Mod 6 - Expansion of Coal Mine

I believe the expansion should go ahead as the singleton community relies on employers such as rio tinoto and with the expansion it will provide not only myself but my children gainful employment and opportunity

I am voting in favor of the submission not only for personal reason but for the future of generations that will follow into the mining sector. It will not only help their local community but it will have a chain reaction right across the board. It will be the younger generation that I feel will be affected the most with the loss off work through-out the hunter valley be that it may where they work from the small corner store and up to the larger shopping centers. We need to let them as know that as young emplee,s of the future we care about them and thier careers.

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 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
Alison Potter

Dear Minister,

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.

Both my husband and I are employed at Mount Thorley Warkworth mine and we are relying on the modification being approved at Mount Thorley Warkworth as our future depends on it.

We relocated our family 14 years ago to work at Mount Thorley Warkworth and have made Singleton our home. We shop local, visit the local restaurants, dentist etc and our kids have attended the local schools. A large proportion of our income goes back into the local Singleton economy.

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.

We need certainty. We've been wondering what the future holds now for four years. If this minor modification to an existing, 30 year old mine does not get approved, I am worried about what this will mean for local jobs and investment across the NSW mining industry.

Please accept this submission in support of the Warkworth Modification.

My Husband and I have worked at MTW for 7 years since moving to Singleton. We support Coal and 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.
We have seen evidence in the Singleton Community caused by the recent downturn in the coal export sector and for MTW to cut further jobs would be a double blow to our Community. We have two teenage sons at school we provide for and we would have to uproot our Family if we no longer have jobs.
We need certainty. This is an existing 30 year old mine which has invested heavily in infrastructure and its people and community not a new greenfield site. Please accept this submission in support of the Warkworth Modification.

The loss of these jobs will have a massive "ripple" effect with the local economy suffering and this has not been thought about enough.

I would like the 350metres to be approved. As I work at the mine and I help sapport not only my family, but my perents as well. The wider community will also be affected with job loses though out the whole area, including Sydney.

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.

The company is breaking two 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. 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.

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, Rio Tinto, clearly have no commitment to genuine consultation with the Bulga community.

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.

The proposed expansion will impact on local residents it will 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?

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.

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..

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.

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.

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,

Susanne skates

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.

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.

BROKEN AGREEMENTS with residents of the town most impacted by the project.
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.

Sincerely,

Anna Cooke

My grandparents live in Bulga. I have spent my holidays there.
It is a beautiful place. It's not right to have it wrecked by mines.
Anyway, the court already said NO. Why are they asking again ?

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,
Dominic May

I wish to express my objection to the proposed extension of the Warkworth Mine.
In 2003 the Mine was required to Deed this parcel of land as a Permanent Conservation Area as part of the Conditions of approval of their 2003 extension. They did not follow the requirements of the Deed and now appear to believe that a solemn undertaking then required is now not applicable in the name of profit.
The area proposed to be mined has already been the subject of an application to mine, which has been denied by the NSW Land & Environment Court. It is unconscionable that they should make this application in defiance of the Court ruling.
The Residents of Bulga are already subjected to loud noise and excessive dust, way beyond the 2003 Consent Conditions, and the Mine has very selectively chosen data in support of its application that puts them in a good light. We know of the non compliance because we live with it. An extension will mean more noise, more dust and more close blasting.
Many studies in the Hunter Valley show how dust from mining has serious health consequences, I object to this project as it must increase the dust in our air and water.
I am concerned that, as selective data has been used in their EIS regarding noise and dust, that other data on water, and environmental matters may be similarly selective. Meaning that a decision may be made on specious grounds.

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,
Barbara May

I object to the expansion of Warkworth Mine for the following reasons

Dust
I do not believe that the Air Quality Assessment for this EA adequately addresses the health implications of the mining extension proposal.

I am experiencing dust on a daily basis including in our drinking water tanks, swimming pool on the animals, drinking water troughs and dust throughout the house causing allergies and asthma.

I believe this dust produced by open cut mines is affecting my health and that because of the methods of open cut mining the production of dust cannot be prevented. For health reasons alone, any expansion of Warkworth Mine must be rejected.

Saddle Ridge.
This ridge is an important barrier between the noise and dust of the Warkworth mine and the village of Bulga. The Mine said they would not mine this Saddle Ridge and signed a Deed of Agreement with the Government in 2003 agreeing that they would preserve the ridge as a Non Disturbance Area. This Ridge must not be mined or damaged with mine related activities.

Noise
Any increase in the noise levels already adds to the excessive noise being received by me from this mine. Rio Tinto has been fined for exceeding noise limits. Last year the mine received 800 noise complaints. No increase in noise levels is acceptable.

Visual Impact
The overburden dumps which are currently seen from our house will further contributed to by this extension. Further, the massive excavation into the eastern side of Saddle Ridge will have a major visual impact when viewing the Ridge from the east. The intrusion into my home from lighting is evident and will more so when excavation begins into Saddle Ridge

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
The Wonnarua aboriginal heritage of my ancestors must not be destroyed. Four out of seven artefacts remain from those identified in the earlier EA. With this expansion the remaining four will be destroyed. These artefacts were intending for preservation under the Deed of Agreement of 2003. This will not be honoured under this expansion.

A large proportion of families living in the Hunter Valley rely on the mining industry for a living.
I believe that the approval of the modifications sought by Coal & Allied in relation to it's Mount Thorley Warkworth mine would help the ensure the prosperity of these families for at least the next two years.
I fully support the approval of the modifications.

I support Mining and the Warkworth Extension!

to many people ar losing to many jobs, it has to stop. 1300 job loses doesn't there, it's also going to affect contractors, transport companies, retail groups, etc, etc

I support the Warkworth extension 100%. As an employee I know we Treat the wellbeing of our neighbours as a very high priority.

I support mining & the Warkworth extension

Iam a contractor at mount thorley warkworth and if it was to close it would affect me and my family in a major way