Medical Waste Facility

I work in Kurri Kurri. This facility should not be located in a populated area. In theory when the equipment is all working fine it may be relatively safe. What legally enforced and monitored safeguards would be in place to shutdown the operation if pollutant levels are exceeded? I do not agree that this facility should be located here. There is already too much pollution from wood fired heating (and I use the term wood loosely, based on the toxic fumes excreting from many of these fires).

As a local resident I am opposed to the proposed hazardous waste incinerator at 129 Mitchell Avenue, Kurri Kurri.

Three matters of concern have been raised:
1. The stated justification for the project, that "NSW urgently needs treatment capacity to process these wastes locally" is misleading and simply untrue. There is no pressing need to approve an additional clinical and related waste treatment facility in NSW and approval should be reserved for the most appropriate locations to site an incinerator. The proposed site at Mitchell Avenue may be commercially expedient for the applicant, however, being located 800m straight line distance from the nearest residences, there would be far better site location options from a public health perspective. The applicant's own documentation acknowledges there are alternative potential sites that could be considered.
2. The proposed waste and washed bin storage areas are manifestly inadequate. The stated maximum quantities of stored wastes provided in Table 2 "Materials at the Project" in Appendix J Preliminary Hazard Analysis are incompatible with the stated annual waste throughput volumes and the maintenance needs of a waste incinerator.
3. The proposed method of treating water from bin washing and the washing down of bunded areas not adequate.

We have not long ago got rid of the odours/polution from the Hydro Smelter. This proposal should be moved far from residences. It does not matter what 'safeguards' are put on paper, we all know they cost money to implement and are only done when being monitored. Current site is within close proximity to many residences and prevailing winds will not favour the health of the local community. There is no gaurantee of the community safety with this project, so it should not proceed

I'm a resident of Weston who lives on the already busy Government Road adjacent to Mitchell Avenue and I'm objecting to the upgrade of the Weston Aluminium Pty Ltd which is to be turned into Weston Aluminium Medical and Other Waste Thermal Processing Facility.
I've done some extensive research about the proposal and I'm not happy about what I've read. We are a residential and industrial area which means that any proposal's that WILL affect our health and wellbeing is a very big concerns.
Stated in the proposal is how you're going to destroy the Medical and other waste but what you don't mention is after the medical and other waste is incinerated what happens to the ash that is of contaminated substances? The ash still holds disease and viruses that needs to be contained correctly otherwise it will contaminate the air, the residents breath in on a daily bases. This puts all residence in a very high bracket of developing a range of different cancers and viruses as the ash is still a contaminated substance that needs to be disposed of correctly.
The proposal mentions that the ash pit will be burning for 8hrs straight; I don't want to be breathing in polluted, contaminated air from the medical waste and other waste the facility will be burning even if there is not a smell in the area as the air can still be contaminated with deses and viruses.
What is meant by the "OTHER WASTE" the facility will be incinerating. Is it chemicals based? As this leads to more environmental contamination as well as impact on human health and well-being as it stated in the proposal "Unidentified substance with unknown human health or environment effects, with components that are potentially infectious" this is a HUGE problem if what is being incinerated no one knows the health and environment effects it will/could have and I certainly DO NOT want to be living near a facility that is uncertain about the health impact it's going to have on MY FAMILY. I'm not a renter in the area, in a home owner and usually that means living in an area that is suitable for a life time so I'm very concerned about the impact this facility is going to have on MY FAMILY and so far there is more negative points than positive point which all relate to the health implications of developing cancers, viruses and diseases.
The WA might be "confident that the existing regulatory emissions control requirements and limits will be satisfied" I can say that I'm not confident that the existing equipment is up to the job of controlling the air pollution specially when the rest of the equipment will be up dated to take on the medical and other waste. This tells me that the existing emissions control needs to be up grade as well, as who knows when that was up dated last and the fact that the facility is dealing with "components that are infectious", therefore ALL equipment needs to be up graded to maintain the health and environmental impacts it will have on the area.
Mitchel Avenue is not a road that is just used for the workers that work in the facilities, it's a road that is used by all resentence, and the local school bus as well as residents walk along that road with their children also have the older school students that ride their bikes to get to the local high school. It's a very busy road that is used by all and will be effect by the pollution and the extra traffic that will be also using the roads. The children that use the road to get to and from school will be affected the most with the infections components as they could be in contact with the substances as there is nothing stating that the security will be up grate to keep unauthorised personal out of the area which in school holidays an alarm is activated every day in the industrial area which can be heard clearly by my house, usually courses by children trying to gain access to the creek that runs behind the facilities in the area. Transport routes should be planned to minimise possible exposure to the waste by consideration of activities of the road uses and the population that resin in the area.
The proposal also states that there will be no changes to the traffic or roads, the roads are poorly kept both Government Road and Mitchell Avenue which having more traffic on these roads will result in more pot holes which becomes a residential driving hazed and the noise pollution that will occurs with the existing traffic. My house sites adjacent to Mitchell Avenue and it deals with the existing noise's from the traffic hitting those pot holes which my whole house shakes so having the facility operate 24 hrs a day 7 days a week listening to the extra traffic that will be driving past my place every day will occur noise pollution and what about the extra noises that will travel in the night from the proposed area? I did read that no extra noises will be acknowledged but I can ashore you that the trucks that are delivering the waste to the facility in the quietest parts of the night will be heard from my house as I can hear the noises that occur at the sites that are open late at night and early in the morning. Therefore noise pollution needs to be looked at in a more in-depth study than having car counters sitting on the side of the road.
Overall 129 Mitchell Avenue is an unsuitable site to take on a medical and other waste facility specially when it has been stated in the proposal that the site at this stage is an adequate and that NSW is in no need for a waste facility as well as being a commercially expedient which there are plenty of places that are more suitable for such a facility that is away from residential areas.

I strongly oppose the proposed Kurri Kurri hazardous waste incinerator. The. Location is inappropriate as there are are too many residents in the area. Closest residents are only 800m away from proposed sight. This area does not need any more operations that will further detrimentally affect the air quality in this area. There is a wide spread concern that this proposed development will negatively affect the health of the residents of Kurri Kurri and surrounds and there would be far better sight location options away from the township. There is also evidence that there is no pressing need to approve an additional clinical and related waste facility in nsw and any approval should be reserved for a more appropriate location.
Also to be noted
The proposed waste and washed bin storage areas are manifestly inadequate. The stated maximum quantities of stored waste in table 2 "materials at the project " in appendix j preliminary hazard analysis are incompatible with the stated animal waste throughout volumes and the maintenance needs of a waste incinerator.
Also the proposed method of treating water from bin washing and the washing down of bundled areas not adequate.

Since the recycle plant has been in operation, my house, driveway and shed have been covered in black stains from fallout. During the nicer weather when we used to open our home right up the black dust comes into the home. This is the air my family continually breathe. Admittedly there in a cement crushing plant next to the recycle plant which has a small effect as well. Especially when we have Easterly winds.
I am totally opposed to the Hazardous waste Incinerator starting production with the new items listed in the letter I have received and I agree with the three points made.

Weston, Kurri Kurri, Cessnock and surrounding areas are an extension of the Hunter Valley Wine Region and is slowly gaining the sophistication of the Hunter Valley Wine Region. Now and in the coming years these areas will and are developing into major tourist attractions, enticing visitors looking for residency, accommodation, lifestyle venues, site seeing excursions and just to experience the tranquility the areas have to offer.
As the Weston, Kurri Kurri area have experienced major air and noise pollution from the previously operating aluminium processing plant located at the Mitchell Avenue site, which I may add, is located in a straight line 800 metres from the nearest residences and particularly with the new housing developments that have been approved and built, my impression is that to introduce a hazardous waste incinerator site would inhibit any further growth in the development of new housing in the immediate area.
With the development of expressways and upgrading of the overall highway and road facilities, people from Newcastle are moving into the area as is evident from the development between Kurri Kurri and Maitland and across the creek from the Mitchell Avenue site in Weston. These developments, I would imagine are repeated in many areas in the region.
To introduce a hazardous waste incinerator at the Mitchell Avenue site, with all the ramifications, with the incinerator proposing to operate 24 hours per day, is to CONDEM the people living in the immediate vicinity to unexpected health and possibly mental ramifications as well as JEOPARDIZE the development of the overall area to become part of the sophisticated Hunter Valley Wine Region, attracting the tourist dollars that will benefit the total areas population, (rather than have one entity secure the revenue as well as lower the areas integrity) and are required to enable the area to grow into a sought after destination to live, visit, frolic and enjoy.
.

I am not satisfied that this development is urgently needed. Surely the current providers of this service could increase amounts of waste disposed of.
I do not agree on the proposed site for this facility as it is to close to the townships of Kurri Kurri and Weston. I have concerns regarding air pollution and odours, the proposed location is North West of Kurri Kurri, prevelant NW wind would carry the offending air and odour to our living environment.
The increase in traffic would impact on my personal health and comfort. Is there not another location such as the HEZ development which was purposefully developed for such enterprize.
Upon advise I have learned that the proposed waste and washed bin storage areas are manifestly inadequate. the stated maximum quantities of stored wastes provided in Table 2 " materials at the project" in Appendix J Preliminary Hazard Analysis are incompatible with the stated annual waste throuhput volumes and the maintenance needs of a waste incinertator.
The proposed method of treating water from bin washing and the washing down of bunded areas are indadequate.
Once again surely there is other sites that can be utilized for this purpose why do the people of Kurri and Weston be submitted the the pollution, odours and extra traffic that this proposed development would generate. I would be like living next door to a Nazi concentration camp. If it is so urgent develop within a current zoned dump site like Summer Hill in Newcastle or one of the designated dump sites in the Sydney area. Please give this submission due consideration as I believe a better solution could be reached.

I object to the waste plant.

Generally interested in noise, air quality impacts and traffic

Air quality

Comments on the AQ assessment
* The air quality section shows the current annual average for PM10 to be 30µg/M3, but there is no mention of the possible change with the possible likely future update of NEPM and EPA guidelines.
* Also, it appears no local monitoring is in place for the site to confirm compliance with air quality standards or existing levels or to aid in accurate inputs into model
* In addition, the Weston education facility is in the wrong spot and is actually closer than shown on the plans. Therefore, the modelling for this site would be incorrect and should be remodelled in the correct location. The results of the modelling under play the effect on the school as it is actually in much closer proximity to the project area.
Suggested conditions on consent/further works
* To install environmental air quality monitoring stations to measure compliance against criteria with regular public reporting requirements.
* Installation of best practice pollution controls at the source.

Noise

* The noise assessment included 1 night of attended noise monitoring, which is inadequate as weather conditions play a significant role in noise emissions.
Suggested conditions on consent/further works
* Conduct more night monitoring of current site, focusing on La max and La1 levels to refine noise predictions.
* At my residence, my sleep has been disturbed in the past by reversing beepers, but I have not been able to identify the source, so am unsure whether it is from this site or not. A condition of consent to use broadband reversing alarms should be imposed. They are relatively low cost and would be very helpful in reducing noise impacts upon the local community.

Traffic

The traffic assessment is inadequate for the following reasons:
* It does not appear that any traffic surveys were carried out so current traffic volumes and impacts are not known
* Other proposals such as the Kurri Hydro development, other proposals by the proponent currently being assessed and the Frame drive bridge upgrade were not assessed. The Frame drive bridge upgrade in particular has the potential to send the majority of traffic coming from the city of Cessnock to Newcastle through the Gingers Lane, Sawyers Gully Road, Hart Road and Government Road intersection that is proposed to be used by this development as the main route of traffic to and from the site.
Suggested conditions on consent/further works
* Contribute to the upgrade to the Gingers Lane, Sawyers Gully Road, Hart Road and Government Road intersection to the satisfaction of Cessnock City Council

See attached pdf file.

Please find attached the SSHEG Submission Objecting to the five Weston Aluminium Facility Major Project Applications.

Weston Aluminium Thermal Waste Processing Project (SSD 15_7396)

I have uploaded my submission

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached