Bylong Coal Mine

Everywhere you go and speak with other communities affected by coal mining one of the biggest issues is how they've been affected negatively by decreased water supply or contamination of water supply.
I have a well on my land at the Bylong General Store it is over 70 years old and is one of reliability and quality. In the dry times when we've run out of tank water I have been able to put my garden hose in my rain water tank to have a reliable, quality supply of potable water, an absolutely priceless commodity.
It is only for stock and domestic has no pressure on it for irrigation. You can imagine to my horror in August of this year, not in a dry time and in winter, so hardly anyone irrigating nearby when I discovered that my well had dropped 6 feet! I had to buy a new pump, as the pump in the well could not handle the extra lift. How has this happened? No, drought, no irrigation nearby. A well that has never changed in 70 years in any circumstance!
It then occurred to me that since Kepco bought the exploration licence in 2010 they have drilled over 500 core holes during their exploration. Could it be that has had the dramatic affect on my otherwise reliable water supply.
I have put this to Kepco and they said no way has their drilling had any affect on my well and basically I would have to prove it.
Is that any way for the proponent to behave? Why not offer in good will to monitor it for me. Could they be in the wrong, why don't they have to prove it. I am entitled to potable stock and domestic water , it is extremely important to my business, my health and well being.
Volume 2 Geology Report Section C Figure 7 show the drill holes in the exploration licence. I have heard some stories from drillers where they had trouble filling holes with grout, holes bubbling over with water, how could this not be linked with my situation.
They haven't started mining and already these issues are happening. What happens if the project does go ahead and they start washing their coal and other land holders start complaining of exactly the same issue, will they have the same attitude, more than likely. So how about not letting this happen in the first place.

I object to the proposed mine on the basis of the potential damage to the groundwater and agricultural land and therefor on the sustainability of Australia's future food security and quality of life.

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.

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 irrelevant, as the replacement BSAL is never the same, and is usually being already well managed and conserved. Experience in the Upper Hunter has shown that replacement BSAL was better managed when owned by graziers.

Impacts on groundwater and surface water will be significant, even in the absence of unintentional damage (when the situation will be irretrievable). 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.

A significant area of critically endangered Grassy Box Gum Woodland will be destroyed along with habitat for 17 threatened birds and 7 threatened plants.

Bylong Coal Project: SSD 14_636

Please accept this submission from Stop Coal Seam Gas Blue Mountains, a group with approximately 450 supporters opposed to inappropriate mining ventures.

We wish to object to the proposal on the following grounds:

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 in 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 open cut. The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Jan O'Leary
for Stop CSG Blue Mountains,
PO Box 468,
Springwood, 2777.

I respectfully object to the proposed mine venture in Bylong region.
I stand with our neighbours of the Pacific who are calling for Australians to join them in calling for NO NEW MINES. Their lives and livelihoods already seriously impacted by climate change.
I also stand for the protectionof agricultural land, waterways, the rights of Aboriginal people and the protection of cultural sites.
Please, no mining in the Bylong.
yours, sincerely, Lynn Daniel

Science now tells that to keep dangerous global warming below 2oC, all of the coal that is currently below ground should stay there. An appropriate fossil fuel policy would include a sensible phasing out of these dirty energy sources over two decades allowing a planned exit for all investors without the losses that will be incurred when we find ourselves left with stranded assets. A smooth transition to a zero carbon economy could be achieved with simultaneous investment in renewables and new technology.

From a global perspective, the best outcome would be to have no new coal mines at all. From a local perspective, the Bylong Coal Project will have many disadvantages for the people living nearby and the environment.

The area that is proposed to be mined is on prime agricultural land. The loss of this land and the loss of productivity to surrounding farm land is a significant financial loss especially when future losses are taken into account. Destruction of the aquifers cannot be undone. All farming areas report significant loss of available groundwater, often much more than was predicted, when mines are constructed in the area. Given that ground and surface water impacts are predicted to be significant, actual losses may well be devastating.

A significant area of Woodland habitat will also be destroyed by this mine. Species that live in Woodland areas are already in serious decline, if not already threatened with extinction, because Woodlands have been extensively cleared all over Australia to make way for farmland. Any remaining areas of Australia's woodlands areas are precious and must be protected before we lose them and all the species that depend on them. The Bylong Coal Project will further endanger a significant area of Grassy Box Gum Woodland as well as the Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby, New Holland Mouse, Regent Honeyeater and the Spotted-tailed Quoll.

The recent suicide of George Bender after constant disputes with mining companies on his farm, illustrates the toll this mine will have on the human inhabitants can also not be dismissed. Loss of community, water and the harmful dust blowing across their once prime farmland all add to the deterioration of the health, both physical and mental, of people living near the mines even if they are not directly impacted by mining. In fact, the Bylong community has already suffered devastating social impacts.
The area also has significant Aboriginal cultural sites and important European historical sites that will be destroyed if this project proceeds.

My name is Peter Grieve. I own the properties "Talooby" and "Arabanoo" in the Bylong Valley, the latter being within KEPCO's exploration area (AUTH 342).

I have spent in excess of 50 years in agriculture in the Bylong Valley and hold a Diploma of Agriculture from Hawkesbury Agricultural College.

I have a special interest in the Valley's water resources.

My chief concerns with respect to KEPCO's proposal are as follows:

1. SALINE WATER leakage from the proposed up to 2.5GL storage in the final void making its way into the shallow aquifer.

2. SALT currently contained in the overburden WILL be released into the environment. Salt will also enter the shallow aquifer from the Permian coal measures, from the screenings (5000-8000 ppm salt) accumulated in the final void. Salt is the greatest destroyer of agricultural land, in particular irrigation land.

3. POTENTIAL FRACTURING of the "Tarwyn Park" aquifer. The barrier between the pit and the aquifer could well be fractured by blasting etc, greatly affecting the areas of the property where Peter Andrews has completed his most celebrated work. That work must be protected at all costs given it is a model of soil carbon capture. Carbon levels on 'Tarwyn' are typically in the range 7%-16%, with 16% being perhaps the highest in the nation. (The average carbon content of Australian soils is <1%.)

4. The QUANTITY OF WATER required for the mine in the open cut phase will not, in my opinion, be available.

5. TARWYN PARK will be extremely adversely affected by the mine's activities. This includes not only the potential impacts on water and Peter Andrews' work as already outlined above but also on the historic homestead and stable buildings. Tarwyn as a whole deserves proper heritage listing and should be protected by appropriate conditions placed on any proposed development.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. No open cut.

2. Underground to have the following conditions:
a) All spoil to be stored onsite and returned underground
b) All excess water to be treated by reverse osmosis before release.

Yours faithfully,


Peter R. Grieve, OAM

I live in the Wollar area and know what devastating impact the coalmining industry has on the land, the village and its people and surroundings.
I totally object to an opening of yet another coal mine in the Bylong valley, a rich agricultural area with a significant Aboriginal cultural heritage and important European historic sites, which will be destroyed by the impact.
Also impacts on ground- and surface water will be significant. The mine disturbance area has very high biodiversity values that will not be mitigated through the proposed offset arrangements.
The increased traffic movements through the Munghorn Gap Nature Reserve and through Wollar has not been assessed and the loss of all the Bushfire Brigades in this area (Ulan, Wollar, Bylong) has not been considered. It is an increased threat of unattended fires and road accident emergencies across the north eastern area of Mid-Western Regional Shire.

We can NOT eat coal !!!!!

No new mines!
Value sacred land, biodiversity and farm land over polluting coal. Its time to invest in renewables, protect species, and prioritize slowing down climate change.

Land is sacred. Land is life.

Mining coal is outdated and a danger to our environment. It pollutes the land and water for a large distance around the actual operation. Anywhere a mine is situated will become an environmental disaster.
When considering a contract with a company there should be certain rules put in place. Firstly and most importantly the mines should not be placed anywhere near our food production areas or water reservoirs of any kind. Secondly there should be no chance of any Australian person being impacted by health issues that arise from the mining operation. Thirdly they should pay. Pay ahead an amount that would be assessed for any environment damage that is done. They should pay a GOOD amount for the ore being taken. The companies that are doing the mining should also pay for the carbon tax that is estimated that the coal or ore that is being mined will eventually be producing.
All mining of Australian resources should be assessed as above not just coal but all ores.

Allowing this mine to proceed will completely change the whole character of this beautiful part of our state.

I am deeply disappointed at the way the current government is selling out Australia and our farmers. It seems their only vision for the future of our beautiful country is to destroy valuable farming land and the environment in order to make foreign owned mining companies wealthy. After the land is destroyed their vision is to turn Australia into a nuclear dump!

The Byalong Valley is among the most productive areas of Australia and must be completely protected. Despite the supposed stringent environmental conditions, this mine is a threat to not only valuable farming land but to our water supply. Australia is the driest continent on Earth, and yet we allow mining to waste billions of litres of water every year; water that would be much better used!

I am also totally against the government paying billions of dollars to the big miners as subsidies or providing finance to assist them to destroy our country.

It is perfectly clear that the majority of Australians want a moratorium on mining. As the move to renewables increases and the price of coal falls, it does not make economic sense to open new mines or expand old ones.

Mining employs a small percentage of the population due to the mechanisation of the industry. These people would be more gainfully employed in innovative, new industries that would provide a much better future for generations to come.

Yours faithfully

Rebecca Stevens

The Bylong Valley part of the upper Hunter Valley region is under threat from massive coal mining which is very threatening indeed. The Bylong Valley has agricultural land and the areas earmarked to be mined are larger than even the Liverpool Plains have to contend with. Coal mining is an archaic practice, we live in the 21st century now and there are upgraded solar and wind energy plants available that the rest of the world even China is embracing. Put up wind farms and solar with storage and Bylong Valley will be the much better for it because sustainability should be the focus over greed.

Please don't be short-sighted and tempted by short term money gains over long term food sources for Australians and others

1. 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.

2. A significant area of prime agricultural land will be destroyed: the mine footprint will disturb 2,875 hectares (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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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 open-cut. The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

The world beseaches you to stop! No more new coal mines ...what good is money from coal if we cannot breath the air or grow our food. invest your money in renewable technologies instead and help the planet heal.

Being given such a short period of time in which to respond to the publication of the EIS for this proposed mining application is a disgrace. I object to the proposal for the following reasons: The destruction of...
* The heritage listed scenic Bylong Valley
* Prime agricultural land
* Excellent horse breeding country
* The habitat of local endangered species of flora and fauna
* The water table
Further objections include the general pollution of the Bylong Valley and its environs.

1. 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.

2. A significant area of prime agricultural land will be destroyed: the mine footprint will disturb 2,875 hectares (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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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 open-cut. The social impacts on the Bylong community have already been devastating.

I object to the proposed Bylong Coal Project for the following reasons:

- impacts on groundwater will be significant,
-local farmers will lose their water supply because of over allocation already occurring on the rivers system,
- there has been a total disregard for Aboriginal Heritage issues and a significant number of identified sites have been recorded and will be impacted upon,
- the endangered wildlife should be considered such as the spotted tailed quoll, new Holland mouse, regent honey eater and the brush tailed rock wallaby,
- European Heritage has also been ignored with several homesteads and farm building already identified.
- the Hunter Valley has already many unused mining leases that are yet to produce coal and the major rehabilitation obligations I fear will never be completed on those currently operating!

Dear Managment of Dept of Planning and Environment NSW,

I am female, 56 years of age, born in Australia, married nearly 30 years, have 2 adult sons and work part-time. I hope in the 'not to distant future' i.e. approximately 5 to 6 years time that I will finally explore my own country thoroughly (along with hundreds of thousands of other retiring Australians!) MY husband and I are looking forward to roaming our beloved country and exploring its beauty. We will be happy and excited to see valleys dressed with majestic wind-mills and inspiring solar farms BUT will NOT go anywhere near 'coal mines' of course! (along with all other australians!) Along with hundreds of thousands of other australian retirees I will vow to take our retirement money to other countries and spend it there if our Governments refuse to invest wisely in Australia's future! 'be it on your heads'! It makes no sense to subsidize a dying economic failure like coal when that money could be more wisely spent of a lucrative Green future such as 'tourism' ! Holdiay parks with daily tours of the areas, winery tours, farming tours, Indigenous history packeages run by our Indigeous people and so on and so on. (International visitors/tourists most welcome ) I ask the department if it has considered the long-term cost of destroying land ! Will not investment in tourism be a much more lucrative and sustainable industry going forward? I believe so and so do most Australians i think!

This seems like a tremendously bad proposal.

In part aesthetics - I've seen first hand the unpleasant results of similar mines in the vicinity, from Muswelbrook across to Warkworth, and up to Wybong. The kinds of devastation of natural resources we expect to see in third world countries without alternatives but with abundant corruption.

In part economics - tourism is growing, coal and other fossil fuels (despite political rhetoric) are undeniably a lucrative business right now, but will not (and should not) be the future we are planning for. Similarly, the health impacts - the Hunter already has a significantly and measurably higher rate of lung cancer and particulate-matter related diseases than elsewhere in the state.

In part the effects on water supply for everyone (or every thing) downstream, and indeed any future 'post mining' scenario for the site proper. The proposal seems to be suggesting they intend to use the majority of the rain that would otherwise refresh underground reservoirs - and that's assuming average rainfall. We've just had a few years of above average rainfall, but the el nino / la nina effect is reversing this year and the cycle typically lasts several years, which means they'll be draining all subterranean reservoirs with little hope of them being refreshed for decades. Again, there's plenty of evidence elsewhere in the world of the monumentally negative effects of such recklessness.

And that assumes their proposal on water usage is accurate - there's little evidence to suggest such ventures are at all accurate with any of their environmental impacts, and much evidence to support the notion of extreme conservancy (way beyond hubris and into the realms of negligence) in their estimations of negative impacts. The precautionary principle should be applied with much vigour here.

I haven't visited the specific sites, but I believe there's several places that are considered important to our indigenous friends, as well as many regions within the designated mine ara that are homes to endangered flora and fauna.

While I understand the land is currently mostly used for running stock, it's certainly fertile and arable, and we clearly don't have much arable land in Australia - wantonly destroying what little we do have is lunacy.

Even more so given the fact we're proposing destroying this land in return for a very short term financial gain by a very small number of people, with long term financial, environmental, community, and health costs for a very large number of people being offered back to us.

If we don't want history to think of us as a goldfish generation - unable to consider the effects of our actions more than a few minutes into the future - we really have to say no to this kind of foolishness.