Bylong Coal Mine

I fully support the Bylong Project.
Australia and the world needs coal, to sustain our standard of living, to supply reliable base load power and contribute to the resolution of energy poverty. I am a supporter of renewable energy, however at this point, these sources are not able to economically or reliably meet our needs.
Kepco is a leader in power generation, with their stations using the latest advanced emissions control technology, to ensure that the generation of power is leading practice.
There are economic benefits this mine will have on the Australian economy, such as local wages and salaries, state and national taxes and royalties and locally sourced consumables from the established suppliers already in the Mudgee region.
Recent agreements between the Australian government and the Korean government will have significant benefits for all Australians. This coal mine will only strength these bonds.
I look forward to a sensible outcome regarding the Bylong Project, and the positive impacts this mine will have on the community on a regional, state and national scale.

I support the Bylong Project.
I note that it largely occupies previously cleared farming land and not pristine ecology systems. Kepco's commitment to developing Biodiversity Offsets goes a long way at improving the current situation.
The economics of the project will return significant royalties to the NSW Government which benefits everyone in the state supporting services provided by the state.
Employment opportunities will also be great benefit to an industry which is seeing a reducing jobs in the current climate.
The oversight and compliance requirements by the Government will ensure that the Bylong Project will be developed in a sensible and sensitive manner. I am personally aware of many of the consultants used by the proponent and have the highest respect for these organisations (and individuals) - MSEC, SCT, RGS, DP etc. These organisations have high ethical and technical standards and their work add to the overall credibility of the project.
The Executive Summary of the EIS outlines the need for the thermal coal product generated by the Project. It acknowledges how the market place will over time move from a coal dependent electricity production to one of alternate sources - which can't happen over night, but needs to evolve over a longer time frame. This strikes me as being realistic. It is also something that I would urge the Government to take a more active leadership role in. Currently there is little open discussion about how the State/Nation will assist the change from coal to alternatives and which alternative/s should be utilized. This is a complex discussion and process and needs government leadership.

I support the mine. I support coal mines. I support coal mines developed by foreign companies.

But please ensure that they do the right thing by the environment by incorporating environment protection at the planning stage.

Please ensure that the EPA has the right resources to police them.

Basis:

1. The coal is being used to power the economy of one of our largest trading partners. The products generated from the use of the electricity come back to Australia in the form of goods.
2. Kepco's ultra-supercritical power stations use the latest advanced emissions control technology and are therefore some of the cleanest in the world
3. The economic benefits to Australia stem from wages and salaries, taxes, royalties and locally sourced consumables

5. The land will be fully rehabilitated at the completion of mining, and the EIS states that the plan is to fill in the open cut pit.

To whom it may concern:
I am writing in support of the Bylong coal project. This is a well-considered project that will have a tangible economic benefit to the state of NSW, including the following components:
1. Direct wages and salaries for mine employees, and associated income taxes to the Federal Government
2. Payroll taxes to the State Government
3. State Government royalties
4. Indirect employment via suppliers of goods and services such as consumables, port and rail services
5. Employment multipliers applied to items 1 and 4

It is almost incredible that it needs to be stated that mining projects such as the Bylong project underpin our economy. Primary production sits at the foundation of the economy, without which there can be no secondary and tertiary sectors above. Without mining, there would be no manufacturing, and hence no hospitality and no banking sectors. Simply put, our way of life depends on mining.

Whilst the coal from Bylong will most probably find its way to South Korea, to provide electricity to one of the most industrious nations on Earth, it should go without saying that the economic value-add provided by the energy will flow through to goods traded with Australia, and used by Australians. This is especially so since the signing of the free-trade agreement with South Korea. There is no better analogy for this trade than watching the shipping on any given day at Port Kembla. Coking coal for steel production leaves the port for our trading partners, and finished goods - motor vehicles - arrive. Some might say this is a fair trade.

If you accept that our modern way of life depends on mining; and that coal is necessary for everything from iPhones and electricity to cement and cars, then the question becomes one of how we can meet our needs without compromising our standard of living in other ways, such as through environmental damage.

The Bylong project will operate to some of the highest and strictest environmental standards anywhere in the world. Dust, noise and water impacts will be ameliorated by design and continuously monitored in operations. Flora and fauna habitats will be offset, relocated in the case of fauna, and then restored during the mine's rehabilitation. These measures are now standard for mining projects in Australia.

Should the coal be used by Kores, it is likely to be in one of their modern ultra-supercritical coal fired power stations, which are extremely efficient and produce extremely low levels (near negligible) of atmospheric pollutants such as sulphur and nitrous oxides.

The alternative is for Kores to source poorer quality coal from countries with far lower environmental standards such as Indonesia. This would be a terrible outcome: for Australia, for Indonesia and for Korea. But this is indeed the unintended consequence of the uninformed and hysterical environmental activism that now drowns out sensible consideration of the facts.

I commend this project to the Planning and Assessment Commission and to the Minister for Planning for approval.

The Australian Government's Climate Change Authority recommends Australia's emission goals include a budget which provides a 67% probability of limiting warming to 2 degrees or less.
To enable this most of known fossil fuel reserves cannot be burnt. Building and operating any new coal mine is not compatible with this goal (If we want a livable climate for our kids)

Caerleon Mudgee Pty Ltd has invested significant resources in increasing the availability of housing supply in Mudgee. As the owner of Caerleon Estate, Caerleon Mudgee Pty Ltd is supportive of mines opening and expanding in and around the Mudgee area as these mines contribute significantly to the growth of Mudgee's township and the nearby area.

It is for this reason that Caerleon Mudgee Pty Ltd is in favour of the mine being approved HOWEVER, Caerleon Mudgee Pty Ltd is NOT and CANNOT support the building of a Workforce Accommodation Facility on-site.

The building, construction and operation of the mine is a positive for the Mudgee region. It has the potential to create many new jobs for Mudgee residents plus grow the population by bringing in new workers to town. This is all a great result for the town and its economy. However, if a Workforce Accommodation Facility is built then the benefits of this mine are quickly nullified. All of a sudden, workers of the mine will most likely not come from nearby Mudgee but from out of town and interstate. These workers will not live in Mudgee but in temporary accommodation. These workers will therefore not spend their money in and around the town of Mudgee, they will spend it within their temporary accommodation/camp. These workers will live in camp and fly back or drive back to their families on their days off. There is very little economic benefit to Mudgee and its residents.

Mudgee is an established town. It has been around since the mid-1800's. The argument by Kepco that there is not enough short stay or long term accommodation is laughable at best or an outright lie at worse. Analysis by previous mines has shown that mines within the Mudgee region do not need temporary workers' accommodation. Moolarben is not building a camp for its expansion workforce. Ulan or Wilpinjong did not or are not building future camps with their planned expansions.

Council has confirmed that there is enough accommodation in town to meet the needs of Kepco's proposed construction workforce. Caerleon Mudgee has also spoken with Kepco in the past and confirmed that it is prepared to work with Kepco to deliver housing solutions for both its temporary and permanent workforce if given the opportunity to sit down with Kepco and more clearly understand their needs and timeframes.

Yes, Caerleon Mudgee has a vested interest in delivering a housing solution to Kepco as it seeks to build residential housing lots in Mudgee over the coming years, however, more importantly Caerleon Mudgee Pty Ltd's shareholders know from experience with past projects in mining regions that a temporary Workforce Accommodation Facility/Camp on a mine site does very little to benefit the nearby towns - both economically or socially.

Temporary camps take away a chance to create a win/win for the miner's workforce and the nearby towns. By encouraging workers to live in town rather than in a camp on site, workers become part of the social fabric of the town and seek to get both themselves and their families involved with the community and the lifestyle that can comes from this, while the town gets the benefits both economically and socially of increased employment and a growing population.

It is for these reasons that Caerleon Mudgee Pty Ltd encourages the Department to approve Kepco's Bylong Coal Mine but not approve the building of a Workforce Accommodation Facility.

The destruction of the beautiful little Bylong Valley through any approval of mining operations will be one of the worst blots on governance in this generation. This has divided the community and many if not most farmers have been bought out by the foreign mining interests, and left the area. The suicide of a Queensland farmer, announced this morning, after suffering a similar heartbreak, highlights the outcomes when government and political parties put profits and donations before the longterm viability of our best agricultural land and the hardworking farmers. The loss of Tarwyn Park, and its groundbreaking experiment in land and water management, is one of the most tragic developments. Do you believe that a foreign company will really cherish Tarwyn Park ? for how long ? puh-lease !

I believe the project's water needs jeopardise the already dwindling water tables. In this dry region many of us farmers rely on bores for stock and irrigation.
I also believe that from a sociological point of view this project's workers accommodation project will create substantial problems in our local communities. Leading studies highlight the implications of creating an exclusive ghetto-like workers' camp for surrounding communities especially at the proposed large scale.
My greatest concern for this part of the project is the very real possibility that this South Korean, state-owned company will fly in cheap Korean miners to establish the mine, reducing the economic and welfare benefits of this project for our local communities. In addition these flown in workers will be deprived of elemental satisfaction of certain human needs and will seek for this in the surrounding communities. This in in turn can increase conflicts in the interactions with the local community members and a subsequent need for increased policing.

Noise and Blasting.
We are receiver 65 within the exploration licence and right on the project boundary,in the village of Bylong. All of our neighbours are classed as significantly impacted and therefore either at property mitigation or acquisition( receivers 60, 63, 69)
We are classed as moderately impacted, therefore only receive voluntary at property mitigation rights.
What could possibly be the difference between our neighbours and ourselves re possible acquisition?
We will be living 2-2.5 kms from the major infrastructure and open cuts pits if this project goes ahead and are told by Kepco that there will be no impacts!
We believe a mine that will operate 24/7 will have major impacts on our health, well being and amenity.
Mine construction, road construction, increased traffic movements, heavy plant and equipment movement, new rail loop, coal handling preparation plant,blasting, open cut MIA and reverse noise beeping. Plus any operating noise that we have not considered.
How can Kepco's modelling for noise be taken seriously, when they can hand pick who will be affected and who will not.

Despite the many other reasons this project makes no logical sense. This project is for thermal coal of which demand is in decline. It makes no sense to open up a new mine when others are going broke and for sale at bargain prices

*The predicted long-term impacts on prime agricultural land and water systems in the Bylong Valley are unacceptable and will not be mitigated through proposed offsets and rehabilitation. The renowned Tarwyn Park natural sequence farming processes will be destroyed.


*A significant area of prime agricultural land will be destroyed: the mine footprint will disturb 2,875 ha of land including 440 ha of Bioregional Significant Agricultural Land (BSAL), 260 ha being destroyed in open cut, plus 700 ha of mapped Critical Equine Industry Cluster land. The proposal to replace BSAL at another location is untested and high risk.


*Impacts on groundwater and surface water will be significant. The highly connected alluvial aquifer system within the stressed Bylong River catchment will have predicted peak losses of up to 295 million litres per year (ML/yr). Loss of base flows to the Bylong River is predicted to be 918 ML/yr. The mine proposes to use up to 1,942 ML/yr which is over 75% of the annual rainfall recharge. The river system is over allocated and local farmers will lose important water supply.


*The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements. Nationally endangered species recorded in the area include the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and Spotted-tailed Quoll. Three entirely new plant species were recorded. A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.


*The area has Aboriginal cultural heritage significance: 239 sites were recorded in the study area with 25 regarded as being of high local or regional significance (including an ochre quarry, grinding grooves and rock shelters); 144 sites have been identified at risk from mine impacts with 102 within the open cut area.


*Important European heritage, including the Catholic Church Cemetery, Upper Bylong Public School and a number of historic homesteads and farm buildings will be destroyed in the opencut. The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

!

Being familiar with coal mines and the coal market, I strongly oppose the Bylong Coal Project on the grounds that there is a gross oversupply of coal, resulting in austerity measures within the industry and job losses occurring country wide. Kepco tout creation of hundreds of jobs, yet another Korean company in Queensland sold their mine for $1 recently. In my opinion, it is gross negligence on the government's part if this mine is approved, currently employed people will lose their jobs as the over supply of coal increases. Further to this, the Bylong Valley is one of the few remaining food bowl areas of this State, an alluvial flood plain with abundant ground water. It would be not only criminal, but verging on insane, to even contemplate the destruction of this area. I urge all concerned to employ wisdom and not be blinded by short term financials.

I wish to make a submission to the Bylong Coal Project and state that I vehemently oppose the project.

I am a GP, a member of Doctors for the Environment Australia, a father, and a NSW citizen - in all these roles I have grave concerns about the impact of coal mining and the development of a mine in the Bylong Valley. These include:

The predicted long-term impacts on prime agricultural land and water systems in the Bylong Valley are unacceptable and will not be mitigated through proposed offsets and rehabilitation.

The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements. Nationally endangered species recorded in the area include the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and Spotted-tailed Quoll. Three entirely new plant species were recorded. A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.

The area has Aboriginal cultural heritage significance: 239 sites were recorded in the study area with 25 regarded as being of high local or regional significance (including an ochre quarry, grinding grooves and rock shelters); 144 sites have been identified at risk from mine impacts with 102 within the open cut area.

Important European heritage, including the Catholic Church Cemetery, Upper Bylong Public School and a number of historic homesteads and farm buildings will be destroyed . The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

Most importantly, it is absolutely the wrong decision to open new coal mines when the consequences of climate change related to fossil fuels are so well described and starting to occur.

Yours Sincerely

Dr Simon Morgan

*The predicted long-term impacts on prime agricultural land and water systems in the Bylong Valley are unacceptable and will not be mitigated through proposed offsets and rehabilitation. The renowned Tarwyn Park natural sequence farming processes will be destroyed.


*A significant area of prime agricultural land will be destroyed: the mine footprint will disturb 2,875 ha of land including 440 ha of Bioregional Significant Agricultural Land (BSAL), 260 ha being destroyed in open cut, plus 700 ha of mapped Critical Equine Industry Cluster land. The proposal to replace BSAL at another location is untested and high risk.


*Impacts on groundwater and surface water will be significant. The highly connected alluvial aquifer system within the stressed Bylong River catchment will have predicted peak losses of up to 295 million litres per year (ML/yr). Loss of base flows to the Bylong River is predicted to be 918 ML/yr. The mine proposes to use up to 1,942 ML/yr which is over 75% of the annual rainfall recharge. The river system is over allocated and local farmers will lose important water supply.


*The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements. Nationally endangered species recorded in the area include the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and Spotted-tailed Quoll. Three entirely new plant species were recorded. A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.


*The area has Aboriginal cultural heritage significance: 239 sites were recorded in the study area with 25 regarded as being of high local or regional significance (including an ochre quarry, grinding grooves and rock shelters); 144 sites have been identified at risk from mine impacts with 102 within the open cut area.


*Important European heritage, including the Catholic Church Cemetery, Upper Bylong Public School and a number of historic homesteads and farm buildings will be destroyed in the opencut. The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

*The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements. Nationally endangered species recorded in the area include the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and Spotted-tailed Quoll. Three entirely new plant species were recorded. A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.

*The area has Aboriginal cultural heritage significance: 239 sites were recorded in the study area with 25 regarded as being of high local or regional significance (including an ochre quarry, grinding grooves and rock shelters); 144 sites have been identified at risk from mine impacts with 102 within the open cut area.

I do not understand why we are opening more coal mines. Why are not the 2 levels of government supporting households and farmers to have solar power on their roofs. Farmers need assistance and ways to drought proof their properties. Opening more coal mines alongside waterways is disastrous it impacts on the above and below ground water tables. Why is it that when this is said that the words of locals is crap but hydrologists that work for companies and that are paid for by those companies their words are gospel. How is it that the bottom has fallen out of the coal market but our economy is obsessed with opening up these types of businesses that do nothing for our future. I want to be able to host a solar, hydro (small) or wind farm on my property I don't want to be reliant on leasing to someone else who over uses my land. If I was able to host a solar farm and run cattle and grow crops wouldn't this be more beneficial. By having solar installed on every roof in Australia explain to me how this wouldn't create enough energy and create ongoing installer jobs that would be sustainable rather than short term destructive coal mines.

Climate change evidence about the need to reduce emissions is overwhelming and means mining or using fossil fuels is an economic and environmental absurdity.

The predicted long-term impacts on prime agricultural land and water systems in the Bylong Valley are unacceptable and will not be mitigated through proposed offsets and rehabilitation. The renowned Tarwyn Park natural sequence farming processes will be destroyed.



A significant area of prime agricultural land will be destroyed: the mine footprint will disturb 2,875 ha of land including 440 ha of Bioregional Significant Agricultural Land (BSAL), 260 ha being destroyed in open cut, plus 700 ha of mapped Critical Equine Industry Cluster land. The proposal to replace BSAL at another location is untested and high risk.



Impacts on groundwater and surface water will be significant. The highly connected alluvial aquifer system within the stressed Bylong River catchment will have predicted peak losses of up to 295 million litres per year (ML/yr). Loss of base flows to the Bylong River is predicted to be 918 ML/yr. The mine proposes to use up to 1,942 ML/yr which is over 75% of the annual rainfall recharge. The river system is over allocated and local farmers will lose important water supply.



The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements. Nationally endangered species recorded in the area include the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and Spotted-tailed Quoll. Three entirely new plant species were recorded. A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.



The area has Aboriginal cultural heritage significance: 239 sites were recorded in the study area with 25 regarded as being of high local or regional significance (including an ochre quarry, grinding grooves and rock shelters); 144 sites have been identified at risk from mine impacts with 102 within the open cut area.



Important European heritage, including the Catholic Church Cemetery, Upper Bylong Public School and a number of historic homesteads and farm buildings will be destroyed in the opencut. The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

I have been travelling through the Bylong Valley for the past 14 years, I have seen it in all seasons , in drought and in flood,
On dirt road and on sealed road, and I have always been amazed by it's beauty and envied the rich soil and water.
So different from the rocky property that we farm in Rylstone.
I always stop at the village shop for coffee and sandwich and enjoy the community spirit. I cannot believe there is going to be
a mine in this valley it is so wrong on many points,1) a food bowl
2) wonderful healthy soil 3) clean water 4 ) community 5)historical All the money in the world is not worth the destruction of this exceptional valley

The predicted long-term impacts on prime agricultural land and water systems in the Bylong Valley are unacceptable and will not be mitigated through proposed offsets and rehabilitation. The renowned Tarwyn Park natural sequence farming processes will be destroyed.

A significant area of prime agricultural land will be destroyed: the mine footprint will disturb 2,875 ha of land including 440 ha of Bioregional Significant Agricultural Land (BSAL), 260 ha being destroyed in open cut, plus 700 ha of mapped Critical Equine Industry Cluster land. The proposal to replace BSAL at another location is untested and high risk.


Impacts on groundwater and surface water will be significant. The highly connected alluvial aquifer system within the stressed Bylong River catchment will have predicted peak losses of up to 295 million litres per year (ML/yr). Loss of base flows to the Bylong River is predicted to be 918 ML/yr. The mine proposes to use up to 1,942 ML/yr which is over 75% of the annual rainfall recharge. The river system is over allocated and local farmers will lose important water supply.

The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements. Nationally endangered species recorded in the area include the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and Spotted-tailed Quoll. Three entirely new plant species were recorded. A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.

The obvious long-term impacts on prime agricultural land and water systems in the Bylong Valley are unacceptable and will not be mitigated through proposed offsets and rehabilitation. The renowned Tarwyn Park natural sequence farming processes will be destroyed.


A significant area of prime agricultural land will be destroyed: the mine footprint will disturb 2,875 ha of land including 440 ha of Bioregional Significant Agricultural Land (BSAL), 260 ha being destroyed in open cut, plus 700 ha of mapped Critical Equine Industry Cluster land. The proposal to replace BSAL at another location is untested and high risk.


Impacts on groundwater and surface water will be significant. The highly connected alluvial aquifer system within the stressed Bylong River catchment will have predicted peak losses of up to 295 million litres per year (ML/yr). Loss of base flows to the Bylong River is predicted to be 918 ML/yr. The mine proposes to use up to 1,942 ML/yr which is over 75% of the annual rainfall recharge. The river system is over allocated and local farmers will lose important water supply.


The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements. Nationally endangered species recorded in the area include the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and Spotted-tailed Quoll. Three entirely new plant species were recorded. A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.


The area has Aboriginal cultural heritage significance: 239 sites were recorded in the study area with 25 regarded as being of high local or regional significance (including an ochre quarry, grinding grooves and rock shelters); 144 sites have been identified at risk from mine impacts with 102 within the open cut area.


Important European heritage, including the Catholic Church Cemetery, Upper Bylong Public School and a number of historic homesteads and farm buildings will be destroyed in the opencut. The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

It is unacceptable for mining to go ahead as the impacts on the land and water resources are too great. A large amount of prime agricultural land would be destroyed, including 440 ha of Bioregional Significant Land, the proposal to replace BSAL somewhere else is too risky to be considered viable.

The proposal for the mine to use 1,942 ML/yr is not sustainable and will greatly reduce the water available for agriculture. The alluvial aquifers are interconnected and would suffer considerably from mining activities.

The area has a significant amount of biodiversity which would be severely impacted and would not be mitigated by the proposed offset arrangements.

Lastly we do not want any more coal mining if we are to reduce the risks of climate change.