design will be required to ensure the road (including the intersection design with Cadia Rd) meets the required Austroad design guidelines.

The design and planning of the road construction will ensure access will be available at all times for Emergency Response traffic.

No, Flyers Creek will not be impacted by the Panuara Road realignment.

The construction work will be carried out during the day with minor impact on local residents, as you would expect for any construction works on any project. The changes, including how it will operate once it’s in place, have been factored into the inputs for the EIS assessments, and will form part of the impact assessment outcomes which will be shared with community prior to EIS submission.

A Visual Impact Assessment will be carried out for the project, including for the Panuara Road realignment. A number of visual montages have been prepared for locations around the mine showing the visual impact of the proposed Southern Tailings Storage Facility (STSFX). Although these do not include the road, there will be an assessment made in relation to the visual impacts of the road.

The proposed Panuara Road realignment has undergone refinement. Once a few small details are sorted out pegs will be installed for viewing. Local residents will then be informed and invited to view and discuss the alignment on site.

Yes, it will be on the western side of the ridgeline separating the road from the Errowanbang valley.

In order to meet a higher safety standard for tailings facilities, Cadia is changing from an upstream lift method to a centreline lift. The final embankment design for the existing Southern Tailings Storage Facility (STSF) is larger than anticipated to meet these higher standards, so a small section of Panuara Rd is required to be moved. This change is proposed as part of Modification 15.

As part of the CCOP, Newmont is seeking a separate, more significant change to the alignment of Panuara Road to accommodate the proposed STSFX. This significant realignment of Panuara Rd is part of the planning and approval process for the CCOP and will not commence until approval of the Project is granted by the NSW Government.

Both options are approximately the same distance. They both add approximately 3.7km additional length compared to current Panuara Rd. This could mean an additional 2-3 minutes of travel dependent on vehicle speeds.

A water balance for a mine site is a comprehensive assessment that accounts for all water inputs, outputs, and storages within the mining operation. It involves quantifying water sources, such as licensed extraction from rivers and dams, rainfall, surface water inflows, and groundwater inflows, as well as water uses and losses, including water used for processing, evaporation, seepage and dust suppression.

The purpose of conducting a water balance for a mine site is to ensure sustainable water management practices. It helps Cadia to understand the mine’s water usage patterns, identify opportunities for water conservation and efficiency improvements and comply with regulatory requirements regarding water use and discharge. Additionally, a water balance is crucial for predicting future water needs and ensuring the long-term viability of the mining operation through wetter and drier periods.

Water from the storages onsite is proposed to be used for irrigation. These storages include Upper Rodds Creek Dam (URCD) and the Pit Tailings Storage Facility (PTSF).

The primary control for maintaining a wet surface of tailings which can minimise dust generation is sequenced deposition of tailings. This approach involves strategically layering or sequencing the deposition of tailings around the perimeter of the facility to maintain a wet surface.

By optimizing the deposition sequence, Cadia can reduce the amount of water needed for dust suppression and moisture management. Layers with higher moisture retention properties can help minimize the need for constant water application.

Cadia will be preparing a water balance for the CCOP which will determine the requirements for water across the site and the proposals for future operations under CCOP. This work is still being undertaken and the outcomes will be presented in future workshops and fact sheets.

It is unlikely that Cadia will be seeking additional water licences from river catchments above what is already in place for the operation. Cadia will be preparing a water balance for the CCOP which will outline the current water licences held by Cadia and the proposals for future operations under CCOP. This work is still being undertaken and the outcomes will be presented in future workshops and fact sheets.

The perimeter drain is lined with riprap (rock armour) for erosion protection. Along steep cuts and batters of the drain a non-woven geotextile will be placed beneath the riprap for added protection.

The function of the perimeter drain is to convey construction water, surface water runoff and emergent seepage from the downstream embankment face towards the reclaim ponds.

Cadia routinely monitors and forecasts water efficiency, water supply security and reliability as part of its normal operations. Prolonged drought periods have changed Cadia’s operational practices.

The site water balance reviews enable Cadia to prioritise water re-use over freshwater extraction and to improve water use efficiencies in accordance with the conditions of our approval and our Water Management Plan.

Cadia recognises water as a shared resource. Site water supply is managed with the aim of reducing the demand on high value water sources including the Belubula River. Water supply from external sources is prioritised as follows, subject to available water allocation and on-site storage capacity:

• Priority 1 – treated town effluent from Orange
• Priority 2 – unregulated river and regulated river supplementary and uncontrolled flow events when announced by WaterNSW
• Priority 3 – regulated river general security water from natural tributary flows rather than releases from Carcoar Dam
• Priority 4 – regulated river water from Carcoar Dam releases. Where possible, this extraction is coordinated with WaterNSW to reduce catchment scale transmission losses by combining water orders with downstream water orders.

Cadia maintains a detailed record of site water data which includes:

• Water demand for processing, underground mine operations and other ancillary purposes;
• Water level and stored water volume of water management storages;
• Tailings level of the PTSF, NTSF and STSF (when operational);
• Water transfers to and from water management storages;
• Water transfer to and from underground mine operations;
• Water supply from internal and external sources;
• Environmental flow release from Cadiangullong Dam and Flyers Creek Weir; and
• Total site water storage volume.

The site water records are used to inform:

• Water management decisions made by the Cadia Water Committee;
• Calibration, using models to recreate past conditions and forecasting via the probabilistic site water balance model;
• Calibration and forecasting via the numerical groundwater flow model; and
• Verification of the groundwater inflow predictions.

The site water records are continuously maintained, reviewed and updated to reflect near real-time site conditions.

Information on the results from various monitoring sites is available in Section 3 of this document 12618414-REP-0_Cadia_2022-2023_Surface Water Assessment.docx (caapp.com.au). Monthly samples are taken of water within the PTSF and Upper Rodds Creek Dam (URCD). This data is then independently analysed and forms part of our Annual Review.

Cadia will be preparing a water balance for the CCOP which will outline the current water licences held by Cadia and the proposals for future operations under CCOP. This work is still being undertaken and the outcomes will be presented in future community workshops and fact sheets.

The embankment walls and the drains are designed to be highly permeable. The finger drains and collector drains beneath the proposed hydrocyclone sand dam walls are designed to catch and channel all rainfall and water that permeates the sand dam wall out to the external perimeter drains and then flow to the reclaim ponds where the water is pumped back to the process plant for reuse. This is a key aspect of the dam design as it increases the inherent stability of the facility.

The drains beneath the wall are constructed with a gradated crushed rock fill and sized to convey the operational required flow rates both during construction of the sand dam as well as throughout closure. The drains have been designed to have capacity to convey normal operational seepage as well as construction water realised during hydraulic sand placement.

Migration of hydrocycloned sand overlying the drains is controlled by gradational filters and/or geotextiles. The drain rock material has been specified to be sufficiently durable to continue providing drainage of the STSFX through the post-closure asset life. A safety factor is applied to estimated design flows in calculating required capacity of the gravel drains. See typical collector drain and finger drain illustrations below.

The proposed reclaim ponds have been designed in accordance with ANCOLD Guidelines and more importantly have been designed to ensure that Cadia does not release surface runoff water offsite.

Reclaim ponds are fully lined and sized for a flood storage to suit a 1 in 100-year Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) 72 hr rainfall event. The emergency spillway has been designed for a 1 in 1000 AEP flood and all water storages are actively managed to mitigate the potential for water release outside the site boundaries.

There are five reclaim ponds located around the perimeter of STSFX. The function of the reclaim ponds is to:

• Collect surface water runoff, construction water and flow from the underdrainage system and emergent seepage for transfer back into the site wide water system;
• to manage the risk of the release of water from the Cadia site to the environment.

The reclaim ponds operate collectively to manage the require volumes of water with a total storage volume of approximately 3,450 ML. A recent design change has been proposed which will remove the Reclaim Ponds 1 & 2 and diverts the water previously designed to be captured by these ponds to a larger Reclaim Pond 3. The overall volumes are expected to be similar, however design for this is still in progress and the individual sizing of each pond will be subject to minor changes.

Any seepage water from the tailings or the sand wall is collected in drains constructed below the sand wall and directed towards the perimeter drains around the facility and then to reclaim ponds where the water is pumped back to the process plant for reuse.

Cadia mine is designed and managed not to affect groundwater in the region.

Cadia monitors groundwater through an extensive network featuring more than 100 monitoring bores, both on site and across the Cadia district. This network was installed to detect any changes to groundwater levels or quality, with a focus on shallow groundwater interactions with local water resources. All data from this monitoring is shared with the local community and relevant government agencies via the Newmont Cadia website to ensure accountability and transparency. Cadia manages and monitors groundwater in conjunction with independent specialists.

Under our Project Approval and Environment Protection Licence (EPL) there are strict compliance requirements for routine sampling and analysis for water chemistry, which is then reviewed by an independent expert. Findings are shared with regulators including the Department of Planning, the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and Water NSW and also published on the Newmont Cadia website in our Annual Environmental Review.

In the most recent Annual Review the independent expert concluded that any seepage from the TSF is contained to the immediate TSF area, in compliance with the project approval, and does not have an impact on downstream groundwater water receptors.

CCOP has added to this network of monitoring bores to provide data to support the impact assessments and once approved some of these bores will become a part of the monitoring network.

A groundwater and surface water impact assessment are being undertaken and results will be shared with the community prior to submission of the EIS. CCOP has installed a significant number of new bores in recent years years to provide data to support the impact assessments. We would welcome feedback on any requirement for additional bores.

Yes. Cadia’s Annual Review provides details on water monitoring locations and an addendum to the Annual Review – providing a report on two additional monitoring locations (referred to as BRPS & CAWS71) – was uploaded to the Cadia website 3 June 2024 and can be found at 12640002-REP_Cadia Belubula River surface water assessment.docx (caapp.com.au).

These additional monitoring points have been incorporated into the draft Cadia Water Management Plan currently with the department for approval.

As part of the CCOP EIS process, additional monitoring points have been established:

• CAWS70 – will be added to the draft Water Management Plan to represent the most downstream point on Cadiangullong Creek prior to the junction with the Belubula River.
• CAWS81 – CCOP surface water monitoring point upstream from the Belubula River Pumping station monitoring point.

The data from these CCOP monitoring sites is being used to support the surface water and groundwater impact assessments for CCOP. The results will be shared with community as part of future EIS Technical Q&A Forums and are likely to be incorporated into the Water Management Plan if CCOP is approved.

As part of the Site and Technology Selection process undertaken, Cadia identified a number of sites that were smaller than the capacity required to cater for the proposed life of CCOP. Whilst a combination of these facilities could potentially meet the required capacity, they would create significantly greater impacts on water catchments, biodiversity, agricultural land and community.

Further details can be found in the Southern Tailings Storage Facility Site and Technology Selection Process report on the CCOP website.

The site and technology selection considered the impacts of each site and technology on surface and groundwater systems. A detailed surface and groundwater impact assessment is being undertaken for the proposed Southern Tailings Storage Facility Extension (STSFX) as part of the preparation of the EIS and, when complete, will be shared with the community for feedback.

Newmont has undertaken a detailed assessment of all site and technology options including the Northern option. The assessments were undertaken against criteria including: the impacts on biodiversity, noise and dust impacts, potential impacts on the quality and quantity of impacted water catchments, changes to visual amenity and technical risks.

Based on these assessments and an assessment of technical risk the southern site has been determined to best meet the community's needs.

The community requested that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) conduct an independent expert review of this selection. The assessment of the experts was that the selection of the southern site was appropriate. The site and technology selection report and the independent experts report are available on the CCOP website.

The assessment of the northern option highlighted two key technical risks:

• The foundations of the facility wall are required to be built on loosely backfilled material. This creates significant difficulty in constructing the wall with the required stability levels to last in the long term.
• The northern site is exposed to significantly larger catchment and larger water flow in Cadiangullong Creek. This creates significant difficulty in ensuring the facility design is not eroded, remains stable, and that the required water quality leaving the facility can be achieved.

The proposed Southern Tailings Storage Facility Extension (STSFX) is the nominated site based on Newmont’s site selection report and review by independent expert reviewers. Newmont has been transparent and will continue to engage with the community in relation to the site selection process and the factors that were considered in the site selection process.

Willow Park was acquired by Newmont following its public listing and auction. This property will be managed in accordance with the Cadia Farm Strategy.

Hydrocyclone sand dams are used extensively throughout North and South America and are often used in areas that have very high levels of seismicity and that are located on or near fault lines. The design work conducted to date on the proposed STSFX has fully considered the underlying geology of the site including relevant seismic criteria.

The STSFX has also been designed in accordance with Australian National Committee on Large Dams (ANCOLD) Guidelines. Specific design criteria have been adopted in relation to seismicity. From a seismic perspective, a Cadia Mine Seismic Hazard Assessment and Time History Analysis study was undertaken by the Seismology Research Centre for the Cadia site in November 2019. The data from this analysis has been used to inform the design of the STSFX facility under normal operating conditions and post-seismic loading conditions.

There have been several geological studies across the Cadia site including the tailings storage facilities. Geotechnical drilling campaigns conducted over the ground nominated as the footprint for the STSFX to understand the geotechnical conditions have informed the designs to date. Further geotechnical drilling is planned.

The Southern Tailings Storage Facility Extension (STSFX) is planned to manage approximately 650 million tonnes (Mt) of tailings over its life. This includes an area to store excess sand which may ultimately contain 90Mt of excess sand. Cadia is continuing to look at further refinement options in order to reduce this volume of excess sand stored and how it plays a role in early rehabilitation where feasible.

Work is continuing on the refinements to the design of the STSFX and how it integrates with the existing NTSF and STSF. We will share these with the community in future CCOP Forums.

As a key part of the site selection process, a range of potential tailings deposition technologies were investigated across six potential shortlisted TSF sites.

The technologies considered over the multiple studies included:

• Conventional (thickened) slurry – as currently used at Cadia across all current TSFs
• Central thickened discharge;
• Paste;
• Dry stack (filtered tailings);
• Co-disposal of coarse mine waste (cobbles and boulders) with slurry;
• Co-mingling (tailings and coarse waste rock are mixed together within a storage facility or as a single discharge stream);
• Hydrocycloned sand wall embankment.

Hydrocycloning of the tailings waste separates the coarser tailings fraction, hydrocycloned sandfrom the finer tailings, providing a coarse sand material for construction of the new Tailings Storage Facility embankments.

Once separated, the coarse sand (hydrocyclone underflow) is delivered to and hydraulically deposited into cells on the embankment for compaction. The finer fraction is discharged into the facility behind the progressively raised embankment. Water is collected and returned to the process for reuse.

Hydrocycloning of tailings was developed in the 1960s and continues to be used globally as a safe and reliable method of embankment construction.

Hydrocylone sand dams have only recently been explored as an option in Australia. Previously considered construction methods such as upstream lifts are no longer considered acceptable. Cadia’s own experience has highlighted that it is no longer an acceptable design practice. Hydrocylone dams are considered leading practice around the world as an inherently better design, however they are new to Australia and change can take time. Cadia will lead Australia to a better benchmark.

Hydrocyclone sand dams are used extensively throughout North and South America and are often used in areas that have very high levels of seismicity.

The current existing STSF area (including embankment walls) is approximately 500 hectares. The additional surface area of the STSFX at the end of its life (2048-2050) is approximately 650 hectares. The wall height when it reaches its final height will be the same as the current NTSF and at the end of its life will vary around the perimeter from around 30m on the eastern side of the facility to between 60 and 80m on the western side of the facility. Similar to the STSF at the highest point in the southwest in the area of Rodds Creek the wall height from natural ground level is approximately 150m.

Due to the nature of its construction the STSFX is expected to generate less noise and light emissions than existing construction techniques for the tailings facilities at Cadia. Sand will be pumped to the dam wall where it is constructed using either cell construction or downslope construction.

Sand material and the fine tailings will be pumped from the process plant to the STSFX.  The sand is deposited as a slurry within constructed cells or directly downslope of the crest. From there dozers are used to push the sand around and compact the surface. This is a considerably smaller fleet than the traditional carting and dumping of rock being used on the existing facilities. For the early construction of the starter embankment which is constructed with rock materials the fleet is expected to be similar to the existing construction techniques.

The hydrocyclones that separate the tailings into coarse sand for construction of the sand embankment wall and the fine tailings will operating 24 hours a day. The sand is deposited as a slurry within constructed cells or directly downslope of the crest is in line with the operation and pumping of tailings to the NTSF and STSF. Dozers and other heavy mining equipment are used to manage the facility and compact the surface. This heavy mining equipment will operate during the day only, as is currently the case for the NTSF and STSF.

In May 2023 we showed the community pictures of the most common practice of cyclones on the wall of the dam. We received clear feedback that this was not acceptable to the community. In response, we first considered relocating the cyclones and pumps to an enclosed facility adjacent to Cadia Rd. Whilst this was an improvement, we have explored alternatives and will now be moving to a facility adjacent to the Cadia Concentrators to minimise the sources of noise and light from the areas around the STSFX.

A detailed geochemical assessment is being undertaken for the both the proposed coarse tailings and fine tailings streams that are produced for the cyclone sands dam. The preliminary results of the assessment indicate that the tailings and sand is non-acid forming (NAF). Further updates will be available once this work is complete.

Groundwater and surface water impact assessments are being undertaken and results will be shared with the community prior to submission of the EIS at a future EIS Technical Q&A Forum. This groundwater impact assessment will consider seepage from the TSF and also transport of dissolved matter through the tailings.

Dust management for the proposed hydrocyclone sand dam includes:

• For the tailings area the primary method for controlling the surface moisture content is the sequenced deposition of tailings. This approach involves strategically layering or sequencing the deposition of tailings around the perimeter of the facility to dampen and maintain a moist surface;
• For the STSFX it is also proposed to include a sprinkler system on the crest of the dam covering portions of the tailings beach from the dam wall for contingency irrigation and difficult atmospheric conditions (hot, dry or windy weather);
• For the sand wall it is proposed to install wind breaks with progressive rehabilitation where advancing the downstream slope of the wall slope has progressed. We are currently investigating using a downslope up approach to enable progressive rehabilitation on the eastern wall of the TSF;
• Consideration will also be given to temporary erosion protection measures for inactive areas during construction/operation including: (seed + mulch + fertilizer + dye, currently in use on STSF), mechanical planter (seeding), synthetic protective solid covers (e.g. geotextile), synthetic protective covers (polymers/sprays).

Cadia is also undertaking additional testing to identify optimal environmental conditions, moisture content and wind conditions that minimises dust lift of tailings and sand. This will enable the operation to proactively respond to the conditions to ensure adjustments to the operations can be made to reduce impacts, such as turning on irrigation sprinklers ahead of a hot dry spell.

As part of the ongoing study into hydrocyclone sands, a pilot plant for cyclone sands has been established to test the process of creating the sand of the correct specifications required for the construction of the cyclone sand wall. The test results show that the correct sand specification for sand dams can be delivered for the proposed STSFX.

The outcomes of the trials are critical to the design development of sand dams and have informed the specific technical details for the wall and tailings impoundment concept design for the STSFX. A consolidated report of the trials was provided to DPHI for their review and has been uploaded to the CCOP website. The Tailings Pilot Plant Phase 2 Trials Consolidated Report can be found on the CCOP website.

A further larger scale trial has been proposed to be carried as part of the Modification15 submission to provide further data to support the engineering design of the facility. Community members will be invited to attend whilst this facility is in operation.

While detailed comparisons of rock quantities between the hydrocyclone sand dam and dry stack technologies have not been made, it is expected that volumes of rock required would be comparable. Both options require rock in the initial construction of starter embankments, and for construction of filter drains and other associated infrastructure.

There are many sand dams in operation around the globe including at various copper/gold mines in both North and South America. Newmont's Peñasquito Polymetallic Mine has a sand dam and produces gold, silver, zinc and lead. Newmont also operates the Red Chris copper-gold mine which also has a sand dam.

A detailed geochemical assessment is being undertaken for both the proposed coarse tailings and fine tailings streams that are produced for the cyclone sands dam. The preliminary results of the assessment indicate that the tailings and sand are non-acid forming (NAF).

The proposed design includes many features to address seepage from the facility. The role of the seepage control system is to minimise losses of construction water, process affected and final tailings pore water into the foundation (and therefore, regional groundwater).

For the STSFX this will be achieved using a system comprised of several seepage mitigation design (SMD) elements.

The SMD components included in the seepage control system are:

• Hydrocycloning of the whole tailings to remove the sand fraction (resulting in lower permeability for the STSFX final tailings compared to those stored within the existing TSFs);
• An underdrainage system beneath the hydrocycloned sand embankment to collect construction water from the hydraulically placed sand and emergent foundation seepage upstream of the embankment toe;
• A perimeter diversion drain beyond the downstream toe that will collect shallow foundation seepage;
• Reclaim ponds (plus the Return Water Pond) downstream of the STSFX embankment that will capture runoff and emergent seepage;
• Clay and geomembrane lining where appropriate;
• A positive foundation cut-off trench through residual soil and extremely weathered rock beneath the upstream toe of the starter embankment;
• Provision for foundation/fault grouting if relatively permeable zones are identified during the proposed Phase 3 site investigation.

Newmont acknowledges the catastrophic impacts of both Mount Polley and Brumadinho tailings dam failures. However, it is important to note that neither dam was a hydrocyclone sand dam. Brumadinho was also an upstream raise construction method that is no longer used in new dam constructions. Mount Polley was a conventional rockfill/earthfill dam, and the failure was attributed to a weak foundation failure.

The proposed STSFX is a centreline/downstream raise construction methodology. The STSFX has been designed in accordance with Australian National Committee on Large Dams (ANCOLD) Guidelines. Specific design criteria have been adopted in relation to wet weather events and seismicity.

For wet weather events Flood Storage Compartments within STSFX are shown in the figure below.

The design criteria for each storage compartment are shown in the table below.

There are cumulative storm water storage allowances provided for in the design. There is excess water storage within the STSFX during all stages of development, indicating that the flood storage requirements are able to be met. The maximum operating level is the decant pond level at which deposition is required to cease.

From a seismic perspective, a Cadia Mine Seismic Hazard Assessment and Time History Analysis study was undertaken by the Seismology Research Centre for the Cadia site in November 2019 (Seismology Research Centre 2019). The data from this analysis has been used to inform the design of the STSFX facility under normal operating conditions and post-seismic loading conditions.

The slope of the embankment wall is 3.5:1. This means for every 1 metre increase in height, the horizontal length would go out to 3.5m This has been benchmarked against hydrocyclone dams across the world.

The design of the sand dam wall is permeable to allow the free draining of water from the walls to be collected in drains constructed under the wall. The drains channel the water to a perimeter drain which is collected in reclaim ponds. The water is then pumped back to the process plant for reuse.

A detailed geochemical assessment is being undertaken for the both the proposed coarse tailings and fine tailings streams that are produced for the cyclone sands dam.

The results of this work will be presented in future forums.

The STSFX has been designed in accordance with ANCOLD Guidelines. Designing tailings dams to last in perpetuity post-mining involves considering a wide range of factors to ensure their long-term stability, environmental safety, and minimising maintenance. Some of the key factors considered in the design of STSFX include:

• Geotechnical and Structural Stability:
  • Detailed geotechnical investigations have been undertaken to assess foundation conditions. Geotechnical work will continue to be done as detail design progresses to ensure the geotechnical properties of the foundation soil and rock are well understood.
  • The Seismic Stability: a Cadia Mine Seismic Hazard Assessment and Time History Analysis study was undertaken by the Seismology Research Centre for the Cadia site in November 2019 (Seismology Research Centre 2019). The data from this analysis has been used to inform the design of the STSFX facility under normal operating conditions and post-seismic loading conditions.
  • Slope Stability: Ensuring stable slopes for both the dam and the surrounding terrain, using appropriate angles and reinforcement where necessary.
• Water Management Considerations:
  • The STSFX has been designed with a key focus on water management and management of seepage mitigation.
  • The water management systems include:
    • Hydrocycloning of the whole tailings to remove the sand fraction (resulting in lower permeability for the STSFX final tailings compared to those stored within the existing TSFs);
    • An underdrainage system beneath the hydrocycloned sand embankment to collect construction water from the hydraulically placed sand and emergent foundation seepage upstream of the embankment toe;
    • A continuous 1 to 10 m deep perimeter diversion drain beyond the downstream toe that will collect shallow foundation seepage;
    • Reclaim ponds (plus the Return Water Pond) downstream of the STSFX embankment that will capture runoff and emergent seepage.
    • Maintaining a central decant pond within the STSFX (reduces gradients near the embankment crest).
  • Rehabilitation and closure design forms a key part of creating a safe and sustainable landform post-mining. A detailed rehabilitation strategy will be developed for the CCOP.
  • Long-term monitoring and maintenance:
    • Instrumentation: installing monitoring equipment to track the dam’s performance over time, including measuring stress, strain, seepage, and other critical parameters.
    • Regular inspections: conducting periodic inspections to identify and address any issues early.
    • Adaptive management: adjusting management practices based on monitoring data and new insights.
  • Case studies and historical data
    • The STSFX design has taken into account the latest research and technological advances into the hydrocyclone dam designs and has been benchmarked against several cyclone sand dams around the globe including those at current Newmont operations.

The design of the sand dam intentionally allows air and water to infiltrate the wall. The wall is permeable to allow the free draining of water from the walls to be collected in drains constructed under the wall. The drains channel the water to a perimeter drain which is collected in a reclaim pond. The water is then pumped back to the process plant for reuse.

The sand dam wall is a free draining wall. It is not a concrete consistency.

As part of the Site and Technology Selection process Cadia considered the use of the voids created by the subsidence zones over both Ridgeway and Cadia East underground mines. While underground mining is still in progress, the safety issues associated with depositing tailings, whether thickened or unthickened over working areas of the mine is unacceptable to Newmont.

The sand is pumped to embankment wall as a slurry. As the sand settles and is compacted in the wall, the water freely drains out of the embankment wall and is captured by the underdrainage system beneath the wall. The drains capture the water and direct this to a perimeter drainage channel which takes the water to the reclaim ponds from where it is pumped back to the process plant for reuse.

Newmont will prioritise the control of dust. Meeting the obligations laid out in CCOP is vital to us as a business and vital to the community. Reducing production would form part of a range of responses to meet that commitment and will occur if required.

Cadia tests water to assess for environmental contaminants that could be of concern above certain site-specific guideline values such as pH, electrical conductivity (i.e. salinity) and also for heavy metals.

There have been some studies undertaken into alternate uses for tailings including a University of Queensland study that did some early investigation into the use of tailings in the manufacture of bricks. Cadia will continue to investigate further developments on alternate uses for tailings in the future.

We understand that this is an important topic for the community and nearby landholders. The risk assessment requires a number of other studies to be completed. We will provide an update on this risk assessment later in 2024.

Newmont is a signatory to the GISTM and is committed to its implementation. Newmont communicates progress towards this standard annually in August. The STSFX is being designed to meet GISTM standards.

The Newmont tailings management website provides background information on GISTM and Newmont’s approach to safe tailings governance. (Newmont Tailings Governance) GISTM requires meaningful engagement on tailings management which, for new/expanding facilities, includes discussing design options and incorporating/considering feedback and concerns into the decision-making process.

The Newmont tailings management website includes details on Newmont’s tailings governance systems and processes. This can be found here.  The Accountable Executive in Newmont is the Chief Technology Officer.

Cadia uses appropriate experts for its facility designs. These designers have the appropriate qualifications and experience to lead the design of the facilities. Newmont also utilises an independent tailings review board composed of subject matter experts to assist in providing appropriate technical governance as part of the wider governance processes for tailings facilities. The Engineer of Record will prepare and approve the final design prior to construction commencing.

Newmont has a site-specific responsible tailings facility person on each site, supported by enterprise level subject matter experts, operational teams and an independent technical review board.

A detailed geochemical assessment is being undertaken for the both the proposed coarse tailings and fine tailings streams that are produced for the cyclone sands dam. The preliminary results of the assessment indicate that the tailings and sand is non-acid forming (NAF) and is currently being independently reviewed. The results of this work will be presented in future EIS Technical Q&A forums.

We understand the request, it’s been six years since the slump, getting it right is taking more time than we had anticipated. The design of the repair needs careful and diligent work as well as independent oversight from experts. The designs for the NTSF Western and Eastern walls have been completed and these areas have also had their embankment buttressing work completed. An update on the remainder of the NTSF wall repair will be provided to community as soon as it is complete.

The CCOP EIS will provide an updated assessment of the impacts associated with the proposed extension of life of the operation and of the associated infrastructure such as the extension to the Southern Tailings Storage Facility Extension (STSFX), Southern Water Storage Dam, realignment of local roads and increased mining activity in Ridgeway Mine and Cadia East.

The update assessments will include:

• CCOP EIS | Air Quality Impact Assessment
• Assessment of Commonwealth Matters Report
• Cadia LOMT | EIS | Wind Tunnel Analysis
• CCOP EIS | Peer Review of Hydrogeological Conceptual Model Review and Update’
• CCOP EIS | Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment
• Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment
• Air Quality Impact Assessment
• Aquatic Ecology Assessment Report
• Biodiversity Assessment Report
• Bushfire Assessment
• Economic Impact Assessment
• Flood Study and Risk Assessment
• Greenhouse Gas Assessment
• Groundwater Impact Assessment
• Hazard Assessment
• Human Health Risk Assessment
• Land and Agriculture Impact Assessment
• Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment
• Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
• Rehabilitation Strategy
• Social Impact Assessment
• Surface Water Impact Assessment
• Tailings Geochemistry Assessment
• Traffic and Transport Impact Assessment

Cadia is investigating options for permanent noise monitoring locations and have signalled Newmont’s intention to adopt noise monitoring in Cadia’s submission into the EPA’s Environment Protection Licence review. Currently long-term noise monitoring is being undertaken at locations close to the TSF in relation to the TSF construction works to the east and west of the operation.

A full noise impact assessment will be conducted as part of the EIS. A number of changes have already been made to the project following feedback from community. The hydrocyclones that separate the tailings into coarse sand for construction of the sand embankment wall and the fine tailings that is stored are now proposed to be located at the main process plant following community feedback and assessment by the engineering team. This reduces the noise impacts to the community.

CCOP continues to work on the project details to minimise impacts on biodiversity and agricultural land where possible. Detailed land and biodiversity impacts will be included in the impact assessments for the EIS and the outcomes of these assessments will be shared in future Technical Q&A Forums.

As part of the EIS an Aquatic Ecology Assessment will be undertaken which includes taken a number of samples from the bores on site. This assessment is still in progress and the findings will be shared with community at a future Technical Q&A Forum prior to submission of the EIS.

A detailed Noise Impact Assessment will undertaken for CCOP and a mitigation plandeveloped. Cadia is not seeking any increase in noise limits above our current approvals. The outcomes of the impact assessments will be shared with the community before the EIS is submitted.

Cadia will be preparing a Noise Impact Assessment as part of the preparation of the EIS for the project. This assessment is still in progress and the outcomes of the assessment will include recommendations for mitigation and management measures for affected properties. Once the results of the assessments are known Cadia will engage with potentially affected properties to explore measures to mitigate any impacts.

Cadia is committed to maintaining air quality within the required limits of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of Particulate Matter (PM) 10 and 25 micrograms per cubic meter of PM2.5 for any 24-hour period to assist in minimising the impact that our activities could have on the local community and the environment.

To maintain openness and transparency, we have launched a dedicated real-time monitoring page to display air quality levels around the clock at four strategic locations on and around our site. To view real-time data displayed from Cadia’s monitors, click here  Live air quality monitoring.

The NSW Government also reports air quality data from various monitoring stations across the state, including monitors located at Errowanbang, Forest Reefs and Millthorpe. To view real-time data displayed from NSW EPA monitors, click here Air Quality NSW

The Air Quality Impact assessment being conducted considers all available baseline data across the project area and data available from Cadia monitoring sites as well as EPA monitoring sites.

The assessment will also include the improvements made by Cadia over the last 12 months including:

• Installation of a $14 million centre pivot irrigation system on the Northern Tailings Storage Facility;
• Installation of additional dust extraction units;
• Additional monitoring of vent rise emissions;
• Installation of additional dust sampling instrumentation in the underground mine.

Cadia is committed to maintaining air quality within the required limits of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of Particulate Matter (PM) 10 and 25 micrograms per cubic meter of PM2.5 for any 24-hour period to assist in minimising the impact that our activities could have on the local community and the environment.

To maintain openness and transparency, we have launched a dedicated real-time monitoring page to display air quality levels around the clock at four strategic locations on and around our site. To view real-time data displayed from Cadia’s monitors, click here  Live air quality monitoring.

The NSW Government also reports air quality data from various monitoring stations across the state, including monitors located at Errowanbang, Forest Reefs and Millthorpe.

A noise and vibration impact assessment will be conducted as part of the preparation of the EIS. Cadia is not seeking any increase in vibration limits above our current approvals. Once the outcomes of this assessment are complete the findings will be shared with the community at a future EIS Technical Q&A Forum.

A detailed Historic Heritage assessment is being conducted as part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation and will include how the project proposes to mitigate impact to identified heritage sites. When this is available we would welcome comments on how it could be improved based on local heritage knowledge.

CCOP will prepare the Historical Heritage Assessment report to identify important sites including structures. A Noise and Vibration Assessment will also review potential impacts to surrounding properties and structures.

The preliminary findings from the Historical Heritage studies and the Noise and Vibration Assessment will be shared with the community at an EIS Technical Q&A Forum. The final investigations from these studies will be shared with the community as part of the preparation of the EIS phase of the Project.

The Historical Heritage Assessment will seek to identify potential impacts. If required Cadia will strengthen or otherwise modify existing structures at its expense to withstand any adverse impacts from vibration caused by Cadia.

The CCOP team has undertaken two rounds of field investigations with Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAPs) and has prepared a draft of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (ACHAR), which has been shared with the RAPs.

A culturally sensitive summary outlining the study methodology, approach and preliminary findings of the investigations will be shared with the community at the EIS Technical Q&A Forum. Newmont will also conduct a Cultural Values Assessment in the coming months and will finalise the ACHAR once all feedback has been received from the RAPs.

The Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) is one of the final assessments that will be completed as part of the EIS. This is because the HHRA requires outputs from a number of different studies including noise, air quality, surface water and ground water, aquatic ecology and geochemical assessments.

As these studies are still in progress the HHRA will be undertaken once the outputs from these assessments have been completed. We anticipate the HHRA will be finalised in October 2024.

A visual impact assessment is a requirement of the EIS submission and CCOP is currently undertaking a Visual Impact Assessment for the project. In addition to this we have shared with nearby neighbours montages of the project from individual private properties and will continue to work with neighbours to address the visual aspects of the project.

As part of the preparation of the EIS, Cadia is required to undertake a Visual Impact Assessment (VIA). The outcomes of the VIA will be shared with the community ahead of the exhibition of the EIS. Preliminary observations indicate minimal additional impacts from night-time lights from the operation over and above those being currently experienced.

Yes. We do a calibration exercise to understand the existing measures being implemented. We simulate the existing conditions and test the modelling and the measurements. We seek to understand what has been measured and what is modelled to make sure it is doing the right things at the right times. We do make assumptions to calibrate the model including the effectiveness of management measures.

There are typically two groups of mitigation measures: standard measures (things that happen every day i.e. water carts) and routinely included in the models. The other group are reactive control measures. These measures can be simulated by modelling however, for conservatism, we generally don’t include these in base models in order to assess outcomes without them. Reactive control measures can subsequently be modelled, as required, to test the effectiveness of these controls.

We haven't looked at all of that information but we will look into the effectiveness of measures that have been implemented in the past.

We do act in an auditing role on some mine sites. We are currently undertaking the assessment for the CCOP rather than acting in an advisory role. It's common that a project evolves over time because it needs to meet environmental standards in order to demonstrate that it can reach environmental standards. This also involves advising of any necessary changes to the project.

A plan is important, but I wouldn’t consider a plan to be a mitigation.

A key part of the assessment process is looking at the whole life of the project and identifying scenarios that will form part of the assessment. One of the main scenarios is to look at a worst case and also representative cases. The Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) calls for construction and operational scenarios. We will assess whether modelling final stages is going to be a helpful exercise but generally when there is more rehabilitation occurring, you would expect the dust risk to be lower.

We look at long term records in terms of spatial distribution and time distribution. There is also a test in the assessment process which determines if the project is causing an exceedance, as without any operation in place, there will be exceedances from time to time. We aim to understand if the project is causing an exceedance and consider these in relation to the weather event.

Airen will be looking into this as part of the Air Quality assessment. Meteorological conditions are important for driving what happens at a particular monitoring location and what is in the dust. We will need to undertake those investigations to characterise all the different scenarios at different locations.

(Newmont response)

Part of this process, in collaboration with the air quality specialist, is to determine where to put some additional monitors. We anticipate there will need to be more monitors. When the results some back, if more monitors are needed, we will work with community to discuss the most effective location for additional monitors. Key considerations for the placement of additional monitors include the proposed extension of the Southern Tailings Storage Facility, changes to climatic conditions and taking into account the operations of the mine that have changed and will continue to change over time. Part of Cadia’s submission for a new Environmental Protection Licence, included proposing additional locations for air quality monitors. That EPL is still being considered and we are waiting to receive that. But regardless of the EPL outcomes the Air Quality assessment will likely make more recommendations of where we need monitoring and this report will be shared with community as part of the Environmental Impact Statement public exhibition and in future technical forums.

(Specialist response)

Part of the process is to work out where to put those additional monitors. We welcome feedback and suggestions from the community on potential suitable locations.

Yes, a key part of the assessment is to determine the suitability of the current air quality monitoring network and suggest any necessary changes to this network, both to meet the proposed changes to assets and operations as part of the CCOP and adequately monitor any changes to air quality as a result of the changes to operations proposed under the CCOP project.

(Question on notice – Newmont response)

Yes, Cadia is aware that the monthly air quality monitoring reports were stopped in May 2023. All data is available in a couple of formats – either via the live air quality monitoring page available on the Cadia website : Live Air Quality Monitoring | Cadia Valley Operations | Newmont, or all PM10 and PM2.5 data for the whole year is provided on the website in the EPL reporting. The first option is available in a graph, while the second option is available in a spreadsheet. EPL Monitoring Data | Cadia Valley Operations | Newmont. If you would like any further format, or assistance in interpreting the data, please reach out to the Social Performance team on 1800 063 943.

(Newmont response)

As part of our planning application for the CCOP, Newmont Cadia is required to provide a rehabilitation plan. This includes a schedule for when this will likely take place, which is predicted to be some time in early 2030. This is because the NTSF will be needed until late 2020, as outlined in the Modification 15 plan. As soon as the NTSF is retired from being a tailings dam, Newmont will start the rehabilitation process.

(Newmont response)

The CCOP project team will work in close collaboration with Airen, the technical specialists completing the Air quality assessment, to advise the timing for rehabilitating the NTSF. This information will be added to the air quality monitoring model, which will also take into account the potential noise and dust impacts that are associated with rehabilitating the NTSF site and the reduction in dust when the work is complete. We will tell Shane Lakmaker, the air quality assessment specialist, when we are planning to do the rehabilitation and then he will change his model. We have to account for the noise and the dust that's created as we do it. But then once it becomes rehabilitated, it lowers our dust content and that's put in the model as well.

(Newmont response)

As part of the CCOP, Newmont Cadia would be required to move the powerline at our cost. Newmont Cadia would work with the Owner of Flyers Creek and near neighbours regarding the potential relocation of transmission lines and any potential impacts during construction.

As part of the Noise Impact Assessment for the CCOP Environmental Impact Statement, Independent Specialists are undertaking studies to assess the potential noise impacts of the Project. These noise assessments are in line with government policies and guidelines that outline the acceptable noise levels for a project in construction and operation and outline the potential impact of noise on nearby residents. The assessment also considers the likely potential noise impacts if there are changes to the existing environment, such as the removal of trees, and how potential impacts can be carefully managed and, where possible mitigated. This would include a review of Newmont Cadia’s long term rehabilitation requirements and any additional visual screening to mitigate impacts to affected residents as much as possible.

(Newmont response)

The current approvals allow for a realignment of Cadia Road due to subsidence, however this is yet to take place. With CCOP extending the life of the mine, the cave subsidence has been remodelled and it is anticipated a realignment of a section of Cadia Road near the Cadia East Underground Mine site would be required. The concept design for the Cadia Road realignment is currently being finalised, however, it is anticipated the design would be a bit further to the east to what was predicted at the time of Cadia East approval.

(Newmont response)

The realignment is approximately 500m further east from its current location and 200-300 metres from the previously proposed location (as part of the Cadia East approval).

(Question on notice)

Yes, we have considered the roads around and leading into Cadia including Cadia Road, Errowanbang Road, Panuara Road, Forest Reefs Road, Four Mile Creek Road, Millthorpe Road, Orchard Road and Woodville Road. There is a table in the Traffic and Transport Assessment which will be released to the public at the time of the Environmental Impact Statement that will include information on each road studied and the types of road data used to inform the assessment.

(Newmont response)

The Traffic and Transport Assessment is designed to assess traffic volumes and impacts to roads. Cadia has mechanisms in place to promote appropriate employee and contractor behaviour in line with our values. However, it is fair to say that because it is offsite, (driver) behaviour can be difficult for us to enforce. We welcome any feedback where we can identify poor driver behaviour and help correct it. Cadia has, as part of its site planning, introduced the use of buses to reduce the number of vehicles travelling to and from the site and will launch a driver awareness campaign before the end of the year.

(Newmont response)

We have informed the bus company to make sure that they understand their expectations. We welcome calls on the community line, 1800 063 043. Knowing the identity of the vehicle and/or driver will assist us to manage poor driver behaviour.

The detailed design hasn’t been finalised, however, it will be shared with the community in the near future, as part of the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement. As part of the preliminary findings from the Traffic and Transport Assessment, it is predicted the proposed realignment of a section of Panuara Road would increase travel time between Four Mile Creek Road and Errowanbang Road by about 1.5 minutes. This will be refined as the detailed design progresses and shared as part of the public exhibition of the Environmental Impact Statement.

Yes. The Traffic and Transport Assessment has shown that, in the long term, there would be no significant change in traffic volumes above current levels and the draft conclusion of the study is that the roads are adequate for the demand.

We've assessed both the conditions now, and in the future with CCOP and what we're finding is that in terms of mid-block capacity, the “worst” sections of road during the Cadia peak hours are at level of service C and will continue at level of service C. As far as the intersections go, they were at level of service A and they've been modelled in a traffic modelling software, and its level of service is A.

(Post meeting note)

Levels of Service definitions are used to translate numerical performance measures (speed and travel time, delay, density, freedom to manoeuvre, traffic interruptions, safety) into a simple stratified system relating to road users’ perceptions of travel of the road. There are six levels of service, A through F, with A representing the best operating conditions from the users’ perspective (free flow) and F being the worst (flow breakdown, unsatisfactory). At Level of Service C, vehicles have a higher tendency to travel in groups, as there may not be opportunities for drivers to overtake or travel at their desired speed.

It is an important distinction that it's not the condition of the road in terms of things like potholes. Through negotiated Voluntary Planning Agreements with Blayney, Cabonne and Orange Shire Councils, Newmont Cadia provides financial contributions, some of which go towards public road maintenance to mitigate the impact of heavy vehicles and other road users travelling to and from the mine site.

There are two types of survey instruments. The first type is where we have the automatic tube counters, and we usually get a week or two of data out of that. Those tubes measure both speed and vehicle type. There's special software that can then work out what size vehicles are using those roads as well. This is called a classified count. The second type of data that we collect is intersection counts. It's usually done with a camera. We put the camera up and analyse the video and count how many cars are going through the intersection, so we know who's turning left, who's turning right and who's going straight through.

Yes, the survey used cameras at all the intersections in the survey. The cameras were removed after the surveys were completed.

The survey data was collected in March 2022, and surveys were conducted in consultation with Cadia regarding their operating conditions at that time. The surveys were delayed until operating conditions at Cadia were considered typical, with workers instructed to be back on-site. At the time the surveys were conducted, no travel restrictions were in place.

Crash data comes from police records. We don’t have a method of collecting near misses, but when there is a crash and it's reported, that's when it goes into the data.

(Newmont response)

The latest traffic surveys were undertaken in March 2022 which was prior to the Cadia Road closure due to Vent Rise 14 which was from July to December of 2022.

We don’t believe that traffic patterns will change as a result of the realignment of sections of Cadia and Panuara roads. During construction we anticipate that the road realignments will be constructed in parallel to the existing roads, to minimise impacts to all road users. A Construction Traffic Management Plan will be prepared to mitigate the impacts of any temporary lane closures to ensure the safety of residents and efficiency of the road network.

(Newmont response)

The intent is not to close the roads. We would anticipate that there will be a few days of interruption when the old and new roads are connected and at that time there will be traffic management but no total closure. Once completed the old section of road will cease to be used and road users will start using the new sections of the realigned roads. Newmont Cadia would notify the local community prior to any road construction work and would provide regular updates as the work progresses.

Any upgrades to road designs such as the intersection of Panuara Road and Cadia Road, would be done in accordance with the Austroads Guide to Road Design. That would include ensuring appropriate sight lines and, if required, a turning lane.

(Post meeting response)

Traffic data was obtained from Cabonne and Blayney Councils and reviewed as part of the study, however the data related to periods when operating conditions at Cadia remained atypical due to Covid restrictions. The survey program was developed to capture traffic conditions at all locations at a consistent time, at which Cadia’s operating conditions are known and typical.

From the Air Quality Impact Assessment, we receive an excel file which includes raw data from their model that has every receptor location with an Northing and Easting co-ordinate. It has every single compound that they've modelled, and it has results in micrograms per metres cubed, which is an air concentration. They also have a separate sheet which is a deposition rate, which is how far a compound might move on a particulate and that's how we estimate what might fall onto soil. We also take into account the baseline sampling that's been conducted by the Environmental Protection Authority in NSW.

Meetings have been held with the air quality impact assessment specialists (Airen Consulting) to discuss what is needed to inform the Human Health Impact Assessment studies as well as confirming the compounds in the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements. We also talked about dam locations and residential property locations.

The ABS data we are looking at has been updated since last year. It's a new lot of data compared to what was previously published. We are also considering the exposures to silica and will have more detailed breakdown of disease. We are looking at respiratory in particular in terms of the baseline community exposures from hospital admissions. We are considering a bigger range than we did in the previous assessment (as part of the Human Health Risk Assessment).

The assessment can't be undertaken on an individual basis. That's not the aim of a health impact assessment. The report is designed to look at human health for the average population. We appreciate there is a wide range of ways people interact with the environment, which is why we are really interested to hear about how you interact with the environment. This is why in the previous study we asked about home grown produce and the way that the conceptual site model is showing how people are exposed from the mine.

We haven't started the process to do the CCOP health impact assessment so I can't comment on what the outcomes will be. When we receive all the studies in the next few months that will then take place. However, there has to be an average base case for a 'typical' resident who lives near the mine, and then a sensitivity assessment which will consider higher than average exposures to certain things such as somebody who has their own chickens and they're eating their own home grown eggs the whole time.

We are more than happy to consider the report rather than the raw data to understand methodology, limitations etc. We are willing and open to receive any information. We prefer to receive it in a report. It's very difficult to receive results in the lab form when we're not understanding how they were collected, the base, quality control. If you are able to share the report via Cadia, we can consider it in our studies.

(Post meeting note: Dr Ian Wright’s study was provided and passed on to Sage Environmental Services for consideration).

Sage is committed to producing independent reports. As we did last time, we were willing to publish a report that showed there was elevated results and risks. Another thing that the Human Health Impact Assessment requires us to do, for the qualitative studies, is to look at the effects to community both positive and negative from the CCOP. That's something we'll be doing in a transparent matter. We go through the report, we then propose mitigation or suggested improvements along with the technical experts of those studies, ways in which it can be turned into neutral or positive outcome for the project. We are looking at the statistical data. We will be comparing the existing community health demographic data to Orange and to the NSW average.

Yes, it's a requirement of the work.

There are no individual case studies done. Any assessment done in NSW, or in Australia, has to be undertaken using a typical resident. It needs to be done in a demonstrated manner in accordance with the frameworks. Those frameworks are set up in the SEARs to meet the Department of Planning requirements to specifically to address assessment of human health impacts to community.

Cumulative impacts are interpreted in a number of different ways. One of these is to look the industries operating concurrently, such as agriculture, forestry and other mines. These industries are added to air quality models, for example, because you cannot just model the mine by itself to understand the potential cumulative effects. Another is to look at potential cumulative impacts on human health through lifestyle factors such back yard soil for growing foods, having chickens and cows, water sources into dams.

Our model will look at the soil conditions in the community before expansion is undertaken. We have some geological information for the area, which we will use. We also have the NSW EPA soil data. We recently had to look at geological soil concentrations for metals and when the NSW EPA data came out, the results were very similar. They married up for the assessment of a baseline. In terms of time, the baseline does not look back to the beginning of mine operations. It starts from now – or most recent studies of air quality, soil quality, etc, ie 2022/ 2023 – and looks at potential cumulative impacts based on what the CCOP is proposing.

No, we will not be considering the mine progress from the first day of operations until now. There is no information available to undertake that kind of study and that is typically not how assessments are done in terms of health impact. Cumulative impacts are taken into consideration by assessing the current status of the environment within and surrounding the mining operation. The future cumulative impacts are then assessed through modelling.

No, we don’t compare other non–mining areas. As we mentioned, the Human Health Impact Assessment is meant to clearly demonstrate what is happening here now, at Cadia and surrounds and any potential impacts with the addition of the CCOP over and above existing mine operations and other existing and proposed industries and activities.

Our assessment has to be done in 2024 based on the current demographics from the community using the latest ABS data. One thing we will look at is the hospital admissions and there'll be an assessment for potential of increases to those types of admissions from the modelled impacts that we get from the air quality impact assessment. Then we do a qualitative assessment for positive/negative impacts to the community wellbeing and health. We will be doing a quantitative assessment of an intake into our body based on the air emissions data from both air and soil and a number of different pathways.

(Newmont response)

In terms of this health assessment, the model takes the current baseline of the air quality from this year and assesses going forward for the 25 to 30 years that are remaining between now and the end of the life of mine extension (CCOP) if approved. Cumulative impacts are taken into consideration by assessing the current status of the environment within and surrounding the mining operation which includes the impacts from Cadia in the past 25 years. The future cumulative impacts are then assessed through modelling.

(Post meeting response from Umwelt)

An assessment of the impacts of the Project on people’s mental health and wellbeing (otherwise known as psychosocial impacts) will be included within the social impact assessment (SIA) as required by the SIA Guideline (DPE, 2023) and also within the SEARs that have been issued for the project. This is also consistent with international SIA practice as documented by the International Impact Assessment Association (IAIA).

These impacts will be further identified, understood and analysed using a combination of social research methods including engagement with community, research into the current community context, review of impacts associated with other project developments in the region and a review of studies on psychosocial impacts of mining projects in Australia. Umwelt will seek to understand wellbeing impacts from the perspective of those affected by the Project and will consider peoples lived and historical experiences and perceptions.

In our communication material, Cadia always attempts to refer to either the Commonwealth Department, or the NSW Government departments. If there is a reference in a document and this is not clear, it should be assumed it refers to a NSW Government department as this is the primary agency for approvals.

Preliminary findings from the historic heritage and Aboriginal cultural heritage assessments were shared with the community at the EIS Forum in August. The presentations from the specialists have been uploaded to the CCOP website, and there are separate facts sheets outlining the methodology and early findings from these studies under the FAQs and resources page of the CCOP website.

The Rehabilitation Management Strategy is required by regulators to ensure that Cadia, the community and the state government have an agreed minimum standard for rehabilitation of the mine at the end of the period of consent, in order to ensure that the management practices to be implemented are as current as possible at the time of rehabilitation. If Cadia were to submit these plans as part of the Environmental Impact Statement submission to the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure then the management practices of 2025 would be the implementation benchmark. For this reason the government regulatory agencies do not require submission of these more detailed plans until 5 years from closure.

Modelling has indicated that, once mining has been completed, the water table will rise in the subsidence zone areas over time and water will overlay the rock surface within the voids. This will form a water body that is most accurately described as a lake.

The quality of the water within the lake is an important aspect of the long-term legacy of the mine. It is the subject of ongoing studies, and the EIS submission will assess the quality of the water. Once this assessment has been completed it will be shared with the community.

The CCOP submission will outline a rehabilitation timeline as part of the submission. As indicated at previous EIS Technical Q&A Forums, for the NTSF this is likely to be in the early 2030s.

A landform evolution model for the STSFX will be developed and presented as part of the Environmental Impact Statement.

As part of the Rehabilitation and Final Landform Assessment, the team is exploring several possibilities for land use. This includes options for agricultural grazing land. A key part of understanding the feasibility of a variety of options includes seeking input from near neighbours and the community. These suggestions are not fixed or confirmed, but rather an opportunity for Cadia to work with community and within the constraints of the site, to put forward a fit-for-purpose solution that also addresses the requirements by the NSW Government DCCEEW to return the land as close to its original state as possible.

The blue lines represent indicative drainage lines which will exist when the rehabilitation is complete. These drainage lines run to ponds to manage the water flows over the long term.

Part of the rehabilitation strategy is to propose potential post mining land uses that are sustainable and provide a safe and non-polluting landform. In some cases, this will include options to return the land to as close as possible the pre-mining vegetation. In other areas, different restoration approaches may be needed.

Several catchment dams are used to collect and send the water that gathers at the base of the Upper Rodds Creek Dam back to the processing plant. Post mining, Cadia will continue to operate those catchment areas to manage the water until the rehabilitation is complete and the water quality returns to our release criteria. We are anticipating reaching this water quality within 10-15 years post closure.

Newmont is responsible for the water quality and rehabilitation of the site until such time as the closure criteria, set by the regulator, is met. We are anticipating reaching this water quality within 10-15 years post closure.

The current plan for upper Rodds Creek Dam is that it will be decommissioned. Water will be directed to flow around the outside of the tailings facilities by a drainage channel to a series of wetland ponds that manage water quality through filtration, ensuring that Newmont minimises harm to the surrounding environment.

As part of the EIS, Newmont Cadia will propose a topsoil depth and cover profile, considering all practical aspects and the vegetation trials conducted to date. The final closure design will be refined over the next 20 years, informed by ongoing vegetation trials. Additionally, Cadia plans to conduct various trials on the NTSF to explore opportunities for enhancing the land capability of rehabilitated TSFs by using different substrate and growing medium methods.

The Rehabilitation and Closure Assessment will include consideration of a range of different studies undertaken in relation to rehabilitation on the TSF, including the research undertaken by Vanessa Connick.

The gradient (slope of the outer wall) is about 3.75H:1V. This slope is informed by stability criteria, experience around the world with similar facilities and landform evolution modelling undertaken on the slopes. This will be presented in the rehabilitation assessment.

Test pitting is where an excavator digs a trench or hole, and a range of sampling and testing can be undertaken to understand the chemical and physical properties of the material. It is usually undertaken on areas such as waste rock dumps or areas below the infrastructure. These pits are used to understand geotechnical constraints, soil profiles and any potential impacts of Cadia's operations.

As part of the EIS, Newmont Cadia will propose a topsoil depth and cover profile, considering all practical aspects and the vegetation trials conducted to date. The final closure design will be refined over the next 20 years, informed by ongoing vegetation trials. Additionally, Cadia plans to conduct various trials on the NTSF to explore opportunities for enhancing the land capability of rehabilitated TSFs by using different substrate and growing medium methods.

The current designs proposed for the STSFX include a partial clay liner over the floor of the TSF to minimise impact to groundwater and to meet the required permeability requirements under the relevant standards.

As part of the EIS, Cadia will propose a topsoil depth and cover profile, considering all practical aspects and the vegetation trials conducted to date. The final closure design will be refined over the next 20 years, informed by ongoing vegetation trials. Additionally, Cadia plans to conduct various trials on the NTSF to explore opportunities for enhancing the land capability of rehabilitated TSFs by using different substrate and growing medium methods.

Newmont Cadia will complete a material balance for clay lining materials as well as capping material and topsoils for the facility. Extensive work has been done on available soil depths within the proposed development areas and these will be presented as part of the EIS.

Upon completion of the rehabilitation of the tailings facilities, drainage channels will be established and these are noted on the plans made available at the technical forum. Newmont is responsible for the water quality and rehabilitation of the site until such time as the closure criteria, set by the regulator, is met. These criteria will include a water quality requirement for these drainage channels to enable stock grazing.

The South Water Storage (SWS) facility was included to inform the community as well as the regulator on the potential scope of CCOP so that the impacts could be properly assessed. It was assumed that the facility was required for water security. In this case, the completion of expert assessment shows no benefit to the operation and significant impacts to the community, environment and heritage of the area. For these reasons it was withdrawn.

Newmont has no current intent to acquire further water licences. We acknowledge that we cannot make guarantees for the actions of management 10-20 years in the future.

There was no correspondence received by Cadia in this regard from any Registered Aboriginal Party consulted as part of the CCOP.

The area if the NTSF is ~740Ha
The area of the STSF is ~510Ha
The area of the STSFX in addition to the STSF is ~340Ha
The additional disturbance area as a result of the infrastructure for STSFX (including changes to Panuara Rd) is ~710Ha*

The CCOP project area defines the extent of the area at the commencement of background studies, including ecology, cultural heritage, and water. The impact assessments have covered the entire area to ensure we understand the maximum extent of impacts. The reduced disturbance area is what we have proposed for CCOP moving forward, and all disturbances will occur within this area.

The disturbance area refers to the maximum extent of potential disturbances required for regulatory assessment of the project. This area includes fixed infrastructure, dam walls, topsoil stockpiles, construction office and laydown areas and water management structures. The design process will continue to optimise this area to minimise impacts where possible.

The height of the STSFX wall will gradually increase over time, reaching its maximum height only at the end of the mine's life. We can begin planting vegetation soon after approval, allowing it to grow and effectively screen areas around the roads or reduce visual impact from various vantage points.

The disturbance areas have been adjusted based on ongoing design progress for the facilities and additional ecological fieldwork identifying flora and fauna in the area. As a result, the initially assumed extent of flora and fauna to be avoided is smaller than previously thought.

We do not intend to take any more water. We will continue using our current water supply, as we have no plans to increase our water usage going forward.

Cadia takes groundwater impacts to its surrounding properties with the utmost importance and seriousness. The groundwater monitoring and reporting in the Annual Review (formally called the Annual Environmental Monitoring Reviews (AEMRs)) concludes that any potential seepage from the TSF is contained to the immediate TSF area, in compliance with the project approval, and does not have an impact on downstream water receptors or the surrounding environment.

The independent report authored by Williams and Steward concluded that both the site location and proposed hydrocyclone dam are the most appropriate for Cadia. Professor Williams also concluded that while technology was appropriate the detailed designs would need to be supported by the results of further testing. Newmont Cadia intends to present these designs for approval by the regulator.

As noted in Cadia’s annual environmental report, there is no contamination of groundwater of surrounding properties as a result of Cadia’s activities. The current designs proposed for the STSFX include a partial clay liner over the floor of the TSF to minimise impact to groundwater. Detailed designs will be included in the EIS and the Groundwater impact assessment will demonstrate the continued minimisation of impacts to surrounding properties.

In the previous Cadia East EIS which led to the current approval, Cadia committed to progressive rehabilitation. This was completed and included the rehabilitation of the North and South Waste rock dumps. The CCOP EIS will also commit to progressive rehabilitation which will include the early closure and rehabilitation of the NTSF. Throughout the course of the approval Cadia will be held to account for this commitment by the regulator. As part of the CCOP, Cadia will outline the timing of rehabilitation and the planting of screening vegetation. The timing of this work will form part of the site plan going forward and will be regulated by the DPHI.

Cadia has developed a better understanding of emissions from VR8 and undertaken a series of projects including installation of scrubbers, continuous monitoring underground and more frequent emissions monitoring that is published on the Newmont Cadia website to address concerns and be more transparent. Regulators and community members of the Cadia Consultative Committee have been underground to view these systems and the scrubbers in operation. In addition, Cadia has proposed to instigate continuous monitoring of vent emissions as part of its submission to the regulator for the Environment Protection License (EPL) review.