Copi Mineral Sands Project

I am opposed to this heavy mineral and rare earth mining proposal because of:
1) Potential risk of contamination of Darling River and Murray River system.
2) Lack of consultation with neighbouring farmers.
3) Farmers should have a right to farm their land without the threat of being kicked off their farms by mining companies.

I totally disagree with the allowance of the Copi Mineral Sands Mine to proceed due to it's obvious future destruction of the land around the mine and adjoining properties. My family and I have been able to enjoy this area on heaps of occasions over the last 2 or 3 years, camping and visiting the owners of Huntingfield Station and enoying the natural and varied landscapes of their property. In reading through the proposed Enviromental Impact Study it is quite evident that there are a lot of miscoceptions and information that appears to be false and misleading and therefore doesn't highlight the issues and risks involved to Local Water Sources getting contaminatedm from disturbed heavy metals in the water table and local residents and visitors like us, inhaling dusts from mining activities which contain radioactive contaminants. Also I cannot understand how the Mining Companies can propose that they will improve and enhance the local countryside after they finish mining by attempting to reinstate and revegiate the area, after conducting the process using a "wet mine" system. From what I can tell is, that is the sand/soil is dug up, stripped of the required elements and the materials left are pumped back into the hole as a sandy sludge. This will aslo have mixed in with it, a large portion of salt contamination from the water and therefore, not allow anything to actually grow.
If this Mine goes ahead the whole area of the Copi Mineral Sands Mine will never be able to be Enjoyed, Studied and Explored enjoyed in it's beautiful current state ever again, which is why I have taken the time out of my day to make the effort and submit my objection.
Please review and analyse the data proposed in the EIS as I believe there are way too many inaccuracies, assumptions and errors in it to be a valid reason to allow this project to continue.

My submission is in the file attached

The Radiation Assessment does not provide detailed
information on the handling and storage of the radioactive
materials, in particular the HMC and the REC.
The assessment should include actual calculations which
describe the circumstances of
workers as they handle and approach the stockpiles as well as other locations, for instance in the areas of the processing plant where HMC or REC might not be contained in vessels or plumbing.
The physical stockpiles of HMC create considerable risks as the proponent may find it necessary to stockpile some
thousands or tens of thousands of tons of HMC on site waiting
logistics such as shipping or waiting for a turnaround in
market conditions circumstances to create a sale
During adverse weather conditions HMC stockpiles, which can be 15m or more in height can be subject to dramatic wind
The erosion of HMC by wind creates a number of human health risks. First, HMC dust (which proponent consultants commonly avoid modelling) pollutes rainwater tanks at residences with heavy metals which form a component of the HMC
The HMC dust needs to be further incorporated in the human health assessment as it is both inhaled, ingested in locally produced food products such as meat, eggs or vegetables, or absorbed by dermal contact.
The companies’ failure to provide a draft Work Plan limits the capacity for the mining company to prepare other relevant reports and accurate assessments because they do not have the background that the Work Plan provides
The Economic Assessment is incomplete. The assessment claims to present a cost benefit
analysis. Only one side of the ledger has been presented, that is a claim for benefits to the community such as employment or expenditure on local goods.
There is no detailed
assessment by the proponent on the cost of production of the products to be marketed.
The proponent has not provided a Salt Balance report. In each year of production, the mine will extract approximately five gigalitres of saline
groundwater for the operation of the dredge and mine pit.
This groundwater is at a level in excess of twice the salinity of the ocean.
The extraction of groundwater then includes a component of up to million tons of salt on an annual basis.
Much of the saline groundwater is reported back to the mine pit as mine tailings are deposited
and ultimately returned back to the groundwater system. However, dependent on operating
circumstances and the weather and to achieve a balance at times, mine water and mine tailings
will be stored or held in surface dams. This provides the opportunity that as mine water
evaporates that a salt component can remain in storages and ultimately be transported by
wind action or otherwise from the mine site.
Salt is a poison to farmland and a risk is created that ultimately through dust deposition and
surface water flows that salt reports to Lake Victoria.
The consideration of salt balance could be evaluated by an examination of the nearby Ginkgo mineral sand mine which in many aspects, including the mining model, appears to mirror the proposal put forward by the Copi project.
Have the RZ Resources consultants sought to gain valuable data which is available at the Ginkgo site?
The Air Quality document reports an annual carbon dioxide production of just less than 40,000 tonnes. This figure does not include the accumulated figure for the road and rail transport of
product to port, the shipping of product to ports in China or elsewhere and the interstate
transport of FIFO workers etc.
As the proponent has chosen to submit
documents that are variously incomplete, or inadequate, missing or misleading in some
important areas such as human health risk, it would be reasonable that Major Projects do not
advance the EIS until complete documents have been lodged by the proponent.
It would also be reasonable that the affected community should not be held to the constraints
of the minimum number of objections requirement before they are provided the opportunity to present at a Panel Hearing.
Given the size of the farming properties/ stations and the remote location of the community,
the ability to garner the required number of objections to qualify for a Panel Hearing
potentially places an unrealistic requirement on the community that will disadvantage their
ability to defend their homes & livelihoods.

I am against the Copi Mineral Sands Mine because it would destroy the natural habitat at Huntingfield Station to which my family has been generously allowed to camp on for the past 3 years. This area in far west NSW is a absolute gem for native vegetation and wild life. To allow a mine to destroy the habitat would have devastating long term consequences.
The EIS does not go far enough to cover the real risks to the mine area and people that will be affected by radiation, noise, dust and heavy metals both on the ground and in the water system.
Once this area is nuded of trees, grassland and native wild life I fear that the area in question will be lost for ever as no mine site is ever truly rehabilitated back to a natural state.

Please consider my concerns as a First Nations Person.

I object to the RZ Copi mine project. My family lives on one of the farms RZ plans to mine.
We can’t spend much time as a family together because RZ costs our family a lot of money in legal fees, my parents have to work all the time. They are always working on something to do with RZ.
A lot of my family time, where I am meant to be spending time with my family as a kid growing up, has been taken up because of RZ’s stubbornness, and behaviour towards my family. This has been going on for 4 years.
Some majorly endangered animals that live on our farm will be greatly affected by the radioactive/toxic materials in the air. This could send them extinct. Some of these animals constantly come back to the same area to continue their reproduction cycle. Due to land clearing needed for mining, this could destroy many animal's habitats.
RZ have told people they would be mining already, this has caused other people to come looking for the mine. Some of these people have got lost on our property or come to our house. I have seen RZ driving through our paddocks without permission. I really don’t like seeing that.
One of the hobbies that I like to do is star gazing at night using my telescope. If RZ was allowed to mine the amount of light pollution would make it almost impossible to see the stars I can currently see.
This mine is not a good idea because if there is toxic materials in the air around so close to where we live it will impact our lives, our pet’s lives, our stock’s lives and the environment.
I don’t want this mine on our farm. I don’t like how RZ has treated my parents and our family.

I object to the Copi mine and RZ Resources. (Otherwise known as relentless resources).
RZ plans to mine on my family’s farm.
If this goes ahead we will never be able to go anywhere, my parents are always so busy dealing with RZ, it takes up a lot of my parents and my time as an 11 year old kid.
Its not that fun coming home because my parents are always buried into the computers dealing with RZ.

I don’t want to live with toxic stuff around us all the time. I don’t want to develop cancer. We have spoken to mining engineers that know what they are doing, and found that if this goes ahead there will be toxic substances throughout the land, the animals, the people and the water that supplies the town. Meaning that the Far Western corner of Farmers will not be able to sell and earn money off their produce.

All the pets and animals that live on our farm will get sick and die quicker. Each year I raise 2 – 4 orphaned baby goats, which end up being beloved pet goats. We watch these pet goats from being a baby, to being a mother to their own babies. Whenever I get the time I always go and see the pet goats. And when it’s the right season, I check to see if they have had their own babies yet. I don’t want to lose the pride and joy these pets give me.

I am worried RZ could come into our house and take our things. I have seen RZ park their cars and trucks out the front of our house. I have seen them pull up in their heavy duty trucks. It worries me they will run over our pets, baby goats and dogs.

We have had times where we have been going through our own gates we built ourselves, and finding RZ people going through our gates, even running over our own fence once. This was without any permission given to go off the main road. This was stressful knowing that any time of the day we could have someone driving through our paddocks.

I fear for the safety of our farm, all the animals and the residents of the Wentworth community. The Wentworth community has survived and thrived this long we don’t need a destructive, unreasonable mine coming and ruining everything.

I strongly object to this project, I am extremely concerned about to potential harm this radioactive material will have on the water, air quality, livestock and the health of my friends and their children, as well as the community.

I am against the proposed Copi Mineral Sands Project mainly due to the trace elements of uranium and thorium which is radioactive. RZ Resources has no real plan for the safe handling of radioactive material that are cancer causing to both humans and animals. The proposed mine is approximately three and a half kilometres from the homestead of Huntingfield Station which a family of four resides. RZ Resources is also proposing to interfere with the water table and underground streams to use in dredge mining, talk about environmental rapists pretending to be able to rehabilitate the mine site to better then it currently is now. Do they really believe the community believes this in a harsh dry climate.
In conclusion please consider these facts before granting RZ Resources a mining licence on what could be considered a very lacking environmental Impact Statement.

I am writing this submission in support of the Copy Mineral Sands Project. It is my understanding the basic principles and processing of this mine is the same as many others in our area. Assuming the same rigid environmental and cultural standards are met, this site will provide an incredible support for not only Wentworth but also the wider region. As a business owner I obviously understand the economic benefits which will flow directly into the community, but also in creating employment opportunities for all in our municipality including our indigenous members. By all reports the company, RZ Resources has also sought to engage with the community through sponsorship of community events and funding numerous local projects.
In closing, I believe this mining project going ahead will be beneficial on so many levels for our entire community.

My comments regard the possible contamination of ground water & stock & domestic water supplies.
1 From Economic Impact Assess 6.6 :" The Mining activity has the potential to significantly impact on ground water resources in the project area."
The mine is in close proximity to Lake Victoria & the ground water moves North to South towards the lake & Murray River

2 Moving dirt particles can travel large distances enabling it to contaminate domestic [settling on roof tops then washing into tanks used for showering & drinking] & stock water. This could have serious results on a family's health & contaminated stock water could seriously impact our meat & wool markets. Dust movement doesn't stop at the boundary fence as seen in dust storms hitting Melbourne or Sydney.

Disappointing Access Agreements haven't been forthcoming as I thought this was a requirement of the Mining Act. I received an indemnity form April 24th to cover surveyors doing cadastral work on an easement.
Some figures look questionable : Page 5 Economic Benefits says use of land Present value $670817.00. I think the property in question is about 16000 Ha & on today's market $300 / Ha would value the land at $4.8 mil.
Also goat numbers in Wentworth LGA would far exceed 10000 .

Time given to read & assess this EIS is unreasonable as there are many hours reading required to properly evaluate something that could have a big impact on our area either positively or negatively.

Unable to attach submission as select button didn't work on smartphone. Submission sent to "submit an enquiry to the department. Your enquiry has been forwarded to our customer support team" https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/thank-you-your-enquiry

Refer attachment

after a great deal of investigating the information provided i do not find it to be sufficient . the impact on native and domestic animals could be great which will also effect the adjoining landowners ,toxic dust from the mine that the animals graze and drink at or close to the mine which are also transient , if they are and highly likely will be used for human consumption testing positive would shut down all joining properties along with export at a huge cost to the nation. Taking water from the ground will also have an impact on salinity levels and water quality all the way through SA where this system goes. Also there has been additional land added to the map without any consultation with adjoining land owners. Another concern i have and probably the most important is the mining of silicone which causes silicosis a lung disease after all the problems that asbestos caused and still causes , there is no way you can guarantee that there will be 100% suppression of the toxic dust entering the thermal layer in the atmosphere and travelling for km before settling on the ground and waterways.

Reading through Section 6 of the EIS it is surmised that the entire subject site properties (Sunshine, Huntingfield and Warwick) will be used for the mine site, camp and biodiversity offset requirements. The applicant has stated within this section that they would prefer to not have to pay for offset requirements, but rather seek stewardship sites within the project site or within the surrounding area. This will mean that the project properties for the life of the mine, and perhaps in perpetuity, will no longer be used or available for primary production purposes. Additionally, this could also lock up and remove other property areas from primary production purposes.
The NSW state government up to 2021 has purchased over 400,000 hectares of pastoral land for conservation and national parks. Since then a further 100,000 hectares has been purchased recently and locked up as a national park.
With a national growing population, the removal of land to provide food for our nation cannot continue and is not sustainable.
The amount of water to be extracted from underground is definitely not acceptable and will eventually create salinity not just within the surrounds, but in the overall system that runs through to South Australia.
Also of concern is the risk to livestock within the surrounding area of contamination from silicon dust, which causes silicosis, a detrimental lung disease.
Just because the tenure of the land is crown owned, should not predicate that the western land leasee can be set aside and their primary production business diminished by desecrating the land. Leases are purchased and are valued at the value of the land, just as if you are purchasing freehold.
The consultation conducted has been hit and miss too. It is rumoured that land that was not originally considered for exploration has been included in some of the mapping, without direct consultation with those property landholders/leasees.

The Copi Mineral Sands project EIS presents as an incomplete and inadequate document.
The potential for serious irreversible environmental and health impacts from the proposed project are unacceptable to the community and must be independently researched, evaluated and considered against the information cherry picked and provided by the mining company proponent.
The company’s history of breaching mining rules on numerous occasions, including lying to the NSW mining regulator in 2021 regarding rehabilitation of drill holes and in 2023 where the company was again found to have breached mining rules an additional 22 times, does not instil community confidence about how the company will undertake a huge mining operation and conduct itself within the mining regulator rules and framework.
The EIS process for the community set be most impacted is totally unfair and inequitable. The mining company have exponential resources financially, personnel and experience in government approvals. They develop the EIS over many years with the use of the above resources whereas communities are left to scramble and provide a response in 28 days to the proposal with little knowledge or the expertise required to understand and decipher the very technical information.
The combination of a deficient EIS and the proponents conduct and management history alone is grounds to not approve this proposal.
Regards,
Melisa Kennedy

As a local business owner of Wentworth, I am thrilled to support the Copi Project Mineral Sands Mine in northwest New South Wales. This project promises to bring significant economic benefits to our community, including increased employment opportunities and enhanced local infrastructure. The influx of workers and associated services will boost demand for local goods and services, stimulating our economy. The project's commitment to environmental sustainability ensures that our beautiful region remains pristine. By fostering economic growth and supporting local enterprises, the Copi Project will play a crucial role in the prosperity and development of our community.

As a young local from the Wentworth area, I am excited about the Copi Project Mineral Sands Mine situated 75km from our town. This project brings hope for our future by creating job opportunities and encouraging skill development among young people like me. It promises to inject vitality into our local economy, supporting businesses and services that we rely on. The Copi Project represents a positive step towards a prosperous and sustainable future for our community.

-We requested information in writing about the project from RZ Resources multiple times, but never received anything.

-RZ visited us at Wenba and bought their General Counsel/Lawyer to the meeting. RZ did not give us warning that they would bring their legal representative, so we were not able to have our own legal representative present.

-RZ didn't tell us at the meeting and his comments would be recorded in the EIS/publicly. They told us they were just there to meet him and introduce themselves.
I have looked at spending my last years at my property with my family this will impact both my health and mental health significantly.
RZ right back in the beginning had previously offered to fence of the location and provide me with the materials and I would provide the labour this has never happened which shows me a significant trust factor .
We totally reject ANY TYPE OF MINING TO PROCEED AS MANY OF THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS' FEELINGS.