Mod 6 - Expansion of Coal Mine

The mine cannot presently control its effects of noise and dust on the residents of the bulga area, so what hope have we if they move closer? In the environmental impact study submitted by the mine in support of their application, they have selected noise data from one monitor that shows relative compliance with their consent conditions, however they do not show data from two others which show fairly continuous exceedences. And we have to live with the faulty blasts and excessive noise and dust now produced by the mine.
I am not anti mining, neither do I want people loosing their jobs. I would support any application by them to mine these seams by underground means.

I am strongly against any further open cut mining near the village of Bulga .I have lived in bulga all of my life and I love the place ,how ever the constant dust and noise is having a detrimental impact on our health and wellbeing not to mention the irreversible impacts on the environment ,constant blasting causing structural damage to private dwellings. Enough is enough leave our village ALONE!

I support the application due to the significant benefit that the mine brings to the local economy including large number of jobs.

i have been employed at mount thorley warkworth for almost 6 years now and my partner is employed here also.
i suuport the extension go ahead as it means myself and my partner will have guaranteed job security for a little longer which will come as a relief to both of us as we, like most people have a mortgage and bills to pay, i would also hate to see massive job losses on site and in surrounding work area's related to the mining industry who are depending on this extension also, thank you.

John Krey and Ian Hedley are at retirement age they should sell up and move to the coast and complain about the Beer temperature. I wonder which one of these fellas has made his millions from the mines? Hypocrite.

My family of 4 is dependent on the mine getting this expansion for future income..

I have been employed at MTW for the past four years as a full time employee and a further 15 months as a contractor. In this time I have made Singleton my home, purchased a house in the area and do the majority of my shopping in town. As a production employee at MTW, I can vouch for the critical importance of extending a lifeline to the operation, as any downgrading or closure will have drastic impacts on not only my personal circumstances, but also that of the community at large.

Personally, were I to lose my job, I would have to potentially sell my house and move to another area to find work. Magnify this impact with the other 300-500 MTW employees that live in the Singleton local area, and imagine the roll on impact on the town. Socially and economically it would be a disaster.

I acknowledge that there needs to be a balance struck between environmental, social and economic issues, but with the state of the Australian economy and the fact that there are a number of other industries struggling to survive at the moment, I ask that consideration be given to support operations that generate strength into the economy. Without this mine, there will be an additional large number of people in need of support, and the Australian welfare system is already overloaded.

In summing up, I ask that you give proper and due consideration to the benefits to the local, state and national economies in lending support to this application. I also ask you to consider the number of people that would be adversely affected by a denial of the application. There has been a great amount of noise and publicity generated by a small number of local residents in opposition to the extension of our mine, but I can assure you that the number of people that would be out of work would be far more and the impacts, further reaching thana handful of residents and a 2km radius.

I support Coal & Allied's Warkworth Modification application to gain access to an additional 350m of land owned by the mine to avoid a significant drop in production and employment.
I have been employed at Mount Thorley Warkworth Mine for 5 years as a Mobile Equipment Operator. Mount Thorley Warkworth provides a stable income for over 1,300 full time employees in the Hunter Valley and the operation of the mine reaches into many other businesses that supply MTW. Thousands of people depend on this mine and if production was to drop, the result could be devastating on the community.
Please accept this submission in support of the Warkworth Modification.

My family has worked in the coal industry for the last 3 generations,I have worked at MTW for the past 8 years.
I have family and friends that work at numerous businesses in the hunter valley that depend on the mining industry.
The proposed extension for MTW should be allowed due to the profesional way that they conduct business and support the local community.

I find it hard to find the words to object to this application, and I shall try to be brief as well as factual, unlike the submission from Rio Tinto.
1. The area proposed to be mined is included in the are where approval was denied by the NSW Land& Environment Court in 2013 - it seems to me that an abuse of process is now occurring when the Mine is appealing the L&E Court decision, but submits an application to mine part of that area already denied.
2. The Mine was required in 2003 to submit to a Deed setting this area aside as Non Disturbance Area 1 (NDA1) and to submit an application to Singleton Council to have it Zoned as a Permanent Conservation Area. The purpose of this was twofold, a. to protect a significant area of Warkworth Sands Woodland from mining and therefore extinction and, b. to provide a visual & noise buffer between the Mine and the ViIlage of Bulga. By some deceit, the Mine did not submit the land for re zoning and has breached the deed and by definition, their 2003 Consent Conditions - for which they must now be held to account.
Many residents of Bulga relied on that Deed to make life plans and are now in a position where their properties are worthless, their lives are in some turmoil and they are under threat by an expansion which should never have been contemplated.
3. The EIS submitied in support of the project is faulty in a number of respects.
a. It says that noise will hardly increase-- and uses data from one monitoring station in support. We in Bulga know that this monitor is in the wrong place, at a lower RL than the mine and behind significant screen trees. Were they to take data from the two Barn Owls in Inlet Road and Wollemi Peak Rd, you would see and entirely different story. Constant noise at 42 and 44db, and in some cases up to 46db, almost 300% above their existing consent conditions!!
b. It says that land is useless for agriculture. That is not the case, for many years up until the Mine took over the land it was a very productive sheep grazing property, evidence of this can still be seen in the meadows on the southern slopes of Saddleback Ridge. Latterly it was grazed by cattle from the Warkworth Pastoral Company, now that the mine has allowed sapling regrowth on some of this land it's grazing potential has lessened, it could be returned to good, productive grazing land with little effort.
However, after mining has been completed and Rio Tinto has faded into the distance, the land, once mined will be USELESS for any pursuit, as it will no doubt form part of a void, which will just hold saline water and look like a moonscape for ever!!!
4. In considering the the ecology, the EIS makes a number of very broad statements regarding the flora and fauna and says that the proposed offset area to the west of he mine is suitable. Mt Justice Preston in his 2013 judgement said the an offset area must be "Like for Like" and be additionlal to existing. The area offerred already exists, provides some, but not all of the biodiversity of flora & fauna - but is ALREADY THERE, so it cannot be considered as an offset. Further the EIS goes on to say in para 5.3 "will be conserved for the life of Warkworth Mine"
As the Mine had abrogated, or some might say, deceitfully avoided, its obligations under the 2003 Deed, we would have no reason to believe that this off set area would continue as stated.
5. Presently the Mine does not comply with the NSW Industrial Noise Policy, in that it makes no measurements of Low Frequency Noise and therefore does not the required adjustments to its observed readings,
Any data presented in the EIS by the Mine is incorrect (as it is unadjusted)
6. As to air quality, the Mine tells us in EIS that the winds seem to favour the fact that Bulga will not be impacted by dust from the mine - those of us who live and work here know this to be little short of a joke. We have constant deposits of black greasy dust on any surface, my white trucks & ute display this evidence with no shame - The local mines use more than 30 Million Litres of Diesel per annum and they move say 5 tonnes of overburden per tonne of coal, at 18megatonne per annum from MTW, we could expect dust from more than 100 mega tonnes of rock & soil (PM10), plus vast quantities of PM2.5. In addition there is many hectares of exposed soil in the MTW mine area, so we get windblown dust. Already local health authorities tell us that we have dust at dangerous levels, we constantly have dust readings in and around the district way above acceptable levels and consent conditions, with health warning regularly issued.
Therefore it is submitted that any additional dust from this proposal would be unacceptable.
7. The EIS re Visual is another fanciful piece of writing, worthy of a Booker Prize. MTW abounds the Putty Road, particularly the West Pit which is the subject of this amendment. Every time we drive along the Putty Road to town, we are reminded of the devastation the mine is imposing on our landscape. If we can see into the Pit we can see dust rising, machines working and the moonscape of mine workings. If the view of the pit is screened by a visual bund, we are reminded of the hidden devastation by the state of the bund, its shape, which is alien to the local landforms, its covering of weeds and some hardy grasses which highlight the fact that it hides even uglier workings. Or if we see the spoil piles, with their pointy tops, the erosion gullies and the flat final form again we are reminded that Engineers are generally not artists and that their idea of neat and tidy bears no relation to nature. From my home we look directly at a spoil pile which no doubt will grow if this project goes ahead, apart from the visual pollution this creates, the building of this pile is one major annoying noise source.
8.I am sure that the local Wanaruah people will comment adequately on items of heritage in this area, but suffice to say that because of its bountiful rivers & streams and its productive grasslands, there is considerable Aboriginal history in the local area, this must not be allowed to be destroyed by the mine,
9. Groundwater. In the EIS the mine actually admits that the proposal has the potential to impact groundwater, perhaps one of the few true statements made.. It is fair to say that the underground aquifers in the vicinity of the current mine workings have been permanently damaged, and no amount of rehabilitation can be successful in repairing this damage, because of the damage to the strata. Whilst motherhood statements such as," the proposed modification is not expected to result in any significant or detectable increase in depressurisation" sounds good, this is just an opinion and any increase in depressurisation could have significant effects on water levels in the Wollombi Brook to the west of the area, and therefore the Hunter River. Further, more mining means more disturbance of aquifers which again could lead to an increase in Salinity, mentioned as EC in the EIS so as not to alarm readers. When salinity increases in streams and Irrigators draw water from those streams, they increase the potential for soil degradation and therefore a reduction in usable land for food production, cropping grazing etc. It is important that the impact of mining on streams be minimised, with the proliferation of coal mining, particularly open cut mining in the Singleton region, now is the time to call enough. Para 10.4.4 tells it all. the experts use various models and from them make predictions, however they admit in this paragraph that they cannot measure whether they were right or wrong so can only estimate via modelling!! What happens if they are very wrong??
The EIS refers to predictions of what will happen to groundwater at the cessation of mining (not saying whether this is 2021 or 2031) . If equal emphasis is given to this report, as to the Noise/Dust reports we can conclude that the experts and their modelling are probably wrong again.
When speaking of Surface Water, the EIS admits that the proposed extension has the potential to effect the flows of surface water to the Wollombi Brook. This is a very serious admission, the Wollombi Brook is an important local stream, providing irrigation water for farms downstream of the mine and ensuring flows to the Hunter River. Any reduction in flows to the Hunter would put pressure on storages upstream to maintain River levels and provide sufficient water for Irrigators downstream of the confluence with the Brook. Also the EIS says that there is a risk, however slight of an increase in salinity of the Brook, and therefore the Hunter River because of this. Just downstream of the Mine is the takeoff for the Broke Fordwich Private Irrigation District and further downstream east of Singleton is the takeoff for the Hunter Wine Country Private Irrigation District. Between them these bodies take up to 8000 megalitres per year from the Hunter and this water is used for irrigation purposes by more than 560 Farms. many of these farms are vineyards and provide tremendous economic benefit to the district in the way of employment, wine production at all stages, transport and most importantly tourism. Any deleterious effects on the quality of Hunter River water could have catastrophic effects on this industry and its vertical consequences, eg tourism, employment etc.,
10. Social Impact. The Mine has almost made light of this in its EIS, saying that everything in the garden is rosy, right now- Well that is far from the truth, The residents of Bulga and Milbrodale are suffering substantially from the social effects of mining, as demonstrated by Professor Albrecht in the NSW Land & Environment Court. He has identified Solastalgia as a serious factor in the residents and many are very upset that the Mine has not had the courtesy to even mention to them that there was a proposal in the wind.
Because of the reaction of the Mine in denying complaints when made, most residents have a deep distrust of the Mine and its' Management. Their inability/unwillingness to recognise the effect of their operations on the residents has created a rift so great that I doubt the Mine could regain the residents trust in the foreseeable future. Whilst they say in the EIS that there was only one blast overpressure event recorded, they have failed to mention two faulty blasts dealt with earlier in this submission, which caused breathing problems to a number of people in the area. They also have failed to mention that most of the recent blasting was not in the West Pit., But when it was, many residents complained of excessive vibration and damage to their homes. Any blasting associated with this application will be closer to Bulga residents than any previous blasts. we have suffered significant damage to our home from blasting, but the mine tells us that we live on reactive soils and that all of the cracking of concrete, slumping of foundations etc., is the fault of those soils. Funny thing that our home lasted almost 80 years with no significant problems, but in the last 28 the reactive soils have really caused havoc!!

In conclusion I would say that there is nothing in the EIS supporting the application that I take much comfort from. MTW and its Management have selectively used data from sources that advance their cause and have avoided the truth when it comes to the adverse effects, they now cause and will continue to do so if this amendment is approved. They neglect key items in their 2003 Consent Conditions, have abrogated their responsibilities under the 2003 Deed and, with their recent lack of consultation on this project have totally lost any credibility they may have had in respect o ethical and community responsibilities.
As the area proposed for this extension is part of an area where approval was denied by the NSW Land & Environment Court, I believe it is at best an abuse of process to make this application and at worst an contempt of that Court and its Chief Judge.
Again I object in the strongest terms to the project.

I have been an employee at C&A MTW for 11 years now and fully support the extension of the lease. Since I have worked here I have seen that the company is passionate about caring for the surrounding environment and neighbours to our mine. They shut the pit down on windy days when the dust gets up and also shut machinery down if there are noise issues or we have received complaints from the local community. MTW is a great place to work and it provides employment for approximately 1300 people, some of whom reside in the local town ship of Bulga and surrounding small community's. Singleton, Branxton, Rutherford, Lochinvar and Belford are just a few more towns where employees reside and travel to work. It would be devastating to the local economy if jobs were lost because of the extension being declined.

To whom it may concern
I support the application for the MTW extension because if the extension gets knocked back the economical strain it would place on my self, my fellow work colleges and surrounding bussiness & communities alike would outway any other out come.
Yours truly
Darren Drayton

i live locally and the extension would give my family security to ensure we can stay in this area

I support it

I support the MTW extension as this will give my family security for the future.

I am employed at the site and support the proposed expansion to assist with the ongoing employment security in the region.

I support the MTW extention, this will give me security for the future and prevent me having to leave the area to look for work

I support the extension for my family and our future

I support for my husband and our family's future

I support the extension for my future and those of my work mates and community