Nepean River Pump & Pipeline

I have been (and will continue to be) a regular user of Penrith Whitewater Stadium and am familiar with the variability of water quality. Several people I have taken to the facility have become sick directly as a result of the poor water quality.
Although I object to the project proceeding prior to completion of analysis and design of the wetland and associated water quality management measures for Penrith Lakes, my specific objection is that the project as stated has no firm or definite measures to ensure that river abstration occurs does not occur if the Replacement Flows Project is not operational. This could be easily and affordably achieved without any significant cost (as it would be a inter govt agency issue readily effected by telemetry or other digital methods) and would ensure consistency with the whole purpose of the EIS, wihch is to ensure river abstractions free of sewage contamination. If there can be no assurance that the Replacement Flows Project would indeed be operational during river abstractions, then that goes back to my overall objection.
Your genuine consideration of these concerns would be appreciated.

Comments are as follows:


1. A Bushfire Asset Protection Zone needs to be provided round the pumping station structure, essentially on Penrith Lakes Development Corporation land. Asset protection also needs to be afforded to overhead power supply connections to the pumping station.

2. The river intake and intake pipe are proposed on a currently deep section of the Nepean river. In circumstances at present or in the future where dredging the river is required around or associated with operation of the intake, then a licence would be required from Crown Lands for the dredging works, subject to appropriate environmental assessment.

3. Given the potential erodability of river bank (likely comprised essentially of a fine sand), construction of the intake works, pumping well and access facilities need to ensure that the structural stablility of the river bank is maintained and enhanced as practical in accommodating these works.

4. Noxious aquatic and land-based weeds upstream of and in the vicinity of the intake works need to be eliminated with ongoing monitoring and management provided.

5. Degraded aquatic and terrestrial habitat upstream of and in the vicinity of the intake works needs to be restored as practical, particularly to River-flat Eucalypt Forest in the riparian zone.

6. While treated sewage will likely be benign component of flows pumped into the lakes scheme, a potential consequence in drier times will be the build-up of nutrients in the lakes, possibly contributed to by recreation uses. If nutrient build-up posed a serious problem then this potentially may require flushing of the lakes, possibly at the expense of guaranteed environmental flows in the Nepean-Hawkesbury system.

As attached.

As attached.

As attached.

As attached.

As attached

As attached.