Weston Aluminium Additional Waste Streams

I Object to this project.
This is a major concern for our community. The community has not be made fully aware of Weston Aluminium's proposal. Only a handful of residents were giving a letter of notice, a tiny announcement in the local paper that we don't even receive anymore. This is unacceptable as it concerns all residents off Kurri Kurri & its surrounds.
We need a town meeting where we can voice our concerns.

I TOTALLY OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL....

This is a total disgrace..
Why would anybody think to burn more toxic hazardous waste in our small community. This toxic waste is going to be hazardous to our health & the enviroment.

Please put a stop to this!!!

I totally object to this project.
This will do nothing but harm to our community. Our community has suffered enough already. Weston Aluminium should of never been put into a community like Kurri Kurri, even if it has been zoned for heavy industry.

Please reconsider this proposal for the health of the Kurri community.

Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on this development, as residents of Kurri Kurri we are concerned about the impact of air emissions from the Western Aluminium facilities particularly the emissions from thermal treatment processes.

We object to the proposal to increase waste streams accepted by the site on the basis that the site already impacts on our amenity through the generation of odours and we are concerned that the broadening of the range of wastes treated by thermal methods will lead to health impacts on our family and community.

As local residents we are frequently impacted by chemical odours during the night, given wind directions on these occasions, knowledge of the local area and the business that operate here we believe the sources is Weston Aluminium site. Being a 24 hour facility we request that the Department of Planning and Environment closely scrutinise the air modelling data to ensure that modelling considers impacts of different weather conditions including the patterns common here at night with low wind speeds and inversion conditions as we are already being impacted by odours in these conditions and are concerned about increasing risk of health impacts.

We are concerned that impacts of air emissions on us will also be increased by the treatment of additional waste types, while we understand that waste volumes treated at the site may not increase the mix will change. Our understanding is that aluminium dross and spent linings are relatively homogeneous products and that alternative waste streams defined as 'solvent-based liquid wastes (e.g. Class 3 flammables; paints, solvents, dyes, etc.) and other wastes will have far broader chemical make-ups that may not be able to be adequately reflected in modelling and that current requirements to sample these emissions annually (EPL6423) would not result in a sample that is representative based on the broad chemical make-up of the increasing variety of wastes being treated. On this matter we also note that there is limited discussion within the EIS regarding the potential changes to emissions and the suitability of any current pollution control treatments or necessary upgrades.

Lastly we are concerned that the POEO public register records non-compliances with the sites EPA licence for 4 of the last 5 years and notes that there are ongoing investigation into some of these being carried out by the EPA.

In summary we are concerned about the increase in waste streams and there impact on our health and amenity and we request that the Department of Planning and Environment:
-scrutinise air emissions modelling and pollution control treatments to ensure there is no deterioration and ideally an improvement in air quality
-ensure the chemical composition of waste products and the variability there of has been scrutinised and that restrictions are put on chemicals likely to result in harmful emissions
-ensure that control equipment is appropriate for the waste streams being treated
-liaise with the EPA regarding EPL non-compliances and ongoing investigations to ensure the site is being operated in an efficient and proper manner and that environmental impacts are being minimised before allowing a more chemically diverse range of wastes to be treated at the site

I do not want this going a head while I have young children near it.

This Hazardous Materials should NOT be allow to be processed in our small local community.
I totally disagree with this application.

I object this project as there is already enough rubbish in the air from factories along Mitchell Ave and as a parent I am very concerned about the impact this will have on the health of my children, myself, family and neighbours.
Industries like this should be in an area away from residents such as Hez Industrial Park.
Thank you.

I have been a resident at 1 ninth st weston for 8 years,and lived in the weston district for over 35 years and have always noticed a Burning smell when the wind turns our direction, we would like to know what the health implications will be for myself and children now and in the future.
As a small business owner I'm always supporting expansion and development, in this case we strongly recommend they move their facility outside of the populated area and expand there,for example hez industrial park.
Thankyou for allowing our submission.
Re Jon Woodhall
VALUE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SPECIALIST.

I personally OBJECT to this proposal.
This hazardous waste is dangerous to our community.
This is massive and needs to be thoroughly reviewed.

I strongly OBJECT to the application/proposal/ project from Weston "Aluminium" (this business should be forced to change their name, as it no longer has any dealings with aluminium and is just using the name aluminium as a front/cover to hide under). THIER IS NO DOUBT THAT THIS UNSAFE BUSINESS WILL HAVE MANY NEGATIVE HEALTH OUTCOMES INTO THE FUTURE. This business should NEVER have been allowed/approved to operate so close to a town i.e., less than 500 metres from residential housing. Both the local residents and Cessnock City Council were against Weston "Aluminium" from originally being constructed and operated due to the obvious HEALTH, SAFETY and ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS that the operation would pose being SO CLOSE TO TOWN. One would have to ask the question why would an NSW Government Planning Minister go against the wishes of both the Local Residents and Local Council to approve such a, DANGEROUS, UNSAFE and ENVIROMENTALLY DAMAGING OPERATION??? The current operation can't even control or meet their existing operating obligations, let alone any EXTRA and more HAZARDOUS materials to STORE and PROCESS on a TOTALLY UNSUITABLE SITE. In the time that Weston "Aluminum" have been in operation, they have had TWO (2) FIRES One (1) of which on 14 November 2021 was a totally out of control fire which took Three Hundred (300) Fire Fighters from across NSW many days to extinguish and closed the local High School as it was DEEMED TOO UNSAFE for students to attend School, as there was so much TOXIC SMOKE in the air and covering the school. To this day when a Westerly Wing blows the "normal" toxic smoke/emissions blow over the entire School and children's playgrounds. There is no doubt in my mind that Weston "Aluminium" will be the source of many CANCER CLUSTERS in time to come. Only a person of DUBIOUS MEANS (Brown Paper Bags) would approve such a HORRENDOUSLY UNSAFE and DANGEROUS operation, an operation that has existing HEALTH, SAFETY and ENVIRONMENTAL issues, which would only be exacerbated if the current application is approved.

I think this project is very irresponsible. Using and burning such chemicals so close to urban areas is reckless. I live literally 400 meters from the site, I have lived here for more than 20 years with the expectation that our community would be protected from such things. I would have thought in regards to the highly toxic chemicals being used that a reasonable butter zone would be required. As it has been proven in recent times the plant is not well protected from fire and or Arson. These things can’t be controlled and is a major worry when this happens so close to housing and schools. I have children at home and one day I hope to have grandchildren here. But it is a great concern if I feel their health is at risk. My peace of mind is greatly compromised. I was very happy to live out my life here but now we have to re evaluate our future, so I hope the everyone realised what impact this will have on our communities peace of mind and mental wellbeing.

I totally OBJECT to this Application/Proposal.
This sort of hazardous waste is not suitable to be stored & processed so close to homes,preschools, primary schools,
high schools, aged care facilities,sporting grounds, shopping centres etc.

This Application/Proposal needs a public meeting to discuss.

We want a town Hall Meeting
Our biggest concern is safety
Why do we not have public monyoring systems throughout our community
To alert our town if we have excess hazardous waste
Who is watching this company to protect the community and why is our community not receiving these reports
The compliance reports on this particular site should be made public every quarter and posted to social media
We have a right to know if our community is being poisoned

I am concerned with the lack of community involvement and consultation.
As a resident within 700m of the premise we have not received any direct communication with the developer/owner of the project.
I have concerns about the chemicals which will be treated onsite as it is so near housing. My concerns include the transport of the dangerous chemicals to the site and material leaving the site on local roads. Unloading and the handling of chemical onsite as I understand the Weston Aluminium has a current investigation regarding arson at the site. I do not feel the documentation and application completely address concerns around security of the site.

With the proposed site being close to housing, and the transportation of these chemical being so near to housing I believe there should be more consideration to the safety of residents. I have serious concerns about the developers handling of the proposed materials as the chemicals lists are of a hazardous and dangerous nature.

I also have security concerns for the site as, nothing has been revealed about the current/ongoing investigation into arson at the site last year. When this incident occurred it showed a lack of security at the site and caused major disruption for the town and surrounding businesses and local High School which had to close for several days due to the toxic nature of the previous chemicals. I would have serious concerns that the site could not manage the previous chemical how would they be able to securely protect and dispose of more dangerous chemicals which are proposed in this development application. The previous incident at the site needed large amounts of resources (Fire Brigades, Ambulance, Police) and rural fire service volunteers to manage the site for several days. The entire street had to be closed due to the nature of the incident and issues from the fire.

The very nature of the chemicals in the development application can lead to potentially harm to residents and their properties near the development and with housing including my own house at the end of the street I am incredibly concerns about the health of my family and myself moving forward and nothing in the documentation has allied my concerns.

I object to the proposal of a permit for Weston Aluminium at Kurri Kurri to receive, consolidate, store and process additional waste
streams for the following reasons.
*The local community was never informed that Weston Aluminium which was originally formed to process Aluminium Dross could be and now is a toxic waste incinerator.
*The location of the site and chimney stacks is too close to local houses at Kurri Kurri and Weston, the Kurri Kurri School as well as the newly developed area of Heddon Greta.
*The facility has a record of incidents of fires including the horrific event of the 14th November 2021 when the plant was on fire sending plumes of toxic waste over the entire town which required people to stay indoors and the Kurri Kurri High School was closed and children sent home. The Hazmat team were on site for days and the street shut off.
*This event in itself proves the facility does not have a system of safe storage of toxic waste materials and fire fighting procedures
*Even with an upgrade of safe storage of toxic waste, storage and disposal procedures the facility has proved by previous incidents that the company involved cannot be trusted by the local community to act in a safe manner to safeguard the community.
*It is the duty of care of the relevant authorities to deny Weston Aluminium's proposal to receive, store and process highly toxic, hazardous waste streams to protect the local community from the chance of more incidents and ongoing air pollution from Weston Aluminium's chimney stacks when most locals including many new residents to this growing community are unaware it is and now could be an even more toxic waste incinerator!

See uploaded document

I object to this proposal because it is surrounded by residential developments and up-wind from the local high school. There was a major fire emergency at this plant recently, made worse because of poor storage and poor housekeeping. The fire took days to extinguish and tied up many fire resources, and resulted in toxic smoke being released over residential areas.
When this plant was first approved, there were a lot of conditions put upon its operation, proof that it probably should not have been allowed in the first place. Then within a short time, the operator sought to have many of the safety conditions relaxed or dismissed. The modelling that was used in the original submission stated that one particular type of emergency incident would be expected to occur once in one hundred years, but they had several such incidents within a short period of operation. Clearly, their modelling and assumptions were vastly inaccurate. The lived experience of people in this area is that the assumptions made in previous submissions about the impact of noise and smells from the plant have also been vastly inaccurate. There is no reason to assume that the assertions contained in this submission, especially regarding the impact on the lives of people in this area, will be any more accurate. The operators and management of this plant cannot be trusted to comply with the necessary safety and monitoring conditions that exist now, and should not be trusted to do any better in the future.

I am a retired engineer, living if the Lower Hunter Valley, at Nth Rothbury.
I object to this project for the following reasons:
. The burning of hazardous wastes should not be allowed at all in an area of population growth and urbanisation. It would be better located in a more remote area.
. The proponent has not advertised the public display of the EIS adequately and the local community is largely unaware of this proposal. No sporting groups who use the Birralee Park have been advised of the display of the EIS. The same applies to the P and C from Kurri High School which has 800 students is downwind from the site and so, subject to odors and any fallout.
. The proponent has already been condemned by the the EPA for poor storage practices both before and after the huge fire of 2021, seemingly without any penalty, yet now wants to increase the amount of chemicals burnt on site. It is doubtful that they can be trusted to do so according to conditions of approval.
. The huge fire of November 2021 caused the school to be closed for 2 days and people were forced into their houses. This demonstrates that this is already not a suitable place to burn hazardous wastes with houses only 700 metres from the site. The area is changing from rural to residential as the local population increases which is another reason to not bring in more hazardous waste.
. The site is only 100metres from Swamp Creek which feeds via Wallis Creek into the Hunter River and will flow through the proposed Loxford Waters residential area. With the poor management of toxic waste already demonstrated by the proponents, it would be easy to imagine the Creek being contaminated by toxic substances leeching into ground water and the creek.
. Residents have expressed concern that wind born waste particles could escape the site during unloading and be deposited around the area. There are already reports of odours suspected to be coming from the site.
. The EPA report issued after the major fire clearly shows a range of shortcomings by the proponent that should eliminate any thought of any expansion.
. The new proposal includes the bringing in of 100 to 200 tones of PFAS contaminated material per annum. This is an extremely mobile and very toxic substance linked to negative health outcomes as demonstrated elsewhere. PFAS or other substances leeching into the nearby creek would be a predictable disaster.
. Appendix C lists many different toxic substances that could be brought onto site. There would have to be listed details of handling procedures for each one of these substances. Why would we think that they would be followed, given the record of the proponent to date, according to the EPA report? Who would be responsible for seeing that these conditions of approval were being followed?
. I understand that the main building proposed to house the thermochemical process was destroyed in the fire has to be rebuilt. This means that it could be rebuilt elsewhere, preferably further away from residential areas and populations.
For the above reasons, I think that the proposal to burn additional toxic waste should be refused and that any toxic incineration should be relocated to a more remote location.
Yours sincerely,
Denis Rothwell

I write to object to the proposal for additional waste streaming at Weston Aluminium, Weston.

I do not believe that there has been adequate community consultation. Given the close proximity of the site to residential areas which appear to have been inadequately notifued about the proposal further consultation should be undertaken before the proposal process proceeds.

I suggest that Weston Aluminium is an unsuitable location for an expanded/growing thermal waste facility.
* There is existing housing less than a kilometre from the site
* Extensive residential expansion is planned for the immediate area
* There is a growing population which will be directly exposed to emissions from the site.
* The close proximity to Kurri High School is a serious concern and should preclude development of a process that might impact students.
* The site is also located in close proximity to Swamp Creek which flows via Wallis Creek into the Hunter River. The risk of soil leaching is too great to warrant permitting the development.
* There is also flood risk, as has already occurred, making the site unacceptable for waste storage and handling.

Due to the close proximity off residential streets, a growing population and the close proximity of waterways I suggest that the risk to air and water quality is too great for this site to be acceptable for the proposed use.

I request that the DoP recommend refusal of the the development

I object to the project based on community safety. This will increase vehicular traffic in and out of the site, these vehicles can only gain access to site by travelling through the township of Kurri Kurri or Weston, there is no direct highway access. Kurri Kurri does not have adequate fire fighting facilities to deal with any emergencies onsite, as proved in the November 2021 fire emergency where specialist fire fighting equipment had to be brought in from Sydney taking many hours to arrive, this fire burnt for days emitting noxious smoke over the township. This facility is poorly situated, it should not be in such close proximity to a growing residential area and within a 1km radius of 3 local schools.