State Significant Development
Bengalla Coal Mine - Continuation
Muswellbrook Shire
Current Status: Determination
Interact with the stages for their names
- SEARs
- Prepare EIS
- Exhibition
- Collate Submissions
- Response to Submissions
- Assessment
- Recommendation
- Determination
Bengalla Continuation Proj
Consolidated Consent
Modifications
Archive
Request for DGRS (3)
Application (1)
DGRs (2)
EIS (25)
Submissions (117)
Public Hearing (7)
Response to Submissions (10)
Assessment (1)
Recommendation (2)
Determination (3)
Approved Documents
Management Plans and Strategies (20)
Reports (6)
Independent Reviews and Audits (3)
Notifications (7)
Other Documents (10)
Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.
Complaints
Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?
Make a ComplaintEnforcements
Official Caution issued to Bengalla Mining Company Pty Limited (SSD 5170 as modified, Muswellbrook LGA)
On 24 September 2020, the Department issued an Official Caution to Bengalla Mining Company Pty Limited (BMC) for failing to implement the approved Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) at the Bengalla Mine on 12 May 2018 and 7 August 2018. AQMP’s must be implemented to ensure that air quality impacts from developments are suitably managed and mitigated. The Department will continue to monitor compliance with conditions of consent.
Inspections
17/04/2020
7/05/2020
4/11/2020
19/01/2021
26/04/2021
16/11/2021
10/12/2021
28/06/2022
27/09/2022
25/01/2023
16/02/2023
25/10/2023
14/11/2023
8/03/2024
20/11/2024
21/11/2024
Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.
Submissions
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Nick Glenn
Support
Nick Glenn
Message
Baker & Farrow Pty Ltd
Support
Baker & Farrow Pty Ltd
Message
PETER LANE
Object
PETER LANE
Message
Noise:
Volume 1 Section 8: Table 40 shows 155 in the significantly affected section. We are the closest receiver to the West of this development.
Table 42: also shows us as being significantly impacted by this development.
I cannot find any information as to the noise impact of the realignment of the link road in year15. There is mention in Appendix H table 16 of link road construction noise exceedance, but no mention in table 18 "Existing and proposed operational traffic noise,LAeq" This relocation will have a major impact as now it is approx 1km from our residence after realignment it will be approx 200m from our house with traffic traveling at 100kh. Also this road will eventually be a major heavy vehicle bypass fitting in with MSC western roads strategy. There is no reference to 155 in Appendix Q section 7. and 7.1
Dust
Volume 1 Section 8 Table 31 shows exceedances for 155 but only in year 24. I would have thought that being the closest western receiver approx 500m from the disturbed area and mining coming towards us the impacts from dust and blasting would have been more significant. Especially cumulative impacts from MAC, Mt Pleasant and Mangoola. Left out of Appendix G Table 10-20. What are the cumulative impacts when surrounded by these 3 major developments especially when taking into account our elevation? Surely the impacts from this development and MAC would be far more significant than has been stated.
Groundwater
Appendix K Section 11.5: Impacts on Groundwater Users: There is only one bore on private land GW073576 which is within the modeled zone of depressurization associated with the project. That is our bore. The drawdown at this bore is predicted to be about 2m. This is quite a vague answer considering it is just outside the Aquifer Interference Policy. To trigger the AIF the drawdown is to be greater than 2m. There is no mention of the impact to discharge rates or water quality. 12:3 states "It is not possible to collect all the data characterizing the whole groundwater system in detail and therefore various assumptions have to be made during development of the groundwater model". Modeling and assumptions are not real scientific evidence of the true impacts of interfering with underground aquifers.
Blasting
Section 8:4:3 Impact assessment states "BMC blast monitoring results for the period 2007-2011 indicates that a minimum setback distance from non mine owned receptors of 1470m from project blasting would be appropriate to ensure impacts remain below relevant criteria". Our residence will be approx 900m from the proposed pit. Closer than property 156. This is considerably closer than the study's appropriate distance of 1470m and therefore impacts in our opinion would be significant. When you take into account the massive plumes of orange gasses that escape after each blast are full of Nitrates and Sulphates 900m would be unlivable. Appendix G 15:4 acknowledges that the project is moving west and as it does the blast fume impacts to the west would increase." It would become increasingly more complicated and restrictive to apply only simple blast permissions to prevent impacts in this situation". One would also have to question the modeling for blast fume when there is so much inconsistency between each blast as to how much gas they produce. As stated earlier most blasts in the Valley now have an orange yellow cloud due to cheaper explosive and varying degrees of moisture in the blast hole. But all looks good on paper. Maybe that is why our tank water has a ph5. Used to be 7.2.
Bengalla link road realignment
Appendix H Table 16 shows noise exceedances during construction of the realignment of the link road at 155 but there is no mention of the impacts of moving the road to within 200m of our residence. This will be a major noise and visual impact. Section 12 in the Conclusion mentions the impacts of construction at receivers here but not the ongoing impact of realignment. This link road is also earmarked for use as a heavy vehicle bypass by MSC under their Western Roads Policy. Moving it to within 200m of our house will have major impacts. Especially at change of shift when mines traffic increases substantially.
Visual Impacts
Appendix I Section 7.2 Residences: Western Sector. The visual impacts on residents with views to the project in this sector will continue to be moderate to high. I cannot find any information on the visual impact of the realignment of the link road which would be difficult when only 200m away.
7.7.2 Direct Light Effects: The only locations that will have direct line of sight to night lighting are elevated locations such as Roxburgh road that overviews any screening topography and vegetation. This impact has just increased with the mine now in a direct line of sight after taking out a ridge line. As the mine moves further west we will not have the benefit of screening from trees and ridge line. The overburden mountain is approx 50m higher than what was in the original EIS. Is the height of that going to change?
Property Values. This topic has been bought up with each new mine development and still has not been properly addressed. This is a question for Planning "How is it possible for landowners to get proper valuations supposedly not affected by mining when they are surrounded by mining developments"?
We envisaged up till now of being able to stay here and live out our lives, but this development makes our home unlivable. The impacts will be quite significant.
Stephen Fuller
Support
Stephen Fuller
Message
Mark Weeks
Support
Mark Weeks
Message
I have two childern (20month old boy and girl twins)completely depending on the Bengalla continuation project to provide a stable source of income to our family. As a member of the Upper Hunter community and as a mining supervisor (OCE) at Bengalla I can say without any doubt that the employees and management are and will be in the future, 110% committed to being environmentally conscious members of our community. No one at the mine wishes to destroy their own "backyard" with many employees raising families within 20km of the mine it is in every employees best interest to run a productive yet environmentally responsible operation.
I ask that you please take into account the overwhelming benefits that the extension will provide for our community, our families and for the country when making your decision.
Yours Sincerely
Mark Weeks
Tim Wodward
Support
Tim Wodward
Message
From the day you walk in the door you quickly learn that it's not our right to mine but a privilege that is extended to us by our neighbours and the community. We have a responsibility as individuals and a company to protect the environment, consider our neighbours and the community during our daily work. In the last six years I have seen this practiced on a daily basis time and time again. I am proud to say I work at Bengalla and we practice what we preach.
Bengalla has a presence within the local community through it's sponsorship of local events and community donations, which brings the community together.
It is for the above reasons that I support the continuation of Bengalla.
Tim Woodward
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Justin Harris
Support
Justin Harris
Message
Stephen Penfold
Support
Stephen Penfold
Message
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
I have been a resident of Muswellbrook and an employee of Bengalla Mine for the past two years. During my time in Muswellbrook I have had the pleasure to be welcomed into a community that is passionate and very proud of its local mining history. I can say without question that I am equally proud to be employed by a company that is committed to the health, safety and future of its environment, its community and its employees.
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Christopher Newnham
Support
Christopher Newnham
Message
I wish to write in support of this project going ahead.
Muswellbrook and Singleton have in the time I have been living here benefited significantly from the jobs that the mining industry creates. As evidence of this, one only has to examine the new developments, facilities and infrastructure improvements that have occurred in the last two years as a direct consequence of having a healthy mining industry.
It would be very unfortunate for people's jobs and the surrounding towns / districts if the proposal was rejected.
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Dean Wise
Support
Dean Wise
Message
Donna Wise
Support
Donna Wise
Message
* Bengalla mine provides consistent long term employment to people in the Upper Hunter community. The community is further enhanced through donations and contributions to charitable organisations, and the support of projects to benefit residents.
* The company is involved in environmental initiatives such as bird watching and tree planting.
* The management of the visual impact of the mine site on the town of Muswellbrook has been well handled. The view from my home directly onto the mine is adequately pleasing.
Kristen Clapham
Support
Kristen Clapham
Message
Whenever the Mines in the area have had economic downturns, the flow on effect on the community has been significant which strongly indicates to me that the other commercial sectors rely very much on Mining Industry. Having experience in Hospitality in the local area, this includes the Wine & Horse industries.
I would be very disappointed to see this submission rejected and believe the impact on Muswellbrook and surrounding communities would be detrimental.
Greg Hickey
Object
Greg Hickey
Message
Anthony Burnett
Support
Anthony Burnett
Message
Many believe the local mining industry is seen to be at a cross roads with agriculture in the Upper Hunter. I disagree with these comments and strongly agree that mining and agriculture can work together for the benefit of the community.