Warkworth Coal Mine Continuation

I work at Mt Thorley Warkworth and need this job to support my family.

I completely support the continuation project. So many friends and family including myself rely heavily on this to survive.

I truly support the continuation of the Mount Thorley Warkworth Mine. If it wasn't for the coal mines in the Hunter Valley we wouldn't have what we have. Not only a flourishing town like Singleton, but our jobs as well.

I support the need for these 1300 jobs

I support the Warkworth mine expansion to save even more job losses in the Hunter Valley

The Hunter Valley communities and surrounding support businesses rely on the continuation of mining in the area

The expansion of the Mt Thorley warkworth mine is vital to all aspects of the community through out Singleton and the surround suburbs, The people of Singleton rely heavy of the income that the mine brings to support the local employees and their familes, not just in the mining industry but every person who lives, shops and passes through the commuinty. This also affects commuinty organisations and schools. With out mining in this area every one will suffer, a bost in expanding this mine will bost the commuinty of Singleton in a lot more ways than one.

Singleton locals need this expansion to go ahead to maintain a growing community, to keep mortgages paid, to school children, to keep business's in business. For some people this is their lively hood, my dad has worked at MTW for 25 years he has provided a home for us, a good education, holidays food on the table, clothes on our back. If this expansion wasn't to go ahead than singleton would become a ghost town. There are not enough employment opportunities for everyone around here, People would need to move to towns or in the city for jobs. Keep people in jobs, keep people stress free.

This expansion should go ahead for the future of singleton.

I fully support the extention. The miners work hard and deserve a fair go.

I have family that work there and know that with out this job none of them would be able to support themselves.

1300 workers, their families and 600 businesses need MTW mine to continue operations.

I object to the Warkworth Continuation Project. This project has been rejected as without merit on previous occasions and in the Land and Environment Court. Changes to the Mining SEPP to make economic considerations the primary criterion for determining a mining proposal has not changed any of the problems associated with this project, especially for the residents of Bulga. These problems cannot be ignored. The same problems with dust and noise continue, as does the potential for major environmental damage and impact on hydrology, as presented in previous evidence. Mining companies cannot be trusted to comply with conditions of consent - there are many instances of carelessness and negligence resulting in major environmental damage (e.g. coal seam gas projects in the Pilliga Forest and I have never seen a successfully environmentally remediated coal mine. And the environmental offsets system leaves a lot to be desired. The Hunter Valley around Muswellbrook, Singleton and Bulga is being trashed for the sake of quick dollars. And in years to come, apart from the destruction of whole communities and ecosystems, continuing to extract coal at such a rate in the context of the known impacts of fossil fuels on destructive climate change will be viewed with disbelief. Although such considerations are not legally required in this current instance, granting consent to this project will just cement the public's mistrust of the NSW state government and the institutions and processes that are supposed to be overseeing 'sustainable development' as currently defined in state legislation.

Mount Thorley Warkworth is the heart of mining here in singleton and by not approving the extension will not only hurt the Australian mining industry but thousands of families!!
PLEASE APPROVE THE EXTENSION, HELP FAMILIES AND HELP AUSTRALIAN MINING BY CONTINUING MINING IN MOUNT THORLEY WARKWORTH!!
I SUPPORT MINING, IT IS WHAT AUSTRALIANS HAVE DONE FOR MANY MANY YEARS AND SHOULD CONTINUE TO FOR MANY YEARS INTO THE FUTURE!
PLEASE APPROVE THE EXTENSION!!

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I felt compelled to make a submission because I believe the people of Bulga have suffered a major injustice both by Rio Tinto and the NSW government and that this injustice should not be allowed to continue.

I wish to oppose both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The NSW Land and Environment Court ruled in April 2013 that expanding the Warkworth coal mine would do the NSW public more harm than good. Judge Preston found that the information used by Rio Tinto and NSW Planning in support of the project was wrong, and he overturned the approval.

When Rio Tinto and the NSW Government appealed that decision to the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), they lost. Two superior NSW courts have now ruled that Rio's plan to expand the Warkworth coal mine fails on merit.

The Bulga people and their many supporters justly assumed that this would be the end of the project. Instead, Rio Tinto have simply resubmitted their mining application. It has been split in two, and the name updated, but these two projects (SSD 6464 and SSD 6465) are effectively the same project that has been rejected by two NSW courts (MP 09_0202).

That the Planning Department has even accepted Rio Tinto's application is a failure of procedural fairness, and makes a farce of the very process you are now asking us, the public, to participate in. We are being asked to make submissions on a project that has already been through this very same assessment process and failed - only to be resubmitted. We are being asked to submit to a process overseen by a Department that is clearly working closely with the proponent to get the project approved, and which got the decision wrong the first time around. There can be no faith in this process.

The Department must respect the decisions of the NSW Land and Environment Court, and the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), and reject these applications.

Sincerely,

Jan O'Leary

Mount Thorley Warkworth is the heart of mining here in singleton and by not approving the extension will not only hurt the Australian mining industry but thousands of families!!
PLEASE APPROVE THE EXTENSION, HELP FAMILIES AND HELP AUSTRALIAN MINING BY CONTINUING MINING IN MOUNT THORLEY WARKWORTH!!
I SUPPORT MINING, IT IS WHAT AUSTRALIANS HAVE DONE FOR MANY MANY YEARS AND SHOULD CONTINUE TO FOR MANY YEARS INTO THE FUTURE!
PLEASE APPROVE THE EXTENSION!!

Dear Sir/Madam,

This is a submission against both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects. I thank you for the opportunity to comment.

The NSW Land and Environment Court ruled in April 2013 that expanding the Warkworth coal mine would do the NSW public more harm than good. Judge Preston found that the information used by Rio Tinto and NSW Planning in support of the project was wrong, and he overturned the approval.

When Rio Tinto and the NSW Government appealed that decision to the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), they lost. Two superior NSW courts have now ruled that Rio's plan to expand the Warkworth coal mine fails on merit.

The Bulga people and their many supporters justly assumed that this would be the end of the project. Instead, Rio Tinto have simply resubmitted their mining application. It has been split in two, and the name updated, but these two projects (SSD 6464 and SSD 6465) are effectively the same project that has been rejected by two NSW courts (MP 09_0202).

That the Planning Department has even accepted Rio Tinto's application is a failure of procedural fairness, and makes a farce of the very process you are now asking us, the public, to participate in. We are being asked to make submissions on a project that has already been through this very same assessment process and failed - only to be resubmitted. We are being asked to submit to a process overseen by a Department that is clearly working closely with the proponent to get the project approved, and which got the decision wrong the first time around. There can be no faith in this process.

The Department must respect the decisions of the NSW Land and Environment Court, and the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), and reject these applications.

Sincerely,

Bronwyn Gahan

I wish to lodge this submission in order to oppose both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The NSW Land and Environment Court ruled in April 2013 that expanding the Warkworth coal mine would do the NSW public more harm than good. Judge Preston found that the information used by Rio Tinto and NSW Planning in support of the project was wrong, and he overturned the approval.

When Rio Tinto and the NSW Government appealed that decision to the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), they lost. Two superior NSW courts have now ruled that Rio's plan to expand the Warkworth coal mine fails on merit.

The Bulga people and their many supporters justly assumed that this would be the end of the project. Instead, Rio Tinto have simply resubmitted their mining application. It has been split in two, and the name updated, but these two projects (SSD 6464 and SSD 6465) are effectively the same project that has been rejected by two NSW courts (MP 09_0202).

That the Planning Department has even accepted Rio Tinto's application is a failure of procedural fairness, and makes a farce of the very process you are now asking us, the public, to participate in. We are being asked to make submissions on a project that has already been through this very same assessment process and failed - only to be resubmitted. We are being asked to submit to a process overseen by a Department that is clearly working closely with the proponent to get the project approved, and which got the decision wrong the first time around. There can be no faith in this process.

The Department must respect the decisions of the NSW Land and Environment Court, and the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), and reject these applications.

Thank you for the opportunity to make comment.

Yours sincerely,

Tom Coley

Two Judicial courts have declared this extension must NOT proceed. It is time for the NSW Government to listen to the courts and the people of Bulga. .Not the lies of Rio Tinto.
This must NOT be approved.

Mount Thorley Warkworth is the heart of mining here in singleton and by not approving the extension will not only hurt the Australian mining industry but thousands of families!!
PLEASE APPROVE THE EXTENSION, HELP FAMILIES AND HELP AUSTRALIAN MINING BY CONTINUING MINING IN MOUNT THORLEY WARKWORTH!!
I SUPPORT MINING, IT IS WHAT AUSTRALIANS HAVE DONE FOR MANY MANY YEARS AND SHOULD CONTINUE TO FOR MANY YEARS INTO THE FUTURE!
PLEASE APPROVE THE EXTENSION!!

I wish to oppose both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects and am appalled at the audacity of Rio Tinto in endeavoring to flout our legal system and have their way through any back door means.

The NSW Land and Environment Court ruled in April 2013 that expanding the Warkworth coal mine would do the NSW public more harm than good. Judge Preston found that the information used by Rio Tinto and NSW Planning in support of the project was wrong, and he overturned the approval.

When Rio Tinto and the NSW Government appealed that decision to the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), they lost. Two superior NSW courts have now ruled that Rio's plan to expand the Warkworth coal mine fails on merit.

The Bulga people and their many supporters justly assumed that this would be the end of the project. Instead, Rio Tinto have simply resubmitted their mining application. It has been split in two, and the name updated, but these two projects (SSD 6464 and SSD 6465) are effectively the same project that has been rejected by two NSW courts (MP 09_0202).

That the Planning Department has even accepted Rio Tinto's application is a failure of procedural fairness, and makes a farce of the very process you are now asking us, the public, to participate in. We are being asked to make submissions on a project that has already been through this very same assessment process and failed - only to be resubmitted. We are being asked to submit to a process overseen by a Department that is clearly working closely with the proponent to get the project approved, and which got the decision wrong the first time around. There can be no faith in this process.

The Department must respect the decisions of the NSW Land and Environment Court, and the NSW Supreme Court (Court of Appeal), and reject these applications.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Yours faithfully,

Barbara Wakefield