Russell Vale Underground Expansion

Russell Vale Underground Expansion Project:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I object to the Wollongong Coal's Revised Preferred Project Report
(PPR) to the Russell Vale Underground Expansion Project 09-0013.

The reasons for my objection are as follows:

1. Risk to Greater Sydney water catchment area.

The project will further the loss of ground and surface water from
Cataract Reservoir and its catchment, adding 131 ML/year of ground
water and 10 ML/year of surface water to losses from previous mining
damage. This is estimated to bring the total ground and surface water
loss from the project to 298 ML/year. [3] This is the equivalent
annual water usage of 25,492 people.

An additional 146 ML of "upgradient inflow" from surrounding mines -
the now "inactive" Cordeaux mine and Corrimal mine (not mined by
Wollongong Coal) - are draining water into WCL workings, bringing the
total to 444 ML/year.[5] This is the approximate water usage of 37,981
Greater Sydney residents.[6]

2. Risk of triple seam mining.

The mining is particularly risky because a third seam of coal is being
mined beneath two previously mined seams. Triple seam mining has
little precedent and impacts are difficult to predict.

The proponent admits that instability in the overlaying old Bulli seam
workings may cause pillar collapse and subsequent subsidence of 1 to 2
metres. It is unacceptable of the NSW government to allow such risky
mining in the water catchment for 5 million people of Greater Sydney
in a time of drought.


3. Wholly inadequate commitment from Wollongong coal to treat
contaminated water from the mine.

Following mining the void left will fill up with water. The water will
keep rising until it reaches the adit (mine portal) in the Illawarra
Escarpment in about 2057. The water will overflow through the adit and
the outflow will slowly increase, reaching 0.3ML (300,000 litres) per
day in 2179. WCL's modelling shows that the volume of water outflow at
the adit above Russell Vale will continue to flow, even beyond 2179.
[7] In other words, the project will result in escalating water
discharge from the adit for at least 160 years and probably longer.
The outflow will need to be managed and treated. Wollongong Coal is
proposing a commitment to manage and treat the water for 10 years.[8]

a 10 year commitment for a 160 year problem is woefully inadequate.
Again, given their non-compliance on other requirements I doubt their
commitment to even 10 years is truthful. So who will pick up the bill?
Sydney residents in the form of polluted water and higher taxes and/or
higher water bills to pay for the mess someone else created (and
turned in a handsome profit for putting us in this mess).

4. The poor record of Wollongong coal in adhering to approval
conditions.

They say that "first workings" where pillars of coal are left to prop
up the seam will provide stability to the seam in the long term, but
that leaves a lot of coal still in there, and that is a lot of profit
lost to Wollongong coal. Wollongong coal are currently operating under
three existing non-compliances. Who's to stop them just doing long
wall mining and perhaps leaving the odd pillars here and there in the
hope of stopping any subsidence. In short I do not trust them to
follow their obligations on stopping subsidence.

Previous applications and approvals promised numerous items to protect
the community and environment that have never been met by the
proponent. These include but are not limited to: truck loading
facilities, sound walls, covered conveyors, limited stockpiles, sealed
roadways and realignment of Bellambi Creek. Now in this new revised
project, Wollongong Coal is promising the same or similar things.

In fact right now, Wollongong Coal is operating under three major
non-compliances: the realignment of Bellambi Creek to protect it from
pollution and flooding (due Oct 2012); the removal of 200,000 tonnes
of oversize coal that was illegally stockpiled on the adjoining slag
heap (due July 2019); and, the dedication of land to Council in a 1989
approval from Wollongong City Council (due 1990). All of these
obligations still have not been met.

It is of real concern that the proponent is proposing to put in place
pit top infrastructure after they have started mining. History shows
that operators of this mine are unwilling or unable to meet the
conditions of mining approval and the Department of Planning is
unwilling or unable to enforce compliance. In every case the local
community suffers from the failure to implement required pit top
infrastructure.

5. Impacts on the local community.

The colliery site at Russell Vale is closer to dense residential areas
than any mine in Australia. Residential communities have suffered the
impacts from this mine over many years, including noise and
particulate pollution. In this day and age, Russell Vale is not a
suitable location for a colliery.

Wollongong Coal plans to build a coal processing plant at the Russell
Vale Colliery and process coal on site. The Russell Vale mine is the
closest mine to any built up residential area in Australia and is not
a suitable area for coal processing.

Moreover, the proponent has been unable or unwilling to comply with
many conditions of past approvals and the NSW government has proven to
be unable or unwilling to enforce compliance. Residents have no
confidence in "conditions" or "commitments" to operate the processing
plant according to suitable standards.

6. The suitability of the proponent

Wollongong Coal and its parent company Jindal Steel and Power Ltd, are
currently the subject of an investigation by the NSW government's
Resources Regulator into whether or not they are a `fit and proper'
entity to hold a mining license.

In India, corruption charges are being framed against Naveen Jindal,
Chairman of Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL). JSPL, via a holding
company, JSPL Mauritius, is majority shareholder in Wollongong Coal
Ltd. [14]

Moreover, here in Australia, the company has a history of failing to
comply with conditions of approval. Even its auditors have questioned
its capacity to continue as a going concern; its current liabilities
exceed its current assets by nearly A$1 billion. Operating a coal mine
in the water catchment of Australia's largest city is risky business.
The NSW Resources Regulator started investigating whether Wollongong
Coal was a "fit and proper" entity to hold a mining license in
2016...... and it's still investigating...... Isn't it about time the
Resources Regulator reached a conclusion? And shouldn't any
consideration of an expansion of operations be postponed until after a
conclusion has been reached.

7. Summary.

In short this mine is in the wrong place. There should be no mining in
the Sydney water catchment area. Our water is a precious resource and
should not be threatened in this way. We are all trying to conserve
water yet this will suck water out of the dams and eventually return
some of it as polluted water. This is simply not worth the risk.

If they want to build a mine thats fine by me, but don't do it in our
water catchment area.

I ask that you reject this application from Wollongong Coal and start
the process of closing the mine at Russel Vale.

Yours Sincerely,

Richard Redman

REFERENCES
[1] Russell Vale Revised Underground Expansion Project 3687_R05 RtPAC
Second Review FINAL Revised Preferred Project Environmental
Assessment, p. 62

Accessed 18.8.19 at:
https://majorprojects.accelo.com/public/7f32dda24beaa9a6c18ea7d52be9c53d/RtPAC%20Second%20Review%20FINAL.pdf

[2] ibid, p 63

[3] Russell Vale Colliery Underground Expansion Project, Russell Vale
East first workings, Groundwater assessment, Geo terra, NRE16 - R1D,
11 July, 2019, p. 96 accessed at:
https://majorprojects.accelo.com/public/7f32dda24beaa9a6c18ea7d52be9c53d/RtPAC%20Second%20Review%20FINAL.pdf

[4] Based on water consumption of 306 litres per person per day, cited
in Sydney Water Conservation Report 2017/2018, accessed at
https://www.sydneywater.com.au/web/groups/publicwebcontent/documents/document/zgrf/mdq3/~edisp/dd_047419.pdf

[5] Geo terra 2019, op cit, p. 63

[6] Sydney Water Conservation Report 2017/2018, op cit 8[7] Geo terra,
2019, op cit, pp. 96-97

[7] Russell Vale Revised Underground Expansion Project, op cit, p. 172

[8] ibid, p. 158

[9] ibid, p. 133

[10] Greenhouse Gas and Energy Assessment 3687_R08_GHG Report_Final
Impact Assessment Results p. 7

accessed 18.8.19 at:

https://majorprojects.accelo.com/public/7f32dda24beaa9a6c18ea7d52be9c53d/RtPAC%20Second%20Review%20FINAL.pdf

[11] Australians annually are responsible for about 21.528 tonnes of
CO2 per person (based on 538.2 mt CO2 emissions year to Dec 18 as
cited at
http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/climate-science-data/greenhouse-gas-measurement/publications/quarterly-update-australias-nggi-dec-2018)
and population of 25 million)

[12] Russell Vale Revised Underground Expansion Project, op cit, p. 9

[13] TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR RUSSELL VALE COLLIERY
REVISED UNDERGROUND EXPANSION PROJECT AT RUSSELL VALE RESPONSE TO PAC
SECOND REVIEW REPORT, p 5 accessed at:
https://majorprojects.accelo.com/public/7f32dda24beaa9a6c18ea7d52be9c53d/RtPAC%20Second%20Review%20FINAL.pdf

[14]

http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2019/jul/01/delhi-court-orders-framing-of-charges-against-naveen-jindal-and-four-others-in-coal-scam-case-1997865.html

The risk of irreversible loss of the Cararact reservoir is to significant
to ignore. No amount of assurances on the last of Wollongong Coal Ltd.
will suffice to ensure agaibst this.
Coal mining needs to cease altogether to prevent further climate
change. These claims aren't conjecture. There are multiple instances
world wide and here in Australia already, where mining under or near
critical aquifers and surface watt supplies has ended with State
significant loss.
I encourage the department to approach Wollongong Coal Ltd. to ask any
insurance company whether tgey would cover such loss, after first
assessing the value of the reservoir.

Under new management the Russell Vale mine will be a bonus to the
Illawarra, creating new jobs, not only for the local miners but for
all the associated industries and businesses. The Illawarra has a
proud history in coal mining and this proposal is a continuation of a
mine that is well over 100 years old. The method of mining that will
be adopted is environmentally friendly to the catchment area with no
subsidence of the surface during or after mining has occurred. The
mine has been an integral part of the community for over a century and
there is no reason for this to change. Coal is a votal resource in the
Australian economy and not to mine it at Russell Vale is a waste of a
natural asset of the country. One extra job in the community is good,
hundreds is even better and that will occur if the mine gets approval
to operate.

Wollongong Coal's Revised Preferred Project Report for the
Russell Vale Underground Expansion Project:

I object to the Wollongong Coal's Revised Preferred Project Report
(PPR) to the Russell Vale Underground Expansion Project 09-0013.

Wollongong Coal has been operating the Russell Vale mine since 2004
(prior to 2014 under the name of Gujarat NRE Coking Coal).
This company has had numerous years to prove its worth and show if it
is a good corporate citizen.
It has failed miserably.
I don't need to reiterate their failures and inabilities; they are all
very well documented by the Government agencies and in the media.
But now this failed company, with its financial encumbrances, wants to
mine under our vital water catchment area and in a very sensitive
residential area, when they have clearly shown that they do not have
the capacity or expertise to operate a mine responsibly.
This application should be rejected on the company's inability to
function in a responsible way.
They are currently being investigated under the `fit and proper'
provision of holding a coal license.
I believe that NSW Planning should not approve this project until
Wollongong Coal has proven itself and when the `fit and proper'
investigation has been completed.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

I am a concerned citizen whom like many others will be severely affected
by this project.

to my knowledge 5 million citizens of greater Sydney rely on the water
of the Cataract Reservoir and its catchment and I find it
irresponsible to trust Wollongong coal to care for it.

I believe this because to my understanding, after many breaches this
company is currently being investigated to decide if they should
legally hold a mining license in the state of NSW.

I believe that this area has two previously mined seams. Triple seam
mining is not a common practice and it is very safe to predict that it
will have a terrible impact but it is difficult even for people with a
lot of experience to predict what will be the extent of the damage.

To my knowledge, Special Areas of Sydney's Water catchment like this
one are so delicate that people may liable to receive a $44,000 fine
for merely setting foot on them. Why must it be different for a
company that is likely to have an awful impact on this precious water.

Please consider the future of NSW water before you consider anything
else, water is an essential part of our lives and we are already
seeing the impacts of water shortage along the Murray-Darling Basin.

Care for our water, for our lives. Please.

Regards
Ginette Villasmil

You already have the objection points from IRRM
As a visitor to the South Coast area and as a member of the public I
abhor that this is even up for discussion with what has been presented
to you and fast becoming common knowledge.
It is past time for governments at all levels to stand up and be
counted in their opposition to any more coal mining/gas fracking
initiatives.
It is time to say we have lacked vision and that lack of vision is
going to cost society greatly but we will address it now.
Better that than contaminated water and a wasteland, not to mention
civil law suits for what I and most people consider such a gross
negligence of a duty of care

I object to the Russell Vale Expansion Project. The impact of this
expansion would be far reaching, not only will there be continued
contamination of the local waterways, coal dust affecting the
surrounding area. There are residential homes so incredibly close that
it would be detrimental to those living near it.
Not only will local residents be affected but the contamination of
water for greater Sydney is likely. The mining will take place in the
Special Areas of the Greater Sydney Water Catchment - areas that
forbid public access because of their sensitivity and strategic
importance - and up to the shores of the Cataract Reservoir.

I've attended meetings on this because I know the historical
importance of coal in the Illawarra, the generation of jobs and how it
has supported communities for generations. I actually can't believe
that coal is being considered at Russell Vale in 2019. There are other
avenues for income generation and jobs in our region. All far more
sustainable and for the greater good of all, not just the company due
to make huge profits.

I'm also shocked that Wollongong Coal and parent company Jindal Steel
and Power Ltd, are currently the subject of an investigation by the
NSW government's Resources Regulator into whether or not they are a
`fit and proper' entity to hold a mining license. The company has a
history of failing to comply with conditions of approval. Even its
auditors have questioned its capacity to continue as a going concern;
This is of huge concern considering the risks associated with mining.

Again, as a local residentI strongly object to this application.

I refer the department/minister to the current terms of reference (2) and
(3) of the Independent Expert Panel for Mining in the Catchment:

2. Undertake a review of current coal mining in the Greater Sydney
Water Catchment Special Areas with a particular focus on risks to the
quantity of water available, the environmental consequences for swamps
and the issue of cumulative impacts, including:
a. A review and update of the findings of the 2008 Southern Coalfield
Inquiry (Impacts of Underground Coal Mining on Natural Features in the
Southern Coalfield - Strategic Review) for mining operations at the
Dendrobium, Metropolitan, Russell Vale and Wongawilli mines, including
recommending measures to improve the way mining effects, impacts and
consequences in relation to water quantity are assessed and managed.
b. In developing its advice, the Panel will meet, undertake site
visits, seek information and data, and consult as needed.
c. Establish a process for and invite public submissions, including
from public authorities and special interest groups.
d. In delivering its report, the Panel will provide comment on and
make observations or recommendations about any information or factors
the Panel believes relevant, including requirements to strengthen
monitoring networks or undertaking further scientific research.
e. The report is to be delivered no later than 31 December 2018.
NOTE: the reporting date has subsequently been extended to 14 October
2019.

3. Provide advice as required to the Department of Planning and
Environment on mining activities in the Greater Sydney Water Catchment
Special Areas, which may include but is not confined to:
a. A Subsidence Management Plan application for Longwall 16 at the
Dendrobium mine.
b. An Extraction Plan application for Longwall 303 at the Metropolitan
mine.
c. An Environmental Impact Statement for the Dendrobium Extension
Project.
d. A Preferred Project Report for the Russell Vale Underground
Expansion Project.
A modification application for the Wongawilli mine.


I cannot see how the department can take the panel's advice on a
preferred project report for the russel vale expansion if the panel
has not yet completed the update of the 2008 souther coalfields
inquiry which is to inform the review of russel vale mining operations
and associated projects. As the terms outline " NOTE: the reporting
date has subsequently been extended to 14 October 2019." This project
expansion is closing for public submission and review today, 29 August
2019.

NSW planning simply cannot incorporate the necessary independent
advice, or at best, the public, media, local stakeholders and
residents, experts outside the panel, ngos and industry groups etc
will not be able to review the independent findings before
consultation ends and a decision is made.



The Department of Planning and Environment should not be considering
let alone approving Wollongong Coal's Russel Vale expansion, nor any
other mining expansions in the catchment areas of the Southern
Coalfields until at minimum the Southern Coalfields Inquiry can be
updated, and at best, the panel tasked with creating requisite
empirical knowledge for geology and hydrology can actually undertake
the reviews necessary to establish legitimate environmental controls.
In short, if NSW government approves this project it would be doing so
with direct disregard for the independent panel and in negligence of
scientific data.

Any damage of catchment waterways is as much the responsibility and
therefore fault of the minister and the party as it is any miner in
the southern coalfields. Does planning power make the minister immune
from court or auditor general of commission of inquiry findings into
planning approvals which ignore independent panel advice and issue
approvals in the interest of industry?

The current government should heed former planning ministers
downfalls, consider independent panel's needs over the next 1-2 years,
listen to community voices, and dare I say, consider some of the
conservation points. The chief scientist and engineer has pointed out
no other country in the world allows mining underneath its catchments.
This is not because other countries doubt their technological
capabilities, it is because they aren't willing to risk the single
most critical asset for the continuity and development especially not
in their largest metropolitan areas.

If NSW government is really willing to impose this risk, and now
expand this risk for the people of Wollongong and Sydney, I would at
least assume planning would want to know whether it's liable to have
water loss or disaster on its hands. I understand ministers can ignore
independent panels but I'm surprised it's even procedurally feasible
to go ahead and approve mining extensions without independent panel
advice at least existing in the first place.

I object to the Wollongong Coal's Revised Preferred Project Report (PPR)
to the Russell Vale Underground Expansion Project 09-0013.

Some of the reasons for my objection are listed below.

Climate change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions

Coal mining, whether for energy or steelmaking, produces the GHG
Emissions that are causing dangerous climate change. This project is
estimated to result in 11,624,000 tonnes of GHG emissions through the
mining and the burning of the coal.
A risk to Greater Sydney Water Catchment

The mining will take place in the Special Areas of the Greater Sydney
Water Catchment - areas that forbid public access because of their
sensitivity and strategic importance - and up to the shores of the
Cataract Reservoir.
Not only will the mining infrastructure, such as access roads and vent
shafts, disturb and damage the catchment, the proposal for Bord and
Pillar mining will result in up to 100 mm in subsidence.
The extraction for the Wonga Central Development Mains extends under
the Cataract Reservoir itself. Cataract is severely affected by
drought and is currently at only 29% of capacity. Mining should not be
permitted anywhere near Great Sydney water supply reservoirs.
Triple seam mining

The mining is particularly risky because a third seam of coal is being
mined beneath two previously mined seams. Triple seam mining has
little precedent and impacts are difficult to predict.
The proponent admits that instability in the overlaying old Bulli seam
workings may cause pillar collapse and subsequent subsidence of 1 to 2
metres. It is unacceptable of the NSW government to allow such risky
mining in the water catchment for 5 million people of Greater Sydney
in a time of drought.
The proponent is not fit and proper to hold a mining licence

Wollongong Coal and its parent company Jindal Steel and Power Ltd, are
currently the subject of an investigation by the NSW government's
Resources Regulator into whether or not they are a `fit and proper'
entity to hold a mining license. The company has a history of failing
to comply with conditions of approval. Even its auditors have
questioned its capacity to continue as a going concern; its current
liabilities exceed its current assets by nearly A$1 billion.
Wollongong Coal is not a `fit and proper' entity to operate a coal
mine in the water catchment of Australia's largest city.
Impacts on local community

The colliery site at Russell Vale is closer to dense residential areas
than any mine in Australia. Residential communities have suffered the
impacts from this mine over many years, including noise and
particulate pollution. In this day and age, Russell Vale is not a
suitable location for a colliery.
Wollongong Coal plans to build a coal processing plant at the Russell
Vale Colliery and process coal on site. The Russell Vale mine is the
closest mine to any built up residential area in Australia and is not
a suitable area for coal processing. Moreover, the proponent has been
unable or unwilling to comply with many conditions of past approvals
and the NSW government has proven to be unable or unwilling to enforce
compliance. Residents have no confidence in "conditions" or
"commitments" to operate the processing plant according to suitable
standards.
The proponent has a history of non-compliance with approval conditions

Previous applications and approvals promised numerous items to protect
the community and environment that have never been met by the
proponent. These include but are not limited to: truck loading
facilities, sound walls, covered conveyors, limited stockpiles, sealed
roadways and realignment of Bellambi Creek. Now in this new revised
project, Wollongong Coal is promising the same or similar things.
Wollongong Coal is currently operating right at this moment under
three non-compliances: the realignment of Bellambi Creek to protect it
from pollution and flooding (due Oct 2012); the removal of 200,000
tonnes of oversize coal that was illegally stockpiled on the adjoining
slag heap (due July 2019); and, the dedication of land to Council in a
1989 approval from Wollongong City Council (due 1990). All of these
obligations still have not been met.
A proponent with such a poor record of compliance should not be
considered for, let alone granted, approval to mine. The NSW
Department of Planning's inability or unwillingness to enforce
compliance (with the conditions that it itself has stipulated)
undermines confidence in the planning system.
We ask that you reject this application from Wollongong Coal and
commence a process to close the mine at Russell Vale permanently.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Yours sincerely,
Sean

NSW Dept of Planning & Environment
Wollongong Coal's Revised Preferred Project Report to the Russell Vale
Underground Expansion Project (PPR)
Submission
Julie Marlow, Wollongong
29 August 2019
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Wollongong Coal's PPR.
I strongly object to any expansion of coal mining in the Illawarra,
indeed in NSW generally. My main reason is role of coal in
perpetuating the global climate crisis. The fossil fuel industries are
major contributors to global warming, the most urgent and serious
threat confronting our planet. It is the responsibility of these
industries and the governments that have jurisdiction over them to
undertake a rapid phasing out of human dependence on fossil fuel. It
is grossly irresponsible of Australian federal and state governments
and the industries themselves not to recognise the redundancy of coal
and embrace the alternatives that are now available.
I also strongly object to any expansion of coal mining in the Greater
Sydney Drinking Water Catchment. Water is an essential of life.
Already the health of the catchment is under threat from the impacts
of climate change. Also, it has a long history of underground coal
mining, both `bord and pillar' and longwall. Despite its high level of
intensity, the latter is now the method of choice, and companies aim
to continue their operations unabated up to 2050. To my mind, it is
scandalous that mining continues to expand when the cumulative impacts
are so hard to predict, that is, the combined impacts of climate
change, the geological destabilisation and other damage associated
with the mazes of old mine workings and the uncertainty beleaguering
current proposals such as Wollongong Coal's.
On the face of it, the switch in this proposal from longwall mining to
a `non-caving' system is welcome. However, any comfort it brings is
counteracted by Wollongong Coal's stated intention to apply for
resumption of longwall mining in the future. Furthermore, the risks to
water safety (quantity and quality) remain unacceptable, given its
resort to `third seam' mining in this application. Originally,
Wollongong Coal assured the community that its non-caving system would
cause no water loss. However, it is obvious from its PPR that the
assurance is not being upheld with any level of acceptable certainty.
In the PPR, the area to be mined is considerably bigger than that
proposed in the previous proposal. The area extends into NSW Dams'
Notification Area for the Cataract Reservoir. Given that the coal seam
to be mined underlies two previously mined seams, the risk of movement
and subsidence is surely alarming. `Triple seam' mining is NOT
traditional practice and its impacts are unpredictable. The proponent
admits to `low risk' of the proposed operations causing
destabilisation of " ... remnant pillars in historical Bulli Seam
workings above the proposed workings". It is also admitted that areas
within the PPR Application Area are "in limiting equilibrium ...
because of previous mining, including Longwalls 4-6 in the Wongawilli
Seam. ...low-level movement related to previous longwall mining
operations has potential to continue to cause low-level impacts to Mt
Ousley Rd and valley closure across Cataract Creek that may be
perceptible." The level of uncertainty that the proponent finds
acceptable is incredible. "This movement" the report states, "is a
legacy of previous mining and is not expected to be influenced by the
proposed mining. Movement may continue irrespective of any further
mining in the Wongawilli Seam." [my emphasis]
The proponent states that it is not proposing to mine under the
Cataract Reservoir, yet the Wonga Central Development Mains clearly
passes under the reservoir. Wollongong Coal complacently states that
this driveage is covered under their previous, now expired approval.
The possibility that the tunnelling may be made more risky in the
context of the proposed extension and its `third seam' method must be
evaluated. Certainty that no risk is posed to the water storage must
be established.

Millions of residents rely on the Greater Sydney Drinking Water
Catchment. We rely on WaterNSW's ability to meet its responsibility to
protect the quality and quantity of our water. I believe that this
proposal, if approved, will simply add to the obstacle that coal
mining has become for WaterNSW to fulfil its role.
I ask that those responsible for evaluating whether or not the PPR
meets standards necessary for approval take heed of all that is
implied in NSWWater's six `Principles for managing mining and coal
seam gas impacts in Declared Catchment Areas'
https://www.waternsw.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/119890/Mining-principles.pdf.
I believe that not one of WaterNSW's principles can be upheld should
this proposal be approved. Under its first principle, WaterNSW states:
"Mining and coal seam gas activities under or near to water storages
can create pathways for stored water to enter mines or move below and
away from the base of the storage and out of the catchment. WaterNSW
opposes any mining or coal seam gas activities under or near its water
storages in Declared Catchment Areas, unless it can be demonstrated
that there is an acceptable and very low risk of water being lost
through these activities".

I am opposed to the expansion of the mine. This company has treated the
community really badly in the past, repeatedly not meeting
environmental conditions or other conditions. They still haven't paid
hundreds of thousands of dollars owing to council and the state
government. The one is extremely close to a densely populated
residential area and will have a terrible impact on local residents.
It has very little economic value to our community, having been non
operational for years. The min is also directly under the water
catchment, where there is significant damage from the mines they have
previously exploited. Further mining will no doubt increase the damage
already done.

I object this development in the name of the future generations that will
be negatively impacted by the long term effects in the damage of the
land, water and air.

* Longwall mining damage to the water catchment area
* Proximity of the Russell Vale Colliery to residential areas
* Proposed stock piles close to residential areas - dust, noise and
other potential harm to public health
* Traffic congestion and noise with 700 truck movements daily at peak
operation,
* Poor ownership governance and track record. GNRE have demonstrated
on multiple occasions that they do not take their corporate,
environmental and community responsibilities seriously.

I support this application as I believe it is good for the overall well
being of the local economy,and benefits in terms of enhanced and
increased employment, tax base, and development of the region. This
approval also has positive global employment implications.

I'm really frustrated with how a council and or small government will
probably go-ahead with this proposal, even though the overwhelming
majority of citizens are strongly against this.
This is the people's land, the traditional owner's land, this is going
to impact the local and broader environment for decades, if not
centuries, to come.
Coal is dead, stop mining this antiquated fuel which can only created
CO2.
please.....

I strongly object to the Underground expansion Project proposed by
Wollongong Coal for the following reasons.
My children and grandchildren live in close proximity to the Russell
Vale mine and I believe any further development in such a highly
populated area would prove to be environmentally dangerous and have
adverse effects on my family's health.
The number of truck movements suggested, ie up to 32 per hour and not
including waste removal trucks, is untenable. Memorial Drive carries
enough traffic as it is without adding the hazard of huge trucks
mingling with residents, workers and school buses.
The waste running into Bellambi Creek will foul our beautiful beaches.
Wollongong Coal has a disastrous record both environmentally and
financially. Already owing Wollongong Council over $400,000, one has
to question the wisdom of entering into business with them again!
I understand that the coal the proponents intend to produce, will not
be used for local steel.
The issue of water loss for the greater Sydney region is most
concerning and I will let others with greater scientific
qualifications submit their supporting data.
In this year of 2019, when the world is calling out for the closure of
coal mines and possessing the knowledge to expand our production of
Sustainable Energy, it is highly desirable, that Wollongong Council
become leaders in the race to forge a new way of producing clean
energy.
I urge Wollongong Council to display true courage and knock this
Underground Expansion Project on the head for the greater benefit of
its ratepayers, residents and visitors to this beautiful part of the
NSW Coast.

I object to this proposal which endangers our health, our land and our
lives. We have had enough.

Dear Sir/Madam,

As a resident and citizen I object to the proposal mostly on the
grounds of its impact on our drinking water.

If our drinking water is compromised or ebbs away, what then? The fact
that we are forced to beg for its protection shows the utter madness
of it all. Please act in the long term interests of our children and
grand children. Thankyou for reading my submission.

Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writing to urge the Department to reject the expansion
application on a number of grounds:

1. The mine will further risk our drinking water. There is already
considerable evidence that longwall mining affects the drinking
catchments where it is located and there is a desperate need for more
studies to explain how important areas like Cataract Gorge have
experienced so much damage - likely because of mining.

2. The mine will add considerable greenhouse gas pollution through the
burning of the end product further exacerbating dangerous runaway
climate change. It really is a complete folly to allow more investment
into this industry that is proven to be killing people and threatening
our ongoing survival as a species.

3. The mine will only prolong dead-end jobs in a structurally
declining industry when the focus should be on assisting workers in
the industry to retrain into more sustainable industries.

4. There is a large body of evidence that the parent company of
Wollongong Mines is unfit to undertake business and will likely not
have the funds to remediate any affected land, pay it's suppliers and
workers and taxes.

I have lived in the Wollongong and Picton areas for my entire life.
One of my earliest jobs was assisting my father undertake surveying of
houses and areas affected by longwall minining in the Picton,
Yerrinbool, Appin areas. I have seen the terrible impacts of longwall
mining first hand and read, year after year of the impacts on our
waterways.

I strongly urge you to reject this application and urge the company to
instead invest in sustainable industries.

Sincerely,
Reece Turner
Thirroul

Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writing to urge the Department to reject the expansion
application on a number of grounds:

1. The mine will further risk our drinking water. There is already
considerable evidence that longwall mining affects the drinking
catchments where it is located and there is a desperate need for more
studies to explain how important areas like Cataract Gorge have
experienced so much damage - likely because of mining.

2. The mine will add considerable greenhouse gas pollution through the
burning of the end product further exacerbating dangerous runaway
climate change. It really is a complete folly to allow more investment
into this industry that is proven to be killing people and threatening
our ongoing survival as a species.

3. The mine will only prolong dead-end jobs in a structurally
declining industry when the focus should be on assisting workers in
the industry to retrain into more sustainable industries.

4. There is a large body of evidence that the parent company of
Wollongong Mines is unfit to undertake business and will likely not
have the funds to remediate any affected land, pay it's suppliers and
workers and taxes.

I have lived in the Wollongong and Picton areas for my entire life.
One of my earliest jobs was assisting my father undertake surveying of
houses and areas affected by longwall minining in the Picton,
Yerrinbool, Appin areas. I have seen the terrible impacts of longwall
mining first hand and read, year after year of the impacts on our
waterways.

I strongly urge you to reject this application and urge the company to
instead invest in sustainable industries.

Sincerely,
Reece Turner
Thirroul