Mod 6 - Expansion of Coal Mine

This mine is more than a job it is our livley hood and our families future

My family and hundreds of others would be devastated if this operation didnt go ahead as jobs would be lost

the Warkworth modification is a lifeline for many works and business

I support the application

I support the application

I am writing in regards to Warkworth consent 2003-mod 6. I am firmly against this modification. I currently live in Bulga and have done so for 38 years. I am disgusted, upset and angry by this proposed modification by Warkworth mine. No consultation with the Bulga community on this proposed modification was sought, but Warkworth mine have known about the project for 2 months. Why the secrecy? Chief Justice Preston from the Land and Environment court agreed with our concerns and ruled against Warkworth mine.We have not heard the outcome from the Supreme court appeal, but here we are writing submissions to our government who we elect, trying to convince you that Warkworth mine does not care about communities that are affected by large open cut mines.

The area that is proposed to be mined a mere 350m is the spin BS that Warkworth mine would like you and everyone to believe. So when modification No7 turns up on nsw planning's desk for another 500m and the next modification No8 for another 400m, then you start to see that it is not a mere 350m, but the start of the ruination of Bulga community and Warkworth Sands piece by piece. This proposed area was supposed to be protected by the 2003 ministerial deed, but as we all know has now been amended to the benefits of Warkworth mine by our government to ease the access to more royalties.

I live in an elevated area and already have full view of Warworth/Mt Thorley mine, Saddle Ridge and Charlton Ridge and mined overburden. The noise modelling and visual amenity outcomes used for the proposed modification have not in any way given the high impact on people who will be affected, but as usual have put forward material that shows Warkworth mine can comply which to me is highly questionable. We already suffer from sleepless nights due to loud mine operation, so this shows that they cannot comply with conditions now, so by moving closer, compliance will be harder for Warkworth mine to achieve.

Yes I do feel for the 1300 workers with future job uncertainity, as my husband is one of those workers, but no job is guaranteed secure and there is more than 1 source of employment.

We need this modification to help them support other business and families that supoort Workworth.

The uncertainity in the planning system over recent years has impacted the economy & Australia growth prospects. Not only has this impacted our economy but inturn caused substantial job losses across all industry. I continue to be concerned for my job security even though i am highly qualified & been in the energy industry for 20 plus years. Hopefully the opponents of the mining industry dont win & get their way with proposed changes to the Planning Bill.
Regards S.T

The Warkworth modification is a lifeline for Mount Thorley and the businesses who supply us

This is a submission against the proposed expansion of the Warkworth coal mine (DA 300-9-2002-i MOD 6).

I object to the project, and I submit that it should be refused on the following grounds.

BROKEN PROMISES
The proponent, Rio Tinto, signed a Deed of Agreement in 2003 promising not to mine Saddle Ridge, which protects the town of Bulga from the worst impacts of the Warkworth mine. Rio committed to approach Singleton Council and have Saddle Ridge and the endangered woodland around it rezoned for environmental protection.

The company is breaking both of these promises, and cannot be trusted to keep any commitments it makes in the present application. The NSW Land and Environment Court has previously rejected Rio's application to mine Saddle Ridge. That decision must be respected.

DECEITFUL BEHAVIOUR
Local residents learned of the new application the day before it was lodged. Residents attended a community consultation meeting with Rio Tinto just three weeks before that. At that point in time, the Environmental Assessment for the project would have been ready to lodge, but yet residents were not told about it. This is deliberately deceitful and sneaky behaviour from Rio Tinto, who clearly have no commitment to genuine consultation with the Bulga community.

UNFAIR PROCEDURE
This application was lodged just two business days after new mining regulations came into force, which require the economic significance of a coal resource to be the primary factor influencing the government's determination of a mine application (the "Resource Significance" SEPP). This was surely not a co-incidence, and erodes public trust in the objectivity of government in this process.

Ordinarily, a significant mine expansion such as this would go on public exhibition for up to 6 weeks. Yet this project was sprung on the public without any notice, with just two weeks for public submissions. A formal appeal by local residents for an extension to the public exhibition period was rejected by the Planning Department, with no reason given.

For the government to accept this application from Rio Tinto in the first place shows a blatant disregard for the outcome of the previous Land and Environment Court ruling, and the current proceedings in the Supreme Court. It is difficult not to see the Modification application as the first step in a strategy to have the disallowed Warkworth Extension approved bit-by-bit to avoid full assessment.

The government appears to be conspiring with Rio Tinto to push this project through the approval system without due process,. In light of recent revelations from the ICAC inquiry into mining lease corruption in NSW, this is not a good look.

IMPACTS ON RESIDENTS
Noise
The proposed expansion would bring the mine closer to Bulga, and remove some of the landform which currently shields the town from the worst of the mine's impacts. Noise from the mine already has a major impact on the mental and physical health of the residents of Bulga. The mine has been in continual breach of the NSW Industrial Noise Policy, and its current approval conditions. Despite this, and despite 800 noise complaints against the mine from local residents last year alone, the NSW Government has not taken any action to enforce the mine's approval conditions.

How can the Government approve a project that would increase noise impacts on local residents, when the mine cannot even adhere to its existing approval conditions to control noise impacts?

Particulate emissions
The World Health Organization now classifies particulate pollution as a Class 1 Carcinogen. According to the EPA, 87% of PM10 sized particle pollution in the Upper Hunter comes from coal mines. It is likely that the existing Warkworth coal mine has a significant impact on the health of local residents, and and the proposed expansion would cause an unacceptable increase in these impacts. A cumulative health impacts study of the Hunter coal industry is needed.

BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS
The proposed Warkworth modification project would destroy 16 hectares of Endangered Ecological Communities. The promised "offset" for this irreversible loss of endangered species and their habitat does not compensate for its loss, and would not protect equivalent habitat to that proposed to be bulldozed. In any event, Rio Tinto have shown that their so-called 'offsets' are not protected anyway, and may be subject to future mining applications.

The Warkworth mine must not be allowed to expand into an area that Rio Tinto agreed, in 2003, to protect in a permanent conservation area, and in which open cut mining was rejected by the Land and Environment Court in earlier this year..

SOCIAL IMPACTS
Sadly, too many Hunter Valley villages have already been swallowed up by coal mining. Bulga, a close-knit community with deep historical significance for the Hunter, must be protected.

It is disappointing to note that Rio Tinto has been misleading its employees about the reasons the Warkworth Extension was rejected in court, and has failed to publicly acknowledge the agreement it has broken - to protect this area from mining. This has lead to conflict in the community.

ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
The proposed modification project would destroy four known Aboriginal artefacts, that Rio Tinto has previously agreed to protect (under the Deed of Agreement). This agreement must be kept, and these important cultural artefacts of the Wonnaruah people must be protected.

JOBS AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Rio Tinto have provided no economic assessment in support of the project, and their bland public statements to the effect that this project is needed to maintain jobs have not been supported by any information provided.

Rio Tinto's estimates of the employment and economic benefits of expanding the Warkworth mine have previously been rejected by the NSW Land and Environment Court, and they remain untrustworthy. Threats of jobs losses by the proponent should not be a factor for consideration when assessing the merits of this project, and they certainly should not take precedence over the protection of public health, adherence to the Deed of Agreement to protect Saddle Ridge from coal mining, and the right for the community of Bulga to persist.

I wish to be able to look my grandchildren in the eye and say I tried to protect their environment.

Sincerely,
Lyn Brattan

Without this modification many jobs and families will be left devastated. Many businesses in Mount Thorley industrial area will be massively impacted resulting in closing of businiess

my house backs onto the mines it is about as close as you can get to the mine. the noise is not a problem. i think most of the people who do winge are out to put there hands in the mines back pocket to benefit them self by the mines paying for air con insulation ext ext.

The Warkworth modification is a lifeline not only for the mine itself but for the many business that are suffering in this downturn. Including people that have lossed jobs. Without this there is sur to be more to come

The closure of this site would see a reduction in the work available to us as a contractor to Mt Thorley Warkworth. This would directly result in the loss of jobs within my organisation and I would strongly urge the expansion of this operation for the financial security of persons working within this organisation.

I support mining and the Warkworth extension

The Hunter Valley has been mining in this region for many years beyond mine and I support the years that may be left in the industry. Many, if not all people in this area benefit of some way from the industry, whether it be directly or not, I'm sure everyone here knows someone, family or friends who have gained employment if not from the mines direct to relating entities.
Mining helped Australians come out of the GFC, has provided so many opportunities for people in the area.
I am from a farming background and do understand the impact mining has on farming families but I do also have to say "Look at the bigger picture"
Personally, through tough times in drought, my father gaining mining employment saved his 3rd generation sheep and cattle property.
Stop the negative stigma on Mining, look at the benefits and stop focusing on the negatives. This is mining country and mining country is what it should be

I support mining and the Warkworth extension.

My family and I have just moved back here from mudgee after spending 5 years out there. We moved back for the better live stile and more opportunities for my kids . I took on the role here because my family and I thought it would see me out for retirement. If they do not get this exstention I feel sorry for all the people in singleton that will lose there jobs.

I object to the project, and I submit that it should be refused on the following grounds.

UNFAIR PROCEDURE
This application was lodged just two business days after new mining regulations came into force, which require the economic significance of a coal resource to be the primary factor influencing the government's determination of a mine application (the "Resource Significance" SEPP). This was surely not a co-incidence, and erodes public trust in the objectivity of government in this process.

Ordinarily, a significant mine expansion such as this would go on public exhibition for up to 6 weeks. Yet this project was sprung on the public without any notice, with just two weeks for public submissions. A formal appeal by local residents for an extension to the public exhibition period was rejected by the Planning Department, with no reason given.

For the government to accept this application from Rio Tinto in the first place shows a blatant disregard for the outcome of the previous Land and Environment Court ruling, and the current proceedings in the Supreme Court. It is difficult not to see the Modification application as the first step in a strategy to have the disallowed Warkworth Extension approved bit-by-bit to avoid full assessment.

The government appears to be conspiring with Rio Tinto to push this project through the approval system without due process,. In light of recent revelations from the ICAC inquiry into mining lease corruption in NSW, this is not a good look.

LOCAL IMPACTS
Particulate emissions
The World Health Organization now classifies particulate pollution as a Class 1 Carcinogen. According to the EPA, 87% of PM10 sized particle pollution in the Upper Hunter comes from coal mines. It is likely that the existing Warkworth coal mine has a significant impact on the health of local residents, and and the proposed expansion would cause an unacceptable increase in these impacts. A cumulative health impacts study of the Hunter coal industry is needed.

BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS
The proposed Warkworth modification project would destroy 16 hectares of Endangered Ecological Communities. The promised "offset" for this irreversible loss of endangered species and their habitat does not compensate for its loss, and would not protect equivalent habitat to that proposed to be bulldozed. In any event, Rio Tinto have shown that their so-called 'offsets' are not protected anyway, and may be subject to future mining applications.

The Warkworth mine must not be allowed to expand into an area that Rio Tinto agreed, in 2003, to protect in a permanent conservation area, and in which open cut mining was rejected by the Land and Environment Court in earlier this year..

SOCIAL IMPACTS
Sadly, too many Hunter Valley villages have already been swallowed up by coal mining. Bulga, a close-knit community with deep historical significance for the Hunter, must be protected.

It is disappointing to note that Rio Tinto has been misleading its employees about the reasons the Warkworth Extension was rejected in court, and has failed to publicly acknowledge the agreement it has broken - to protect this area from mining. This has lead to conflict in the community.

ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
The proposed modification project would destroy four known Aboriginal artefacts, that Rio Tinto has previously agreed to protect (under the Deed of Agreement). This agreement must be kept, and these important cultural artefacts of the Wonnaruah people must be protected.

JOBS AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Rio Tinto have provided no economic assessment in support of the project, and their bland public statements to the effect that this project is needed to maintain jobs have not been supported by any information provided.

Rio Tinto's estimates of the employment and economic benefits of expanding the Warkworth mine have previously been rejected by the NSW Land and Environment Court, and they remain untrustworthy. Threats of jobs losses by the proponent should not be a factor for consideration when assessing the merits of this project, and they certainly should not take precedence over the protection of public health, adherence to the Deed of Agreement to protect Saddle Ridge from coal mining, and the right for the community of Bulga to persist.

This is a submission against the proposed expansion of the Warkworth coal mine (DA 300-9-2002-i MOD 6).

I object to the project, and I submit that it should be refused on the following grounds.

BROKEN PROMISES
The proponent, Rio Tinto, signed a Deed of Agreement in 2003 promising not to mine Saddle Ridge, which protects the town of Bulga from the worst impacts of the Warkworth mine. Rio committed to approach Singleton Council and have Saddle Ridge and the endangered woodland around it rezoned for environmental protection.

The company is breaking both of these promises, and cannot be trusted to keep any committments it makes in the present application. The NSW Land and Environment Court has previously rejected Rio's application to mine Saddle Ridge. That decision must be respected.

DECEITFUL BEHAVIOUR
Local residents learned of the new application the day before it was lodged. Residents attended a community consultation meeting with Rio Tinto just three weeks before that. At that point in time, the Environmental Assessment for the project would have been ready to lodge, but yet residents were not told about it. This is deliberately deceitful and sneaky behaviour from Rio Tinto, who clearly have no commitment to genuine consultation with the Bulga community.

UNFAIR PROCEDURE
This application was lodged just two business days after new mining regulations came into force, which require the economic significance of a coal resource to be the primary factor influencing the government's determination of a mine application (the "Resource Significance" SEPP). This was surely not a co-incidence, and erodes public trust in the objectivity of government in this process.

Ordinarily, a significant mine expansion such as this would go on public exhibition for up to 6 weeks. Yet this project was sprung on the public without any notice, with just two weeks for public submissions. A formal appeal by local residents for an extension to the public exhibition period was rejected by the Planning Department, with no reason given.

For the government to accept this application from Rio Tinto in the first place shows a blatant disregard for the outcome of the previous Land and Environment Court ruling, and the current proceedings in the Supreme Court. It is difficult not to see the Modification application as the first step in a strategy to have the disallowed Warkworth Extension approved bit-by-bit to avoid full assessment.

The government appears to be conspiring with Rio Tinto to push this project through the approval system without due process,. In light of recent revelations from the ICAC inquiry into mining lease corruption in NSW, this is not a good look.

IMPACTS ON RESIDENTS
Noise
The proposed expansion would bring the mine closer to Bulga, and remove some of the landform which currently shields the town from the worst of the mine's impacts. Noise from the mine already has a major impact on the mental and physical health of the residents of Bulga. The mine has been in continual breach of the NSW Industrial Noise Policy, and its current approval conditions. Despite this, and despite 800 noise complaints against the mine from local residents last year alone, the NSW Government has not taken any action to enforce the mine's approval conditions.

How can the Government approve a project that would increase noise impacts on local residents, when the mine cannot even adhere to its existing approval conditions to control noise impacts?

Particulate emissions
The World Health Organization now classifies particulate pollution as a Class 1 Carcinogen. According to the EPA, 87% of PM10 sized particle pollution in the Upper Hunter comes from coal mines. It is likely that the existing Warkworth coal mine has a significant impact on the health of local residents, and and the proposed expansion would cause an unacceptable increase in these impacts. A cumulative health impacts study of the Hunter coal industry is needed.

BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS
The proposed Warkworth modification project would destroy 16 hectares of Endangered Ecological Communities. The promised "offset" for this irreversible loss of endangered species and their habitat does not compensate for its loss, and would not protect equivalent habitat to that proposed to be bulldozed. In any event, Rio Tinto have shown that their so-called 'offsets' are not protected anyway, and may be subject to future mining applications.

The Warkworth mine must not be allowed to expand into an area that Rio Tinto agreed, in 2003, to protect in a permanent conservation area, and in which open cut mining was rejected by the Land and Environment Court in earlier this year..

SOCIAL IMPACTS
Sadly, too many Hunter Valley villages have already been swallowed up by coal mining. Bulga, a close-knit community with deep historical significance for the Hunter, must be protected.

It is disappointing to note that Rio Tinto has been misleading its employees about the reasons the Warkworth Extension was rejected in court, and has failed to publicly acknowledge the agreement it has broken - to protect this area from mining. This has lead to conflict in the community.

ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
The proposed modification project would destroy four known Aboriginal artefacts, that Rio Tinto has previously agreed to protect (under the Deed of Agreement). This agreement must be kept, and these important cultural artefacts of the Wonnaruah people must be protected.

JOBS AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Rio Tinto have provided no economic assessment in support of the project, and their bland public statements to the effect that this project is needed to maintain jobs have not been supported by any information provided.

Rio Tinto's estimates of the employment and economic benefits of expanding the Warkworth mine have previously been rejected by the NSW Land and Environment Court, and they remain untrustworthy. Threats of jobs losses by the proponent should not be a factor for consideration when assessing the merits of this project, and they certainly should not take precedence over the protection of public health, adherence to the Deed of Agreement to protect Saddle Ridge from coal mining, and the right for the community of Bulga to persist.

Sincerely,

Craig Chapman