MOD 7 Infrastructure consolidation and remediation

Submission: Objection to MOD-7 – Incomplete Remediation of Contaminated Industrial Site, Kurnell Peninsula
I am writing to formally object to the proposed modification (MOD-7) concerning the remediation of the heavily contaminated Kurnell Peninsula industrial site.
As a staff member at a local preschool, I am deeply concerned about the significant environmental and public health risks posed by this modification. MOD-7 effectively enables Ampol to externalize the long-term environmental costs associated with fossil fuel extraction and processing, further degrading an already severely compromised site. This modification allows Ampol to avoid its responsibility for fully decontaminating the land, including the removal of hazardous materials.
Moreover, our local community, including the children who attend the preschool, directly interacts with the local environment. The nearby waterways, including those impacted by the contamination, are utilized for bush Kindy—an educational program that brings young children into natural environments to foster their learning and connection to nature. Any compromise to the health of these ecosystems, including through the release of toxic substances, directly endangers the wellbeing of these children and the broader community who rely on the health of these waters for recreation, education, and sustenance.
Ampol must be held to its obligation to undertake a thorough and comprehensive cleanup of the site. The proposed modifications risk not only the future environmental health of the area but also the trust of the public, which is entitled to expect that these matters be handled with the utmost care for future generations.
The Australian Oil Refining Agreements Act 1954 (No. 34) (p. 33) stipulates that the company occupying the land defined in MOD-7 must not present a danger to public health. The diesel spill on 7 April 2022, in which 9,000 liters of diesel were released into Kurnell Village and nearby waterways due to grossly inadequate fuel storage management, is a clear violation of this law. The spill, compounded by heavy rainfall, caused toxic chemicals to spread into residential areas, leading to reported symptoms among residents such as nausea, headaches, and eye irritation. There were also fatalities among local wildlife.
Despite a relatively minor fine of $700,000 imposed by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), the environmental, psychological, and ecological consequences of the spill have been both severe and lasting. One of the most troubling effects is the ongoing deterioration of the Towra Point Nature Reserve, a RAMSAR-listed wetland of international importance.
In addition, the Act (p. 27) explicitly prohibits the company from allowing solid or liquid waste to enter Botany Bay unless it has been rendered completely harmless to marine life and incapable of causing ecological harm. Yet, these provisions have been repeatedly breached.
MOD-7 also proposes the removal—either partial or complete—of the oily water separation system, which would significantly increase the volume of untreated runoff entering nearby bays and wetlands. Allowing this would exacerbate the discharge of chemical pollutants into a RAMSAR-listed site, which is not only environmentally reckless but also ethically indefensible.
Furthermore, it is essential to address the contamination of local waterways by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). These chemicals, known for their persistence in the environment and bioaccumulation in both aquatic ecosystems and humans, pose an ongoing threat. PFAS contamination of Botany Bay and surrounding areas must be treated as a critical part of the site’s remediation. These chemicals do not degrade easily and can remain in the water and soil for decades, causing long-term damage to local ecosystems and potentially entering the food chain. It is vital that Ampol takes full responsibility for the identification, removal, and treatment of PFAS contamination from the site and its surrounding waterways to prevent further harm.
Given the serious environmental and health risks involved, I urge the Department to reject MOD-7. Instead, I call for a fully transparent, scientifically rigorous cleanup process, one that aligns with Ampol’s legal obligations and prioritizes ecological justice. The company must be held accountable for restoring the site to a condition that poses no threat to human or environmental health, especially for the children who learn and play in these ecosystems.

I am a resident of Kurnell and a parent of four young children. I strongly oppose MOD 7 in its current form due to serious concerns over contamination, public safety, environmental impact, and lack of meaningful community engagement.

Environmental health and contamination risk:
MOD 7 proposes capping contaminated soil rather than fully removing it, effectively leaving hazardous substances—particularly petroleum hydrocarbons, PFAS and asbestos—buried onsite in perpetuity. This approach means future generations, including my children, could be exposed if caps degrade or fail. The proposal to redirect stormwater from 22% of the site into Quibray Bay—part of the RAMSAR‑protected Towra Point wetlands—is especially troubling given recent diesel contamination incidents in Marton Park draining into sensitive ecosystems.

Flooding, stormwater and ecosystem impact:
MOD 7’s planned changes to stormwater pathways and increased runoff (10‑20%) raise serious flood and environmental risks to local residents and protected wetlands. A new flood study reflecting recent climate‑adjusted rainfall data must be integrated before such changes are approved.

Process inadequacy and lack of transparency:
The exhibition period was a mere 15 days—plus a one‑week extension—to review a highly technical proposal with multiple voluminous appendices. This timeline is insufficient for community members without technical expertise to meaningfully assess its implications.

No user‑friendly summary was provided, and there has been minimal direct outreach to the broader Shire or to Sutherland Shire councillors.

Recommendations:
1. Reject MOD 7 in its current form.
2. Require full remediation of contamination (soil and groundwater), not simple capping.
3 .Mandate a transparent, plain‑language community education process and meaningful engagement.

Conduct an updated flood and stormwater study incorporating climate‑adjusted data before approving any runoff changes.

Provide clear assurance that site activities will not threaten public safety, especially given the single access road in and out of Kurnell.

My four children, as well as the rest of the community deserve to grow up and thrive in an environment that is safe, healthy, and fully remediated—not one where contamination remains underground indefinitely. I request that MOD 7 be withheld, strengthened, and reopened for broader, more inclusive consultation.

Thank you for considering my concerns.

Objection to Modification 7: Prioritizing Full Cleanup for Kurnell's Health, Heritage, and Future
As a mother of three young children (aged 5, 4, and 2) attending Kurnell preschool—located just 500m from Ampol's site—I've lived in Kurnell for 8 years. We've built our life here in a thriving community transformed since the refinery shutdown in 2014. Kurnell is now a much loved destination, drawing over 1 million visitors annually to Kamay Botany Bay National Park, boosted by National & State investments and rejuvenation in $78 million in Kamay Wharves, $50 million Gamay Visitor Centre, and promenade upgrades ($10-15 million). This has fostered new local businesses (café, fish and chips, etc), doubled kindergarten classes at the primary school (500m away), and boosted families like mine. Yet Mod 7 threatens this progress by abandoning full cleanup for permanent on-site toxin capping, risking health, environment, and our historical land.
I strongly object to Mod 7 under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act Section 4.55—mods must not worsen impacts) and Australian Oil Refining Agreements Act 1954 (No. 34 public health protection and no harmful bay discharge). The original approval mandated off-site removal of contaminants like PFAS, hydrocarbons, and asbestos. Mod 7 reverses this (Section 4, Page 60), allowing capping for cost savings while locking in E5 industrial zoning enabling Ampol’s broader monetary strategy of Kurnell Energy & Industry Precinct (KEIP), Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) and Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) blending… this is likely only the start as the subdivision maps illustrate. I dread to think of Tourists sentiment and perception (local and worldwide) once they see what Ampol and the Australian Government has allowed to happen to Kurnell, the birthplace of Australia (Kurnell the Birthplace of Australia - an industrial wasteland).
Further to this:
Health and Safety Risks: Capping PFAS—linked to cancer (global studies)—and hydrocarbons ignores flood/leak threats (Figure 7-5, Page 111), with self-monitoring and no new independent audits. Who is accountable for future disasters? Proximity to preschool, primary school, girls hall, and Marton Park (used for sports/Christmas events) endangers children. The 2022 diesel spill (9,000 liters, EPA fine $700,000, September 20, 2023) killed mangroves in Quibray Bay (visible on Google Earth) and caused nausea/headaches—breaching Act 1954 p.33 (public health protection).
Environmental Impacts: Kurnell, a Ramsar-protected wetland (DCCEEW), risks permanent pollution to Botany Bay, violating Act 1954 p.27 (no harmful discharge). Dead mangroves from past spills highlight biodiversity threats.
Historical and Social Factors: As Australia's birthplace—Cook's 1770 landing on Dharawal land—Kurnell is culturally sacred. Mod 7 erodes this heritage, clashing with National & State investments turning it from industrial eyesore to family/tourism hub. Tourism is surging as evident on weekdays and weekends. People are travelling to watch the Whales, attend sporting events, take their dogs to the dog beach, visit Captain Cooks landing, the list goes on.
Broader Precedent: Approving Mod 7 in a Ramsar site sets a dangerous national/international example: if sacred/historical, protected Kurnell allows buried toxins, what stops it elsewhere? Sydney and Australia will be watching.
I strongly Reject Mod 7: Enforce off-site removal and do not turn Kurnell into an industrial wasteland. Kurnell's future as an internationally recognised, safe, vibrant community—not industrial dump—depends on it.
Regards,
Alice

I write to formally object to the proposed Kurnell Battery Storage System (BESS), currently under assessment as a State Significant Development (SSD). While I acknowledge the importance of energy transition and storage in facilitating renewable energy integration, I have serious concerns regarding the suitability of this project in the Kurnell area due to the following issues:
Proximity to Residential Areas: The proposed site is in close proximity to existing residential dwellings. Large-scale lithium-ion BESS installations have well-documented fire and thermal runaway risks, as acknowledged in both international literature and recent Australian incidents (e.g. Victoria’s 2021 Moorabool fire). A failure event could expose residents to hazardous gases, toxic smoke, and potential evacuation scenarios. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must account for worst-case scenarios and prove that risk can be acceptably mitigated.
Cumulative Industrial Burden: Kurnell has long borne the burden of industrial development—from oil refineries to desalination infrastructure. The addition of another hazardous energy facility, without proper planning reform or cumulative impact analysis, further erodes community wellbeing and amenity. There must be a cap on the compounding of industrial risk in already stressed communities.
Planning Precedent and Inappropriate Zoning: Approval of this development risks setting an unacceptable planning precedent for large-scale battery systems to be placed near homes and sensitive land uses. Until robust planning controls and setback guidelines for BESS facilities are finalised in NSW, no such projects should be approved in peri-urban or residential environments.
Conclusion: In light of the above, I respectfully request that the Kurnell BESS project be refused until:
Full risk assessments (including fire and explosion scenarios) are publicly released;
And meaningful community consultation has been demonstrated.

I strongly oppose the approval of Modification 7 at Kurnell.I’ve lived in Kurnell my whole life—20 years—and I love my community, the beach, the wetlands, and the local ovals where I spend time with friends and play sport. I also go fishing with my dad and mates. This proposal deeply concerns me. Leaving contaminated soil—such as PFAS, hydrocarbons, and even asbestos—on-site permanently is unacceptable. Heavy rain and flooding could easily spread these toxins into Botany Bay, the wetlands, and the areas where we swim, fish, and walk. Risking our health and environment for corporate savings is not justifiable. Ampol originally committed to properly remediating the land and converting it into parkland or open community space. That gave residents hope. Now, the proposal is to retain industrial zoning indefinitely and merely cap the contamination instead of removing it. This is not good enough. If Modification 7 is approved, it won’t just endanger public health and the environment—it will impact the local economy, tourism, wildlife, and any prospects for future development. It means more industry, noise, pollution, and less green space for children and families. Please don’t let this happen. Kurnell is a unique and valued place. It must be protected—not turned into a permanent dumping ground. Ampol should be held to its original promise and carry out proper remediation. The community deserves a clean, safe future—not one burdened by toxic risks. In summary my dot point below:


Toxins staying on site.
Risk to kids, water, and wild life.
Lack of full clean up.
Industrial land locked forever.

Submission: Objection to MOD-7 – Incomplete Remediation of Contaminated Industrial Site, Kurnell Peninsula
I am writing to formally object to the proposed modification (MOD-7) regarding the remediation of the heavily contaminated Kurnell Peninsula industrial site.
I am deeply concerned about the significant environmental and public health risks posed by this modification. MOD-7 essentially allows Ampol to offload the long-term environmental costs linked to fossil fuel extraction and processing, enabling further degradation of an already compromised site. This modification allows Ampol to avoid taking full responsibility for the complete decontamination of the land, including the removal of hazardous materials.
Ampol must be held to its obligation to undertake a thorough, comprehensive cleanup of the site. The proposed modifications risk not only the future environmental health of the area but also the trust of the public, which is entitled to expect that these matters be handled with the utmost care for future generations.
The Australian Oil Refining Agreements Act 1954 (No. 34) (p. 33) stipulates that the company occupying the land defined in MOD-7 must not present a danger to public health. The diesel spill on 7 April 2022, in which 9,000 litres of diesel were released into Kurnell Village and nearby waterways due to grossly inadequate fuel storage management, is a clear violation of this law. The spill, compounded by heavy rainfall, caused toxic chemicals to spread into residential areas, leading to reported symptoms among residents such as nausea, headaches, and eye irritation. There were also fatalities among local wildlife.
Despite a relatively minor fine of $700,000 imposed by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), the environmental, psychological, and ecological consequences of the spill have been both severe and lasting. One of the most troubling effects is the ongoing deterioration of the Towra Point Nature Reserve, a RAMSAR-listed wetland of international importance.
In addition, the Act (p. 27) explicitly prohibits the company from allowing solid or liquid waste to enter Botany Bay unless it has been rendered completely harmless to marine life and incapable of causing ecological harm. Yet, these provisions have been repeatedly breached.
The 2002 Spill has decimated arears of local mangroves and without full remediation of the site the potential for further damage is inevitable The fact that Ampol’s past track record may point to a lack of proper response or remediation is especially concerning.
MOD-7 also proposes the removal—either partial or complete—of the oily water separation system, which would significantly increase the volume of untreated runoff entering nearby bays and wetlands. Allowing this would exacerbate the discharge of chemical pollutants into a RAMSAR-listed site, which is not only environmentally reckless but also ethically indefensible.
Furthermore, it is essential to address the contamination of local waterways by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). These chemicals, known for their persistence in the environment and bioaccumulation in both aquatic ecosystems and humans, pose an ongoing threat. PFAS contamination of Botany Bay and surrounding areas must be treated as a critical part of the site’s remediation. These chemicals do not degrade easily and can remain in the water and soil for decades, causing long-term damage to local ecosystems and potentially entering the food chain. It is vital that Ampol takes full responsibility for the identification, removal, and treatment of PFAS contamination from the site and its surrounding waterways to prevent further harm.
Furthermore, the July 2007 Conservation Management Plan for the Kurnell Peninsula highlights the importance of protecting local biodiversity, particularly the endangered Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurelia), whose habitat lies within the affected area. This species, which is listed as vulnerable under both state and federal legislation, is already under significant threat from habitat destruction, pollution, and climate change. The proposed modifications under MOD-7 would further compromise the integrity of their habitat, potentially driving this species closer to extinction. It is crucial that the remediation efforts prioritize the preservation and recovery of this frog population, ensuring that all activities at the site are consistent with the objectives outlined in the Conservation Management Plan and that they do not exacerbate the risks faced by this endangered species.

Additionally, the proposed capping of contaminated solid waste is, at best, a temporary and inadequate solution to the site's long-term environmental issues. Capping does not address the root cause of the contamination, nor does it eliminate the risk of further leaching of toxic substances into the surrounding soil and waterways. This approach merely places a band-aid over a deep wound, deferring the responsibility of proper remediation. The potential for long-term environmental harm—particularly to local ecosystems and human health—will remain, and this method falls short of the comprehensive cleanup required to restore the site fully. A proper, lasting solution must include the complete removal and treatment of all hazardous materials, not a superficial covering that allows the contamination to persist beneath the surface.
The proposal to allow Ampol to independently test, audit, and report on its own remediation efforts—removing the requirement for mandatory reporting to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)—is deeply concerning. Given Ampol's track record of non-compliance, including the 2022 diesel spill and the ongoing violations of environmental regulations, this arrangement is not only inappropriate but dangerously naive. Allowing the company to self-report without independent oversight risks further failures in accountability and transparency. The EPA must retain the authority to oversee and verify all testing and reporting to ensure that remediation is carried out in full compliance with legal and environmental standards. Trusting Ampol to regulate itself, after multiple breaches of environmental law, would set a dangerous precedent and undermine public confidence in the integrity of the remediation process.
It is also important to recognize the significant investments the state government has made in developing Kurnell as a key destination for tourism and recreation. The construction of the new Kurnell ferry wharf and visitor centre are testament to this vision, designed to enhance public access to the area's natural beauty, promote local tourism, and preserve the integrity of the surrounding environment. Allowing MOD-7 to proceed, with its potential to enable further industrial developments at the Ampol site, directly contradicts this investment in Kurnell’s future as a pristine and accessible natural and recreational area. The continued industrialization of the Kurnell Peninsula would not only undermine these government investments but also threaten the very environmental and cultural values that the state is actively working to promote. The public’s expectation for a cleaner, greener Kurnell should not be at odds with the interests of industrial expansion that poses significant risks to the area's long-term health and ecological sustainability.
Under the MOD-7 proposal, Ampol's land would be prepared for the construction of an 800MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) facility, located just 400 meters from residential properties and next to Australia's largest fuel storage facility. This raises alarmingly high safety and health risks. Kurnell is located only 17 kilometres from Sydney's city centre and approximately 6 kilometres from Australia's largest airport, Kingsford Smith. The close proximity of these high-risk facilities significantly amplifies the potential for catastrophic consequences. A disaster at this site—such as fires, explosions, or chemical leaks—could impact not only the local community but also vital infrastructure, including the airport. This is akin to placing an uncontrollable fire source next to a bomb. Given the risks to public safety and the location's close ties to essential urban and transport hubs, this proposal must be critically reconsidered to prevent devastating impacts on both local residents and the broader Sydney region
Given the serious environmental and health risks involved, I urge the Department to reject MOD-7. Instead, I call for a fully transparent, scientifically rigorous cleanup process, one that aligns with Ampol’s legal obligations and prioritizes ecological justice. The company must be held accountable for restoring the site to a condition that poses no threat to human or environmental health.

Images of the Destroyed Mangrove Are from the 2022 Spill attached
The Green and Golden
Bell Frog Key
Population at Kurnell managements plan attached

The proposed changes raise significant and valid concerns that affect the health, safety, and wellbeing of local families, the environment, and the broader Kurnell community. My key objections are as follows:
1. Toxic Contamination and Health Risks
There is serious concern that Mod 7 allows for contamination and toxins to remain onsite, rather than requiring a full remediation of the land. This poses a direct risk to public health — especially for children who live, play, or attend school in the area — through potential exposure to soil, dust, or groundwater pollution. Without full clean-up and independent monitoring, this site remains a long-term health risk.
2. Impact on Families and Vulnerable Groups
Kurnell is home to many young families and elderly residents. The cumulative impacts of increased industrial activity, airborne particles, noise, and heavy vehicle traffic can cause long-term harm to community wellbeing, including respiratory issues, stress, and reduced mental health. Children are especially vulnerable to environmental toxins.
3. Threats to Wildlife, Waterways, and Mangroves
The site’s proximity to Towra Point Nature Reserve, Botany Bay, and the mangrove wetlands means any disturbance, runoff, or contamination could have irreversible effects on sensitive ecosystems. This includes native birdlife, marine species, and endangered habitats. Mod 7 increases the risk of pollutants entering these waterways and permanently damaging critical conservation areas.
4. Incomplete Remediation and Legacy Industrial Waste
Despite repeated community concerns, the site has never been fully remediated after previous industrial use. Mod 7 does not address this adequately. Allowing development without full site clean-up shifts the burden of environmental risk to the community and the natural landscape.
5. Overdevelopment and Inappropriate Land Use
The proposal effectively transforms a contaminated, land-locked industrial site into something incompatible with the surrounding environment. The scale and intensity of the proposed development do not reflect the local character or the sensitive coastal context of Kurnell. It sets a precedent for industrial expansion in a town that should be moving toward environmental restoration, not degradation.
6. Loss of Amenity and Conflict with Sanctuary Zones
Towra Point is a declared Ramsar-listed wetland and part of a protected sanctuary zone. Mod 7 conflicts with its environmental protections and undermines national and international commitments to conservation. Development so close to this reserve disrespects the ecological value of the area.

In summary, Mod 7 is not in the public interest. It poses unacceptable risks to health, safety, environmental integrity, and the character of the Kurnell Peninsula. I urge Council to reject this modification and require full site remediation and independent assessment before any further development is considered.

As a resident of Kurnell and a member of a growing young community, I strongly object to the proposed Ampol Mod 7 project.

Kurnell has undergone a huge transformation over the last few years, becoming a thriving, family-oriented suburb with many young families choosing to call it home. Our community is working hard to create a safe, healthy, and enjoyable environment for our children to grow up in. Approving this project puts all of that at risk.

My main objections are:
1. Health & Safety Risks
• The Mod 7 proposal focuses on capping contaminants on-site rather than full removal, leaving asbestos and other toxins such as hydrocarbons, PFAS (linked to cancer), and heavy metals in the ground.
• This is a direct risk to the health of our children, families, and future generations living, schooling, and playing in Kurnell.
• With schools, preschools, and family homes so close to the site, any exposure to these toxins would have devastating long-term impacts.
2. Environmental Concerns
• The site is adjacent to Ramsar-protected Quibray Bay and critical mangrove ecosystems. Leaving contaminants capped instead of removed risks leaching into surrounding wetlands, especially during flooding or storm events, which we know are common in this area.
• This puts local wildlife, marine ecosystems, and the natural heritage of Kamay Botany Bay National Park in danger.
3. Community Impact
• Kurnell has become a hub for young families, with a strong sense of community and a bright future. Allowing this project locks the area into industrial use and sends the wrong message about the value of our community’s wellbeing over corporate cost-cutting.
• We have invested in making Kurnell a safe and enjoyable place to live and raise children. This project threatens to undo that progress.
4. Lack of Transparency & Trust
• The use of misleading images in Ampol’s materials (showing Cronulla instead of Kurnell) undermines community trust.
• The proposal downplays key risks, including PFAS contamination and flood vulnerabilities, raising serious concerns about transparency and long-term accountability.

Our children deserve to grow up in a safe, clean environment, not next to a capped toxic site. Kurnell has a rich cultural heritage and is now a thriving residential area. We want to preserve that, not hand over our community’s future to an industrial project that prioritizes cost savings over safety and environmental protection.

I strongly urge the planning department to reject this proposal in the best interest of public health, environmental protection, and the future of Kurnell as a vibrant, safe community for families.

We are a couple in our 60s from Caringbah who have loved Kurnell for decades. We have visited regularly for years and watched it transform from an industrial area into a vibrant, family-friendly community. Our own family now lives there, raising small children, and we want them to grow up in a safe, clean environment.

The Mod 7 proposal to cap, rather than remove, asbestos, PFAS, and other toxic contaminants puts that future at risk. With schools, homes, and precious wetlands so close to the site, any contamination or leaching during floods would be devastating.

Kurnell is no longer just an industrial site – it’s a thriving community. We strongly oppose this project and urge you to protect the health of local families and the environment by rejecting Mod 7.

I refer to the Modification 7 application for the Ampol Kurnell Refinery Conversion project.

I understand the application relates to the consolidation of operational infrastructure, removal of redundant assets, as well as remediation and grading.

Many in the local community have strong and legitimate concerns about the potential impacts of the proposed works, in particular the remediation stage.

No methodology to deal with contaminants of potential concern should be approved unless it represents the method with the lowest risk to human health and the environment.

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on this proposal.

I strongly object to the Mod 7 infrastructure consolidation and premeditation at Ampol site on Kurnell. As a resident of the area raising a young family here I believe the health, wellbeing and interests of the residents is at risk. The community is growing and at the forefront should be the best interest for the young families, families and residents who have lived here their whole life. This initiative is the completed opposite to what we need. The fact that this has even been an idea for AMPOL to save money is absolutely disgusting. They once again have not thought about the local residents and how this will significantly impact us. Kurnell is a changing community, we want to improve our community, increase businesses and improve house prices and look after our beautiful community. This will destroy it
AMPOL start thinking about the people that live here. The kids being raised here and not how you can cut costs that will impact out health and water ways.

I strongly insist that all soil and water pollution should be removed, not covered up or sealed. If only to discourage future developments from taking the cheap and dirty route of "pollute, and then cover up instead of remediating".

I have no objections against future industrial developments in the area, such as energy storage facilities, as long as:
1) there is no air, water, soil, noise or light pollution by those developments - or at least, not at levels exceeding ordinary residential dwellings;
2) there is significant green cover: grass, bush, trees. As much as possible. At least 50% of the area, preferably 75%, ideally 90%. Uniformly enough distributed to provide wildlife corridors and recreational green spaces for local residents. Native plants, not introduced species. With actual safety measures in place to protect the wildlife from industrial impacts, such as, electrical hazards;
3) the industrial developments are neither vulnerable to impacts of climate change nor furthering the global warming.

I’m writing to object to MOD-7 for the Ampol Kurnell Terminal. While I understand the plan is to tidy up old infrastructure and prepare the site for the future, there are some big concerns that haven’t been addressed.

Environmental risks – The works are close to sensitive parts of Botany Bay, and there’s not enough detail on how contamination, soil disturbance, or damage to local habitats will be prevented.

Air quality – There’s little information on how dust, emissions, or odours will be managed. Local residents deserve reassurance that these works won’t harm our health.

Transparency – The community hasn’t been given enough clear, accessible information. We need open sharing of environmental reports, plans, and independent oversight so the process can be trusted.

Until these issues are properly addressed, I don’t believe MOD-7 should be approved

Thank you for the opportunity to make comments on this critical project affecting Kurnell. Having read the proposal, I am concerned about the possibility of increased stormwater drainage to the Marton westlands and the Quibray Bay, this has already had unforeseen consequences with significant effect on at least one adjoining property.
Any increase in stomrwater drainager to this area will exacerbate these negative effects.

To Whom It May Concern,

We are new residents to Kurnell and are writing to strongly object to Mod 7.

We moved here recently to raise our young family, we have a one year old and plan to grow our family in this beautiful, peaceful place. As hard-working young professionals, we’ve made a big commitment to build our future here because we truly care about this land, the environment, and the health of our community.

The idea of leaving toxic materials like PFAS, hydrocarbons, and asbestos buried on site is extremely worrying. This isn’t a proper clean-up, it puts our health, our children’s future, and the land we love at risk. With extreme weather becoming more common, the dangers only increase.

We’re also very concerned that Ampol would be left to monitor the site themselves, with no clear timeline or independent checks. That’s not good enough for a community that deserves transparency, safety, and respect.

We love Kurnell and want to see it protected for future generations. Please do not let Mod 7 go ahead.

The proposed Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at Kurnell is not just ill-conceived — it is a public safety disaster in the making, an environmental betrayal, and an economic scam built on false green promises and predatory profiteering.
It must be abandoned immediately in the national interest.

A Site Undergoing Remediation — Now to be Recontaminated?
According to MOD 7 Infrastructure Consolidation and Remediation, lodged by Ampol Refineries NSW Pty Ltd (SSD-5544-Mod-7), Ampol intends to:

“Consolidate existing operational infrastructure onsite, including the removal, relocation &/or augmentation of the oily water system, fire water systems, electrical assets & other structures; & remediation & grading of the former refinery areas on the site.”
This statement alone underscores the sheer absurdity of this BESS proposal. How can a site declared in need of remediation from past chemical contamination now be repurposed to host an even more toxic, high-risk, industrial-scale fire hazard?

This is not remediation. It is re-toxification. It is regression, not restoration.

Key Grounds for Rejection

1. NO GUARANTEED CLEAN-UP — NO DECOMMISSIONING BOND
There is no upfront decommissioning bond attached to this project — no financial guarantee for the safe removal of toxic materials, waste, or infrastructure at the end of the project’s life. The community will be left to deal with the wreckage — both financially and environmentally.

2. RENEWABLE ENERGY RORT: A FAKE GREEN GRIFT
The BESS is a Trojan horse for a renewables Ponzi scheme. It feeds off taxpayer-funded subsidies while delivering no reliability, no price relief, and no energy independence. Electricity prices continue to soar while foreign multinationals harvest subsidies, manipulate the market and abandon responsibility.

3. LIFE-THREATENING TOXIC FIRE RISK
Battery storage systems are fire-prone, explosion-risk installations, and thermal runaway events are near-impossible to control. When they burn, they release lethal plumes of chemicals including hydrofluoric acid, and Bis-FASI — a member of the PFAS chemical family, which is toxic, persistent, and bioaccumulative.

This risk is magnified exponentially by the site's proximity to Australia’s largest fuel terminal — a recipe for industrial catastrophe!

4. UNDERMINES AMPOL'S OWN ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS
Ampol’s MOD 7 submission acknowledges a need to remediate and rehabilitate former refinery areas. Yet this BESS proposal directly undermines that goal by introducing new, persistent contaminants and a major combustion and explosion hazard. It is ecocidal hypocrisy dressed up as progress.

5. INTERGENERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICE
Placing this facility in Kurnell imposes a long-term toxic legacy on future generations. It violates the principle of intergenerational equity, burdening our children with poisoned land, water contamination, and energy instability — all in the name of short-term corporate profit.

6. A NATIONAL SECURITY AND GRID INTEGRITY CRISIS
This is not about powering Australia. This is about grid sabotage by parasitic infrastructure operators like TransGrid, and foreign-aligned energy interests reliant on supply chains controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. The very sovereignty of Australia’s energy future is being traded away.

7. GROSS VIOLATION OF NATIONAL LAWS AND PUBLIC SAFETY STANDARDS
This plan defies:

The National Electricity Objective, which mandates affordable, reliable, and safe energy.
The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines, which PFAS and chemical leaks will threaten.
The Commonwealth PFAS Ban, breached by the presence of PFAS-like compounds such as Bis-FASI.
The Modern Slavery Act, ignored by importing battery minerals from exploitative, unregulated supply chains.

8. A FAILURE OF DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
The Kurnell community has not been adequately consulted. The people who live closest to this danger have been ignored and dismissed. The voices of local residents, First Nations custodians, and environmental advocates have been systematically sidelined.

This is a Project of Pure Harm

This proposed BESS will never generate power or provide essential synchronous inertia, it is not renewable, not sustainable, not sovereign, and not safe.

It is the antithesis of the greater good, and an active threat to:
Public health and safety
Environmental protection
Economic justice
National security
Energy sovereignty

Australia must dump this dangerous NET ZERO fraud & jail the corrupt decision-makers who knowingly place lives at risk, desecrate our land, and deliberately manipulate and violate the truth.

Instead, our evil, rotten Government must urgently prioritise:
Reliable, affordable, secure, 24/7 Australian coal and gas.
The establishment of a safe, sovereign nuclear energy industry.
True environmental stewardship, not this performative, pollutant-laden deception.

The people of Kurnell, and all Australians, deserve THE TRUTH.
We have our BATTLE ARMOR on - THE RESISTANCE to the FAKE GREEN RenewaBULL SWINDLE is only just getting started - and GOD IS ON OUR SIDE!!

We need more information - guarantees of our safety

I wish to formally object to the proposed modification (MOD-7) regarding the remediation of the heavily contaminated former industrial site at Kurnell.
MOD-7 facilitates the further degradation of an already severely compromised site, enabling Ampol to abdicate its full responsibility to undertake comprehensive decontamination and off-site removal of hazardous materials.

Ampol must not be released of its obligation to conduct a thorough and complete remediation of the site. This is critical not only to environmental recovery but to safeguarding the wellbeing of current and future generations.

The *Australian Oil Refining Agreements Act 1954 (No. 34) explicitly states that the company occupying the land defined in MOD-7 must not pose a danger to public health. However, the serious diesel spill on 7 April 2022—when 9,000 litres of diesel were released into Kurnell and adjacent waterways due to negligent fuel storage management—demonstrates a clear breach of this obligation. The combination of this spill with heavy rainfall led to the widespread dispersal of toxic chemicals into residential areas and reported deaths among local wildlife.
There has been a noted decline in the health of the Towra Point Nature Reserve.
Our streets and suburb should not be treated again and again as the unlucky party in this company’s negligence and arrogance at what they can get away with.

Furthermore, the Act (p. 27) includes a clear and binding provision stipulating that the company must not permit any solid or liquid matter to enter Botany Bay unless it has been rendered completely innocuous to marine life and incapable of causing ecological harm. It also requires strict compliance with all directives issued by the Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board and the Chief Secretary’s Department to prevent pollution of Botany Bay. These conditions have been breached on multiple occasions.

MOD-7 also proposes the partial or complete removal of the oily water separation system, which would significantly increase the volume of untreated runoff into adjacent bays and wetlands.

I urge the Department to reject MOD-7 and call for a full, transparent, and scientifically robust clean-up of the site. Ampol must be held accountable for restoring the land to a condition that poses no risk to human or environmental health.

This will basically back onto my property, it’s a Health and safety concern. It will vastly devalue my property. It will expose my family to health risks that are avoidable. It’s too close to homes, we have already experienced emergencies with the refinery and how inadequately prepared they are risking us- the residents. We have had a tornado take our entire home. Having this behind our property with a tornado, just cannot see this being safe at all. It’s a flat no from
My family!

Hello,
I am a Kurnell resident and have been enjoying the amenities of this area for over 14 years.
I would like to see my lovely neighbourhood cleaner so me and my family can continue to enjoy living here.
Having witnessed firsthand the contamination events from the Ampol site, after heavy rainfall, I am very concerned about the health and wellbeing of me, my family and community.
Some family members who also reside in Kurnell include a 2 year old, 4year old,6 year old, 15yr old and 17 yr old. Their health is of the utmost importance to me as i'm sure you would agree.
The proposal to leave contaminated soil on site FOREVER is highly unacceptable to me.
Soil needs to be continually ethically removed and the land regenerated. Our health is at stake.
If you don't have your health you have nothing.
Ampol needs to be held accountable for their actions. Why was the land contaminated in the first place?
The funoff into our beautiful bay not only affects swimmwers like myself and the children but also the environment.
What about all the people who visit this area for recreational purposes throughout the year?
Their health is affected also.
No longer can we allow profit over people.
Those times, thank goodness , are long gone.
We have to change.
That means visibility and accountability by Ampol.
They cannot sweep this under the carpet and hide from their responsibilities.
If you allow this Mod 7 to pass then you too are complicit with this transgression.
Stand up for us and our kids.
How will history view your actions?
You could be condemning current and future residents to live with the threat of hazardous contamination hanging over ourheads permanently. Will you sleep well at night?
I know thousands of us won't.
I am a hardworking Australian.
I have been Nursing the residents of the Shire for over 40 yrs.
Many others like me actually love the Shire and our local community especially the children.
They are our collective future, even yours!
It's a very doable thing what we are asking of you.
Keep our land clean and free from contamination and exploitation.
How will history judge you?
Money and profit over the wellbeing of people is now an outdated model. As it should be.
Do the right thing.
Do not allow Mod 7 to be passed.

Regards
Cheryl Hilton
RN Dip Coun