Dubbo Project (formerly known as the Dubbo Zirconia Mine)

Air quality and water table security are my biggest concerns in relation to the Dubbo Zirconia Project. In relation to air quality please ensure the minimum allowable standards are set for this project ensuring that the high air quality we enjoy in the Dubbo region remains. For the water table I ask that further examination is made in relation to the storage of waste & surplus materials from the mining operations. It is unacceptable to put in jeopardy local water supplies through the burial of these waste and surplus materials because of cost concerns. Such a narrow view (cost based decision) endangers groundwater security for future generations of this region.

I support the proposed mine but want fewer emissions and less dust. Dubbo is currently a fairly clean city and it would be nice to keep it that way. I understand that there are processes available to make it cleaner, just that they cost more. I think we need to proceed with the mine but make it as clean as we possibly can.

The proposal intends to leave an excessive amount (6.7Mt) of salt based waste in plastic containers. The nature of the waste would severely damage the environment if it was to leak out of the plastic containers. There is not guarantee that this would not happen in the future, and in fact the nature of the plastic containers is that it is likely to leak out of the containers in the future. This is a major concern considering the devastating effect this would have on the area. Leak detection is provided, but no indication of a procedure if a leak is detected after the operation has closed.
The increased dust levels may also be a concern to the health of people in the area and needs to be addressed.

My wife and I live very close to the intersection of Toongi Road and Obley Road, with our driveway basically opposite the intersection. We are very concerned about the additional noise from vehicles, both during the construction phase of the refining plant, and after with the number of trucks intended to operate onto Obley Road. We will certainly hear them in both directions as they come up Toongi Road to Obley Road and also on their return. The figures from Alkane for the EIS show a minor additional number of vehicles on the Newell Highway and a smaller increase on Obley Road (in comparison to the number on the Newell). However if the current useage and projected useage just on Obley Road is shown, the increase in traffic numbers is huge, along with associated traffic noise and a convoy of vehicles at times. We have been assured that the plant itself will not create a lot of difference in current noise levels, but trucks as they change up and down through the gears and use exhaust brakes will create a large increase, particularly at the intersection of Toongi Road and Obley Road. There will certainly be a large increase in noise as the workers vehicles and loaded trucks come to a stop from Toongi Road to give way onto Obley Road, then from a dead stop, start their way uphill towards Dubbo. We would like to know if there is likely to be any type of 'sound deadening' allowance made available by Alkane in the way of rows of mature trees to be planted along our frontage or just inside our front fence, or possibly roller shutters for the house to minimise noise, especially at night. The objections that we have are regarding dust, chemical and fume containment and noise that may interfere with our chosen quiet and peaceful lifestyle (and of course, sleep). Although the construction phase and workers afterwards would bring a lot of vehicles daily, we also believe that the best option for transporting 'finished' product would be by rail.

I personally support the go ahead of the project at TOONGI. I believe it will be a benefit across education, training, employment for the community of Dubbo and surrounding townships.

It will especially be of benefit for the Aboriginal community in seeking employment opportunities which will improve the lifestyles of the individual, families and the community.

On this submission I speak for myself being a great-great-great-great-great-great-grandson of the late Billung (chief) of the Warri Gah, a group who inhabited and still do inhabit the lands in and around the Wambool (Macquarie River); lands which you wish to cut open.

Patronising photos of kangaroos grazing on the Dubbo plains in your project materials aside, I am glad that Alkane says that it is in the Dubbo region for the longterm (since the 1980s, or about 1 generation). My family has been in the region for about 2000 generations. So my perspective of "longterm" may be somewhat different to yours (Alkane's).

Accordingly, I wish to put forward the following views about the proposed mining project at Toongi:

* That no toxic water or toxic solids or salts are left behind as a result of the mining, such that there is absolutely no chance of any of the toxic waste entering the land and the water whatsoever.

* The fact that you intend to have groundwater testing in place to ensure that there is no leakage from your plastic-lined pits suggests that it is to be expected that there will indeed be pollution entering the landscape from the mine activities and its waste products. This proposition is not acceptable. The mine is to remove/treat/deposit its toxic waste in a manner which ensures that no groundwater contaminant testing is required.

* That the MAXIMUM measures are employed in order to obtain the MINIMUM dust and radioactivity exposure. This is a far more stringent proposition than simply "minimising" the contamination into the air, which is howsoever much minimal minimisation you can get away with. As I understand your proposal, you are not putting forth a moral argument to absolutely employ the maximum measures to eliminate the environmental hazards that you will create with your mining.

* That as much of the works be encapsulated as physically possible. Therefore no open cargoes of ore, reagents, or waste. No work to be completed on windy days.

* All of the above measures can be made using the extraordinary revenues you will be obtaining - the whole premise for Alkane putting forward this mining proposal.

On the basis that the proposed mine employs various measures which do not contain a maximum effort to make a minimum environmental impact, I am opposed to it.

The Alkane Dubbo Heavy Metals Radioactive Project planned for south of Dubbo would apparently put Dubbo on the map according to those in charge at Alkane. That is pure condescension. Dubbo is already on the map. Lets hope it stays that way - for the right reasons.

I am a frequent visitor to the Dubbo area. I admire the present scenery, farming practice and respect for the environment. The proposal, for an opencast mining excavation requiring vast volumes of water for the mineral extraction process is unacceptable without totally transforming negatively the character of the area.

Alkane Resources Zirconia Project at Toongi
Key points of objection:
1. The radioactive materials associated with the project are of major concern. Toongi has the largest deposit of uranium in NSW. This project could be a back door to uranium mining in NSW
2. The project will disturb 170 ha including three endangered ecological communities and habitat for the threatened pink tailed worm lizard
3. The management of tailings and waste water leachate is high risk. The need for an annual water use of 4,000 million litres of water per year is significant. The possible impacts on the health of Wambangalang Creek and Macquarie River are high.
4. Impacts on groundwater have not been clearly identified
5. The impacts of the proposed pipeline and power line have not been included in the impact assessment
6. The increase in truck movements and social impacts are not acceptable
7. The economic analysis of the project does not consider cost benefits

Regarding the Increased Traffic Movements on Obley Rd;
In assessing that Dubbo Zirconia Project please be aware that on the road frontage adjoining our property on Obley road and on the road in general, the following has and does occur;
- Recently two major vehicle accidents have occurred, due to loss of vehicle control coming onto the straight, resulting in human, vehicle and property damage.
- The road is regularly used by Cyclists, individuals and groups. When the cyclists are on the road vehicles are required to slow down and over-take where possible, sometimes vehicles are required to travel a distance following the cyclist/s before a safe area is found.
- The road is also regularly used by Walkers and Runners as an extension of the Zoo path or as interval exercise for stay at home personnel. Road traffic again are required to safely navigate, particularly when formal events occur including the Dubbo Stampede Run and Zoo-to-Zoo.
- Additionally, I personally push a twin children's pram down the roadside, with a dog leashed from our driveway (71R Obley Rd) to Belmont Road, for exercise with my infants and pet. All vehicle give a wide birth and the majority slow as not to throw up loose stones.
If the road traffic is to increase, particularly with heavy traffic, the width of Obley Road would need to increase in areas to allow for the safe passage of cyclists, walkers, runners, myself with small children and to ensure general road traffic safety. The road surface would also need to be maintained to the current standard if not better for the life of the project to again ensure safety of all road users.
The "road is there to share" by current and future users, however it must be safe.

1. The radioactive materials associated with the project are of major concern. Toongi has the largest deposit of uranium in NSW. This project could be a back door to uranium mining in NSW
2. The project will disturb 170 ha including three endangered ecological communities and habitat for the threatened pink tailed worm lizard
3. The management of tailings and waste water leachate is high risk. The need for an annual water use of 4,000 million litres of water per year is significant. The possible impacts on the health of Wambangalang Creek and Macquarie River are high.

I entered a submission yesterday, but have since noticed what appears to be a serious error in the EIS. The Applicant claims that according to RMS records, the Obley Road, from the Newell Highway to the Benelong Road is a B-Double route. When I consulted the RMS website, this is not the case. It is either a glaring error or deliberate mid-representation by The Applicant. Either way, it is another example of the lack of thoroughness and care The Applicant has shown to the transport process.

I would appreciate it if these comments could be appended to my original submission.

Yours sincerely,

Glenn Shepherd

1. The radioactive materials associated with the project are of major concern. This project could be a back door to Uranium mining in NSW.
2.The project will disturb 170ha-3 endangered ecological communities and habitat for the threatened pink-tailed Worm Lizard.
3.The management of tailings and waste leachate is high risk. The need for an annual water use of 4,000 million litres of water per year is significant.
4.Truck movements and social impacts are not acceptable.

1. The radioactive materials associated with the project are of major concern. Toongi has the largest deposit of uranium in NSW. This project could be a back door to uranium mining in NSW
2. The project will disturb 170 ha including three endangered ecological communities and habitat for the threatened pink tailed worm lizard
3. The management of tailings and waste water leachate is high risk. The need for an annual water use of 4,000 million litres of water per year is significant. The possible impacts on the health of Wambangalang Creek and Macquarie River are high.
4. Impacts on groundwater have not been clearly identified
5. The impacts of the proposed pipeline and powerline have not been included in the impact assessment
6. The increase in truck movements and social impacts are not acceptable
7. The economic analysis of the project does not consider cost benefits

I am concerned that the proposed mine only has rail transport as the preferred option, and not as the planned option (Section 2.12 of EIS). I am also concerned that the rail option would not be implemented for a number of years after the mine starts to operate. This will increase traffic on Dubbo Streets and consequent transport air pollution.
I ask whether the mine could secure the rail transport option and have it operational before the mine begins production.
I recognise this would require development/restoration of the Toongai to Dubbo rail line, but would be preferred over the excessive increase in road transport as would occur if the road option is pursued, and the rail option later becomes abandoned.

Part of the Property known as "Grandale" has Middle Triassic Flora Fossils including unique flora known to be present within the topsoil on an area that is marked as going to be disturbed. This unique fossil deposit may reqire some additional level of care. The following link refers to an article published in 1980 on fossils from the zone outlined in white in the attached file extracted from the EAS:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03115518208565416?journalCode=talc20#preview

Dear Sir/Madam

Please find attached my Submission objecting to the EIS statement provided by Alkane for the Dubbo Zirconia Project (DZP) at Toongi.

Thanks and regards
Landowner -Belgravia Estate

Please see our submission as attached...

Please find submission attached below.

I support Dubbo Zirconia Mine Project and think that it would be good for the local area, however as outlined in the document below I have a number of concerns that I feel need to be addressed by Alkane before approval is given.

Please see uploaded PDF file.