Mod 6 - Expansion of Coal Mine

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.

I object to the modification planned for the expansion of the Walkworth mine.

I object to ANY extension of the Warkworth coal mine. It is clear the mining of coal in this area is having a severe negative health impact not just on nearby communities but on all those who live along the entire rail corridor due to the extreme amounts of coal dust generated by this mine.

There has been no baseline testing and no proper assessment of this issue.

I also object on the grounds that the coal from this mine will be a significant contribute to global greenhouse gas emissions which currently have us on a trajectory to making life for many animals and plants no longer feasible on this planet.

It is incomprehensible to me that the implications of continued emissions from fossil fuels are not considered in assessment processes such as these. If they were to be genuinely assessed this mine would be phased out, not extended.

Finally, this mine is extracting huge amounts of water. The impacts from this water extraction have not been assessed.

You can't eat coal... and you can't drink water that's been through the coal pit!

The Hunter Valley should be for agriculture, biodiversity and human living... not a moonscape of massive holes.

I have worked as a consultant to Coal and Allied at various times over a period of many years. At present our company has several engineers engaged full or part time on C&A related projects.
I understand that if the extension is not granted C&A will be forced to reduce production, with a consequent impact on jobs.
I believe that this short term extension is reasonable given
a) the disruption in planning that has been forced on the company by the very late withdrawal of the previous extension,and
b) the current application is only sufficient to allow continuation of full operations until the original appeal is finalized.
The

We, Andrew and Kim Robey are the owners of the property known as "Meerea" situated at 179 Wambo Road, Bulga.

Our property is situated approximately 4 kilometres from the Mt Thorley Warkworth Mine.

We advise that the proposed extension will encroach further towards our property.

In the recent past noise from the mine has been problematic.

This is particularly so in the morning and at night during the week.

We do not believe that current noise controls and management plans will adequately address the increase in noise that will be occasioned by the modification.

We believe that noise controls and management plans will need to be updated to negative any potential deleterious noise impact from the modification.

We respectfully request that consideration be given to the installation of noise monitoring equipment on our property.

We, Andrew and Kim Robey are the owners of the property known as "Meerea" situated at 179 Wambo Road, Bulga.

Our property is situated approximately 4 kilometres from the Mt Thorley Warkworth Mine.

We advise that the proposed extension will encroach further towards our property.

In the recent past noise from the mine has been problematic.

This is particularly so in the morning and at night during the week.

We do not believe that current noise controls and management plans will adequately address the increase in noise that will be occasioned by the modification.

We believe that noise controls and management plans will need to be updated to negative any potential deleterious noise impact from the modification.

We respectfully request that consideration be given to the installation of noise monitoring equipment on our property.

I am writing to you on behalf of all 1300 employees/families of the Mt Thorley Warkworth operation and the many businesses that provide support for MTW.

We have spent 4 years going through an approvals process to secure an extension to our 30 year old operation on land that we own over which we have a mining lease. Approval was given after consultation with the NSW state regulators, Federal regulators and finally the Planning and Assessment Commission in February 2012. The approval was over turned in the Land and Environment Court in April 2013. This decision has been appealed by both Coal and Allied MTW and NSW Planning in the Supreme Court. We are await a decision from this process, with the best possible outcome being that we go back into the Land and Environment Court for a further period of time with no guarantee of any outcome. NSW's and Australia's reputation as an investment destination is extremely poor.

MTW puts
* $200M into the local Hunter Valley economy through paying companies that do work for MTW each year.
* Pay $220M wages and salaries to our employees who spend locally, pay taxes etc.
* Pay approximately $95M in Royalties to the state of NSW to help pay for hospitals and schools etc etc.
Failure to secure this approval is the first step in the closure of the MTW opencut operation leading to.
* Mine life being shortened by 37 years.
* 220 million tonnes of product coal sterlised.
* $22B revenue lost to this state.
* $1.83B of royalty this state will not see from the MTW mine alone.

We are seeking to be allowed to continue to mine on land that we own, over which we have a mining tenement, generate income for the NSW and Australian economy and make a positive contribution to our country, state, local community and our people.

We acknowledge that there are impacts to mining and we are committed to minimising these impacts as much as possible. We have made significant improvements across many fronts this year, particularly on noise, air quality and blast management. There is always room for improvement and we are committed to continue to do so. In addition we do try to engage with our stakeholders in a positive and contructive way and we are committed to continuing to do so.

I'm an engineer who is employed by Rio Tinto Coal Australia, my job and family depend on me being employed by RTCA. My role involves support to the hunter valley RTCA sites if this extension isn't approved my job will be under threat and in the current economic climate the chance of re-employment is in question. My livelihood depends on this extension being approved.

it will SAVE 1300 jobs as well as create new jobs why wouldn`t people want it to go ahead. Not to mention how many businesses it will affect as well. People like to take advantage of mining but don`t want to see them grow without the mining industry in the Hunter Valley a lot of towns would become ghost towns.

While we live on the fringe of the village of Bulga we are still affected by the impact of the air pollution, noise pollution and the diminishing value to our property. We believe that any future extensions to Warkworth mine increases the uncertainty of the sale of our property and it will decrease the market value .
We have ,for over 30 years ,been establishing a small organic vineyard and olive grove and have experienced an increase in the amount of noise and dust pollution during this time. The Warkworth MIne's submission states that they will give money to various agencies such as the Singleton council and the Aboriginal Trust, what compensation is given to the affect the mine has on a persons health, both physical and mental. The submission admits that at times they have , and could in the future, exceed the limit of acceptable noise and dust emissions. No money can replace the loss of a persons health due to a mine.
We bought our farm to live a healthy life ,which the mining industry has taken away from us.
Any future extension to Warkworth Mine will impact upon Bulga , decrease the lifestyle of the inhabitants, both physical and mental therefore it will have a detrimental impact upon us.
We strongly oppose it.

I support this this modest exstension to this 30 year old
mine which will have a positive future for investment and employment benefits for the people of N.S.W.
Newcastle and the HunterValley regions are experiencing a significant down turn in employment oportunities which will have negative impacts on future state goverment budgets and the tax payers of our state.
The people of N.S.W have put their trust in the managers and senior leaders of our state to ensure that a clear and postive message is delivered for the approval of this modest exstension.
I believe the taxpayers of N.S.W strongly believe this approval should go ahead ,it will have a significant impact on our sustainability to future employment and add to a postive investment enviroment for the future employment and investment oportunities for the people of N.S.W & Australia

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.

CLIMATE CHANGE
Remember climate change? It exists and is getting worse because of our fossil fuel burning. 80% of the world's fossil fuel's reserves must be kept in the ground to have any chance of keeping the warming trend below 2 degrees celsius. Digging up more coal is simply not feasible to maintain a liveable planet.

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,
Adam

I object to this project on the following grounds.

It will have a negative effect of the lives of the people who live in the township of Bulga due to noise and dust.

It will destroy significant areas of ecological significance and have a devastating impact on the biodiversity of this area in which this project is proposed.

It will cause the loss of areas that are of cultural and spiritual significance to the traditional indigenous owners of this land.

Last but not least, this project will have a huge environmental footprint in terms of the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the burning of the coal mined from this project. CO2 is a very long lived pollutant and now is certainly not the time to add a mega amount of this gas into the atmosphere by approving this project. Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere is akin to putting the weather on steroids. It will result in more extreme weather events which will have an adverse affect on the health and well-being of the people of the Hunter Valley and greater NSW.

"The Mining SEPP was recently amended by the Minister for Planning so that where mineral resources are
demonstrated to be significant to the State, they are given greater consideration in the assessment of
development applications or applications to modify development consents."

But it wasn't passed by the Upper House, so they can't use that as justification for going ahead with this extension!
Clearly given the rush to get this application in, that was the intention.

I object to the extension of the Rio Tintoretto mine in Bulga
The area was previously denied by the Land and Environment Court
The area is withi the Non Disturbance Area 1 as agreed in 2003 before I purchased land in Bulga
The mine has demonstrated up to date that it cannot control noise and dust anthis will become more problematic as the mine moves closer to Bulga
I have no objection to the coal being extracted by underground mining

This submission does not support the action to alter Mining Lease approvals or issues that remain under the NSW Supreme Court Decision, and attemps to negate the 2002 based Deed of agreement that is currenyly in place, and contrary to the assertions of the AS.

Secondly, it is disappointing to find the the offser is in fact part of the Bulga RAAF Airfiels Conservation study area and the two Aboriginal marked trees and the two Airfield HIDE bitumum Pads all fall in the offset area and ignored on purposely omitted from the Report, Why!

I am making a submission against the proposed expansion of the Warkworth Coal Mine (DA 300-9-2002-i MOD 6). I object to the project on the following grounds:
Firstly, the residents of the nearby community of Bulga have not been given time to properly asses this proposal, which is being rushed through. Only 2 weeks have been given for the public to examine this proposal and their requests to have this period extended have been refused without explanation. Their objection to the proponent's previous proposal in relation to the area under consideration has previously been loudly voiced, and related matters are now before the Supreme Court. Saddle Ridge, which would be impacted by this proposal, helps to protect the community from the noise of the mine's operations. It is imperative that this barrier for Bulga residents should be preserved. The health of residents is already affected by the mine's operations, and this proposal is likely to increase the output of particulate matter from the mine in the dust produced.
Secondly, regarding the NSW Government's role in this process. The Government has recently passed legislation making the economic value of new mining ventures the primary concern in their approval considerations (the "Resource Significance" SEP). There is strong opposition to this and it appears likely that this decision will be overturned. It appears that the NSW Government is acting in concert with the proponent, Rio Tinto, to allow this proposal to proceed before this happens. This contravenes promises made by the Government in its Regional Land Use Strategy to protect small communities in the Hunter from damaging impacts of mining operations (note the 2 km exclusion zone for CSG mining proposals). Last year there were roughly 800 noise complaints from Bulga residents against the Warkworth mine, but the NSW government has taken no action to enforce the mine's compliance with its approval conditions. Thus it appears that the Government is acting in bad faith through its role in this matter and that the approval process is now inherently corrupt.
Thirdly, there are four known aboriginal artefacts of cultural heritage value that need protection. The Wonnaruah people were previously guaranteed that these would be preserved under the Deed of Agreement. This proposal will destroy these sites. These important artefacts must be protected.
Fourthly, I object on environmental grounds as this expansion would destroy 16 hectares of Endangered Ecological Communities. The offset proposed is not equivalent compensation and it has been shown in the past that protection of these offsets is not guaranteed. The proposal would breach an area which the Land and Environment Court has ruled should be protected from open cut mining and which Rio Tinto agreed, in 2003, to protect in a permanent conservation area.
Lastly, Rio Tinto has provided no economic assessment of this project, yet they have publicly raised the spectre of job losses for the region if the proposal is rejected. This is unfair, and leads to division in the community. Again, they have demonstrated disregard for the Bulga residents and created anxiety for the Hunter Community overall. Small communities such as Bulga should not be subjected to such bullying behaviour by extremely powerful entities such as the proponent. This is unacceptable.
The Planning and Infrastructure Department should reject this proposal when it is clearly against the interests of the Bulga Community, the environment and the larger community in so many ways.

I encourage the mines expansion

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,
Catherine Herron