Rocky Hill Coal Mine

I have friends in Gloucester whom I visit regularly. I object to the proposed mine because it is too close to the town and will have intolerable noise, dust and visual amenity impacts on residents within the Gloucester Valley.

As a visitor to Gloucester, I object to the proposed mine because it is too close to the town and will have unbearable noise, dust and visual amenity impacts on residents in the Valley.

Dear Sir,
I wish to express my opposition to the Rocky Hill coal project on the following grounds:

Proximity to residential areas of Gloucester
The mine is proposed only 900 metres from the residential area of Forbesdale. These residents will carry an
unacceptable burden and will be impacted by dust, noise and loss of visual amenity, resulting in risks to
their health and also loss of property value. There is no assurance that if approved Rocky Hill mine would
not advance closer to residential areas - with greater impacts.

Impacts on Health
Health impacts from open cut coal mines are well known. Most of Gloucester township (including the
hospital and schools) falls within the acknowledged 5km health impact zone of the Rocky Hill mine - thus
placing a large proportion of the population at risk. Those most affected by the health impacts are our
children, the old and the sick.

Impact on other industries in the Gloucester Valley
An open cut coal mine within 5km of Gloucester and within sight of the Bucketts Way will have a major
adverse impact on the visual amenity of the area. Tourism is currently worth over $30M to the Gloucester
economy. It will be impacted with a resultant loss of jobs and income generated in the township.
Additionally, the Rocky Hill project is already adversely impacting on Gloucester's agriculture having led
to the loss of food-producing land, loss of employment and incomes and loss of business for those
companies supporting agriculture.

Environment
The location of the proposed Rocky Hill mine is on the Avon River floodplain, and in the water catchment
area of the Manning River which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has
flooded 5 times in 4 years, with 2 floods occurring in February this year. There is real potential for
contamination of the water in the catchment.

Cumulative Impacts
If approved, the Rocky Hill coal mine won't be operating in isolation in the Gloucester Valley. Yancoal has
requested expansion of its mine at Stratford and AGL is planning on 330 CSG wells in the Valley - many
of AGL's wells are to be placed within the Rocky Hill mine and the Stratford mine area. No other area in
NSW has coal and CSG companies fighting over the same piece of land. To not consider the cumulative
impacts of this mining is reckless and irresponsible.
I have not made a reportable political donation.

I object keep Australia beautiful

I object to the Rocky Hill coal mine proposal!
I have been a local resident in the Gloucester Shire for approximately 15 years.
Gloucester's hospital, its schools, and almost all of its residents are within 5km from the proposed coal pits. Particulate pollution from open-cut mining is known to lead to reduced respiratory health and increased death rates in surrounding communities. It is completely unfair and unjustified to expose the population of Gloucester to these health impacts. All three of my children attend school within this zone. My wife and I also work within this zone. These health risks are unacceptable and an atrocity. Despite my love the Gloucester community and township, I would be forced to move away from the area to simply protect the well-being of my family.
I initially moved to Gloucester because it is a unique and beautiful town on the edge of the Barrington wilderness, and it has a thriving nature-based tourism industry. Open cut coal mining is completely incompatible with this important local industry, which must be protected.
The proposed pits are only 900m from the Forbesdale residential estate, and barely 3km from Gloucester township. The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Once again, the Rocky Hill coal mine proposal is a brutal outrage and I completely object to it.

Michael De Angelis

I support the proposed mine and supporting infrastructure.

I object to the proposed mine on the following grounds:
The proximity of the mine to the town and residential developments, and the associated negative health impacts, both through polution as well as added stress;

The negative economic impact on thr prices of property in the area. This is similar to Bulga mine expansion which has seen house prices crumble, with residents unable to buy elsewhere. Also, this is a community, it is ethically wrong to force people to evacuate because of health concerns. The same proposal would never get a green light from the government if it were in Sydney or somewhere with a high voting population;

The mine will expose Glocester's population to high levels of particulates within the 5 kilometre radius of the operation, which takes in all of Gloucester's schools and most of it's population;
Gloucester is a beautiful town in an idyllic area. Allowing a mine in within an area with an existing $50 million tourism industry is shortsighted and mean. The main reason for the tourism there is it's unique character and clean environment. People don't pay to escape city smog to go somewhere with an open cut coal mine;
Gloucester is the gateway to Barrington Tops. It makes future social, environmental and economic sense to leave it as a non mining town. Having an open cut mine is the opposite of what Gloucester stands for;
Lastly, mine submissions cannot be trusted, as proved elsewhere in the Hunter Valley. Over time they are changed and adapted in order to suit the mines operation, gain the most value from the operation through longer working hours etc. An initial approval is the start of a long slippery slope which can result in total ruin for the area surrounding the mine.
I strongly oppose this mine and believe it should be rejected outright.

Yours sincerely,
Doug Heslop

Coal mining must not continue to destroy our prime agricultural land in NSW. With this Rocky Hill project a beautiful fertile valley will be destroyed and the town of Gloucester faced with ugly surrounds, no longer a tourist attraction. Other concerns are damage and depletion of underground aquifers and pollution of surface creeks and rivers, as has been allowed to happen all over NSW. Loss of royalties to the state's coffers, and a small number of jobs, are outweighed by the steep rise in costs of increasing numbers of extreme weather events and declared disaster areas, as we continue the burning of fossil fuels - plus the large subsidies granted to mining companies. Please stop the destruction of productive and lovely areas.

This new mine will create a lot of additional jobs for the area which is needed to keep the local economy strong.
The conditions that will be imposed on the mine in addition to the clever designs submitted by the proponent will result in minimal impact to the environment and local community.
By restricting the operations to Day Shift only, the effect on the surrounding residents will be minimal and when compared to the positive impacts the whole community will have the mine should be approved.

10th October 20016

I am greatly concerned that the proposed Rocky Hill coal mine may adversely affect the area and its residents, in the ways listed below.

I moved to Gloucester because I like the natural beauty of the area, the sound of birds, cows and grass growing and the quiet lifestyle of a small country town, which has reasonable facilities. This opinion is one I hear repeated to me by many people I meet who live in the area.

Coal is not a sustainable resource. We already have enough coal being produced from existing coal mines. In order to limit global warming, no new coal mines may be opened.

The coal mine is proposed to be less than 900m from the township of Gloucester. In other towns in Australia, coal mines which are located as close to towns as this proposal is, have caused many health and social problems. This mine has a very high likelihood to start another fight between locals and government.

I am greatly concerned that the proposed Rock Hill open cut mine may have negative impacts in the following areas;

1. Mental Health - Many residents tell me that they are concerned about the impacts of the mine on them due to the reasons listed here. I have observed some residents become greatly affected in their manner, bearing and speech as they continually consider the adverse outcomes from the mine.
2. Property values - Families invest in their homes to gain security in their lives. When the mine is approved and even during the approval process, they suffer a fall in the value of their homes. They must choose to stay in an area they have already settled in, and endure the consequences listed here or sell and move and suffer severe financial loss. Accordingly, the security of families is now under threat.
3. Noise - from truck movements on the proposed haul road. The sound of large trucks moving around all day is unnatural and offensive to me.
4. Noise - from increased vehicle movements in the general area. This will result from people working at the mine as well as materials, plant and equipment moving into and out of the area.
5. Noise - from explosions. I find sudden unexpected loud sounds to be very stressful to me as I receive an automatic jolt of nervous tension resulting from my bodies fight or flight reaction occurring.
6. Light pollution - I love to observe stars and this area is renowned as a very good stellar observation point. I am greatly concerned that this will be affected because lights are left on all night for security, safety or emergency concerns of the mine operators.
7. Road damage - Bucketts Way South and East is already in a bad condition, with many locations so uneven and pot holed that damage to vehicles using this road is inevitable. Increased heavy and light vehicle movements will make the roads even more dangerous and damaging to people using this road to travel from Gloucester to Newcastle, Taree, and beyond.
8. Threat to tourism - The area is well known as a tourist destination and one of the reasons for this is the natural beauty of the area. I am greatly concerned that the effects listed here will turn away tourists, which will have an adverse effect on businesses in the area.
9. Water pollution from the haul road, and the mine operation. Water is the lifeblood of the rural industries situated here.
10. Aesthetics - I moved to Gloucester due, in part, to the natural beauty of the area. This will be greatly affected by a mine in the area, due to large ugly piles of overburden appearing as a brown or grey mass on the horizon.
11. Health - dust, from soil and coal, is known to have adverse health affects on humans, particularly due to the close proximity to town.
12. Dust - coal and soil dust will be blown over the town making clothes washing impossible at times and increasing cleaning requirements inside and outside homes.
13. Rehabilitation of the mine site. Will this work be done in a way which will not degrade the areas appearance and the ecosystem.

These are the issues that I am aware of but I do not have time to thoroughly assess the proposal, consider all possible positive and negative outcomes and provide the necessary evidence to you to prove my concerns are valid. I trust that you will do this for me to ensure that the proposal is correctly assessed and all considerations made in relation to negative and positive outcomes.

4 Lorn Street
LORN NSW 2320



2nd October 2016



Director - Resource Assessments
Planning Services
Department of Planning & Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001


Submission for the Rocky Hill Coal Project - Application No SSD-5156
Stratford Coal Extension Project - Application No SSD-4966 MOD 1

Dear Sir/Madam

I strongly oppose the Rocky Hill Coal Project and the modification to the Stratford Coal Extension Project for the following reasons.

1) Water supply to the Greater Taree, Great Lakes and Gloucester Shire local government areas is downstream of the proposed development. This water supply system services a population of over 75,000 people and I am very concerned of the real potential for a negative impact on this water supply. The amended Rocky Hill mine project proposes to discharge treated water from Saline Water and run-off from areas disturbed by mining activities (referred to in the EIS as Dirty Water Zone) to the local waterways. Both Duralie and Stratford mines dispose of excess water
through on-site agricultural irrigation relying more extensively that the proposed Rocky Hill
project on water storages. The run-off from areas disturbed by mining is contained within
water storages at both mines. I have concerns with the water management strategy developed for the amended Rocky Hill mine project. The adopted strategy relies too heavily on discharges into local waterway with the real potential for serious contamination.

2) It is unrealistic to suggest that Australia can operate without coal mines as such BUT in this day and age I believe we should not be opening any new coal mines. Stratford/Duralie has recently had to lay off many miners, the price of coal is down and overseas countries are not buying coal anywhere near the rate it has been doing over the years. I do not believe a new coal mine is at all necessary.

3) Health. To establish an open-cut coal mine so close to residential areas (in some cases less than 1km from proposed mine site) is in my opinion completely irresponsible. We now have sufficient evidence to prove that the air quality in the area will become very poor due to coal dust in the atmosphere and the burning of diesel which can lead to asthma, chronic lung disease, cardiovascular disease and lung cancer. The burning of diesel is now identified as a Class one Carcinogen by the World Health Organisation. David Suzuki - Canadian scientist and environmentalist visited Australia in 2013 and he stated that 'clean air is the top of our basic needs'. Also carcinogenic toxic metals are slowly released from disposal sites and may contaminate waterways etc. Dr Dick van Steenis, a retired UK GP who has researched the effects of coal mining on health for over 15 years stated the death rate in Singleton to be 137% of the average and the worst in Australia. The killing agents are the PM10 and PM2.5 particles that are are breathed into the lungs. Research is also proving that children living in polluted areas have a significant drop in IQ levels.

Mining companies, like any other industry that wishes to operate alongside our schools, homes and work places, have a duty to respond to community concerns. Failing to do so puts the economic and social future of any region at risk.

4) Food and water security for the region. Because of pollution in the air as well as the possibility of water contamination, the future security for our food and water is in question. The Avon River feeds into the catchment for the Manning area water supply and it would be devastating if their water source became further compromised.

5) Tourism. Currently the tourism industry brings $51 million to the Gloucester region. Who will want to visit Gloucester if the area becomes part of the typical Hunter Valley moonscape with coal and overburden heaps lining the Bucketts Way?

6) Noise. Associate Professor Mariana Alves-Pereira from Lisbon's Lusofona University in Portugal visited Bulga early October talking to residents about the impacts of Low Frequency Noise and how current measurement regimes do not provide accurate data for assessing those impacts. Noise is an innate mechanical force - it's like a pressure wave or explosion hitting your body and your body's cells react to that punch. So if you live near a 24/7 source of LFN then it can damage your health," said Dr Pereira.
.........Dr Pereira recommended exclusion zones of around 10 kilometers from homes and sources of LFN such as open cut coal mines.
7) Wind. I have no expertise whatsoever in deciphering wind roses but it appears to me that the roses show clearly that the predominant wind strength and direction is from the South thus blowing contaminants all over Gloucester.

I fully understand that there currently exists a need for mining in Australia and that the royalties that are received by NSW are necessary. I DO NOT, however, understand the need to approve mining in any and every location regardless of the impact that this has on the land and the people who surround it. There are already 2 coal mines in this area and that is sufficient. We should NOT be establishing ANY new coal mines in Australia - we should be looking at establishing alternate energy in infrastructures capable of employing many Australians on a long-term basis.

I have not made any political donations.

With thanks.

Kind regards
Andrea Sage

My personal information is not available for publication

28 September 2016

Director - Resource Assessments
Planning Services
Department of Planning & Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Submission for the Rocky Hill Coal Project - Application No SSD-5156
Stratford Coal Extension Project - Application No SSD-4966 MOD 1

Dear Sir

I completely oppose both of the above projects.

The town of Gloucester sits in a valley between two generally north-south running mountain ranges; the Bucketts Range to the west and the Mograni Range to the east. Winds around the township and residential areas of Gloucester are variable but more often from the south.

The existing Stratford mine is some ten kilometres south and the proposed Rocky Hill mine will be approximately 4 kilometres south of the centre of the township, the hospital and the high school. However developed residential areas are much closer to the existing and proposed workings, some as close as one kilometre. Any blast plume or any or all earth workings, which will always create airborne dust, has the potential to adversely affect those in the path of the plume and dust, particularly with winds blowing towards the residential areas.

Clean air is a basic human need and therefore of utmost importance. The larger dust particles will fall to ground relatively close to the mine workings but the smaller particles
will travel further afield. The finer the particles the further distance they will potentially travel and it is these finer particles, PM 10 and particularly PM2.5 and smaller, which are the most critical to human health and therefore of most concern.

I believe the potential for human health impacts on the people of Gloucester is alone sufficient ground for refusing the applications.

I have not made any political donations.

I moved my family to Gloucester to get away from mines for a variety of reasons. NO NEW MINES IN GLOUCESTER.

I believe that the Rocky Hill Coal Project (SSD 5156) will provide much-needed jobs and investment within the mining industry as well as produce the means for further investment and growth within the local areas surrounding the mine.

Great for the local community and for the economy

This project should be given the green light for the good of the area and the future of Gloucester and surrounding areas

The Mining Industry needs to keep getting new places approved so that when the old site finish, the workers have opportunities to continue their careers.
The local communities always benefits financially from new developments such as this and it means that the kids in the area have a chance to get a job close to home and not have to move away from their family for work.

I oppose the Rocky Hill Coal Project and the modification to the Stratford Coal Extension Project.
1. Proximity to residential areas The mine is proposed only 900 metres from the residential area of Forbesdale. These residents will carry an unacceptable burden and will be impacted by dust, noise and loss of amenity, resulting in risks to their health and significant loss of property value. This will extend to the entire town in the projects proposed staged implementation. In 2015 the PAC found in relation to the Bulga mine that "property values could be negatively affected and that the encroachment of mining will make it more difficult for landowners to sell their property". The Rocky Hill proposal is closer to Gloucester than in Bulga's case. PAC suggested the entire town be moved. Will Gloucester, with over 120 years of history, its hospital, high school, primary schools, aerodrome, farms and residents be moved too? Will we be offered adequate compensation for our homes and
businesses?

2. Impacts on Health Health impacts from open-cut coalmines are well documented. With most of Gloucester township, including the hospital and schools, falling within the 5km health impact zone of the Rocky Hill mine, this places us all at risk. There will be dust impacts on the town & surrounding residents because of the mines position in the valley & the prevailing winds. To deny this illustrates a lack of understanding of the local area by the applicant. Although I live 10km from town I will be affected by the noise and light pollution from the mine. When there is an inversion layer in the valley, which is frequently, I can hear the train, so the mine noise, particularly at night will be significant for residents for kilometres around. Mining up to 10pm IS night time mining, this is unacceptable & highlights the lack of genuine concern for the community by the applicant.

3. Impact on Tourism, worth $51M per annum to the Gloucester economy. An open-cut coalmine within 5km of Gloucester and within sight of the Bucketts Way will have a huge impact on the visual amenity of the area, which is why tourists come to the area. The mine will risk the jobs of hundreds employed in the tourism industry. Gloucester has successfully transitioned from a farming/forestry community to a tourist town and this significant local industry will be killed by this mine.

4. Environment The proposed mine is in the Avon Valley and in the catchment area of the Manning River. This supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment, especially as this area floods regularly.
I believe that this mine will be the closest mine to any town in Australia. Gloucester cannot co-exist with this open cut mine.

My two sons both work in the Mining Industry and it is important not just for them, but the whole industry that new mines are approved to keep the industry strong.
It will also help the local young people have opportunities to gain employment close to home and not have to leave their home town for work.

We have relatives in Gloucester who are totally opposed to the mine. They have shown us where the mine will be and we are amazed that the state government could approve a mine so close to houses. The scenic beauty of the Gloucester valley will be lost forever. This will lead to a drop in tourists and cost my daughter her job. Surely this will mean that whatever financial benefit claims the mining company makes will be cancelled out by loss of tourist dollars and jobs.

Gloucester is known to be clean and green. That is its claim to fame. That image will be irreparably damaged if this mine is approved.

Our relatives are very concerned about any health issues that will arise from living near this mine. It is known that living near coal mines has a detrimental affect on health, including asthma and heart disease. The NSW Department of Health cannot deny the risks.

We ask that the NSW Planning Department do the right thing and not approve this mine, which will affect so many people in a negative way.