Vickery Coal Mine

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

We wish to submit our strongest objection to the section of the Environmental Impact Assessment sent to us by Whitehaven Coal who wish to haul coal along the Blue Vale Road to its coal handling and preparation plant from the Vickery Coal Mine.

Our house and cottage are in close alignment with this road, thus our objection to the noise pollution this would cause. Noise is not the only problem we incur. We also have the problems of coal dust (dry weather), black slushy cars and windscreens (wet weather) and stone chips in the paint and windscreens of all of our vehicles. Currently we have a 10:30pm to 6:30am curfew on these coal haulage trucks and we strongly believe this is the best solution for both us and Whitehaven Coal. This curfew is in line with current urban noise limits. We are able to live with the worker vehicles waking us as the drive past just before 6:30am, but if trucks are running 24-7, we will have vehicles waking us all night. We should not have to live like this.

These problems have currently affected badly the valuation of our property and our quality of life. This property has been on the market for two years and any prospective buyers have looked and left due to our current coal haulage problems. We believe if Whitehaven get the go ahead for 24-7 haulage, the value of our property will drop more, and we will have to live with little or at best interrupted sleep.

In the past few years these B-double coal trucks have been involved in three separate accidents within the length of our property, one of which involving our son who came within centimetres of losing his life. The coal truck was at fault. None of these accidents have been fatal as yet, but it seems it could only be a matter of time. When B-doubles were introduced on our road, we were told by the then community liaison officer for Whitehaven Coal that these B-doubles would only travel to a maximum of 80km/h. However, they now travel at 100km/h and often overtake each other and other vehicles at this speed.

We also believe Whitehaven should take into account the safety of many of their own workers who travel this route to work. Currently morning shift travel before 6:30am thus missing the coal trucks, but with a 24-7 haulage run, this would change and put workers in danger also.

As you can see there are many reasons we believe for NOT allowing coal trucks to travel this road twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. We look forward to further communication on this issue.

Wayne & Kay Campbell
"Weroona"
824 Blue Vale Road
GUNNEDAH NSW 2380
0428 512 752
0428 422 075

I would like to make a submission regarding the proposed Vickery Coal Project.
I do not object to the proposed mine but my residence is close to the proposed construction of the private haul road and overpass over the Kamilaroi Highway. I have correspondence from Whitehaven Coal that states that the proposed overpass will adversely affect the level of any flood in the Namoi River. My residence has been surveyed to be at 261.90 meters and the 1:100 year flood level is 262.25m. Whitehaven Coal admit that the overpass will increase the flood level at my residence by approximately 3 centimeters.
I object to any proposed construction that would have the effect of increasing the flood levels at my residence, as any increase in flood level at my house could cause or contribute to serious flood damage to my house.

Vickery Coal Project (SSD-5000)

I don't object to the Vickery Coal project by Whitehaven Coal provided that they do the right thing, such as:-

* No work between 6pm to 7am on the Western Dumps
* No work on the Western Dump on weekends
* No work on Public Holidays
* No floodlights to be faced out to the Southwest of the Mine
* Work to stop if too loud between 6pm and 7am
* If dust leaves the Vickery Lease work is to be stopped
* Blast monitors of our choice placed at our place of residence
* 24hrs notice prior to blasting
* No blasting before 9am and after 3.30pm
* No blasting in heavy cloud cover, fog and/or rain
* No blasting if the wind is blowing towards the SouthWest
* No blasting on weekends at all
* Spread the dumps out so they do not exceed 350rl
* If they buy neighbouring property (127) on the EIS Maps, no mining vehicles, including trucks are to go through and over the vickery bridge
* Contact with neighbouring properties maintained at all times so that all concerned are kept uptodate
* An independent person to look at The Vickery Coal Project noise modelling contours

I am a neighbour to Vickery Coal Project and my place of residence is 4.3km away from the proposed mining site. I would like to see all the above adhered to, if not then i do object to the Vickery Coal Project going ahead.

I am against the proposed Vickery Coal Project, due to the following reasons:

1) I have concerns regarding the possible cumulative dust impacts from the project and other mining operations in the area, including the Tarrawonga, Boggabri and Maules Creek mines. The dominant wind direction from the south east would certainly carry dust toward my property. I understand the predicted levels are below the standard, but the cumulative effects may cause the levels to be higher than what is predicted.

2) I have current concerns regarding traffic on the Braymont Road. This road is un-sealed and currently carries high amounts of traffic from nearby mining operations. This traffic is predicted to increase due to the Vickery Project. I beleive Braymont Road should not be used by mine vehicles travelling to and from Vickery. Camp style accomodation is being built in Boggabri, workers from this camp and Boggabri would use Braymont Road throughout the mine life as it is the shortest route to travel to the site. The Manilla Road should be used by all mine vehicles and contactors, with buses used for workers from Boggabri. To police this, it would be simple to include conditions in employment contracts regarding travel routes to the Vickery site. Currently the Braymont Road produces excessive dust due to mine related vehicles. The conditon of the road is very poor, as the road was built only to carry minimal local traffic.

3) The social aspect of mining in general is a concern. The amount of property which Whitehaven has purchased throughout this area has been detrimental on the community and also on my buisness. We have limited neighbours remaining in the area and I have limited oppurtunity to expand my buisness due to the majority of the land being mine owned. The proposed road diversion around the Vickery project, will make the trip to Gunnedah longer. This is a particular concern in respect to grain and livestock cartage.

Regards

To whom it may concern

We refer to the development application for the Vickery Coal Project.

Our property is in close proximity to the Whitehaven Coal Coal Handling and Preparation Plant (CHPP). We lived on our property prior to the construction of the CHPP.

This development application proposes developments which would have significant impacts on our residence.

Our residence currently experiences noise impacts which exceed those allowed by the Environmental Protection Licence (EPL 3637) for the Whitehaven Coal CHPP on a regular basis. This has been occurring for over 18 months. Whitehaven Coal has acknowledged that this is the case. The NSW EPA has placed a variation on EPL 3637 requiring that the company rectify this situation. This has not yet occurred and the company has not provided us with any assurance that it will occur.

Documents detailing the current noise impacts on our residence have been provided to us by the proponent. We would be happy to supply these if necessary.

At present the noise of truck movements on the haul road between Kamilaroi Highway and the CHPP impact on our residence. These trucks are regulated in the hours they are permitted to travel down that haul road to deliver coal to the CHPP by virtue of the present consent conditions. This gives us some respite during the late night hours. This application seeks to allow truck movements and access to the CHPP 24 hours per day, seven days per week.

The Company plans to construct a new haul road, including an overpass of Kamilaroi Highway, which will be built in the paddocks adjoining our property. From the EIS it is difficult to ascertain the exact location of the proposed new road. Suffice to say that from the maps provided it appears to be significantly closer to our residence than the existing haul road. The modelling by the Company's noise consultants classifies the new haul road as the equivalent to Kamilaroi Highway. The plan is to have a b-double truck movement every 4 minutes every day of the year. In other words, a new highway next door.

The EIS states that because the haul road is moving further from residences on the other side of it then the noise impacts on them (relative to the noise from the existing haul road) will be reduced. We can only conclude from this that if it is moving closer to our residence then the noise impacts will be increased relative to what they are now.

The Company's noise consultants predict that our residence will receive noise that is 35dB. This is the allowable limit. Our experience with the developments of this Company is that they grossly underestimate the impacts their developments have on our residence. Hence the situation we (and the Company) find ourselves in now. Based on this we believe that if the noise consultants are modelling that we will be on the limit then it is a foregone conclusion that those limits will be regularly exceeded.


The current consent for the CHPP allows it to operate until 2022. From our point of view this places a nine year sunset on the operation. Considering the impacts that this facility has on us and our property, the end of the consent for this facility would be a welcome occurrence. Our interpretation is that this Development application would extend the consent for the operation of the CHPP for a further thirty years. This development would effectively ruin any prospect that our property would ever again be realistically considered rural/residential as it is currently zoned.

We believe it is unfair that a development is able to impact neighbouring properties to the extent that it totally changes their character. In our case the developments of Whitehaven Coal have been taken in a stepwise fashion so that each development seemed to be reasonable. The documents have predicted impacts within the guidelines (as in this application), however these predictions have proved to be erroneous to our detriment and Whitehaven Coal's benefit. The cumulative impact of the developments of the CHPP by Whitehaven Coal and the activities associated with it have resulted in us living with noise and vibration, wrecking our quality of life.

Our objection is based on impact data provided to us by Whitehaven Coal and we believe it is unreasonable to consent to further developments which will only exacerbate the impacts we are currently experiencing from the existing consent.


Yours Faithfully

Justin and Dianne Wilkinson

11/4/13

As a stakeholder with a property nearby the proposed Vickery mine site, my husband and I object to the proposed operating hours of 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. We feel a break from potential noise impact from the operations, lights and trafic flow is necessary for our health and wellbeing. We also object to operations on Sunday's based on our Christian beliefs. We hereby request operating hours cease at midnight and resume at 6.30am Monday to Saturday with no operations on Sundays and public holidays over Easter, Christmas and New Year.

My husband, Lachlan Barker and I also have concerns about the visual impact of the Eastern Emplacement on our property value in future. We request a modification to the expected height, or prefably no Eastern Emplacement at all.

See attachment

See attachment