MOD 7 Infrastructure consolidation and remediation

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Modification 7 (MOD 7) to State Significant Development SSD-5544, which involves infrastructure consolidation, removal of redundant assets, and remediation works at the Kurnell Terminal in Sutherland Shire, NSW, operated by Ampol (formerly Caltex). As a concerned resident/community member/environmental advocate with a strong interest in the sustainable management of the Kurnell Peninsula, I believe this modification represents a missed opportunity for true environmental restoration and community benefit. Instead of perpetuating industrial use on this historically significant and ecologically sensitive surroundings, the site should be fully remediated and returned to the community as public open space to compensate for decades of environmental harm and community harm. For decades we have turned a blind eye to the spills and gas leaks, but to hear that Ampol are looking to subject us to decades more of the same is unreal.

My primary objection centers on the improper extension of industrial activities on land that was originally leased or granted specifically for oil refining purposes. Historical records, including the Australian Oil Refining Agreements Act 1954, show that portions of the Kurnell site, including Crown land, were provided to Caltex under strict conditions tied to refinery operations. These agreements included 99-year leases for infrastructure like jetties in Botany Bay, with covenants restricting use to refining and related activities only, and requiring government consent for any deviations. Crucially, upon cessation of refining or lease expiration, there are provisions for the removal of structures and reversion of the land to the Crown, emphasizing the need to avoid pollution and restore the site.

Refining operations ceased in 2014, rendering the original purpose obsolete. Yet, MOD 7 seeks to consolidate infrastructure for ongoing fuel import and distribution, effectively repurposing the site without fulfilling these obligations. This is not a mere administrative tweak but a fundamental shift that denies the community the right to reclaim this land. The proposal's focus on "remediation and grading" is selective, aimed at supporting continued commercial operations rather than comprehensive restoration. Approving this would contradict the intent of the original leases, which prioritised environmental protection over indefinite industrial occupation. I urge the NSW Government to enforce these historical agreements and require Ampol to hand back the land for regeneration as community space, aligning with calls from groups like the Sutherland Shire Environment Centre for rezoning to open space or national park extension.

Beyond legal and historical grounds, the environmental legacy of the refinery demands full regeneration, not partial fixes. For over 60 years, the site has inflicted significant harm on the Kurnell Peninsula, including hydrocarbon and PFAS contamination of soil, groundwater, and Botany Bay, as acknowledged in Ampol's own environmental reports and the original SSD-5544 Environmental Impact Statement. This has led to habitat loss, erosion of sand dunes, and threats to endangered species in adjacent areas like Towra Point Nature Reserve. The peninsula has already lost approximately 55% of its natural land to industrial activities, including sandmining and the refinery, resulting in widespread weed infestation and biodiversity decline.

MOD 7's proposed works, while including some asset removal and remediation, maintain a substantial industrial footprint with retained storage tanks, pipelines, and distribution facilities. This approach falls short of what is needed to heal the land— decontamination, reforestation with native vegetation, and integration with surrounding protected areas to create a continuous ecological corridor. True compensation for historical harm would involve nurturing the site back to health as public land, enhancing carbon sequestration, improving water quality in Botany Bay, and mitigating ongoing health risks to local residents from legacy pollutants. Partial remediation for industrial consolidation prioritizes Ampol's profits over restorative justice and sustainable land use, ignoring the broader climate imperatives of reducing fossil fuel infrastructure in vulnerable coastal zones.

The cultural and historical significance of Kurnell further underscores the need to reject MOD 7 in favor of community-led regeneration. As the site of Captain James Cook's 1770 landing and a place of profound Indigenous heritage for the Dharawal people—with ancient middens, sacred sites, and traditional connections—the peninsula is a national icon. The refinery's development in the 1950s fragmented this landscape, restricting public access and degrading heritage values. The 1954 Act explicitly includes protections for areas like Captain Cook's Landing Place Reserve, yet ongoing industrial presence continues to undermine these.

Recent initiatives, such as the Kamay Botany Bay National Park upgrades, highlight the value of public access and restoration for education, tourism, and cultural reconciliation. By consolidating infrastructure, MOD 7 would perpetuate barriers to this, limiting opportunities for walking trails, interpretive centers, or expanded parkland that could honor Kurnell's dual Indigenous and European histories. Handing the land back would allow for a "protected corridor of native vegetation" across the peninsula, as advocated by community groups, fostering reconciliation and boosting local economy through eco-tourism rather than fuel terminals.

From a community perspective, approving MOD 7 would overlook the long-term burdens borne by Kurnell residents, including noise, air pollution, and restricted access to their own backyard. With refining ended, there is a golden opportunity to deliver tangible benefits like new recreational spaces, which could improve mental health, property values, and quality of life. Ampol's community initiatives, such as the Kurnell Community Fund, are welcome but insufficient compared to full land reversion, which could generate jobs in environmental restoration and management. Local opposition to past developments on the peninsula demonstrates a clear preference for more green space over industrial expansion.

Finally, this proposal is inconsistent with broader NSW planning policies that emphasize decontamination, rehabilitation, and sustainable development. The State Environmental Planning Policy (Kurnell Peninsula) 1989 calls for thorough remediation, while regional strategies aim to phase out extractive industries and protect biodiversity hotspots. Approving MOD 7 would set a dangerous precedent for other legacy industrial sites, conflicting with net-zero goals and community-led land management principles. Instead, I call for an independent review of options for land handover, potentially rezoning the site for environmental or open space use in collaboration with Sutherland Shire Council and Indigenous stakeholders.

In conclusion, I strongly object to MOD 7 and urge the Department to reject it. The Kurnell Terminal site should be fully remediated and returned to the community as regenerated public land, making amends for historical harms and securing a legacy of environmental and cultural stewardship. Thank you for considering this submission.

As the Director of Kurnell Preschool Kindergarten I have major concerns about this proposal. We support and care for over 75 local families and children and we have grave concerns about what Ampol is doing in our community and how this impacts or preschool directly as we are in such close proximity to Ampol.

There has been little to no concern shown to us directly about how this will affect our local community, and its children as there has been no correspondence and communication with us at the preschool about this proposal and reassurance that we are safe and our children and educators' health and safety are not in jeopardy. To be honest I expected more to be done in regards to communicating and giving us a better understanding of this proposal which is alarming and shows complete lack of care or consideration. We have a responsibility to advocate for our kids and protect them from what is clearly going to severely impact their health and safety if this proposal is to go ahead.

Kurnell already deals with regular water and air pollution, and the lack of clean-up on their part so far has been really disappointing. Honestly, it’s just not good enough.

Now they want to install massive batteries on a site that’s already contaminated. This isn’t just a planning decision—it’s something that could seriously impact people’s health, property values, and quality of life in our small, close-knit community. It feels like our wellbeing is being put at risk so they can increase their revenue.

We already know there are toxins in the environment—things like PFAS and asbestos. These chemicals can have long-term effects on children, from disrupting hormones to affecting how their bodies grow and function. It’s scary stuff, and it’s happening right near where our children play and learn every day.

At our preschool, being outdoors is a huge part of how we teach. Our kids spend most of their day outside and exploring our local community. But we have to ask—is it safe? The land around us is still contaminated. The science tells us that these toxins can impact every part of a child’s development. That’s not something any of us should ignore.

Ampol needs to take real responsibility and consider what is best for our community and our kids. Our community, and especially our kids, deserve much better.

To the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed Modification 7 (Mod-7) for SSD-5544, the Kurnell Terminal Infrastructure Consolidation and Remediation project by Ampol Australia Petroleum Pty Ltd. As a resident of Kurnell planning to raise a young family here, I am deeply concerned about the long-term environmental and health impacts this modification could have on our community and the sensitive ecosystems surrounding Botany Bay. The proposal involves extensive excavation, capping of contaminated areas, relocation of facilities like firewater tanks, and changes to stormwater systems, all on a site with a history of industrial pollution, including PFAS contamination from historical fire-fighting foams.epa.nsw.gov.au These works risk exacerbating existing issues rather than resolving them.

Firstly, the environmental risks are alarming. The site's groundwater is already contaminated with PFAS, which has migrated offsite, posing threats to local wetlands and Botany Bay.epa.nsw.gov.au Excavation and material management, as outlined in the report (e.g., Figures 4-2 and 4-3), could disturb contaminated soils, leading to dust emissions, runoff into waterways, and further biodiversity loss in native vegetation areas (Figure 7-18 and 7-19). The Biodiversity Development Assessment Report acknowledges indirect impacts on threatened species and ecosystems, yet mitigation measures seem inadequate for a site bordering sensitive coastal wetlands. Changes to flooding and stormwater redirection (Figures 7-6 and 7-11) could worsen water quality in Quibray Bay, affecting marine life and recreational areas we rely on.

Secondly, community and health impacts are unacceptable for a family-oriented suburb like Kurnell. Ongoing remediation could increase noise and vibration (Section 7.8), traffic from haulage trucks (Section 7.7), and air pollution from dust and emissions (Section 7.10), disrupting daily life and posing respiratory risks to children and vulnerable residents. The Social Impact Assessment (Section 7.9) downplays long-term effects, but with PFAS levels in groundwater requiring ongoing monitoring and health advisories against using bore water,epa.nsw.gov.au this project heightens exposure risks. Raising a family here means prioritizing clean air, safe water, and a healthy environment—Mod-7 threatens that, especially cumulatively with past industrial activities.

Consultation has been limited, and the report's timelines (exhibition until mid-2025, assessment ongoing) do not adequately address community concerns raised in previous modifications. I urge the Department to reject this proposal or require a full independent review, stricter remediation standards, and enforceable protections for our health and environment. Kurnell deserves sustainable development, not more industrial legacy burdens.

Sincerely,
Stuart Hill

As the president of Kurnell preschool kindergarten, a school of 75+ families that all reside in Kurnell and a parent to 3 children under the age of 5 its blindingly clear that AMPOL are prioritizing the monetization of their site ahead of any health and safety of children.

Water and Air pollution in Kurnell are affected regularly and the lack of effort to remediate the land so far has been appalling - nothing short of unacceptable.

Ampol should not be installing batteries to cause the residents of this little, tight community further damage to livelihood, health and safety, property prices, quality of life at huge risk in a terrible location to increase revenue for their shareholders.

The toxins released already have caused irreversible damage to our fragile environment and biodiversity - Ampol hold no accountability to ANYTHING believing gifts of monetary value to preschool and the wider community enough to keep the Kurnell community quiet.

Our preschool have a huge focus on outdoor play and spend the majority of their days outside. Is the safe for them? the land surrounding preschool is contaminated by PFAS, toxins, asbestos. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are potentially obesogenic for children. Exposure to a combination of PFAS not only disrupted lipid and amino acid metabolism but also altered thyroid hormone function in the children, the thyroid makes two key hormones that play a role in blood pressure control and how the body makes and uses protein, fats and carbohydrates - IT AFFECTS EVERY CELL IN OUR CHILDREN BODIES!

Almost every child in kurnell attends the preschool - therefore every child in kurnell for the past 40 years will and continuing will be seeking lifetime compensation for the cancers and cell destruction that you have and are continuing to cause due to the lack of accountability you have and continue to show towards this community.

Please don't re zone the land and cause any further harm that already done,

I’m a local dad living in Kurnell with my wife and two young kids, and I’m writing to strongly oppose the proposed SSD-5544-Mod-7 changes to the Ampol site.
This isn’t just a patch of land on a map it’s part of our neighbourhood, right near where our kids go to school, next to the national park and where we’re raising our families. The idea that contaminated areas on this site with who-knows-what in them (asbestos? hydrocarbons?) can just be capped and built over without fully understanding the long-term risks is honestly shocking.
Now we’re being told this land is going to become an “industrial energy precinct.” What does that really mean for the families living nearby? Heavy truck movements, noise, 24/7 activity — and all of it sitting on top of a buried, potentially toxic site? It doesn’t sit right. I worry about the health risks, but also about how the character of Kurnell is being quietly shifted from a tight-knit coastal community to an even-heavier industrial zone.
This isn’t just a planning matter, it’s about our kids' health and our future. We deserve proper transparency, a full environmental review, and real answers about what’s going to happen here. Capping contamination and building an energy hub on top of it shouldn’t be treated as a box-ticking exercise. We’re the ones who have to live with the consequences.

As a young family living in Kurnell, I strongly and unequivocally object to the recent modification SSD-5544-Mod-7 relating to Ampol operations. I am deeply concerned about the long-term environmental and health consequences that this proposal could have on my children, my community, and future generations.
Kurnell is not just an industrial precinct, it is a home to families, to children who play in our parks, go to our local schools, and breathe the same air affected by these developments. As a parent, I lie awake at night worrying about the invisible and irreversible dangers being introduced into our backyard. The proposal to cap contaminated sites (potentially containing asbestos, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other hazardous substances) without full public disclosure or transparent, independent risk assessment is absolutely unacceptable.
What exactly is being capped? What guarantees do we have that these contaminants won’t leach into the groundwater, become airborne during storms or extreme weather that Kurnell is prone to having, or degrade over time with disastrous effects? We are not talking about hypothetical risks, we are talking about children’s lungs, drinking water, and ecosystems that cannot be replaced once damaged.
This modification appears to prioritise industrial convenience over community safety. It lacks the caution, transparency, and accountability that must come with any remediation effort, especially in a residential coastal community. I urge you, as a parent and a concerned citizen, to reject or immediately halt this modification until a full, independent review has been conducted and made public. Our children deserve better than capped uncertainty.

I am a long-term resident of Kurnell, and I wish to lodge a formal objection to Ampol’s proposed Modification 7 (MOD-7) of SSD-5544 for the infrastructure consolidation and remediation of its fuel terminal site.

While I support genuine efforts to remediate contaminated land and remove redundant infrastructure, I am extremely concerned that MOD-7 appears to reduce Ampol’s obligations for full environmental remediation, delays the return of land to beneficial public or ecological use, and lacks sufficient community transparency.

1. Dilution of Longstanding Remediation Commitments

Ampol made commitments during the original refinery shutdown (2014–2020) to carry out comprehensive remediation of the site. These included full removal of contamination sources, restoration of natural environments where feasible, and long-term monitoring and reporting. MOD-7 seems to shift the goalposts by:

* Consolidating operations without a full cleanup of affected soils and groundwater.
* Leaving infrastructure in place that may impede future remediation or repurposing.
* Lacking detail about timelines for completing full environmental restoration.

This represents a retreat from prior obligations and potentially undermines both environmental and public health protections.

2. Insufficient Community Engagement and Oversight

The MOD-7 proposal has not been clearly communicated to the community. Many residents are unaware that this modification could have long-term impacts on land use, environmental health, and amenity. There is insufficient evidence that local stakeholders, including environmental groups, Traditional Owners, and residents, have been meaningfully consulted.
3. Cumulative Environmental Risks
The Kurnell Peninsula has historically endured significant environmental degradation, from refinery contamination to the 2015 tornado and wastewater incidents. Ampol’s record of compliance has been mixed, and recent environmental undertakings (e.g. the 2022 overflow incident) show why rigorous, independent oversight remains necessary.

The community deserves a thorough, final remediation—not a staged, unclear process that leaves portions of the site under indefinite industrial control.

4. Missed Opportunity for Sustainable Land Use

This site sits on precious coastal land near Kamay Botany Bay National Park. Given shifting climate priorities, bushland regeneration, community open space, or future battery/storage infrastructure should be transparently assessed.

MOD-7 fails to explore alternatives or provide a pathway for future sustainable land use beyond continued industrial activity.

I urge the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to:

1. Reject MOD-7 in its current form unless it guarantees complete remediation aligned with original SSD conditions.
2. Require Ampol to produce a detailed remediation timeline, including legacy infrastructure removal and soil/groundwater cleanup.
3. Mandate independent environmental audits are made publicly available.
4. Facilitate further community consultations, especially with residents and environmental stakeholders.

Kurnell has carried the environmental burden of the refinery for decades. MOD-7 must not be allowed to erode the promises made to this community. This is an opportunity for the government to hold Ampol accountable and ensure the site is responsibly and transparently rehabilitated for future generations.

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.