Mod 3 - Airly Coal

I am concerned that the proposed coal mining will cause subsidence which will damage the clifflines, slot canyons and rock pagodas on and around Mt Airly. I use this area for bushwalking and would not like to see it damaged. It is a very social and beautiful area that should be added to the World Hertitage Area of the Blue Mountains.

i'm against due to the impact on tourism and to protect conservation of for current and future generations!

Mining and Industry Projects
NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Dear Sir/Madam,

My name is , I am a concerned Australian citizen and I make forward this submission to you to ask that the mentioned proposal be refused outright.

This is a culturally and historically significant location as well being environmentally sensitive, home to many threatened native species of flora and fauna. Being so, this location needs to be protected from the damaging effects of mining processes and activities from which the spectacular structures of the Gardens of Stone and nearby habitat could never be rehabilitated to the extent of "full recovery".
Whilst mining practices are supposed to be governed and regulated to minimise impact on such environments - in most cases the original condition of pre mined locations are never rehabilitated correctly nor thoroughly and it is often local individuals or communities that expose the gross lack
of responsibility by mining companies and the associated regulatory bodies.
In this case, there can be no second chances with the Gardens of Stone. The proposal must be refused outright in order to maintain this fragile environment.
I have also made the following points to support my submission:

Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate

The 1991 development consent is out-of-date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectible levels of surface movements, that is mine subsidence.
Subsidence under the 1991 development consent of 1.8m is totally unacceptable - there must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; and a maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.
The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance and is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, I oppose any coal mining that does not fully protect these historical Oil Shale Ruins from any form of coal pillar extraction.
I agree with the World Heritage Advisory Committee that the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed.
Visually prominent waste and product heaps must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley, such as Pearsons Lookout .
I am concerned about the failure to consider downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal, operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,

See attachment.

Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am appalled at yet another attempt by Centennial Coal to undermine the delicate and spectacular areas in and around the Gardens of Stone, for the following reasons:


* The 1991 development consent is out-of-date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectible levels of surface movements, that is mine subsidence.

* Subsidence under the 1991 development consent of 1.8m is totally unacceptable - there must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; and a maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.

* The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance and is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, I oppose any coal mining that does not fully protect these historical Oil Shale Ruins from any form of coal pillar extraction.

* I agree with the World Heritage Advisory Committee that the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed.

* I am concerned about the failure to consider downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal, operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

* Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.

Make no mistake, you're decisions regarding mining in this area will have a direct impact as to how I vote and my influence towards my peers in regards to this government.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,

Linda Eggington
Director,
Molotov Communications

The proposed Airly Colliery modification 3 proposal seeks to allow intensive coal mining that causes 1.8 metres of vertical subsidence which will be very destructive to the local environment including the unique pagodas of the area. Also threatened are the oil shale ruins as well as the threat of mine water discharges which put at risk Airly Creek which flows into the World Heritage listed Gardens of Stone National Park. It is imperative that Centennial limits mine subsidence to undetectable levels. This proposal should preferably be refused outright or at least be amended to prevent any subsidence greater than 125mm. This unique area should be left in its pristine state and made World Heritage status.

Mining and Industry Projects
NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Dear Sir/Madam,

Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate

The 1991 development consent is out-of-date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectible levels of surface movements, that is mine subsidence.
Subsidence under the 1991 development consent of 1.8m is totally unacceptable - there must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; and a maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.
The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance and is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, I oppose any coal mining that does not fully protect these historical Oil Shale Ruins from any form of coal pillar extraction.
I agree with the World Heritage Advisory Committee that the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed.
Visually prominent waste and product heaps must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley, such as Pearsons Lookout .
I am concerned about the failure to consider downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal, operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,

Jane Parkes

Please don't wreck Gardens of Stone and the beautiful Capertee Valley and Pearson's Lookout vistas. As a Central Tablelands local, and lover of wilderness areas, and bushwalking, I want very careful consideration of this proposal, and object in its current state due to concerns for runoff into nearby creeks and potential subsidence problems from the proposed excavations and extractions.

Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate

I have visited this area many times and would be horrified to think that a government would allow coal mining companies to destroy both the natural and historical environment. Allowing for subsidence of 1.8 metres is unbelievable. That is the height of a person! There should be no subsidence, or at a minimum, a few millimetres.

The 1991 development consent is out-of-date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectible levels of surface movements, that is mine subsidence.

The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance and is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, I oppose any coal mining that does not fully protect these historical Oil Shale Ruins from any form of coal pillar extraction.

I agree with the World Heritage Advisory Committee that the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed.

Visually prominent waste and product heaps must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley, such as Pearsons Lookout .

I am concerned about the failure to consider downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal, operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Mr Lyndsay Edmonds
"Goollooinboin Station"
Glen Davis Rd,
Glen Davis NSW 2846
[email protected]

July 8, 2014

Mining and Industries Projects
NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure
GPO Box 39 SYDNEY NSW 2000

"Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3 Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate"
Dear Sir/Madam,
As the owner of Goollooinboin Station, located in the Capertee Valley I object to Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3 which seeks to allow it to extend its mining operation, as our property, water supply and water quality would be directly adversely affected if this application were granted. Moreover we believe this application is detrimental to Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area an environmentally sensitive area and of cultural significance and will adversely impact our valley's priceless biodiversity, natural amenity and geological integrity which draws a significant and sustainable tourist industry.

Goollooinboin Station is a 9,500 acres, highly productive mixed farm. Currently we run 2000 head of cattle which are dependent on licenced bores supplying water to 60 troughs. We continue to be a crucial supplier of beef with over 1,200 cattle a year sold to the Australian market and Wagu cattle to the Japanese market and the largest supplier of hay within proximity to Sydney. We depend on our bores and creeks and there continues to be serious risks that bores and creeks many of which run through our holding will be affected by Airly mining and our farm will run short of water and/or become polluted and our business will suffer considerably.

Moreover, I am very concerned for our valley as the environmental assessment does not mention the oil shale ruins, or that mine water discharges could put Airly Creek which flows into the World Heritage listed Gardens of Stone National Park at risk and other creeks affected will be Gap Ck, Genowlan Ck and Emu Ck which feed the Capertee River.

This modification 3 proposal asks for more intensive coal mining that causes 1.8 metres of vertical subsidence this will cause cliff collapses and subsidence. Meaning this will destroy this spectacular mesa with its thousands of pagodas, dramatic cliffs of the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area: and the "New Hartley" oil shale ruins. Access will be blocked for ever for safety reasons, and natural and scenic values lost for all time! Is this fair and reasonable?



I'm also very concerned that the coal heaps are NOW visible from Glen Davis Road and from Pearsons Lookout, in contravention of an agreement to screen them with trees. The heaps should be covered to control acid-run off that will affect local waterways.

In closing I personally implore NSW DPI to reject this application and ask that Airly mine be closed for good and no mining of any type be allowed in and around Capertee Valley. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,



Lyndsay Edmonds

My submission is uploaded.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Submission as an Objection: Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3

Existing consent conditions are totally inappropriate: Although Centennial Coal states that it adopts subsidence criteria that would result in minimal subsidence impact, it is applying for a simple time extension of DA162/91, which has consent conditions that allow for subsidence of up to 1.8 metres. This is completely unacceptable. Should Mod 3 be approved it must be with altered consent conditions of maximum tilts and strains that align with Centennial's stated adopted practice as specified on page i of the executive summary and on page 29 in section 6.1 of the EA. Vertical subsidence must be a maximum of 125 mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; and a maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.

Other concerns are:
* There is no mention of possible impacts of discharge water downstream in the nearby World Heritage Area. Operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution directly into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
* There is no mention of top sealing coal waste piles to prevent contamination of groundwater resources through heap leaching. Such leaching often leads permanent downstream pollution. Such top sealing should be made a condition of consent.
* There is no mention of screening visually prominent waste and product heaps. These are an eyesore, especially from Pearson's Lookout, a major tourist attraction and one of the most spectacular lookouts in NSW. Such screening must be made a condition of consent.
* It appears that the camping area in Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area will be undermined, though this area is not marked at all on Centennial's map. This could be incredibly dangerous for people camping on the site.

In addition there are a number of inaccuracies in the EA:
* p. 6: under Land Use and Ownership there is no mention of tourism, which is a growing industry within the area.
* p. 12 states no change to employment of 120 personnel when in fact currently there are only 59 employed (information from Centennial's payroll office on 3/7/2014).
* p. 33 mentions `placing longer term employment options for a recently employed workforce at risk'. The `recently employed' workforce is in fact largely a long-term Centennial workforce relocated from Centennial's Charbon mine. In addition, such concern appears a little hypocritical given that Centennial had no compunction in laying off truly `recently employed' workers (in 2009 when Airly commenced operations) after only three years when the mine was placed into care and maintenance in December 2012. That move enabled Centennial to relocate its long-term workforce from Charbon when that mine's underground operations ceased in March 2014, something that had been long planned.
* p. 26 states `No European heritage sites have been identified in the proposed mining area for this Modification', even thought the EA mentions protecting a stone cottage which is marked on Figure 6: Surface Sensitive Features. However, this same Figure 6 does not mark the very significant heritage sites of the old Torbane Colliery workings and the New Hartley Shale mine workings. Given that Modification 3 is for extension of the original DA, some mention of these very important and sensitive sites should be made. These sites are an important attraction within the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area and are accessible to almost everyone via the track now known as the Tramway Trail. They are assets of huge value to the local community and must be protected and conserved for future generations.
* Throughout the EA there is constant mention of and explanations for the MEP (Mine Expansion Project), making one question whether this the EA for Mod 3 or just a rehash of the EA they are working on for the MEP?

The Airly-Genowlan mesas should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed, as recommended by The World Heritage Advisory Committee.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,

Fiona Sim, President
Running Stream Water Users Association
PO Box 28
Kandos 2848

Submission as an Objection: Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing consent conditions are inappropriate.
* The 1991 development consent is out of date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectable levels of surface movement (i.e. mine subsidence).
* The 1.8 metre subsidence allowed under the 1991 development consent is totally unacceptable. There must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125 mm; maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.
* Downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal appear not to have been considered. Operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution directly into Airly Creek. Such discharges would have a devastating impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.
* The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance. This is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, and the Modification 3 proposal does offer to not protect these historic ruins.
* Modification 3 does not appear to offer effective screening and landscaping for visually prominent waste and product heaps. These must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Yours sincerely,

Mining and Industry Projects,
NSW Dept of Planning and Infrastructure,
GPO Box 39,
Sydney, NSW 2001

7 July, 2014'


Submission Opposing
Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate

I make this submission on behalf of Stop Coal Seam Gas Blue Mountains (SCSGBM), a group of over 450 people wishing protect our natural environment from the destructive effects of CSG and coal mining activity.

SCSGBM wishes to lodge a strong objection to DA 162/91 Modification 3 for the following reasons:

- This proposed operation is situated in the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area encompassing Mt Airly and Genowlan Mountain in the Capertee Valley and will impact on the spectacular mesa with its dramatic cliffs, and multitudes of pagoda rock formations.

- Centennial Coal are endeavouring to extend the original 1991 development consent to October 2015 in an attempt to have it cover their present day intentions. Modification 3 is the first stage of its plan involving a major mine extension proposal, SSD 12_5581. It is an opportunistic attempt to utilise this early consent, granted in a period when little consideration was given to environmental impacts and before the area was given the status of State Conservation Area, in order to carry out high impact mining operations in the eastern section of the mine's current mining lease. These operations will involve increased extraction capacity and an upgrading of the existing infrastructure.

- In anticipation of the declaration of the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area (MMSCA), Centennial's negotiated conditions prior to restarting operations in 2009-10 involved low-impact extraction which would leave half the coal resource in the ground in order to support the surface and protect the Genowlan and Airly mesas by limiting subsidence to 125 mm or less.

- Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area was declared in 2011 and the conditions applying to mining there must conform to those applying to State Conservation Areas.

- As the regulatory framework pertaining to underground coal mining has been considerably tightened since 1991 and conditions for mining in a State Conservation Area are reasonably strict, the original 1991 development consent is therefore inappropriate as it lacks the current, necessary environmental safeguards. Subsidence of 1.8 m., allowed under the 1991 consent, is totally unacceptable and could cause enormous damage to the internationally significant pagodas and cliff lines.

- The Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area Advisory Committee claims that the environmental and heritage values of the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area are sufficiently important for it to be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area ONCE mining has ceased. We believe this should be sooner, rather than later, given the significant benefits to the area flowing from its inclusion.

- The area is of great scenic value and attracts many local and overseas tourists. One need not point out that collapsed pagodas and rock slides do not enhance the scenic beauty nor tourism potential of the area. Similarly waste dumps and stockpiles are an eyesore which, if they must exist, should be screened and landscaped. This is currently not being carried out.

- The downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area are not considered in this proposal. If approved, operations under Modification 3 will discharge saline waste into Airly Creek, into the Gardens of Stone National Park within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Leakage from waste and product dumps can also pollute watercourses.

- The ruins of the historic Oil Shale works, regarded as strategic to Australia's wartime oil supply, have great heritage value and need to be protected from Centennial's proposed venture.

- Centennial's original commitments regarding Airly Colliery may have translated into an operation compatible with the State Conservation Area in which it is situated by preserving environmental and heritage values. However, Modification 3 and Centennial's current plans re SSD 12_5581 are a far cry from acceptable and we believe should be rejected.

Sincerely,

Janis O'Leary
for Stop Coal Seam Gas Blue Mountains

Submission as an Objection: Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3

The 1991 development consent is out of date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectable levels of surface movement (i.e. mine subsidence).

The 1.8 metre subsidence allowed under the 1991 development consent is totally unacceptable. There must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125 mm; maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.

Downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal appear not to have been considered. Operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution directly into Airly Creek. Such discharges would have a devastating impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.

The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special historic significance. The Modification 3 proposal does offer to not protect these historic ruins.

Modification 3 does not appear to offer effective screening and landscaping for visually prominent waste and product heaps. These must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,
David Drinkwater

Submission regarding Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3, from Rylstone District Environment Society Inc.

Rylstone District Environment Society Inc. objects to this proposal on the following grounds:

Mining activity should not interfere with the landscape and biodiversity of Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area; subsidence of 1.8 metres would cause permanent and unacceptable damage to this area; any impacts permitted should consider the conservation, scenic and habitat values of the area.

Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area has been recommended for inclusion in the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Mining activity should not compromise the values that would make this possible. The possibility of short-term economic benefits for a few does not warrant permanent destruction of the area's world-heritage values.

Further investigation is required to assess the proposal's impacts on the quality of ground water and surface water in this part of the valley, and whether there will be adequate water to support existing uses such as agriculture. Possible pollution of Airly Creek is a concern, and warrants further investigation to ensure this cannot happen. Any downstream impacts, and impacts on aquifers, need to be taken into consideration.

Further mining activity should be subject to a proper approval process, taking into account cumulative impacts of all existing land uses, and looking at long-term sustainability, rather than being approved via an extension to the existing development consent.

Yours sincerely
Rylstone District Environment Society Inc.

Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate

I am very familiar with the Capertee Valley area and the particular area which will be affected by this proposal. The scenic beauty of the area would seemingly make any mining proposal seem absurd. I therefore submit that Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3 proposal should be rejected for the reasons which follow:

The 1991 development consent is out-of-date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectible levels of surface movements, that is mine subsidence.

Subsidence under the 1991 development consent of 1.8m is totally unacceptable - there must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; and a maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.

The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance and is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, I oppose any coal mining that does not fully protect these historical Oil Shale Ruins from any form of coal pillar extraction.

I agree with the World Heritage Advisory Committee that the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed.

Visually prominent waste and product heaps must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley, such as Pearsons Lookout .

I am concerned about the failure to consider downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal, operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,

Tom Coley

Mining and Industry Projects
NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Dear Sir/Madam,

Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate


I object to this development and ask that this application be rejected or, at the very least, require that the company adhere to any vertical subsidence be restricted to a minimum of 125mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5mm/m and a maximum strain of 2.0mm/m.

It is very distressing to me that this very beautiful region is being so affected by coal mining. It is equally very distressing that this application could or will affect the historic Shale mine ruins.

The 1991 development consent is out-of-date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectible levels of surface movements, that is mine subsidence.

Subsidence under the 1991 development consent of 1.8m is totally unacceptable - there must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; and a maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.

The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance and is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, I oppose any coal mining that does not fully protect these historical Oil Shale Ruins from any form of coal pillar extraction.

I agree with the World Heritage Advisory Committee that the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed.

Visually prominent waste and product heaps must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley, such as Pearsons Lookout .

I am concerned about the failure to consider downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal, operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,

My submission is attached as a pdf file

Mining and Industry Projects
NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Dear Sir/Madam,

Submission as an Objection - Airly Colliery DA 162/91 Modification 3
Existing Consent Conditions are Inappropriate

I am very concerned that this application is being made over a very beautiful and visually valuable area, with historic Shale mine ruins as well. It seems unthinkable that Australians are faced with valuable landscape being so affected by coal mining when we need to invest now in renewable energy resources. This area is a wonderland for bushwalkers and the landscape is more valuable being protected for long term enjoyment rather than short term monetary gain.

The 1991 development consent is out-of-date and inappropriate as it lacks the necessary environmental safeguards for coal mining in a State Conservation Area, therefore this modification proposal to extend the consent should be either refused or varied to specify almost undetectible levels of surface movements, that is mine subsidence.

Subsidence under the 1991 development consent of 1.8m is totally unacceptable - there must be no exceptions to following limits: vertical subsidence being a maximum of 125mm, a maximum tilt of 2.5 mm/m; and a maximum strain of 2.0 mm/m.

The historic Oil Shale Ruins are of special significance and is one of the best preserved heritage sites of its kind in NSW, I oppose any coal mining that does not fully protect these historical Oil Shale Ruins from any form of coal pillar extraction.

I agree with the World Heritage Advisory Committee that the Mugii Murum-ban State Conservation Area should be added to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area once mining has been completed.

Visually prominent waste and product heaps must be appropriately screened and landscaped to blend in with surrounding parks and popular tourist destinations in the Capertee Valley, such as Pearsons Lookout .

I am concerned about the failure to consider downstream impacts on the World Heritage Area in the Modification 3 proposal, operations proposed under Modification 3 can discharge water pollution into Airly Creek. Such discharges would impact on the Gardens of Stone National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

Reverse osmosis water treatment of the effluent from Airly Colliery to remove all salts and dissolved metals must be required for any discharge to a World Heritage listed property.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours sincerely,