Rocky Hill Coal Mine

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

Please see attached a letter from Mrs Ruth Krestensen of 43 Moonlight Circuit and a letter from Mr David Blanch of Blanch Real Estate in Gloucester
Email: [email protected]

Rocky Hill Coal Mine Submission on EIS - objection.

1. We believe property prices, especially in immediate vicinity for rural blocks will be devalued if the mine proceeds. Forbesdale, Avon Valley Estate and Thunderbolts Estate will be hardest hit. The mine owners in the past have no problem paying big money to acquire land for the mine but when it comes to compensating adjacent landowners once the mine is operating, what mechanism will be in place to compensate for this. We believe the NSW Government Valuer General when valuing land should make comment on affected land values due to the mine where they are impacted.
2. The impact of noise pollution, especially when basting occurs and the increased number of heavy vehicles on Jack's Road will impact our property.
3. Dust pollution, especially when strong southerly winds sweep up the valley will impact properties in close proximity to the mine. This occurs quite often and coal and overburden dust particles will be blown to the north of the mine development all over Gloucester no matter how hard they try and keep the stockpiles watered down.
4. The state of the roads will be impacted by massive increase in large heavy vehicle movements during building and ongoing operation of the mine. These local roads were never designed for this traffic size and volume and the local council cannot keep up with road maintenance now. The Bucketts Way was supposed to be upgraded by now by Government, but we are still waiting for this promised work to begin - if it ever does. So what guarantee is in place that the mine owner will contribute and do some work on the roads.
5. Water runoff in heavy downpour conditions form holding ponds and tailings dams cannot be guaranteed to be contained. How will contaminated water not end up in local creeks and rivers, killing fish and wildlife and ultimately flowing into the Manning River which is the source of the local water supply for many communities? If this does happen who will pay for it and who will clean it up?
6. No guarantee can be given that the mine development cannot contain any toxic gases like methane from polluting the atmosphere causing foul smell in immediate area, that will spread in windy conditions. One only has to drive by other coal mine developments in the Hunter Valley to experience this!
7. There can be no guarantee in place that people employed in the mine development and ongoing operation will be local people. History shows that people who work in a coal mine will not live next to the mine due to health and other reasons and will more likely travel to and from the mine to work - sometimes 100 km's or more, just look at Newcastle and the Hunter Valley scenario!
8. There will be no guarantee that the mine owners and employees will spend money locally in Gloucester. All materials used for development and ongoing maintenance of the mine will be bought in and not sourced or purchased locally in Gloucester.
9. Visually the mine will be an eyesore, parts of the mine will be seen from various points around Gloucester and on adjacent roads and lookouts.
10. Where will monitoring points be for noise, dust, water and other forms of pollution in relation to nearby housing, who will be monitoring and checking the results and what guarantee will be in place that all results will be released and published on a regular basis, both on line, or by the local media and by the local council?
11. What guarantee will be in place that any housing or people affected by any form of pollution caused by the mine development and operation will be compensated and who will administer this?
12. People relying on clean tank water collected by rain water roof run off will be adversely affected by this proposal due to increase in dust and coal particles. What guarantee will be in place to prevent this from happening and if it does who will be responsible for cleaning the tanks and refilling with clean non polluted river water (not town water with added chemicals).
13. The rail load out will be immediately adjacent to the Buckett's Way and will not be able to be screened entirely from view of the road. This will be an obvious eyesore and not fit in with the rural outlook of the valley as it is now.
14. Train movements to export coal from the mine will be noisy and upset the quiet rural valley lifestyle that many people who will be affected enjoy now.
15. Money and profits earned by the mine will most likely end up overseas by foreign companies, even if the owners of the mine are all Australian based currently, there can be no guarantee they will not sell the mine to overseas interests in the future - just look at what has happened with both Stratford and Durallie mines now owned by Chinese interests. This has no benefit to the community and Australia at all.
16. What guarantee will be put in place that all royalties and fees paid by the mine over its 20 year life or so to state and federal governments will come back to the local community in the way of grants, better infrastructure, hospital and school improvements etc and not end up in the usual government "black holes".
17. There seems to be no mention whether the local adjacent rural airport will be impacted in any way, or will this disappear also? It is most important for helicopter movements especially in emergency situations, like for instance helping to fight bushfires in remote wilderness areas like Barrington and Gloucester Tops National Parks.
18. I also object to prime agricultural land used by farmers for many years being destroyed by mining companies for quick money grabs to prop up foreign companies bottom lines - namely profit greed.
19. Mining activity like this should not be allowed in such close proximity (less than 1km in some instances) to existing rural housing and properties and within 5 km's to the town of Gloucester. Let them move the development 10 km's or more away from all existing properties, if they do not like that - then go somewhere else.
20. What guarantee will be in place that sometime in the future a change in government for example, will not end up allowing the mine to operate on a 24 hour, 7 day a week proposition?
21. Are there any guarantees in place if the mine does go ahead that the mine owners will keep all local people informed on incidents, spillages, pollution of all types etc by way of ongoing public forums, meetings and publishing all incidents no matter how small for the local community to access and comment on and maybe apply for compensation when that are affected in any way. Who would administer this and make sure the mine complies?
22. How is the mine going to formally inform all concerned in the immediate vicinity that may be impacted in any way by ongoing blasting. They will need to know in advance on what day and time blasting will occur - not everyone reads the local press or listens to the local radio. For instance will the mine letter box drop this information to all concerned at all times?
23. Many people have retired and moved to this area to take advantage of the quiet and peaceful rural lifestyle the valley currently offers, this will be impacted now to various degrees by this development with no thought of compensation to these people who have put a lot of time, effort and money into their existing property, by either the mine owners or the state government who might approve this development.
24. Local people should be given a vote to decide if the proposed mine goes ahead - not beaurocrat's based in Sydney who themselves will not be affected in any way by approving this ill conceived development.
25. We already have the AGL - coal seam gas project underway here in the same vicinity with over 160 proposed wells (another government approve project ignoring the local communities concerns and wants), enough is enough as far as the local community is concerned. The government says one thing and then turns around and does the exact opposite when it comes to these developments. As usual it all comes down to money paid in royalties and no regard what so ever to the local community that will be impacted in so many ways - all negative as far as we are concerned.
26. According to our government's, burning coal is contributing in a major way to the world's current greenhouse gas problem and the global warming phenomenon, and as such is the reason why the inept carbon tax has been introduced by various world governments. The only affect this has had so far is to sharply increase everyone's electricity bills with absolutely no affect on world climate so far! So why would your government allow more coal to be mined , exported and burned by other countries to further add to these problems apart from greed and money - does not make any sense at all I am afraid!
27. As far as we are concerned, any government that approves this mine proposal so close to rural properties and the town has no morals what so ever and does so at their own peril!
28. In short - we do not want the mine here, fullstop.

Yours Faithfully.

Gary and Elizabeth Sweikert
32 Moonlight Circuit
Gloucester. NSW. 2422.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.

See attached pdf.