Warkworth Coal Mine Continuation

Having lived in the valley for 12 years I believe mining is integral to the long term prosperity of the residents.
Mining can work together with agriculture and more effort needs to be done to ensure this happens.
I can't believe that govt would cause a mine to close and wreck the lives of many families and businesses. Singleton needs mining a nd these mines to survive.
Mining essentially saved Australia during the recent downturn and this can't be forgotten. Employment is not good at the moment and everyone needs a job. These mines provide jobs for all types of people in many different activities from coffee shops, hotels, schools and hospitals as well as businesses in mining services. Youth unemployment (I believe is critical) is high in this area and will become higher if there are less jobs to employ apprentices.
We need the mines for the jobs and that is the end of it, as far as I am concerned.
Sharmyn Elliott

Mount thorley warkworth mine has been operating for more than 30 years. Businesses in the upper hunter and the 1300 workers will be affected. The repercussions will be far worse if the expansion does not go thru. Everyone should support the expansion and secure the jobs of all the workers.

Mount thorley warkworth mine has been operating for more than 30 years. Businesses in the upper hunter and the 1300 workers will be affected. The repercussions will be far worse if the expansion does not go thru. Everyone should support the expansion and secure the jobs of all the workers.

I would like to see the mine progress to ensure employement of my 2 sons who also work at the mine.

I beileve that coal mining is an important part of the hunter valley, it not only supports the immediate employees but also filters down to the local businesses.

Not extending the lease of MTW will not affect 1300 people this will affect a number unknown.

My husband works at Mt Thorley Warkworth and i am making a submission in the hope not only him but hundreds of other families can have a future in the Hunter Valley. We have 3 kids and a mortgage, like so many other people. I could not afford to pay that let alone live if my husband was to lose his job as I only work part time. For the community and hundreds of other families in the Hunter Valley, please approve the extension.

I find it extremely objectionable that the state government is even considering this expansion given that two courts have already rejected almost the same proposal.
The current one is a sham as it will have the same negative impacts on residents from dust and noise. These impacts are cumulative given what is already in the area: this is no justification for making life worse.
The courts have already decided that Rio Tinto has been wrong in its economic and jobs forecasts, and that these benefits will not outweigh the negative health and amenity impacts. The fact that the NSW government shamefully changed laws to put Rio's profit before the people is just that: shameful.
To allow the unique Warkworth Sands as original offset to be in turn offset is negligent in anyone's terms in biodiversity obligation. No amount of retrospective manipulation can absolve Rio Tinto from not acting as they should in ratifying that offset agreement.
To remove Saddle Ridge is to condemn Bulga to un,iveability
To close Wallaby Scrub Road will negatively impact so many people and pose increased emergency risks due to longer access and delays.
No jobs should be at any cost. In this instance the cost is too high: the lives of the 380 people to be affected and the ecosystem to be destroyed.
It is time the Planning Department acted objectively and showed less blatant bias towards Rio Tinto. Please reject this outrageous proposal and restore public confidence in the process.

I support the Warkworth Continuation Project. Too many jobs will be lost and therefore families will then have a high loss of income and decreased livelihood, and there will be a large deficit of money in the Hunter if this Project did not go ahead.

As a person watching Glaciers melting rapidly now in N.Z due to Global Warming.Knowing that all other countries accept that humans are responsible for this acceleration.Please can the government become a foreward looking government and switch now to Solar Energy as it is going to be the only means Australia has to.become good global citizens.
Coal is being subsidised by the electorate and it does not make sense.

My sister is a contractor at Mt Thorley Warkworth, she helps support her family with her job. I not only support her continual position at this site, but also the support that Mt Thorley Warkworth gives the local communities through providing work for small businesses and work for many locals. This company like many in the Hunter has been here for many years working side by side with our farmers. Mt Thorley Warkworth provides a necessity our world needs. The rehabilitation area can be used once again for farming which has been proved by other mines in the area. Saying no to this submission not only affects individuals, but also families, businesses and communities.

isn't it about time that the residents of Bulga were left in peace?

In the latest decision the High Court has refused this mining enterprise but Santos apparently believes that sooner or later everyone will give up and grant the application.

Say no.

MTW should be given this extension as I believe it is crucial for the employment of these people to be keeped and for mining to continue giving to these communities around the mine they forget how much money is donated and invested in keeping there communities alive. I don't believe all these studies being done are the truth they are just being hyped up by the media and the Greens and the community jumping and board because of here say.

I support the Warkworth Continuation Project as MTW supports our local community and is a vital asset to the hunter valley region.

I am writing to express my support for the Warkworth continuation project. I am a contractor currently working for the environmental services department. I have been working in this capacity for the last three years.

I have been witness to legislative changes in NSW planning resulting in the Warkworth PAC, subsequent appeal and ultimately the LEC court proceedings ensuing in the disapproval of the Warkworth Extension. The process has been an utter failure, neither smooth or timely and ultimately the judgement was not made on the basis of the scientific merit of the proposal.

Continuation of the project will help ensure the viability of the contracting company I work for. We are a small company with less than 20 workers and rely on mining for our continued profitability, the work we partake in is primarily land management based.

If the continuation does not go ahead I have concerns about the economics of singleton and the greater hunter valley region with a reduction in employment opportunities, revenues and housing prices.

This application, whilst touted as different, proposes to mine an area that has previously been denied by two courts.
We believe that to submit such an application is arrogant in the extreme, an abuse of process, a contempt of the Court system and shows a disdain for the residents of Bulga and the fragile ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland.
It is breathtaking in its indication of the self importance that Rio Tinto feels for itself and the hubris which the company exhibits in re submitting the application.

The NSW Land and Environment Court examined the proposal to mine this area in very great detail and rejected it as without merit. In its' examination the Court allowed very great leniency to Rio Tinto in daily adducing more and more evidence in support of its application, even though all matters to be raised should have been submitted to all parties in the `discovery ` period before the case.

Subsequently the Company cried "foul" and they, and the Government of NSW lodged an appeal with the NSW Supreme Court claiming a lack of fairness and a number of other procedural errors.
In a unanimous decision, the three most senior judges in the Supreme Court found against them and dismissed the appeal.

The EIS submitted in support of the application is a massive 14 volumes. This is written in response to a document called "the Secretary's Requirements" (previously known as DGR requirements). This document, issued by the NSW Dept. of Planning, was published on 22 May 2014. The 14 volumes of the EIS, purporting to answer the Secretary's Requirements was published on or before 13 June 2014. It beggars belief that such a document could have been prepared in this time, properly addressing the matters in the Secretary's Requirements.
And, in fact our case is, the document does not properly address these requirements.

In the EIS, Rio has included huge volumes of data and statistics from far and wide in the Hunter Valley. And some local and relevant matters. Some of these statistics are so demonstrably wrong as to lead one to assume that the writers were being loose with the truth, or more blatantly, lying!!
One particular in demonstration of this is in Table 4.4 in Appendix P. The Company states that 23.8% of privately owned properties in Bulga are unoccupied that is 37 houses. Of the 156 houses in the Bulga area, we know of 3 that are unoccupied, two are mine owned, one being fire damaged and uninhabitable for years, the other having been found to contain asbestos. The third house is not occupied full time as it is a deceased estate, however the family do spend weekends there.
Another statistic shows the demographic of miners employed at the site. It shows 30 odd percent live in the Singleton Shire and 17 odd percent live in Maitland. This figure must have been taken from a very limited survey of employees as we have other statistics which show 25% live in Singleton Shire and 32% live in Maitland. The skewing of these statistics would then heavily influence subsequent figures showing the economic impact of the mine closing, etc., There are many other errors (or lies) found on a close reading of the 14 volumes.

The Managing Director of Rio Tinto Coal keeps bleating that 1300 jobs are at risk, in the Executive Summary of the EIS it shows 1187 jobs, our information is somewhat less than that, however, were the mining to cease in 2015 as claimed by the EIS (current approval continues until 2012) some hundreds of jobs would still exist in care and maintenance and rehabilitation. We would say that Mr. Salisbury is trying to blackmail the Government by continuously repeating the 1300 number. The truth would be appreciated.

In any event, what price a number of mining jobs over the 380 residents of Bulga and the other locals living in Warkworth, Long Point, Gouldsvillle, Broke, Fordwich and Milbrodale. These folk will have their lives made intolerable by the presence of the mine with the additional dust, noise, blast effects etc., These folk have seen their property values decline by more than 11% (by Valuer General Figures) and in fact cannot sell at any price as demonstrated by the local market.

In an interesting statistic, it is shown that the population of Bulga has grown by almost twice the National average between the 2006 and 2011 Census. This demonstrates that people did consider this a good place to live, and raise a family. It certainly puts paid to the statements that villages in the area are declining as people move to larger towns or cities. In addition - and very importantly - the growth was in no small part due to a sense of security felt by locals after the 2003 approval, when the Government required Rio Tinto to sign a Deed which was to preserve Saddle Ridge and other areas in perpetuity - but Rio Tinto, in an incredible display of disdain for rules, never executed the requirements of the Deed and subsequently secretly induced Minister Hazzard to amend it so it has no effect.

Many residents made life decisions based on the existence of the Deed, bought homes, built homes, induced families to move here or stay here, or did not move when they could. Those families feel particularly cheated. More so when Rio Tinto says they cannot be held responsible for the life decisions of others!

In the Secretary's Requirements, specific mention is made of the concerns of Bulga residents and certain criteria are to be addressed. In the EIS various vague statements like "local residents perceive that there will be increased noise/dust - but we will out in place measures to address that"
This Is not addressing the social impacts, but making a general motherhood statement which is not in the terms or spirit of what is required.
In fact a "Social Impact Management Plan" is necessary under the terms of the Secretary's requirements to address the likely impacts - this is totally missing from the EIS.

Considerable work was done by the consultants to the Mine, EMM in interviewing local residents and assessing their `perceived', `subjective' views - none of this material is included in the EIS

MTW does not employ 1300 workers, as indicated by parts of the EIS and statements by Managing Director Rio Tinto Coal Australia. At various stages in the EIS it talks of 1300 employees, a table 5.1 in Appendix P shows a total of 1300, but in the Executive Summary is a reference to 1187 employees - is this a lie?

EIS says there is no measureable impact on water. This is a patent lie. The present landform west of Saddle ridge slopes substantially to the west, towards the Wollombi Brook. Rain which falls on this slope would normally find its way , via creeks, seasonal streams and underground aquifers into the Brook. When the area is subject to Open Cut mining, all water will fall into the pit. At the simple equation of 25mm of rain on 1 hectare = 1 megalitre of water, then if the 768 Hectares is mined, at the average annual rainfall of 600mm per annum, the potential is to lose at least 18,432 megalitres of runoff water per annum. A total of over 313,000 megalitres over the projected life of the project. This number does not take account of the consequent loss of flows from unidentified underground aquifers that are in the area that will be impacted by these mines, neither does it take account of interrupted flows from the amended plan for Mount Thorley Mine. It is well known that exposed ground of Open Cut mines and the consequent unfilled pits create and collect polluted water, mainly saline, this will increase if the mine goes ahead and creates a huge new void.

This project cannot be considered in isolation. In this area of the Hunter Valley we have Bulga Underground and Open Cut mine to the South East, Mount Thorley and Warkworth Mine to the East, Hunter Valley Operations to the North East and Wambo mine continuing around from North to North West. All of these mines create noise and dust, which are the major immediate impact on residents. If a dust exceedence is recorded, it is very difficult to identify the culprit mine, leading to a lot of "don't talk to us - it was them" statements when complaints are made.

Similarly all of these mines make noise and each blames the other for exceedences. Despite fairly sophisticated monitors being available, Warkworth mine, operating as Mount Thorley Warkworth does not have real time monitors in place in proper locations to measure noise and therefore adjust their operation to ensure compliance with limits. They seem to rely on complaints from residents, and then deny an exceedence because their measuring and monitors are in the wrong place.

15 In the EIS, Executive Summary it is stated that the mine has very few issues of non-compliance with consent conditions - this was obviously written by someone who does not read the call logs of complaints. Whilst we do not have numbers, it is clear from conversations with residents that hundreds of complaints are made each year to the Mine and to Compliance Officers. These complaints are not trivial and very often noise exceedences are three and more times the consent limit.

Same with dust, if we have a windy day the thousands of hectares of exposed ground from SE to NW produce huge volumes of dust, much of it PM10 fine particulates. The Many millions of litres of diesel burned each year in the mines produce PM2.5 very fine particles.

There are NO safe levels of exposure to PM2.5 and PM 10 particles, someone in the Dept .of Planning has set an arbitrary number of so much per cubic metre per day - not in accord with NSW Dept. of Health or World Health Organisation guidelines - these are constantly exceeded, leading to a high incidence of respiratory disease, asthma in children and general illness in the community.

16 Warkworth Sands Woodlands is a unique landform and ecology only occurring in this area, no amount of offsets can replace or replicate it. If mined the Warkworth sands will disappear forever. As demonstrated during the Land & Environment Court hearing, the WS supports a plethora of endangered species of flora and substantial colonies of endangered fauna. Should the woodland be mined it is likely that the remnants of this flora and fauna would struggle to survive in new and different environments.

17 Offsets. Again in the Land and Environment Court hearing, much was made of the fact that the mine was offering large volumes of offsets to the mined area, but some of them hundreds of Kilometres away, near Ulan and Putty. Mr. Justice Preston found this very unsatisfactory as the offsets were not "Like for Like", that is the forests were different, both ecologically and in species of flora and fauna. In any event it was noted that these offsets already existed, so did nothing additional to improve ecological quality or diversity per se., but , the judge noted, like for like offsets should be just that, and close by so that, the local ecology could be somewhat maintained. Further, there is nothing in Law that says these offsets will remain, should a coal reserve be found below these areas there is no bar to them being mined!! Thus demonstrating that the offset policy is little more than farcical.

18 In the Warkworth Sands Woodlands and on Saddle Ridge are significant aboriginal heritage sites, grinding grooves, middens, Burial and Bora Grounds. These must be preserved to protect and preserve our indigenous heritage. No coal sold overseas is worth the destruction of these important sites. This is not a specious claim, these sites have been identified for many years and many of the Wonnoruah people who live locally recognize and respect them.

19 In the 1820s and beyond, when Bulga was first found by our white ancestors, the Surveyor , General, Sir Thomas Mitchell, surveyed roads through the area, including what is now known as Wallaby Scrub Road. This road, running between the Putty Road and Bulga and the Golden Highway at Warkworth. This is a continuation of the Great North Road which began at Wisemans Ferry and allowed access to the Upper Hunter Valley. Now this road is still an important route, paralleling the wartime Wallaby Scrub Airstrip and cutting the corner between Mount Thorley and Warkworth and beyond. The Bulga Rural Fire brigade has responsibility for the area to the north, extending to a few Kilometres short of Jerrys Plains. If the Wallaby Scrub Road is closed, emergency vehicles will take a minimum of 8 minutes extra to travel the highways to these areas. In addition they will have to traverse considerable extra traffic which can lead to delays and its own emergency issues. In the last few years the area from Warkworth to jerry Plains has been the site of a number of major vehicle crashes and fires, even an 8 minute delay in responding can mean that the situation becomes more critical. Bulga Rural Fire Service has members trained as "Community First Responders" that is they have had specialist trauma training and can render much more than emergency first aid to trauma victims and in cases of medical emergency.

While the mine has offered a fire trail within their western boundary this will only allow access to the mine site and not be a reasonable emergency vehicle route.

20 The visual impacts of an Open Cut mine are dreadful, large piles of exposed rock, crushed by blasting and excavation, huge lights at night to facilitate night operations, dust clouds following blasting and on windy days and the general `moonscape' presented by a huge earthmoving operation. In its 2003 EIS Mount Thorley Warkworth Mine conceded that Saddle Ridge was an important visual barrier between residents to the west, including Bulga and Warkworth, now they say it is of no consequence and removing Saddle ridge will have minimal visual impact.

This is total rubbish, any of the residences in Bulga located higher that the creek bank will be looking directly into the mine and will be effected by the continuing workings. The mine proposes to plant screen trees - which would become effective as a visual barrier just about the time the mine finishes in 2031. Saddle ridge MUST remain as a noise and visual protection for the village and surrounds.

21 Not being an economic expert makes informed comment somewhat difficult, however, since the Land & Environment Court found the project had no economic merit in 2012, the only thing that has changed is that the price of coal has reduced. The natural consequence of this is - if the project was not economically good then it is worse now!

22 The social impact on residents of Bulga and surrounding districts is immense, as found by Professor Albrecht in his evidence to the Land & Environment Court. Residents feel constant solastalgia, loss of sense of place and see that this project will substantially reduce their, quality of life, their property values, their ability to have their expected quiet enjoyment of their homes and the relaxed rural lifestyle that seemed guaranteed by the 2003 Deed. In fact they feel cheated by the Mine and the Government, they feel marginalized as a small community fighting a multinational mining giant and they feel a distinct lack of trust in the planning process.

This lack of trust is exacerbated by the NSW Governments recent amendment to the Mining SEPP that makes economics the key consideration in assessing such projects, the same Government changing the rules relating to offsets and the Government's failure to enforce consent conditions on the existing mine. They have NO faith that noise dust and blasting limits will not be exceeded as the mine demonstrates today it cannot (or will not) keep within imposed limits. If it is too noisy and too dusty when it is 7kms away, how could one expect it to be less noisy and less dusty at 2.6km distance!!

23 Returning to economics, today 82% of mining profits are directed overseas, and recently it has been demonstrated that companies have many avenues of reducing their profits through international measures. Rio Tinto is a multinational and sends its profits overseas, it also is actively working to reduce its' workforce through automation, with driverless trains, driverless trucks, huge investments into automated mining processes and the recent moves to reduce its contractor workforce.

Iam 5yrs old, 11 generations from bulga. I love living in bulga but the mines are playing impact on my family and the environment. I often while driving home from town will see dust from the mines so often my mum will have to put her lights on to see. I'm often laying in bed awake cause all I can hear is the noise from the mine. My mum often rings up, at all hours of the night to complain. I would love to stay and grow in bulga with my family but if the mine was to expand, it is forcing an 11 generation of family history out of bulga. As we would have move. I couldn't continue to live here with my family as the noise and dust play a big factor on our family... Singleton doesn't depend on this mine, it only employs 5% local people, the rest don't live or support singleton. The community of bulga makes up more then 5% of this mine, which the bulga people spend there money in singleton. So forcing the bulga people outta of there home town, I find will make a bigger impact on singleton.

Working in the coal transport business, without the expansion and ongoing growth of mining. not only will mining jobs be lost but many others in support companiess

I support the extension of the Warkworth Mine.
Granting approval for the extension will result in a higher confidence in the coal mining industry in the Hunter Valley region. Will provide me with long term security of my job. I have recently relocated with my wife and 3 primary aged children into the area from interstate. Approval of this extension will give me confidence to invest in the area by building a home and to raise my 3 children here. I would be forced to move on to another state if there is no long term prospects here in the Hunter mining industry.
Approve the extension

While this application by the company is touted as different, it proposes to mine an area that has previously be denied by two courts.

MOUNT THORLEY WARKWORTH CONTINUATION PROJECT 2014

I strongly object to this project for the following reasons:
This application, whilst touted as different, proposes to mine an area that has previously been denied by two courts. I believe that to submit such an application is an abuse of process, a contempt of the Court system and shows a disdain for the residents of Bulga and the fragile ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland.

The NSW Land and Environment Court examined the proposal to mine this area in very great detail and rejected it as without merit. In its' examination the Court allowed very great leniency to Rio Tinto in daily adducing more and more evidence in support of its application, even though all matters to be raised should have been submitted to all parties in the `discovery ` period before the case.

Subsequently the Company cried "foul" and they, and the Government of NSW lodged an appeal with the NSW Supreme Court claiming a lack of fairness and a number of other procedural errors. In a unanimous decision, the three most senior judges in the Supreme Court found against them and dismissed the appeal.

The EIS submitted in support of the application is a massive 14 volumes. This is written in response to a document called "the Secretary's Requirements" (previously known as DGR requirements). This document, issued by the NSW Dept. of Planning, was published on 22 May 2014. The 14 volumes of the EIS, purporting to answer the Secretary's Requirements was published on or before 13 June 2014. It beggars belief that such a document could have been prepared in this time, properly addressing the matters in the Secretary's Requirements. And, in fact our case is, the document does not properly address these requirements.

In the EIS, Rio has included huge volumes of data and statistics from far and wide in the Hunter Valley. And some local and relevant matters. Some of these statistics are so demonstrably wrong as to lead one to assume that the writers were being loose with the truth, or more blatantly, lying!! One particular in demonstration of this is in Table 4.4 in Appendix P. The Company states that 23.8% of privately owned properties in Bulga are unoccupied that is 37 houses. Of the 156 houses in the Bulga area, we know of 3 that are unoccupied, two are mine owned, one being fire damaged and uninhabitable for years, the other having been found to contain asbestos. The third house is not occupied full time as it is a deceased estate, however the family do spend weekends there. Another statistic shows the demographic of miners employed at the site. It shows 30 odd percent live in the Singleton Shire and 17 odd percent live in Maitland. This figure must have been taken from a very limited survey of employees as we have other statistics which show 25% live in Singleton Shire and 32% live in Maitland. The skewing of these statistics would then heavily influence subsequent figures showing the economic impact of the mine closing, etc., There are many other errors (or lies) found on a close reading of the 14 volumes.

The Managing Director of Rio Tinto Coal keeps bleating that 1300 jobs are at risk, in the Executive Summary of the EIS it shows 1187 jobs, our information is somewhat less than that, however, were the mining to cease in 2015 as claimed by the EIS (current approval continues until 2012) some hundreds of jobs would still exist in care and maintenance and rehabilitation. We would say that Mr. Salisbury is trying to blackmail the Government by continuously repeating the 1300 number. The truth would be appreciated.

In any event, what price a number of mining jobs over the 380 residents of Bulga and the other locals living in Warkworth, Long Point, Gouldsvillle, Broke, Fordwich and Milbrodale. These folk will have their lives made intolerable by the presence of the mine with the additional dust, noise, blast effects etc., These folk have seen their property values decline by more than 11% (by Valuer General Figures) and in fact cannot sell at any price as demonstrated by the local market.

In an interesting statistic, it is shown that the population of Bulga has grown by almost twice the National average between the 2006 and 2011 Census. This demonstrates that people did consider this a good place to live, and raise a family. It certainly puts paid to the statements that villages in the area are declining as people move to larger towns or cities. In addition - and very importantly - the growth was in no small part due to a sense of security felt by locals after the 2003 approval, when the Government required Rio Tinto to sign a Deed which was to preserve Saddle Ridge and other areas in perpetuity - but Rio Tinto, in an incredible display of disdain for rules, never executed the requirements of the Deed and subsequently secretly induced Minister Hazzard to amend it so it has no effect.

Many residents made life decisions based on the existence of the Deed, bought homes, built homes, induced families to move here or stay here, or did not move when they could. Those families feel particularly cheated. More so when Rio Tinto says they cannot be held responsible for the life decisions of others!

In the Secretary's Requirements, specific mention is made of the concerns of Bulga residents and certain criteria are to be addressed. In the EIS various vague statements like "local residents perceive that there will be increased noise/dust - but we will out in place measures to address that" This Is not addressing the social impacts, but making a general motherhood statement which is not in the terms or spirit of what is required. In fact a "Social Impact Management Plan" is necessary under the terms of the Secretary's requirements to address the likely impacts - this is totally missing from the EIS.

Considerable work was done by the consultants to the Mine, EMM in interviewing local residents and assessing their `perceived', `subjective' views - none of this material is included in the EIS

MTW does not employ 1300 workers, as indicated by parts of the EIS and statements by Managing Director Rio Tinto Coal Australia. At various stages in the EIS it talks of 1300 employees, a table 5.1 in Appendix P shows a total of 1300, but in the Executive Summary is a reference to 1187 employees - is this a lie?

EIS says there is no measureable impact on water. This is a patent lie. The present landform west of Saddle ridge slopes substantially to the west, towards the Wollombi Brook. Rain which falls on this slope would normally find its way , via creeks, seasonal streams and underground aquifers into the Brook. When the area is subject to Open Cut mining, all water will fall into the pit. At the simple equation of 25mm of rain on 1 hectare = 1 megalitre of water, then if the 768 Hectares is mined, at the average annual rainfall of 600mm per annum, the potential is to lose at least 18,432 megalitres of runoff water per annum. A total of over 313,000 megalitres over the projected life of the project. This number does not take account of the consequent loss of flows from unidentified underground aquifers that are in the area that will be impacted by these mines, neither does it take account of interrupted flows from the amended plan for Mount Thorley Mine. It is well known that exposed ground of Open Cut mines and the consequent unfilled pits create and collect polluted water, mainly saline, this will increase if the mine goes ahead and creates a huge new void.

This project cannot be considered in isolation. In this area of the Hunter Valley we have Bulga Underground and Open Cut mine to the South East, Mount Thorley and Warkworth Mine to the East, Hunter Valley Operations to the North East and Wambo mine continuing around from North to North West. All of these mines create noise and dust, which are the major immediate impact on residents. If a dust exceedence is recorded, it is very difficult to identify the culprit mine, leading to a lot of "don't talk to us - it was them" statements when complaints are made.

Similarly all of these mines make noise and each blames the other for exceedences. Despite fairly sophisticated monitors being available, Warkworth mine, operating as Mount Thorley Warkworth does not have real time monitors in place in proper locations to measure noise and therefore adjust their operation to ensure compliance with limits. They seem to rely on complaints from residents, and then deny an exceedence because their measuring and monitors are in the wrong place.

15 In the EIS, Executive Summary it is stated that the mine has very few issues of non-compliance with consent conditions - this was obviously written by someone who does not read the call logs of complaints. Whilst we do not have numbers, it is clear from conversations with residents that hundreds of complaints are made each year to the Mine and to Compliance Officers. These complaints are not trivial and very often noise exceedences are three and more times the consent limit.

Same with dust, if we have a windy day the thousands of hectares of exposed ground from SE to NW produce huge volumes of dust, much of it PM10 fine particulates. The Many millions of litres of diesel burned each year in the mines produce PM2.5 very fine particles.

There are NO safe levels of exposure to PM2.5 and PM 10 particles, someone in the Dept .of Planning has set an arbitrary number of so much per cubic metre per day - not in accord with NSW Dept. of Health or World Health Organisation guidelines - these are constantly exceeded, leading to a high incidence of respiratory disease, asthma in children and general illness in the community.

Warkworth Sands Woodlands is a unique landform and ecology only occurring in this area, no amount of offsets can replace or replicate it. If mined the Warkworth sands will disappear forever. As demonstrated during the Land & Environment Court hearing, the WS supports a plethora of endangered species of flora and substantial colonies of endangered fauna. Should the woodland be mined it is likely that the remnants of this flora and fauna would struggle to survive in new and different environments.

Offsets. Again in the Land and Environment Court hearing, much was made of the fact that the mine was offering large volumes of offsets to the mined area, but some of them hundreds of Kilometres away, near Ulan and Putty. Mr. Justice Preston found this very unsatisfactory as the offsets were not "Like for Like", that is the forests were different, both ecologically and in species of flora and fauna. In any event it was noted that these offsets already existed, so did nothing additional to improve ecological quality or diversity per se., but , the judge noted, like for like offsets should be just that, and close by so that, the local ecology could be somewhat maintained. Further, there is nothing in Law that says these offsets will remain, should a coal reserve be found below these areas there is no bar to them being mined!! Thus demonstrating that the offset policy is little more than farcical.

In the Warkworth Sands Woodlands and on Saddle Ridge are significant aboriginal heritage sites, grinding grooves, middens, Burial and Bora Grounds. These must be preserved to protect and preserve our indigenous heritage. No coal sold overseas is worth the destruction of these important sites. This is not a specious claim, these sites have been identified for many years and many of the Wonnoruah people who live locally recognize and respect them.

In the 1820s and beyond, when Bulga was first found by our white ancestors, the Surveyor , General, Sir Thomas Mitchell, surveyed roads through the area, including what is now known as Wallaby Scrub Road. This road, running between the Putty Road and Bulga and the Golden Highway at Warkworth. This is a continuation of the Great North Road which began at Wisemans Ferry and allowed access to the Upper Hunter Valley. Now this road is still an important route, paralleling the wartime Wallaby Scrub Airstrip and cutting the corner between Mount Thorley and Warkworth and beyond. The Bulga Rural Fire brigade has responsibility for the area to the north, extending to a few Kilometres short of Jerrys Plains. If the Wallaby Scrub Road is closed, emergency vehicles will take a minimum of 8 minutes extra to travel the highways to these areas. In addition they will have to traverse considerable extra traffic which can lead to delays and its own emergency issues. In the last few years the area from Warkworth to jerry Plains has been the site of a number of major vehicle crashes and fires, even an 8 minute delay in responding can mean that the situation becomes more critical. Bulga Rural Fire Service has members trained as "Community First Responders" that is they have had specialist trauma training and can render much more than emergency first aid to trauma victims and in cases of medical emergency.

While the mine has offered a fire trail within their western boundary this will only allow access to the mine site and not be a reasonable emergency vehicle route.

The visual impacts of an Open Cut mine are dreadful, large piles of exposed rock, crushed by blasting and excavation, huge lights at night to facilitate night operations, dust clouds following blasting and on windy days and the general `moonscape' presented by a huge earthmoving operation. In its 2003 EIS Mount Thorley Warkworth Mine conceded that Saddle Ridge was an important visual barrier between residents to the west, including Bulga and Warkworth, now they say it is of no consequence and removing Saddle ridge will have minimal visual impact.

This is total rubbish, any of the residences in Bulga located higher that the creek bank will be looking directly into the mine and will be effected by the continuing workings. The mine proposes to plant screen trees - which would become effective as a visual barrier just about the time the mine finishes in 2031. Saddle ridge MUST remain as a noise and visual protection for the village and surrounds.

Not being an economic expert makes informed comment somewhat difficult, however, since the Land & Environment Court found the project had no economic merit in 2012, the only thing that has changed is that the price of coal has reduced. The natural consequence of this is - if the project was not economically good then it is worse now!

The social impact on residents of Bulga and surrounding districts is immense, as found by Professor Albrecht in his evidence to the Land & Environment Court. Residents feel constant solastalgia, loss of sense of place and see that this project will substantially reduce their, quality of life, their property values, their ability to have their expected quiet enjoyment of their homes and the relaxed rural lifestyle that seemed guaranteed by the 2003 Deed. In fact they feel cheated by the Mine and the Government, they feel marginalized as a small community fighting a multinational mining giant and they feel a distinct lack of trust in the planning process.

This lack of trust is exacerbated by the NSW Governments recent amendment to the Mining SEPP that makes economics the key consideration in assessing such projects, the same Government changing the rules relating to offsets and the Government's failure to enforce consent conditions on the existing mine. They have NO faith that noise dust and blasting limits will not be exceeded as the mine demonstrates today it cannot (or will not) keep within imposed limits. If it is too noisy and too dusty when it is 7kms away, how could one expect it to be less noisy and less dusty at 2.6km distance!!

Returning to economics, today 82% of mining profits are directed overseas, and recently it has been demonstrated that companies have many avenues of reducing their profits through international measures. Rio Tinto is a multinational and sends its profits overseas, it also is actively working to reduce its' workforce through automation, with driverless trains, driverless trucks, huge investments into automated mining processes and the recent moves to reduce its contractor workforce.

Sincerely,
Fee Mozeley