amendment notice 1licence: w5474/2013/1 file no: 2013/003584 template: 1.3 2 amendment notice this...

Licence: W5474/2013/1 File No: 2013/003584 Template: 1.3 1

Works Approval Number W5474/2013/1

Works Approval Holder Exterra Resources Ltd

ACN 138 222 705

Registered business address

20 Kings Park Road

WEST PERTH WA 6005

Date of amendment 2 February 2017

Prescribed Premises Category 5 – Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore; Category 6 – Mine dewatering

Premises Second Fortune Gold Mine

Mining tenement M39/255, M39/649, M39/650 and miscellaneous licence L39/12

MENZIES WA 6436

Amendment

The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) has amended the above works approval in accordance with section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 as set out in this Amendment Notice.

Date signed: 02 February 2017

Tim Gentle

Manager Licensing – Resource Industries

an officer delegated under section 20 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA

Amendment Notice 1


Amendment Notice

This notice is issued under section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) to amend the Works Approval issued under the EP Act for a prescribed premises as set out below. This notice of amendment is given under section 59B (9) of the EP Act.

Amendment Description

On 28 October 2016 Exterra Resources Ltd (Works Approval Holder) submitted an application to the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) for an amendment to the Second Fortune Gold Mine Works Approval W5474/2013/1.

The Works Approval Holder has requested the following amendments:

1. The addition of processing infrastructure associated with Category 5 – Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore.

In addition to the requested changes, details of the already approved dewatering infrastructure specifications have been included in the Works Approval via this notice, in line with Departmental reform. The dewatering infrastructure has not been reassessed as part of this amendment.

Table 1 below outlines the proposed changes to the Works Approval requested by the Works Approval Holder, in relation to Category 5.

Table 1 – Proposed design capacity requested in amendment as application.

Category Proposed Design Capacity1 Proposed throughput Description of proposed

extent

5 613 200 tonnes per annum

156 000 tonnes per annum

Installation of static grizzly, primary jaw crusher, vibrating triple deck screen, washing screen, vibrating feeder, optical ore sorter including compressor and air drying, numerous mobile conveyors and wheel loader

Note 1: design capacity calculated on the basis that the processing plant has a capacity of 70 t/hour.

Other Approvals

Legislation Number Approval

Environment Protection Act 1986

5584/1 Clearing (Purpose) permit.

Mining Act 1978 39258 Mining Proposal

Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914

GWL 176218(2) Abstraction licence


Category 5 – Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore background and proposed design

The existing Second Fortune pit and associated infrastructure are located on mining tenements M39/255, M39/649, M39/650 and miscellaneous licence L39/12.

The existing infrastructure associated with the historical mining activity consists of one open pit, an underground shaft, two waste rock dumps, a decommissioned processing plant, tailings storage facility (TSF), evaporation pond, airstrip, camp and other supporting infrastructure.

Ore from the existing Run-of Mine pad will be processed through a screen and crusher prior to washing and sorting. The amendment to the Works Approval is to include the following infrastructure:

Static grizzly;

Primary jaw crusher;

Vibrating triple deck screen;

Washing screen;

Vibrating feeder;

Optical ore sorter including compressor and air drying;

Numerous mobile conveyors; and

Wheel loader.

A flow chart of the process is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Second Fortune ore crushing, screening and sorting process.

The proposed ore crushing, screening and sorting process has a maximum design capacity of 70 tonnes per hour which equates to 613 200 tonnes per annum if operating continuously at full capacity. The expected throughput is 156,000 tonnes per year. Based on an estimate of mining reserve, the crushing, screening and sorting process will operate for approximately 32


months. Process water for the washing process will be sourced from the already approved dewatering operation. The used wash water will be contained in a tank and decanted to a second tank to be reused as wash water. Slimes will be recovered from the first tank and added to the ore stockpile that will be taken off site for further processing at a toll treatment facility. Commissioning Commissioning is proposed in three phases:

1. “Pre-commissioning – comprising static checks on unpowered equipment to confirm that the infrastructure has been built according to specification.

2. Dry commissioning – comprising test operation of 'empty' equipment and facilities without the addition of fuel, ore, water or air.

3. Wet commissioning – comprising test operation of equipment and facilities with fuel, ore, water and air. Wet commissioning of each component will not begin until pre-commissioning and dry commissioning tests have been passed. During wet commissioning, material feeds to the plant will be gradually increased until they reach the steady-state operational volumes” (MBS Environmental, October 2016).

Location, environmental siting and potential receptors

Table 1 below lists the relevant human receptors in the vicinity of the prescribed premises.

Table 1: Receptors and distance to prescribed activity

Residential and Sensitive Premises Distance from Prescribed Activity

Laverton town Approximately 80 km to the north

Leonora Approximately 115 km to the north-west

Yundamindra pastoral homestead (closest residential receptor)

Approximately 35 km to the west north-west

Table 2 below lists the relevant environmental receptors in the vicinity of the prescribed premises.

Table 2: Environmental receptors and distance to prescribed activity

Environmental receptor Distance from Prescribed Activity

Minor, non-perennial watercourse1 900m from ore processing plant

Groundwater Water table is between 8 to 11 metres below ground level. Hydraulic gradient towards the north

Mount Linden Range banded ironstone vegetation complex (Priority Ecological Community (PEC) priority 3)

2

Located within the 50 km buffer

Threatened (Declared Rare) and Priority Flora under Priorities 1, 2, 3 and 4

2,3

Has the potential to be located on site

Note 1: The hydrology of the area is depicted in Figure 2. Note 2: Native vegetation clearing permit 5584/1 for the project area was granted by the Department of Mines and Petroleum on 11 July 2013. Note 3: A desk top assessment and site inspection conducted by MBS Environmental and commissioned by the applicant has determined the presence of threatened/priority flora to be unlikely or very unlikely.


Crown Water Reserve 5584, vested in the Department of Water partially overlays tenement M39/255 to the west of the pit. DoW advised that the water reserve is a historic water reserve which is no longer required.


Figure 2: Hydrology of the project area

Diagram depicting the surface water catchments and flows of the project area.


Risk assessment

Tables 3 and 4 below apply a risk assessment to the potential emissions which may arise from the amendment. Both tables identify whether these emissions present a material risk requiring regulatory controls.


Risk Assessment

Table 3. Risk assessment for construction of the processing plant

Potential Emissions

Potential Receptors

Potential Pathway Potential Impacts Material

Risk Reasoning

So

urc

e

Category 5: Construction, mobilisation and positioning of ore processing plant

Construction of processing plant.

Dust: Release of particulate matter from construction activities and vehicular movement


Air: Transport through air

Human health impacts – respiratory illness

No Yundamindra pastoral homestead is the closest sensitive receptor located approximately 35 km from the activity.

The Delegated Officer considers the distance to human receptors to be too great for health impacts to occur.

Threatened (Declared Rare) and Priority Flora

Priority Ecological Community (PEC), the Banded Ironstone Ridge Vegetation Complex

Air: Transport through air then deposition

Smothering and the potential suppression of photosynthetic and respiratory functions of vegetation

No The Works Approval Holder has provided the results of a desk top assessment that returned a number of Threatened (Declared Rare) and Priority Flora under Priorities 1, 2, 3 and 4. A site assessment was conducted by MBS Environmental on 18 December 2012 to determine the potential for conservation significant flora and fauna to be present. This assessment was commissioned by the applicant.

The site assessment has determined the likelihood of occurrence as unlikely or very unlikely due to the absence of habitat and the highly disturbed nature of the site.

In addition the site is located within the Priority Ecological Community (PEC) Banded Ironstone Ridge Vegetation Complex 50 km buffer. The desktop and site assessment concluded that this vegetation community is unlikely to occur in the vicinity and was not observed on site. The vegetation on site is degraded scattered mulga.

Noting the highly disturbed nature of the site and that the presence of declared or priority flora being unlikely, the Delegated Officer considers that the consequence is insignificant. The Delegated Officer considers that, based on the short-term nature of the construction activities, adverse impacts on vegetation survival will be rare. The Delegated Officer therefore considers the overall risk of dust emissions to be low.


Noise and vibration: Associated with construction activities and vehicular movement


Air/ground: Noise/vibrations

Human health/amenity impacts


The Delegated Officer considers the distance to human receptors to be too great for health impact to occur.

Use and storage of hydrocarbons

Waste: associated with seepage, leaks and spills of hydrocarbons

Terrestrial ecosystems, surface water ecosystems and groundwater systems

Land and waters: Sheet flow within the Lake Raeside catchment

Terrestrial ecosystems, surface water quality and ecological systems and groundwater quality degradation

No The closest surface water system (minor non-perennial watercourse) is 900m from the processing plant. Sheet flow within the process area drains to Lake Raeside however flood bunds divert clean stormwater around processing areas. The site is not located within a Public Drinking Water Source Area (PDWSA). The groundwater monitoring results provided with the application indicates brackish to moderately saline water (Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) ranging from 2900-17000).

The volumes of hydrocarbons stored on site are below the prescribed threshold of 1000 m

3 for category 73

(approximately 170m3).

Noting the low volumes of hydrocarbons on site, the Delegated Officer has determined that these emissions may have a minimal on-site impact and considers the consequence to be slight. The Delegated Officer considers that slight on-site impacts will probably not occur and has determined the likelihood to be unlikely.

The Delegated Officer therefore considers the overall risk of seepage, leaks and spills of hydrocarbons to be low.


Table 4. Risk assessment for the commissioning and operation of the processing plant

Potential Emissions

Potential Receptors

Potential Pathway

Potential Impacts

Material Risk

Reasoning

So

urc

e Category 5:

Operation of processing plant

Commissioning/operation of crushing and screening plant

Dust: Release of particulate matter from operation of crushing and screening plant, movement of stockpiled material and vehicular movement

Yundamindra pastoral homestead

Air: Transport through air

Human health impacts – respiratory illness


The Delegated Officer considers the distance to human receptors to be too great for health impacts to occur.

Threatened (Declared Rare) and Priority Flora

Priority Ecological Community (PEC), the Banded Ironstone Ridge Vegetation Complex

Air: Transport through air then deposition

Smothering and the potential suppression of photosynthetic and respiratory functions of vegetation

No The Works Approval Holder has provided the results of a desk top assessment that returned a number of Threatened (Declared Rare) and Priority Flora under Priorities 1, 2, 3 and 4. A site assessment was conducted on 18 December 2012 to determine the potential for conservation significant flora and fauna to be present.

The site assessment has determined the likelihood of occurrence as unlikely or very unlikely due to the absence of habitat and the highly disturbed nature of the site.

In addition the site is located within the Priority Ecological Community (PEC) Banded Ironstone Ridge Vegetation Complex 50 km buffer. The desktop and site assessment concluded that this vegetation community is unlikely to occur in the vicinity and was not observed on site. The vegetation on site is degraded scattered mulga.

Noting the highly disturbed nature of the site and that the presence of declared or priority flora being unlikely, the Delegated Officer considers that the consequence is insignificant. The Delegated Officer considers that, based on the short-term nature of the construction activities, adverse impacts on vegetation survival will be rare. The Delegated Officer therefore considers the overall risk of dust emissions to be low.

Noise and vibration: Associated with operation of crushing and screening plant and vehicular movement

Yundamindra pastoral homestead

Air/ground: Noise/vibrations

Human health/amenity impacts

No The Delegated Officer considers the distance to human receptors to be too great for health impacts to occur.

Yundamindra pastoral homestead is the closest sensitive receptor located approximately 35 km from the activity.


Waste: Associated with spills and leaks of process water from tanks. Process water used for washing ore could potentially contain leached metals and metalloids.

Surface water systems, surrounding soils and underlying groundwater

Direct discharge to soil.


Terrestrial ecosystems, surface water quality and ecological systems and groundwater quality degradation.

No The Premises is not located within a PDWSA and the closest surface water system (minor non-perennial watercourse) is located 900m north of the processing area.

The ore will be washed in plant comprising “portable tanks or vats”. Water will be decanted to a second tank for reuse as process water. Process water tanks are to be located in bunded areas and leaks will be inspected for daily. Process water will not be discharged on site.

The depth to groundwater is stated to be 8-11m and as stated by the applicant is located “in the weathered zone and is associated with structural features (fractures and joints) in the underlying rocks”. The application documents also states that the “structural features are mainly tight and offer limited permeability”. The groundwater monitoring results provided with the application indicates brackish to moderately saline water (Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) ranging from 2900-17000 provided within the application documents).

The groundwater is considered a sensitive receptor for the purpose of this assessment because it is partly brackish and therefore capable of being used for beneficial purposes.

Despite the no-chemical process the process water has the potential to contain leached metals and metalloids and due to fractures in the underlying geology. The Delegated Officer has therefore determined that these emissions may have a low level on-site impact and considers the consequence to be minor. The Delegated Officer considers that low level on-site impacts will probably not occur and has determined the likelihood to be unlikely.

The Delegated Officer therefore considers the overall risk of spills and leaks of process water to be medium.

Conditions will be included in the licence requiring the Licence Holder to undertake daily inspection of process water infrastructure.


Waste: Associated with sediment laden stormwater generated through the processing of ore

Surface water systems and terrestrial ecosystems

Land: Run-off to surface water systems

Terrestrial ecosystems, surface water quality and ecological systems

No The closest surface water system (minor, non-perennial watercourse) is located 900m north of the processing area.

A flood bund around the operational areas diverts stormwater around operation areas. The processing area is to be graded to a collection sump.

Noting the distance to sensitive receptors, the Delegated Officer has determined that these emissions may have a minimal on-site impact and considers the consequence to be slight. The Delegated Officer considers that slight on-site impacts will probably not occur and has determined the likelihood to be unlikely.

The Delegated Officer therefore considers the overall risk of sediment laden stormwater to be low.

Waste: associated with seepage, leaks and spills of hydrocarbons

Terrestrial ecosystems, surface water systems and groundwater systems


Terrestrial ecosystems, surface water quality and ecological systems and groundwater quality degradation.

The groundwater is considered a sensitive receptor for the purpose of this assessment because it is partly brackish and therefore capable of being used for beneficial purposes

No The closest surface water system (minor non-perennial watercourse) is 900m from the processing plant. Sheet flow drains to Lake Raeside however flood bunds divert stormwater around processing areas. The site is not located within a PDWSA. The groundwater monitoring results provided with the application indicates brackish to moderately saline water (Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) ranging from 2900-17000 provided within the application documents).

The groundwater is considered a sensitive receptor for the purpose of this assessment because it is partly brackish and therefore capable of being used for beneficial purposes.

The volumes of hydrocarbons stored on site are below the prescribed threshold of 1000 m

3 for category 73

(approximately 170m3).

Noting the low volumes of hydrocarbons on site, the Delegated Officer has determined that these emissions may have a minimal on-site impact and considers the consequence to be slight. The Delegated Officer considers that slight on-site impacts will probably not occur and has determined the likelihood to be unlikely.

The Delegated Officer therefore considers the overall risk of seepage, leaks and spills of hydrocarbons to be low.


Decision The Delegated Officer has determined that the key emissions associated with the construction of the processing plant are noise and dust. The Delegated Officer has determined that the key emissions associated with the operation of the processing plant during operation are noise, dust, spills and leaks of process water and hydrocarbons and potentially contaminated stormwater. The Delegated Officer considers that the risks associated with these emissions are low due to the distance to sensitive receptors with the exception of process water. Groundwater consisting of TDS below 7000mg/L is considered to be of potential beneficial use. The TDS levels in sampled groundwater at the premises indicate TDS ranging from 2600 mg/L to 17000 mg/L. The risk from process water has been determined as medium due to the potential for it to contain metals and metalloids. Regulatory controls relating to process water will be included in the licence. Category 5 – processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore is to be included on the Works Approval. Infrastructure conditions including specifications are to be added to the Works Approval via this amendment notice. The already approved dewatering infrastructure associated with Category 6 has also been specified via this amendment notice in line with Departmental reform.

Amendment History

Instrument Issued Amendment

W5474/2013/1 10/10/2013 Works approval issue

W5474/2013/1 02/02/2017 Amendment Notice 1:

Addition of Category 5 – Processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore

Addition of infrastructure conditions

Amendment 1. The Works Approval is amended by the addition of Category 5 – Processing or

beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore with a production or design capacity of 613, 200 tonnes per annum.

2. The Works Approval condition 1.1.2 has been amended by the deletion of the text

shown in strikethrough below and the insertion of the red text shown in underline below:

1.1.2 In the works approval, unless the contrary intention appears:

“the Act” means the Environmental Protection Act 1986; “CEO” for the purposes of notification means;

Chief Executive Officer


Department Div.3 Pt. V EP Act Locked Bag 33 Cloisters Square Perth WA 6850 [email protected] “Department” means the department established under s.35 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and designated as responsible for the administration of Division 3 Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986;

“Code of Practice for the Storage and handling of dangerous goods” means the Storage and handling of dangerous goods, Code of Practice, Department of Mines and Petroleum, Government of Western Australia; “dangerous goods” has the meaning defined in the Dangerous Goods Safety (Storage and Handling of Non-explosives) Regulations 2007; “Director” means Director, Environmental Regulation Division of the Department of Environment Regulation for and on behalf of the Chief Executive Officer as delegated under section 20 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986; “Director” for the purpose of correspondence means:

Regional Leader – Industry Regulation (Goldfields) Department of Environment Regulation PO Box 10173 KALGOORLIE WA 6430 Telephone: (08) 9080 5555 Facsimile: (08) 9021 7831 Email: [email protected]

“environmentally hazardous material” means material (either solid or liquid raw materials, materials in the process of manufacture, manufactured products, products used in the manufacturing process, by-products and waste) which if discharged into the environment from or within the premises may cause pollution or environmental harm. Note: environmentally hazardous materials include dangerous goods where they are stored in quantities below placard quantities. The storage of dangerous goods above placard quantities is regulated by the Department of Mines and Petroleum; “premises” means the area defined in the premises map in schedule 1 and listed as the premises address on page 1 of the works approval; “Schedule 1” means schedule 1 of this works approval unless otherwise stated; “works approval” means this works approval numbered W5474/2013/1 and issued under the Environmental Protection Act 1986; “works approval holder” means the person or organisation named as the works approval holder on page 1 of the works approval;

3. The Works Approval is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough

below and the insertion of the red text shown in underline below: 1.2.1 The works approval holder shall construct the works in accordance with the documentation detailed in Table 1.2.1:

mailto:[email protected]


Table 1.2.1: Construction requirements

1

Document Parts Date of document

Second Fortune Gold Project Works Approval Application Mining Leases 39/255, 39/649, 39/650 and Miscellaneous Licence 39/12 prepared for Exterra Resources Ltd by MBS Environmental

All June 2013

Email Correspondence from Darren Graham of MBS Environmental, Second Fortune Gold Mine Dewatering Pipeline, Supporting Documentation for Works Approval

All 28 August 2013

Evaporation Pond Design Report prepared for Exterra Resources Ltd by Coffey Mining Pty Ltd

27 May 2013

The Works Approval Holder must carry out the Works within the Premises in accordance with the requirements set out in Table 1.2.1 (Stage 1) and Table 1.2.2 (Stage 2). The Works Approval Holder must not depart from the specifications in Column 1 and 2 for the infrastructure in each row of Table 1.2.1 and Table 1.2.2 except:

a) where such departure is minor in nature and does not materially change or affect the infrastructure; or

b) where such departure improves the functionality of the infrastructure and does not increase risks to public health, public amenity or the environment; and is in accordance with all other conditions of this Works Approval.

Table 1.2.1: Construction of dewatering infrastructure and equipment (Stage 1)

Column 1 Column 2

Infrastructure Construction specifications

Dewatering pipelines (2)

110 mm polyethylene100 PM16

Flow meters to be installed on dewatering pipelines from the existing pit to the evaporation ponds

Contained within bunding in the form of earthen ‘v notch’ drains with collection sumps located at suitable low points to capture leaks from the pipeline with sufficient capacity to contain any spill for a period equal to the time between routine inspections.

Return water pipeline

110 mm PE100 PM16 polyethylene

Contained within bunding in the form of earthen ‘v notch’ drains with collection sumps located at suitable low points to capture leaks from the pipeline.

Settling Dam – Cell 1

Maximum height 1.9 m

Storage capacity 550 m3

Minimum freeboard of 500 mm above the design storage level

Compacted clay liner to a minimum thickness of 300 mm

Lined to achieve a permeability of less than 1 x 10-8

m/s

Constructed in accordance with Figure 1 and Figure 2.

Settling Dam – Cell 2


Storage capacity 550 m3




m/s

Constructed in accordance with Figure 1 and Figure 2.

Evaporation Pond - Cell 1


Storage capacity 49 000 m3




m/s

Constructed in accordance with Figure 1 and Figure 2 in Schedule 1.

Evaporation Pond Maximum height 1.8 m


Table 1.2.1: Construction of dewatering infrastructure and equipment (Stage 1)

Column 1 Column 2

- Cell 2 Storage capacity 47 000 m3


Compacted clay liner to a minimum thickness of 300 mm Lined to achieve a permeability of less than 1 x 10

-8 m/s

Emergency spillway designed to only activate in a greater than 1 in 100 year Average Recurrence Interval, 72-hour duration storm event

Constructed in accordance with Figure 1 and Figure 2 in Schedule 1. Note 1: Maximum height relative to finished ground level exterior to pond/dam.

Table 1.2.2: Construction of processing infrastructure and equipment (Stage 2)

Column 1 Column 2

Infrastructure Construction specifications

Static grizzly Located in an area graded to capture and settle sediment laden water generated in the area

Stormwater is diverted around operational areas

Process water will be contained in sealed tanks in bunded areas

Primary jaw crusher

Vibrating triple deck screen

Washing screen

Vibrating feeder

Optical ore sorter including compressor and air drying

Mobile conveyors

Wheel loaders

Wash water tanks (2)

4. The Works Approval is amended by the deletion of the following condition (1.2.2)

1.2.2 The works approval holder, except where storage is prescribed in section 1.3, shall ensure that environmentally hazardous materials are stored in accordance with the Code of Practice for the Storage and handling of dangerous goods.

5. The Works Approval is amended by the deletion of the text shown in strikethrough

below and the insertion of the red text shown in underline below: 5.1.1 The works approval holder shall submit a compliance documents for Stage 1 and Stage 2 to the CEO Director, following the construction of the works and prior to commissioning of the same.


6. The Works Approval is amended by the insertion of Figure 2 below: Figure 2: Map depicting the location of key infrastructure


Appendix 1: Key Documents/References

Document Title Availability

1 Guidance Statement: Regulatory Principles. (DER, 2015) Accessed at https://www.der.wa.gov.au

2 Guidance Statement: Setting conditions (DER, 2015

3 Guidance Statement: Licence duration (DER, 2016)

4 Guidance Statement: Decision Making Licensing and works approvals (DER, 2016)

5 Second Fortune Gold Project Works Approval Application Mining Leases 39/255, 39/649, 39/650 and Miscellaneous Licence 39/12 prepared for Exterra Resources Ltd by MBS Environmental (June 2013)

DER record A640423

6 Application for an amendment to works approval received 28 October 2016

DER record A1187315

7 Draft amendment notice sent to Works Approval Holder on 20/01/2017

DER record A1361859

8 Signed 21-day waiver and comments received 30/01/2017 DER record A1367371

https://www.der.wa.gov.au/


Appendix 2: Summary of Licence Holder Comments

Comments received

Environmental risk DER consideration of risk

30/01/2017 Request to amend the production capacity to 156, 000 tonnes per annum on page 13. This has been further clarified as the proposed throughput by email on 1 February 2017.

The Delegated Officer has considered the information and has corrected the production or design capacity to be 613, 200 tonnes per annum. The nominated throughput of 156,000 tonnes per annum will be conditioned in the licence. In addition to this change, the risk assessment has been amended for the operation of the premises to align with the draft licence and decision documents. The conditions of the works approval are not affected.

1/02/2017 Request to have the works staged. Stage 1 for the category 6 – mine dewatering infrastructure and stage 2 for the category 5 – processing or beneficiation of metallic or non-metallic ore.

The Delegated Officer has considered and agreed to the change. Condition 1.2.1 and tables 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 have been amended to include the references of Stage 1 and Stage 2. In addition, condition 5.1.1 has been amended to allow for compliance documentation to be submitted for Stage 1 and Stage 2.