Bowdens Silver

Thankyou for allowing me to voice my concerns. I feel that these towers will ruin the visual amenity of the village of Lue. I would also be concerned about the health of the community.

Thank you for my opportunity to make a submission.

The existing 500kv line in question was built some 40 odd years ago, with it crossing the Lue rd about 2km East of Lue. This section is visible to some residences in the village, however the impact is minimal, given the screening of trees and the fact that nearly all residences have been built with a Northerly aspect.
Since then, many properties would have been onsold, with new entrants being aware of the existing line. As part of their due diligence, many people would have considered the Northerly views, which to this day, remain "clean" and free from man made visual impact.
I believe the amendment clearly underplays the visual impact of the proposed realignment. Most residences in the village will have their views impacted by position of at least two towers (based on commentary in the amendment, i assume them to be P3 and P4), some residences on the Southern limits of the village, with their elevation, may see P2 and possibly P1. The impact is varied, due to screening by trees, however, it should be noted that the realignment will be permanent, mature trees cannot be regarded as permanent screening.
The residences along Cox st and the acreage blocks North of Cox st will be affected due to the outlook over the ridgelines where the proposed towers are to go.
To the West of the village are several acreage blocks, some of which are well elevated, with the residences enjoying commanding views over the valley, to the ridgelines and beyond. These ridges can be clearly seen from the Lue rd as far as around 9-10km to the West. From these viewpoints, it will be possible to see additional towers, being P5, as well as P3, P4, and possibly P2. I have attached an image taken from the Western edge of Lue village, showing the approximate locations and height of the most visible towers.
It should be noted too, that the section being replaced is largely hidden from view, being unable to be seen from the West. I note an alternate route (to the East) was looked at but rejected. However, i believe this alternative would present a better outcome as the visual impact etc would be on a far smaller scale.

Other points of concern are......

There has been little to no consultation with anyone in regard to the realignment and the effects of visual amenity, construction noise, as well as the scarring due to clearing of a 50-70metre wide easement.
Given the turnover of property since the original line was constructed, a large number of residents would be affected by the impact which could not have been foreseen until now.
Many residents would still be unaware, even those who may have made submissions to the original EIS. The document is long and complicated and many respondents would have based their submissions on a basic understanding of the mines impact, and therefore, may have missed many details in the proposal.
Another concern is the visual impact may be compounded should sections of the proposed mine site become visible to the West as well as the possible visual intrusion of the tailings dam.
It appears that Bowdens are seeking approval of the realignment based on plans they have sourced/commissioned. There are no plans/designs or firm approvals by TransGrid, the operator/manager of the powerline. As such, it is entirely possible the realignment can attain approval, yet, when it comes time for actual design and construction, be somewhat different to what was approved.

Other concerns include...
Bowdens claim (Strategic Context p.10) that 79% of all submissions were in favour of the proposal. However, and i ask the department for clarity, how many of these submissions were of a "pro forma" style, with little or no content/comment? It is conceivable that some of those submissions were lodged at the encouragement of a related party to the proposal, and as such, could not be deemed to be valid.
Therefore the results of "for v against" could be skewed to the affirmative, as i believe(and stand to be corrected), that objections cannot be left blank, they must contain content.

The amendment document (164 pages) has around 120 pages of "updates" and appendices... as an "average" person, i find this concerning.....it would appear as though the "soccer field" has been presented, submission/responses made, and then later, the "goalposts" are moved in the hope that no one notices......Given the "amendments", is it unreasonable to be of the opinion that the EIS should be re submitted in its entirety, given that many people will not have the skills or time to properly digest the amendments or appendices, let alone the entire EIS.
Further, given that Silver Mines Ltd claim to have reduced the size of the mine proposal, in order to reduce the footprint, and possibly, reduce the opposition to the project, it is concerning that SVL have, as announced on 5/8/2021, that they intend to commence a scoping study into an underground operation in conjunction with the proposed open cut mine. To many, this would appear to be "expansion by stealth", adding to the belief that the proposal be submitted again, in its entirety, in order to give everyone the opportunity to consider the project in its entirety and in one comprehensive document.....thank you

I am objecting to the movement of the main powerline near Lue. The new situation of the powerline is within the view of the village. It would destroy the outlook of the village.
I object to the granting of a mining licence so close to Lue and Lawsons Creek.

Our objections are outlined in the attached document.

I support the project because of the very material positive economic outcomes for this regional community. With the world and in particular the Asian region suffering severe economic uncertainty because of the Covid 19 pandemic plus geo-political tensions between Aust and China, it is important to support domestic projects which can support the future of our population for years to come. This project has also addressed all the potential environmental and indigenous heritage issues in a very thorough and adequate way in the EIS.

Hello Major Projects
The 500KV powerline works have been brought into the current development as part of the same DA.

A. In order to present this part of the project in factual detail, wouldn't a complete and approved by Transgrid design need to be presented?
This would include final locations of ALL the relocated towers?
The locations of all the access roads that need to be built allowing access to the new and existing towers that are being removed need to be presented on a map?

"The exact location of the re-aligned section of the line would be determined by TransGrid
following the completion of three stages of investigation.
Stage 1: A desktop investigation incorporating a review of the available environmental
information (principally from the EIS and supporting assessments), a review of the
indicative route and development of a concept design route and transmission line
profiles (to ensure sufficient ground clearance exists) and the development of a
construction program, including the ability to minimise power outages when the
new section of the transmission line is commissioned.
Stage 2: A scoping study including on-site investigations such as geotechnical studies.
Stage 3: A detailed design stage for all of the work involved in the construction, connection
of the new transmission line and dismantling of the existing transmission line".
None of these steps above have been undertaken as yet.

B. A more accurate list of the equipment required to construct the roads and tower pads, dig and form foundations and assemble/disassemble the towers is required.
Missing items at a glance include concrete trucks to pour footings for the towers, water carts to keep roads free from dust, graders & rollers forming the roads and tip trucks to bring in gravel to build the roads so the construction equipment such as large cranes and semi trailers can get up the hills.
The roads will need more than a swipe with a D9 dozer to get all the cranes etc up there.

C. So far a consultant has completed an estimate on where the towers go, how long the construction will take and with that all the noise, vibration, traffic, dust and visual issues that go with the construction design.
Should the design become more complex or difficult than the current estimates, what happens to all the noise parameters, dust calculations, visual amenities problems?
How can anyone make a submission good or bad based on a potentially flawed design and the effects on the community based on that flawed design?
Have the final design completed to "Stage 3" and then present it to the public for submission.

4. Visual amenities. At this stage the actual locations and quantities of towers to be installed is an approximation only.
Other than the indicative design on the map the only other pictures of what the towers will look like and where they will be located is a cartoon from a 3D program. The picture is not only of poor quality it has no buildings or reference points on the diagram to indicate where the picture is meant to be taken/designed from.
Can pictures be taken from multiple locations/residences along Lue Rd and then have towers superimposed on these pictures to show the public actually what they would see should the towers be moved. Nearly every house in the village and the properties surrounding it face North. This means the new towers will be right in their vision where as they weren't before.
There is also several homes that exist to the west of the powerline that the towers would now be closer to.
Have consideration and detailed discussions with these people been undertaken to discuss the effects that the construction phase as well as the long term effects these residents will be subjected to once the towers are moved?
Discussions need to include detailed construction steps, real statistics, perceived future pictures/views and actual truths on what effects the movement of these towers will have on each property individually not a generic across the board view from the point of view of the company.

5. Noise. Has any consideration been made for the increased noise that the towers will add to the noise base line?
If you are unaware of the noise these powerlines can make then stand under one in summer.
Once the final design has been approved for construction a complete noise map calculation needs to be calculated and presented for submission.

6. Timing. The powerline relocation has been slated to be completed in year 3 of the project.
What if the construction company are not ready for whatever reason and the project is delayed?
What if the approved project design cannot be built inside the 6 to 10 months that has been suggested in the amendment document or the project is slowed due to weather?
Do the noise, dust, vibration parameters for this project fall under Construction or Operational guidelines?
If construction then the mining company can make as much noise as they want for as long as they want until this project is complete. Who sets the time frame for cutting off the construction period and returning to operational mining parameters?
This also applies for the road and pipeline projects.
If Operational then how are exceedances of any parameters acceptable?
Once the final design is in place and approved by Transgrid then recalculate the reports for all the categories that need to be presented to the public for assessment.

7. Lue village traffic. There seems to be a view that any amount of an increase in traffic through the village is acceptable. As the machinery list of equipment is flawed then one can only assume that the rest of the transport list is at a minimum to allow for minimal traffic numbers. An assumption has been made that only a small proportion of the transport and delivery trucks will travel from the east (Rylstone end) and not the west (Mudgee) end of Lue rd. If this assumption is incorrect then the village traffic numbers are incorrect. No amount of telling truck drivers where they can and cant go will ensure they actually go that way. If the road is legal for their truck and the route is shorter then they will use it. Wide loads under escort will get to their location under RTA rules. They will not stop in Mudgee overnight if they can get to their location today. They will be looking to offload their pilots as soon as possible and maybe even get unloaded to get to their next pick up.
Who is going to police this whole process or will it be left up to the public/residents to complain about the breaches?
If there is breaches what is the consequences of a breach?

8. Rehabilitation. At this point the path that the new line is taking is unclear. Once the actual path has been mapped out this will allow for a calculation of how many trees will need to be cleared, soil disturbed and therefore how many trees and grass rehab areas need to be added in the bio diversity offset program.
The same can be said for the roads if they have to be rehabbed or maintained forever to allow access for Transgrid in the future. Has this really been allowed for in the calculations for the powerline project? Have the rehab contractors/employees been accounted for in regards to traffic, employee numbers, equipment and all the parameters of noise etc that go along with this?
More detail in the submission is needed to show that this has been calculated and accounted for?

9. Alternatives. Should the current design (Western movement of the towers) be unacceptable or prove to create too many issues that cannot be overcome, the company should reconsider the relocation of the towers to the East and then calculate and submit the project based on this design. It seems that the only reason for not moving the towers to the east is the cost!

Thankyou for your time and consideration.
My view on the whole project is,
If it is going be to be approved then lets make sure it is done correctly and to the highest "worlds best practice" standard and not based on profitability of the mine and the company making money at the detriment of everyone else and the environment.

I know the area well having grown up in the area and subsequently moved to Sydney with my work but still frequent the Mudgee district frequently. I am all for progress and additional employment and the betterment of rural and regional Australia BUT, at the same time, surely it has to be in concert with the local people and environment. I object to the Bowdens Silver Mine totally. The village of Lue would be changed for the worse forever and the additional traffic in the area will completely destroy the whole ambience of the area and will have a detrimental impact on not only the local people but also the growing tourism trade in the area.
I thank you for this opportunity to have my say on the subject and I hope that common sense prevails and this mine does NOT proceed.

I do not support moving the 500kv line into Lue for the community to have to see and burden. It is unfair that residents may have to put up with the negative health and noise impacts that this mine would bring, to name some. Placing your line through the community is just another unnecessary burden you are placing on the community!

I object to the Bowdens Lead Mine and associated infrastructure. This new amendment of a 500kv powerline would be a blight on the picturesque landscape of the Mudgee region. The new development footprint would also require greater disturbance of vegetation and fauna habitat. The poor visual amenity of this infrastructure will be seen from the road as you drive to Mudgee from Sydney detracting from the scenic views of the region.

Bathurst Community Climate Action Group objects to the Bowdens Mine proposal due to our concerns about water availability and quality when future rainfall is uncertain due to climate change.

I strongly object to the realignment of the 500 kv power line.
I also strongly object to the establishment of Bowdens Silver mine.

The effects of dust, noise, increased traffic and environmental changes will be a disaster for the residents of the area.

1. Power lines visible to local residents
2. Power lines elevated and on inappropriate site
3. Increased traffic is dangerous for Lue residents

I object to the relocation of the 500kv transmission power line to west of its present location for the following reasons :
> the visual impact, it will be directly in my view permanently destroying the ambiance of rural and bush setting
> the proposal to divert traffic during construction onto Cox st for undetermined time frame will create excessive noise and dust as well as restricting my access to my property
> the proposed removal of large established trees and clearing of undergrowth along Cox street to provide access for construction vehicles will destroy and permanently alter my properties ambiance and future value
> the permanent damage to bush vegetation and wildlife habitat along the 3 kilometer 70 meter wide easement totaling 12.46ha
> the noise from 500kv power lines humming, this low tone noise has documented detrimental effects on health

Please see the attached letter from Rylstone District Environment Society Inc.

The recently lodged DA by Bowdens to move a major power line to the north of Lue should not be entertained as Bowdens Silver/Lead mine should not go ahead for serious environmental reasons. Acid mine drainage (AMD ) is one of mining's most serious threats to water. A mine draining acid can devastate rivers, streams and aquatic life for hundreds of years. Engineers Australia 2019 magazine stated, 'The United Nations recently labelled AMD as the second biggest problem facing the world after global warming. Lawson Creek lies just below the proposed Bowdens Mine and the tailings dam is to be constructed on a fault line. Lawson Creek is the life blood to many farming families for stock and domestic use and the creek runs into Cudgegong River. If Lawson Creek was to be polluted our property is worthless. The risk is high if this mine was to proceed. This is just one serious concern i have against the proposed mine, other concerns are, increased traffic on Lue Road, toxic lead dust for residents of Lue, decrease in property values, the mine will take water from Lawson Creek and the aquafers , in the drought Lawson Creek was back to holes, it was not running. The proposed DA to move the power line will be an eyesore on the residents of Lue and surrounds. The risk Bowdens Mine poses to the environment is high and should not be given the go ahead. I object strongly to this project.

See attached document.
Dr Haydn Washington
environmental scientist

Studies using magnetic field strength as an exposure measure have found that exposures greater than the range of 0.3 to 0.4 µT lead to a doubling risk of leukemia, with very little risk below this level. This exposure range is approximately equal to a distance of 60 m within a high-voltage power line of 500 kV.9 Nov 2008
My Daughter her husband and my grandchildren are living in there home very close to the proposed power line and of such high voltage this will be of great concern for their health
I object to a power line of this voltage being build anywhere near residential homes

See attachment

See Attached Submission

See GAC Submission