Warkworth Coal Mine Continuation

Objection - Warkworth Coal Mine - Warkworth Continuation Project
Application Number: SSD 6464

I am writing to formally object to the Warkworth Continuation Project Application Number: SSD 6464, as detailed below
* Closure of Wallaby Scrub Road,
o this road is part of the "The Great North Road", if this road is lost "The Convict Trail" will lose its Heritage Integrity
o as a regular user of this road any closure will cause myself increased travel time to my place of work and this will also create the need for more traffic at the Mt Thorley intersection with the Golden Highway and Putty Road, which is a dangerous intersection particularly for vehicles accessing the Putty Road towards Bulga.

* Removal of Saddle Ridge, as this ridge is a buffer zone for the local rural community and the loss of this ridge will impact the local rural community with noise above the New South Wales Industrial noise policy amenity criteria of 35 decibels.

* As a local resident I am also concerned with the effects this will have on the Air Quality and Dust exposure that Open Cut Mining this close to my house will cause

* I also have concerns as to the social impact this approval could have on the township of Bulga which I reside, there is a potential for residents being forced to sell and move

Many of these concerns could be alleviated or reduced by underground mining, as has been prove in other Cities/Towns. With an underground operation Wallaby Scrub Road would therefore also not need to be closed and could be maintained similar to nearby Charlton Road and Broke Road.

An underground operation would also still provide employment for locals and generate income for local business.

Yours faithfully
Rebecca Gallagher

I am writing to register my objection to the approval of both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The proposed projects will have significant environmental and social impacts, including but not limited to: biodiversity loss, air quality issues arising from coal dust, impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage, impacts upon surface and ground water resources, and increase greenhouse gas emissions. The projects will significantly impact upon the ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland Endangered Ecological Community.

The Warkworth Continuation Project proposes to mine the same area of land as the previous 2010 Warkworth Extension application. That 2010 application was dismissed by both the Land and Environment Court and Supreme Court of NSW due to significant and unacceptable impacts on biological diversity, including on endangered ecological communities, noise impacts and social impacts. Although there are some differences in this new application, the broad scale impacts of the proposal remain the same.

These proposals have the potential to create long-term damage to threatened species, water and human health in the region and should be rejected.

Our Association represents almost 3,000 residents in the 18 Residential Parks within the Port Stephens Region and also in parts of the Hunter Valley.

We believe that Rio Tinto has ignored the community and the courts and re-lodged nearly the exact same mega-mine proposals. Which suggests that they lack any sense of responsibility for the further depredation of the Hunter Valley, which must be the final outcome of yet another huge mine.

Yours Sincerely, Ron McLachlan jp

I strongly oppose the 2014 Continuation Project (SSD 6464). This proposal seeks to expand the Warkworth coal mine and I request that this Development Application be refused.

If this proposed expansion is allowed there will be further significant negative impacts arising from the continued and excessive levels of dust and noise. Health issues will escalate and we will witness permanent and irreparable damage to our immediate natural environment.
The negative impacts of mining borne by the Bulga community are of much greater significance than given credit.
People selected Bulga for the rural lifestyle and so the community is built around the common values of its residents.
These Core Values embraced by residents of the Bulga area seem to have no place or value with Rio Tinto or the NSW Government.
:
Respect for and acceptance of authority.

Rio Tinto, has ignored the findings of The NSW Land & Environment Court and The NSW
Supreme Court of Appeal in its applications for mining extensions at the Warkworth mine.

Justice, Fairness, Loyalty and Honour : equal and impartial treatment under the law, abiding by the rules, steadfastness or faithfulness to which one is tied by duty or promise : a keen sense of ethical conduct where one's word is given as a guarantee of performance.

The NSW Government has deemed itself to be a privileged patron of Rio Tinto.
In 2003, the Government required Rio Tinto to sign a Deed which was to preserve Saddle Ridge
and other areas in perpetuity. Rio Tinto, displaying blatant disregard for rules, never executed
the requirements of the Deed and subsequently secretly induced Minister Hazzard to amend it
so it had no effect.
The NSW Government has drafted and promoted changes to the State Environmental Planning
Policy for Mining so that it elevates the economic significance of coal resources as the principal
consideration for consent authorities.
These changes are tailored to suit Rio Tinto and have given this foreign owned company an
unfair advantage not merely over the residents of Bulga but the people of NSW.

Garry West was appointed to five paid positions on coal project community consultative
committees while he was also a member of the Planning Assessment Commission panels
assessing various mines including the Mount Thorley Warkworth mine. This is not proper or just.

The people of Bulga are fed up with being ignored, patronised and steam-rolled by the
Department of Planning who are too intimate with the mining industry to make decisions or
follow processes that safeguard the public interest.


The Core Values listed above are clearly not demonstrated by Rio Tinto. The NSW Government, by its total disregard of the NSW Land and Environment Court and NSW Supreme Court of Appeal decisions and further action to change planning policies in favour of mining, has proven to the people of NSW that they also lack these core values.
Stopping the expansion of the Hunter coal industry and beginning to reduce output levels will not cause widespread unemployment or problems for state finances. It would, however, contribute to improvements in air quality and other health and environmental impacts and bring benefits for non-mining industries - benefits that, in the view of most respondents, would outweigh the minor costs.
The impacts on the residents of Bulga and surrounding districts are immense. Bulga is not and should not be defined by the number of people who live there just as its future existence should not rely on the profit margins of a foreign owned mining company such as Rio Tinto.
The extension of this mine means the loss of the 200 year old village of Bulga as a place, but also the displacement of the people living in this vibrant and tightly knit rural community.
Both the lodging of this current application made on June 24th, 2014 and its acceptance shows complete contempt for the Court process, the environment, the rural community of Bulga and the lifestyle and health that it's residents are desperately trying to preserve.

I fervently request that this Development Application that seeks to expand the Warkworth mine be refused.

I am writing to register my objection to the approval of both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The proposed projects will have significant environmental and social impacts, including but not limited to: biodiversity loss, air quality issues arising from coal dust, impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage, impacts upon surface and ground water resources, and increased greenhouse gas emissions. The projects will significantly impact upon the ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland Endangered Ecological Community.

The Warkworth Continuation Project proposes to mine the same area of land as the previous 2010 Warkworth Extension application. That 2010 application was dismissed by both the Land and Environment Court and Supreme Court of NSW due to significant and unacceptable impacts on biological diversity, including on endangered ecological communities, noise impacts and social impacts. Although there are some differences in this new application, the broad scale impacts of the proposal remain the same.

These proposals have the potential to create long-term damage to threatened species, water and human health in the region and should be rejected.

I strongly oppose the 2014 Continuation Project (SSD 6464). This proposal seeks to expand the Warkworth open cut coal mine and I request that this Development Application be refused.
When this present NSW Government decided not to honour a Ministerial Deed of Agreement, ignore decisions by both the NSW Land and Environment Court and the NSW Supreme Court of Appeal and change the NSW State Planning Laws in such a way as to make those laws an instrument to promote development of mining resources we were shocked and outraged.
It is unconscionable that in 2013, Brad Hazzard amended this protective Deed of Agreement so the Warkworth mine could then mine through the Non Disturbance Areas. By doing this, the NSW Government is not only ignoring the findings of The NSW Land and Environment Court of 2013 and The NSW Supreme Court of Appeal 2014 but is unjustifiably supporting the foreign owned Rio Tinto and not this community and the constituents of NSW. Clearly this NSW Government does not share the community of Bulga's values or those accepted by a modern democracy of obeying the Law of the Land (i.e. court decisions) or even adhering to basic principles of honesty and integrity and the concept of a fair go. Both the International Council on Mining and Minerals and the International Finance Corporation recognise sustainable development requires an explicit balance of economic, environmental and health considerations. A recent Senate inquiry into the impacts of air quality on health in Australia found balancing a broad range of issues, including economic development, is essential for mitigating the health impacts of mining.
Residents of Bulga continue to suffer deep distress about the possible demise of their village (first settled in 1820) and the damage done to their much loved landscape. This deep distress and anxiety will worsen if the mine expands even closer toward their town. It is impossible to sell a property in Bulga. People are at the mercy of a predatory foreign mining company and a corrupt government doing their bidding.

It is absolutely appalling that the Dept of Planning will even consider yet another application for a mine extension that has been rejected twice by the courts. Does due process mean nothing in this country?

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.

I 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.

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.

I strongly oppose the 2014 Continuation Project (SSD 6464). This proposal seeks to expand the Warkworth coal mine and I request that this Development Application be refused.
The negative impacts of mining borne by the Bulga community are of much greater significance than given credit. Bulga is not defined simply by the number of people who live there. People selected Bulga for the rural lifestyle and so the community is built around people who share common values.
Presently, residents are subjected to excessive levels of dust, noise, vibration and lights not normally experienced in a rural environment. This will worsen if the mine expansion is allowed.If this proposed expansion is allowed there will be further significant negative impacts arising from the continued and excessive levels of dust and noise. Health issues will escalate and we will witness permanent and irreparable damage to our immediate natural environment.
Air quality has a major impact on the health of residents in the area around the open cut Warkworth mine. This fact cannot be ignored. Any further expansion of Warkworth mine will only further exceed the current dangerous levels of air pollution. The health implications of excessive exposure to particulates are well known. The Hunter Valley is enduring ever escalating dangerous levels of particulates and to approve the Warkworth mine extension would contribute further to already alarming particulate levels. The NSW Government may well be found responsible in a class action by the people of the Hunter Valley for the decisions, such as this present proposal, that are made despite contrary expert findings. To allow continued and escalating levels of exposure is not only negligent but a court may well find these decision makers liable.

This is a submission against both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

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. Members of the public 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.

This is a submission against 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.

I strongly oppose the 2014 Continuation Project (SSD 6464). This proposal seeks to expand the Warkworth coal mine and I request that this Development Application be refused.

If this proposed expansion is allowed there will be further significant negative impacts arising from the continued and excessive levels of dust and noise. Health issues will escalate and we will witness permanent and irreparable damage to our immediate natural environment.
The negative impacts of mining borne by the Bulga community are of much greater significance than given credit.
People selected Bulga for the rural lifestyle and so the community is built around the common values of its residents.
These Core Values embraced by residents of the Bulga area seem to have no place or value with Rio Tinto or the NSW Government.
The NSW Land and Environment Court and the NSW Supreme Court of Appeal both found against this proposal.

I am writing to register my objection to the approval of both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The proposed projects will have significant environmental and social impacts, including but not limited to: biodiversity loss, air quality issues arising from coal dust, impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage, impacts upon surface and ground water resources, and increase greenhouse gas emissions. The projects will significantly impact upon the ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland Endangered Ecological Community.

The Warkworth Continuation Project proposes to mine the same area of land as the previous 2010 Warkworth Extension application. That 2010 application was dismissed by both the Land and Environment Court and Supreme Court of NSW due to significant and unacceptable impacts on biological diversity, including on endangered ecological communities, noise impacts and social impacts. Although there are some differences in this new application, the broad scale impacts of the proposal remain the same.

These proposals have the potential to create long-term damage to threatened species, water and human health in the region and should be rejected.

I support the extension to warkworth mine It will keep many local people employed who work for and also associated with the mine as well as the local businesses in singleton

This is a submission against 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.

The Land and Environment Court ruled in April last year that the state government's approval of the original Warkworth open-cut mine extension proposal was invalid because it would have significant and unacceptable impacts on biodiversity; noise impacts on residents; and social impacts on the local community of Bulga.
As far as I am concerned nothing has changed Warkworth open-cut mine extension is still invalid.
What is the point of going th the Land and Environment Court if their ruling is cast aside.

If this extension is not approved, it will have a very negative impact on the life of our family. My husband will more than likely lose his job. There is a lack of jobs vacant in my husbands current field of work which will make it hard for him to get another job in this industry. My income alone will not be enough to support our family if my husband is out of work. We will have difficulty paying our mortgage, paying our bills and will be unable to continue paying for the Catholic education that our 3 children are now receiving. Our children will have to change schools. If this extension is not approved it will have a very dramatic effect on the life of my husband, myself and our 3 children. Please support the workers of Warkworth mine and approve this much needed extension.

I am writing to register my objection to the approval of both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The proposed projects will have significant environmental and social impacts, including but not limited to: biodiversity loss, air quality issues arising from coal dust, impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage, impacts upon surface and ground water resources, and increase greenhouse gas emissions. The projects will significantly impact upon the ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland Endangered Ecological Community.

The Warkworth Continuation Project proposes to mine the same area of land as the previous 2010 Warkworth Extension application. That 2010 application was dismissed by both the Land and Environment Court and Supreme Court of NSW due to significant and unacceptable impacts on biological diversity, including on endangered ecological communities, noise impacts and social impacts. Although there are some differences in this new application, the broad scale impacts of the proposal remain the same.

These proposals have the potential to create long-term damage to threatened species, water and human health in the region and should be rejected.

I am writing to register my objection to the approval of both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The proposed projects will have significant environmental and social impacts, including but not limited to: biodiversity loss, air quality issues arising from coal dust, impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage, impacts upon surface and ground water resources, and increase greenhouse gas emissions. The projects will significantly impact upon the ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland Endangered Ecological Community.

The Warkworth Continuation Project proposes to mine the same area of land as the previous 2010 Warkworth Extension application. That 2010 application was dismissed by both the Land and Environment Court and Supreme Court of NSW due to significant and unacceptable impacts on biological diversity, including on endangered ecological communities, noise impacts and social impacts. Although there are some differences in this new application, the broad scale impacts of the proposal remain the same.

These proposals have the potential to create long-term damage to threatened species, water and human health in the region and should be rejected.

We object to this extension to the Mount Thorley Warkworth.

New application, however this new proposal is not a different area, it is the same area that was proposed to be mined previously, that has been denied by two courts.

There was a deed of agreement not to mine this area, this was a requirement that the Government put on Rio Tinto so that Saddle Ridge would be preserved.

The village of Bulga and it's surrounding areas and villages such as Milbrodale, Forwich, Broke, Warkworth ,Long Point and Gouldsville should be allowed to continue to exist without the continued fear of the dust, noise pollutions that this extension will bring.

This mine and it's employees were originally told that the mine had a life of 20 years. So what is all the fuss about.

Thank you for allowing us to put foward these very important issues in opposition.

Ian & Robyn Moore.

I object to this proposal,
Two Courts have found that there are good reasons why it should not proceed, although he Government has changed the assessment rules to make it easier for the project to be approved, it is proven to have serious negative social and environmental effects.
The application must be refused

I am writing to register my objection to the approval of both the Warkworth (SSD 6464) and Mt Thorley (SSD 6465) Continuation Projects.

The proposed projects will have significant effects on the closer and more distant environment. The proposed projects will have significant environmental and social impacts, including but not limited to: biodiversity loss, air quality issues arising from coal dust, impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage, impacts upon surface and ground water resources, and increase greenhouse gas emissions. The projects will significantly impact upon the ecology of the Warkworth Sands Woodland Endangered Ecological Community.

The Warkworth Continuation Project proposes to mine the same area of land as the previous 2010 Warkworth Extension application. That 2010 application was dismissed by both the Land and Environment Court and Supreme Court of NSW due to significant and unacceptable impacts on biological diversity, including on endangered ecological communities, noise impacts and social impacts. Although there are some differences in this new application, the broad scale impacts of the proposal remain the same.

These proposals have the potential to create long-term damage to threatened species, water and human health in the region and should be rejected.

It is prime time for the government to research and implement environmental friendly energy and policies that make big company to respect communities and their interests.

Regards,
Dr Zsuzsa Millei