Rocky Hill Coal Mine

Dear Sir / madam,
Please take this letter as my objection to the coal mine known as Rocky Hill planned on the edge of my local town, Gloucester.
As a mother of three I am astounded that an open cut mine could even be considered so close to the town where my children go to school. I urge the minister toblock approval for this mine.

MG & WJ FRASER
4116 Bucketts Way South
GLOUCESTER, NSW 2422
Phone 02-65589803
Mob 0428240084
Email: [email protected]

24/10/2013


Director, Mining Projects
Development Assessment Systems and Approvals
Department of Planning and Infrastructure
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001

Dear Sir,

ROCKY HILL COAL PROJECT - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION SSD-5156.

We are writing to oppose the Gloucester Resources Ltd's (GRL) development application for an open cut coal mine within the Gloucester valley. Our reasons are as follows:

Distance from the Mine.
Our family live on a rural property identified in the Rocky Hill Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as receptor number 56A. We are 4th generation farmers and own, operate and reside at "Glenrowan", a highly productive and profitable 210ha dairy farm, producing approximately 1.4million litres of milk annually (something which has not been recognised in the EIS, section 4.1.5.2 and figure 4.8). The business employs 2 full-time and 2 part-time staff along with using several local contractors and supporting numerous local businesses. We have invested heavily in new infrastructure and improving the fertility of the soil on our property during the last 5 years. Below in the attached version is a picture of our property.


Our entire northern boundary joins all of the land proposed for the rail Load-out facility and approximately half of the distance of the overland conveyor (section 4.1.4 and figure 4.6). Our home is situated only 450 meters from the proposed rail load-out facility and 2490m from the main pit with the closest area of disturbance being 430m. The main North Coast rail line dissects our property and our house is 125 meters from the rail line.

We also believe this proposed mine and rail load-out facility will be too close to Gloucester, residential estates and other rural/residential properties.

Wind
With Nor-easterly wind being identified as one of the major wind directions and also one of the strongest (Figure 4.4 in the EIS), our home will now be situated directly downwind of a proposed open cut coal mine and coal conveyor. Wind blowing over coal dumps, exposed overburden and mine blasts will be transferring dust and poisons gases directly towards us, our young children and our rain water tanks.

With only one year of wind data collected and used in the EIS (November 2010 - October 2011) we believe that this may not give a true representation of actual speeds and directions over the life of the project. For example with the current season that we are enduring (hot and dry) we are getting more and stronger winds from the North and North-west. In our particular situation this will have a greater effect on noise and dust from the rail load-out facility than may have been predicted because for the year used in the EIS, winds from a north-westerly direction were not particularly strong.

Noise and Health
The EIS has stated that they will have noise monitoring devices at the two residential estates on the out skirts of Gloucester. There has been no indication of any noise monitoring devices in close proximity of the rail load-out facility and the overland conveyor. Land owners to the south and the west of proposed development require the noise to be monitored

We have been identified as one of four privately owned receptors (we are identified as 56A in the EIS) which would experience noise levels in excess of 5dB(A) above the project-specific noise criterion for the majority of the life of the proposal. It has been identified in the EIS that for the four privately owned receptors, land acquisition may be a reality, if the project is approved. To date GRL has had very limited contact with us. They met with us last week, only for them to ensure we understood the EIS and the impacts for us. The meeting left us with no confidence that our substantial farm investments and family heritage would hold value when calculating adequate compensation.

We also believe that during the construction phase of the rail load-out facility and the overland conveyor that noise/dust will affect us more than is stated in the EIS. With the construction of these two facilities taking up to 12 months to complete, we believe, we will have noise and dust issues for a lot longer than the "less than 4 to 6 weeks" indicated in the EIS (section 4.2.7.2). Therefore, it should be taken into account when modeling the noise for the proposed project.

We live 125m from the North Coast rail line and 450m from the exit of the proposed rail load-out facility. There are currently very few train movements past our home during the night time hours. If the mine is approved we will get a substantial increase in noise, diesel fumes and coal dust from the increased train movements as they decrease/increase in speed to enter/exit the rail load-out facility. There may be as many as up to 6 extra train movements per day with the majority being proposed for the evening and night time periods. This extra noise has not been used when predicting noise for the area because once the train enters the North Coast railway the noise is considered an Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) issue and no longer GRL's.

From information supplied in the EIS and the supporting background document by Wilkinson Murray Pty Limited on Noise, Vibration and Blasting it is evident that the worst of our noise will occur during the evening and night. It is even stated by the supporting document that if noise occurs during the night it is unacceptable for landowners.

We have a family of 2 young children and we work long hours, therefore require adequate uninterrupted rest in a stress free environment, which we currently have. We know our quality of life will be affected, if GRL's Rocky Hill Project goes ahead. Disrupted sleep, increased noise, decreased air quality and stress will compromise our current good health.

Light Pollution.
Throughout the EIS emphasis is notgiven to the lighting that will be required during construction and operation of the mine. The EIS states that the hours of construction of the rail Load-out facility and overland conveyor will be between 7am and 6pm. If these are constructed during the winter months when the days are shorter and sunset on the shortest day (June 21) is at 4:45pm local time, extra lighting will be needed. This has not been considered in the EIS.

The placement of lighting towers on overburden dumps needs to be controlled. We have had recent experience of light pollution when AGL have been drilling wells in the area. The light was several kilometers away but light interference still managed to disturbed our sleeping patterns. The Rocky Hill Mine will be closer and have a higher elevation if the lighting towers are on top of overburden dumps.




Land Zoning
The proposed Rocky Hill Mine will impact on the Agricultural zoning on which it has been designated. It will destroy the Gloucester Valley and its community. I do not accept that the proposed mine will stay at its proposed size.

We believe that the Rocky Hill Mine will have a devastating effect on the Gloucester district. It will be distressing for us personally and will have a shocking effect on a large number of people in the area. House and land prices in the neighboring areas of the proposed mine will be severely impacted upon if they can find a perspective buyer at all.

We believe if GRL's Rocky Hill Project goes ahead our financial net worth, quality of life and health status will decline due to increased noise, disrupted sleep, coal dust, toxic blasting emissions, depressed property values and stress.

Please REFUSE GRL's development application to protect our farm, our family and our employees.

We have made no political donations.



Yours faithfully



Michael & Wendy Fraser
MG & WJ Fraser

The Barrington-Gloucester-Stroud Preservation Alliance objects to the proposed development for the reasons outlined in the attached submission.

see attached PDF

I object to the proposed development for reasons outlined in the attached submission.

See attached

see attached PDF

I totally oppose the Rocky Hill Coal Mine proposal due to the overwhelming opposition of the Gloucester and regional communities and I concur with the submission attached from the Barrington, Gloucester, Stroud Preservation Alliance and also the GRIP submission.
Terence Healey, who chairs the GRL CCC stated 'it beggars belief that a coal mine would be allowed so close to Gloucester"
Then opposition politician George Souris stated '"These matters are not considered until well after the grant of an EL, years of exploration drilling and investigation and years of uncertainty have passed until eventually a development application is lodged and the matter transfers from the Dept Mineral Resources to the Dept Planning. By this stage after many millions of dollars have been expended and considerable encouragement by a host of government departments, it is very hard to imagine the authorities refusing a mining lease.
The time for consideration of these basic issues and the vital aspect of water resources is prior to the grant of an exploration license not after it.
Minister George Souris stood at the rally outside Parliament House and talked publically about how terrible it would be to expand mining closer to our communities in the Gloucester Valley. The people listened and thought George and then opposition leader Barry O'Farrell cared about their health and well-being. Sadly the trust has gone.
Federal representation and scientific recognition of the Bioregional Status of the valley, Council committees, community information evenings and Community Consultative committees have involved many people in this dynamic rural place we call Gloucester Shire.
The community concern and advocacy on behalf of our citizens will only intensify.
A growing movement and network of ordinary people are determined to stand up and be counted. The networks across the region and the state are gaining in cohesion.

Lung function testing and noise reporting is well on its way in the Gloucester valley and people are waking up to this serious threat to air quality and mental health in their droves. Ordinary people are asking how this threat to our lives through air and water pollution is acceptable.
Many people use tank water and work outside in their rural professions.
Government must bear the responsibility of ethical decision-making regarding the future of the extractive industries in the Gloucester valley.
I urge you to see that the future for Gloucester is not one of open cut polluting coal pits, we have a great future as a progressive and beautiful iconic valley that has its vitality in small business, tourism, agriculture, horticulture and rural residential lifestyle amongst other sustainable economic drivers.
Please reject this application and remove the exploration licences. People are sick and tired of the relentless pressure of the coal industry and lack of true government process. The community activism is across all ages, professions and is taking place in your National/Liberal Party heartlands.

I have uploaded my letter opposing the application

We wish to oppose the Rocky Hill coal project.

see attached PDF

submission attached

Please see attached.

See attachment

Dear Sir/Madam;

The Rocky Hill Mine should not be approved. The mine lease should be retired to

This mine is too close to the township of Gloucester.
The noise impacts will be significant.
The impacts to air quality and health will be significant.
The topography means dust will be concentrated.
The people of the township don't want the mine.
The council doesn't want the mine.

Under the principles of Responsible Mining this mine should be rejected.

see attachments

Please refer to attached document

Submssion is attached

Please see attached letter.

Dear Sir/Madam
Please find attached a submission on behalf of MidCoast Water.