MOD 9 - Approval Lapse Date

I object to the proposed modification to extend the Angus Place development consent SSD MPO6_0021.
The timely rehabilitation of coal mines after mining ceases is the basic responsibility of all coal mine owners including the Angus Place colliery owners.
The initial environmental assessment approved a finite limit on the extraction and management of groundwater.
The intent of the original approval to mine coal was never for “carte blanche” access to ground water – arguably an even more valuable resource as Australia is confronted with the impacts of a changing climate.
To extend the life of the Angus Place coal mine permits the transfer of this precious resource to another thirsty gold mine that has difficulty accessing water for its operations. Any approval to extend is opportunistic and sloppy planning.
Too many times mining companies go into liquidation, change ownership, defer and delay in order to abrogate this responsibility for mine rehabilitation as agreed to in their original approval.
Angus Place colliery must be properly rehabilitated within the time frame originally assessed for approval.
It is unfair to the swamps and wetlands within the Garden of Stone that depend on this groundwater for their existence.
The post mining recovery critical for the future survival of the Gardens of Stone should have already commenced and must not be delayed further with any approval to extend the life of the colliery.

Please see submission on behalf of Lithgow Environment Group attached and attachments.

The Nature Conservation Council of New South Wales (NCC) is the state’s leading environmental advocacy organisation, representing over 200 environmental groups across the state. It is our mission to protect nature in NSW and create the conditions it needs to thrive.
We believe that Modification 9 in its current form is a flawed and legally risky proposal due to the multiple and serious failures to comply with the Environmental Protection & Assessment Act 1979 (NSW).
We object to Modification 9 as submitted by the proponent, Centennial Coal, on the following basis:
• Significant, rather than minimal, environmental impact
-There are significant impacts on the Greater Blue Mountains area and Sydney’s drinking water catchment because of ongoing discharge of mine water from Angus Place via Centennial Coal’s Western Coal Services site into Wangcol Creek.
-Modification 9 is aimed to continue this polluting water discharge as part of the ‘care and maintenance’ of the Angus Place mine.
-The proposal is incompatible with the energy and resources environmental planning instrument under the EP&A due to the ongoing and unnecessary impacts on water resources and inefficient resource recovery.
• Unacceptable delays to decommissioning and rehabilitation
-The Angus Place mine has been in caretaker mode since 2015 yet decommissioning and rehabilitation is not planned to be completed until 2042.
-The proposal clarifies that Centennial will not meet its rehabilitation and mine closure obligations mandated under the existing consents and will enable them to continue to be non-compliant.
-This may be because the proponent, Centennial Coal, is proposing an expansion of mining under the proposed Angus Place West project for which an Environmental Impact Assessment has not yet been submitted. The Angus Place West project proposes to mine for up to 2 million tonnes of coal to be extracted each year to 31 December 2040. Such a reason is unacceptable.
• Failure to comply with procedural requirements under the EP&A Act:
- The modification was not exhibited on the IPC website as required to as the decision maker (reg 106 EP&A Reg 2021)
-The modification was not exhibited for the mandatory minimum 14 days (you don’t include the date that information went online) (ss 4.60, Sch 1 Div 2, 10 EP&A Act).
-The proposal does not meet the criteria as having minimal environmental impact, and should have been referred under the EPBC Act as a controlled action.
-The modification is not in the public interest as the description of the proposal obscures Centennial Coal’s plans to continue to operate Angus Place as a care and maintenance project rather than for the purpose of decommissioning and rehabilitation.
-Due to the misleading presentation of information in Centennial’s Mod 9 proposal, Centennial may also be at risk of breaches under s 10.6 EP&A Act for misleading information in connection with a planning matter.
Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission in this matter. I am available for further comment.
Sincerely,
Jacqui Mills, Senior Climate and Energy Campaigner
Nature Conservation Council of NSW

Please see attached document.