Wilpinjong Coal Mine Extension

To Whom It May Concern:

I wish to add my voice to those of the residents of the village of Wollar. I believe that the extension of the Wilpinjong will make the village of Wollar unliveable. I wish my concerns below to be taken into consideration.
* The cumulative social impact of loss of population through mining projects from Ulan to Bylong has not been considered.
* The noise assessment, monitoring and mitigation measures are totally inadequate.
* Air quality has not been assessed against the new standards adopted in December 2015.
* The extension will remove 354 hectares of remnant native vegetation and have an impact on 24 threatened species and ecological communities - more than the current approval. The biodiversity offsets will not provide sufficient habitat for the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater.
* The cumulative impacts on biodiversity, Aboriginal cultural heritage, water sources, greenhouse gas emissions, community and rural industry have not been rigorously assessed.
* The mine will produce an additional 20 million tonnes of greenhouse gasses a year, exacerbating the impacts of climate change. This is at odds with Australia's commitments under the Paris Accord.
* The area has significant Aboriginal cultural heritage values that have not been assessed in a regional context.
* The extension removes existing buffer zones for the Munghorn Gap Nature Reserve.
* The extension will leave three final voids that will permanently scar the landscape and harm waterways for hundreds of years.
* The ongoing impacts on groundwater and surface water systems will be greater than predicted.
* The predicted job numbers are overstated compared, with the current workforce extracting the same volume of coal.
* Peabody Energy is in deep financial distress and may not be fit to meet all its obligations.
* The contract to supply AGL's Bayswater Power Station can be met by the current approval.
* The proposal to continue extracting low quality coal while causing irreversible environmental and social damage cannot be justified.

Yours sincerely,

Ms Suraya Coorey

I believe this mine will have unacceptable impacts on local farmland, would lead to the loss of a key nature reserve in the area and threatens local bird and animal species.

The environmental impact statement for this project contains inconsistencies and contradictions over the impact the mine will have on water tables and the amount of water used. The full impact on farms and the environment can therefore not be fully assessed.

The mine proposal also poses an unacceptable impact on our climate given the amount of emissions the burning of the coal will produce.

Wilpinjong Coal is an important member of the business community providing jobs to both the local and wider communities

I object to this proposal because of its unacceptable social impacts and health effects on nearby residents, and its environmental impacts also on threatened flora and fauna species. I am particularly concerned that the Proponent has a very uncertain financial future, and would therefore not be in a position to meet any long tern mine legacy issues in terms of rehabilitation. This proposal imposes too many risks, and in uncertain global markets for its commodity, in terms of the value of the resource compared to the huge social and environmental costs, it is in ESD terms not worth an approval.

these people are our countrymen and women and we should be supporting them and their community , These pristine areas have been kept this way because of these people and their love of this great land . ARE THEY TO LOSE THIS BEAUTY FOR THE SAKE OF A FEW GREEDY IGNORANT BEAUROCRATS? SHAME .OUR LAND AND WATERS ARE PRECIOUS AND ONCE GONE CAN NEVER BE REGAINED/

The proposed Wilpingjong Extension would make the village of Wollar unviable. Increased air pollution, dust and noise as well as population loss would make conditions unliveable in Wollar. Clearing 354 hectares of remnant native vegetation would be an environmental disaster while damage to ground and surface water is totally unacceptable.
Given the Paris agreement commitment to renewable energy sources, the status of the Peabody Energy Company as well as social and environmental hazards implicit in the proposal, this project should not be aprroved.

I am writing as a NSW resident and taxpayer to oppose the Wilpinjong Extension Project. I respectfully request that the Department not grant approval to the project.

The reasons for my opposition are:

1.The social costs: Wollar is already much diminished by the mine, and the proposed expansion of the project would likely spell the end of Wollar. There is a real question as to whether the village will remain "livable".

2.Economic costs: The extension project (and mine) would be operated by U.S energy corporation, Peabody Energy, which is notoriously known to be in dire financial straits. It is difficult to imagine how the Department could be confident that Peabody Energy would be in a financial position to reinstate wildlife corridors, rehabilitate the land to grazing standard and generally meet rehabilitation conditions of any approvals. It is doubtful that the security currently held by the Crown will be sufficient to meet the enormous costs of rehabilitating the land over decades. If so, this would likely mean that taxpayers would have to cover, at least in part, the costs. I strongly object to such a proposition.

3.Environmental & ecological costs: I understand that the extension will remove 354 hectares of native vegetation with an impact upon numerous threatened species and habitats. I am also aware of serious concerns as to the adequacy of the noise assessment, mitigation and management regimes, measurement of air quality, and impacts on surface and groundwater.

4.Carbon emissions - It is well established that coal mines (and Hunter Valley coal mines) are a major source of methane released into the atmosphere, in addition to other greenhouse gases. The mine will produce annually an additional twenty million tonnes of greenhouses gases, and will undermine Australian commitments at the recent Paris Climate Change talks. I respectfully suggest that an approval may not take into account the best expert opinion from Australian scientists.

I believe that Peabody Energy is having significant financial problems and may not be able to meet make-good requirements after mining. Please send me more information SPECIFICALLY on this point and consider it in your discussions.

Also, EXACTLY what financial provisions have you put into place for the people of the local area whose towns will be affected? How much money is allocated to compensation, both for physical damages of all descriptions and also for mental damage to local people.



Where do you plan to re-house the wildlife that you will be evicting? Australia already has the worlds worst record for small mammal extinctions.

Please send your response by email to me as soon as reasonably possible.

Regards, C Hawse

The very long Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) indicates that potential habitat of several endangered fauna species, in the order of 100-200 of hectares, would be destroyed by this Wilpinjong mine extension. The species include two Critically Endangered birds (Regent Honeyeater and Swift Parrot) and Koala.

Destruction of this endangered fauna habitat in this case should not be allowed, or at the very least much reduced. Far too many mines in recent years have been routinely allowed to destroy large portions of the small remnant of Western Slopes grassy woodlands that had survived agricultural clearing. This process is certainly pushing many woodland bird and other species to the brink of extinction in NSW.

"Offsetting" , in this EIS as in all others, is put forward as some kind of magic wand that will somehow undo the damage done by mining. This is an illusion. Genuine offsets that are similar ecologically to what is destroyed are rarely found.

In the case of the Wilpinjong Extension, about 140 ha of grassy box woodlands (increasingly scarce ecological communities) would be lost, while offsets would "save" about 190 ha of existing generally similar types (i.e. of the combined area of 320 ha, 140 ha or 44% would be lost). It is not clear whether the structure and quality of wildlife habitat of these offset areas is similar to these features in the woodland that would be lost. This is important - mere comparison of areas (ha) may not mean much.

Attempting to rehabilitate open-cut mines to mature woodland is NOT offsetting and should be regarded as a separate obligation of the mining company. Besides, in reality it is not likely to happen because (even if the methodology was established, which it is not), rehabilitation would take many decades with continuing management and oversight, and resources for that are unlikely to be provided for the 80+ years necessary to see it through.

Discussion of rehabilitation in the EIS is sketchy, with little detail of previously attempted work by which to gauge its ultimate success.

In the present case the EIS forecasts only a "short to medium term impact" on endangered species because of proposed offsets, including artificial woodland habitat rehabilitation. As explained above, little or no reliance can be placed on such rehabilitation, at least at this stage of history.

Saying that "the potential impact on protected matters would be localised and negligible on a regional scale"is dishonest; it completely ignores the cumulative impact of numerous similar small-scale destructive projects.

It appears that the 5 offset areas were selected to a large extent because of their proximity to the Munghorn Gap NR and Golburn River NP rather than for similarity to the woodland planned for destruction. It may be useful for the long-term security of offsets to absorb them into nearby NPWS reserves, but it would often violate the important principle of "like-for-like" offsets (which seems to be largely ignored in the present NSW offsetting policy!)

On the plus side, there appears to be evidence that some key threatened woodland bird species would make use of some of the proposed offset areas.

The proposed mine extension is much too close to the boundary of Munghorn Gap NR in several places. All mining should be kept back at least 200-300 m from this boundary, taking additional care not to destroy or damage any streams entering the reserve. This might reduce the available mining area slightly but integrity of the reserve should be paramount.

Submission of Objection - Wilpinjong Mine Extension Project SSD 6764

Thank you for taking the time to consider my submission.

My family have lived and owned land in the Wollar region for over 30 years. We continue to occupy and manage our property alongside the Goulburn River and hope to maintain this for future generations of our family. The impact of mining activities in this area over the the past ten years threatens this heritage. Mining has not only transformed the physical landscape in this region but also the community we have been a part of for this time and poses a great threat to the continuation of life in the area.

The physical changes to the landscape as a result of mining activities has made a once familiar landscape more and more unrecognisable. The proposed extension of Wilpinjong mine would irreversibly transform a further 800 hectares of this landscape with devastating environmental impacts.

As well as the impacts to land, the mine's impact on community has been equally swift and unapologetic. It has been strange and saddening to watch this community dissipate so quickly, particularly knowing that the dramatic changes to the land that are occurring as a result of increasing mining activities will make this area almost unliveable and significantly reduce the likelihood of repopulation once these activities cease.

I struggle to understand how the devastating and irreversible impacts on community, valuable farming land and also on significant and valuable remnant native vegetation can be justified for a material that is low quality and also rapidly going out of fashion globally.

The decisions made today when considering the extension of Wilpinjong mine will make a statement about what we think of legacy and reflect what care we have for future generations.

I strongly oppose the Wilpinjong Mine Extension Project and ask that great consideration be given to the FUTURE when making a decision about this extension.

Regards, Cher Schoenfelder

Another Nail in the Coffin!

My family owns a 'bush block' on Mogo Rd within the Goulburn River National Park. Purchased some 30 years ago as a place to escape the rat race, a place of peace and tranquility. Over the years we have watched as both existing and new mines swallowed up the surrounding landscape. Enough is enough! The expansion of the Wilpinjong Coal Mine, with its dust, noise etc. will bring this mine to within less than 5kms of our piece of Australian paradise, peace and tranquility no longer. It will also be another nail in the coffin of the once sleepy little village of Wollar. Pity the poor residents who have managed to hold on to what little they had left. Another nail in the coffin for numerous threatened flora and fauna species and endangered ecological communities. Offsets, what a joke! Where are critically endangered Regent Honeyeaters suppose to go while woodlands are 'recreated' somewhere else? You can't plant a few trees to offset something that has taken thousands of years to evolve. And as for the purchasing of surrounding properties as offsets, most of these were never going to be good for anything but conservation so how is that an offset if there conservation values were already basically protected and under no threat? Another nail in the coffin for Munghorn Gap NR. Impacts are too numerous to list here. What happened to the 'buffer zones' that we're promised to reduce the impacts on this jewel of the NSW reserve system. Seems fairly obvious to me that the negative impacts to the region of the proposed expansion far out way the positives. And for what? A last gasped attempt to prop up a financially struggling company in a dieing industry?

I am concerned for the residents left in Wollar. The extension is far to close to the village, the impacts of noise and dust will be tremendous. Peabody are in financial trouble and they want to go ahead with an extension, what happens if they go " belly up" just walk away and leave a bloody great gash in the landscape without rehab and our govt will allow that to happen! Wollar deserves better, Peabody promised them the world in 2006 and now it's almost an unlivable ghost town. Shame on Peabody.

I wish to express my opposition to the extension of the Wilpinjong coal mine.

Coal, globally, is in a downturn. There is a global glut of coal at the moment which is driving prices down below the point where it is profitable to dig it up. Opening or expanding new mines in such a situation would appear to be pointless and unwise. The coal industry is operating in the belief that the coal price will recover in time, but they are misunderstanding what is happening world wide.

The world cannot and indeed, will not, keep burning coal for much longer. Every year coal is burned puts another nail in our climate coffin. Coal mines are the last thing we need.

I understand that governments continue to believe that the revenue from coal mining is supporting their bottom line, but they are not taking into account the long term damage caused by coal mining - the wasted water, the health impacts on the workers and those who live near by a mine, the loss of habitat for native species, the damage to farming and other surrounding industries.

The USA is beginning to realise, the hard way, that once a coal mine closes, the towns die too. The little town of Wolar does not deserve to be destroyed for the sake of some short term gain for a small number of people.

A responsible government will make rulings for the benefit of all - the towns people of Wollar, the well-being of the natural environment, the interests of the farming community and those who will be impacted by pollution and global warming.

There is no good reason to keep expanding coal mining. 2016 is the year we must start to reject further expansion and begin the necessary process of contraction of fossil fuels in favour of cleaner alternatives that provide a brighter future for all.

I am an Australian citizen deeply concerned about the future facing my 4 grandchildren, now aged 9, 6, 5 and 1. Bernie Sanders, as a member of the US Congressional Committee on Climate Change, quotes scientists as saying that the world could warm as much as 5 degrees if the Paris Accord is not taken seriously.
The extension will cumulatively impact on biodiversity, Aboriginal cultural heritage, water sources, greenhouse gas emissions, community and rural industry . These effects need to be quantified properly and taken into consideration seriously.
The ongoing coal extraction will produce an additional 20 million tonnes of greenhouse gas per year, which will exacerbate the impacts of climate change, and is at odds with Australia's commitments under the Paris Accord.

Wilpinjong Mine Extension Project SSD 6764

There are many reasons why this extension should not be granted. Just a few of the reasoms are presented below.
This extension will bring the mine to within 1.5km of the village of Wollar and will destroy the village. Even the company's own Social Impact Assessment identifies this.
This will be the second village in our region to disappear because of coal mining and a third is on the books. Nowhere does the planning system require assessment of this kind of cumulative impact on a region.
Jobs are always given as the reason a mining project should go ahead but the numbers of jobs are always inflated and this extension application is no different. The application states there will be more jobs than there currently is, extracting the same volume of coal. Given Peabody Energy is already in deep financial distress one wonders why they would propose a more inefficient (and therefore costly) project?
The above mentioned financial difficulties of Peabody also raises serious concerns that it may not be fit to meet all obligations. What assurances for the community are being demanded of Peabody?
The application is flawed with highly inadequate noise assessment, monitoring and mitigation measures and the air quality has not been assessed against the new standards adopted in November 2015. Nor have the significant landscape Aboriginal cultural heritage values of the area been assessed in a regional context.
This extension is not needed for Wilpinjong to meet its contract to supply AGL's Bayswater Power Station - the original purpose of the mine for which it gained its original approval. However through subsequent modifications the mine has changed in scope and extent, now also being an export mine. Such piecemeal changes of purpose and extent should not be allowed to happen - the full extent and hence impact of a mine needs to be considered before a new mine is allowed to begin. Our planning system is totally flawed as it examines everything in isolation and does not consider the full cumulative impact.
The extension removes existing buffer zones for the Munghorn Gap Nature Reserve. Why can this be allowed? It also will remove 354 ha of remnant native vegetation impacting 24 threatened species and communities and the biodiversity offsets will not provide sufficient habitat for the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater.
Australia made a commitment under the Paris Accord last year but this ongoing coal extraction will produce an additional 20 million tonnes of greenhouse gas per year, which will exacerbate the impacts of climate change, and is at odds with that commitment.
This proposal to continue extracting low quality coal while causing irreversible environmental and social damage cannot be justified. The extension should not be granted.

divide and rule. you peopleare totally irresponsible. the people of this country who really care are forced to spend all of their time trying to prevent the mass deterioration of the environment and society.

I object to the Wilpinjong Extension Project.

The dust and noise for local residents will be unbearable, and the harm to our climate from more polluting coal is unacceptable.

I understand that this application considers the Wilpinjong Extension Project in isolation. I am concerned that the cumulative impact of mining projects from Ulan to Bylong are not being considered.

Biodiversity offsets are inherently flawed. I does not assure the viability of the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater population, to clear this native vegetation, but put funds aside for another area. I am alarmed that the open cut mining operation will have a negative impact on 24 threatened species and ecological communities.

I am appalled by the destruction of the native environment by open cut mining. Cultural heritage and diverse native habitat are lost forever.

Having recently spent some time in the area on contract work I felt physically ill after seeing just how wide spread the destruction has become since my last visit some 5 years earlier.

Perhaps the NSW Dept. of Planning and the Environment and the Minister have not noticed that our planet has already been warming for some years due to the effect of the burning of fossil fuels including coal.
It is therefore madness to continue destroying the natural environment i.e. the land, air and water all living things, including humans, need to survive.
All governments have a responsibility to protect natural landscapes and those dependent on them for life.
I am totally opposed to the extension of all existing coal mines and also to the destruction of land and soil and water by the opening up of new mines.
The fact that greedy mining companies are still so determined to destroy our land for profit and continue to press for support by your Government despite the harm they have already caused beggars belief.

The extension of Wilpinjong Mine will make the village of Wollar unlivable.
The cumulative social impact of loss of population through mining projects from Ulan to Bylong has not been considered.
The noise assessment, monitoring and mitigation measures are totally inadequate.
Air quality has not been assessed against the new standards adopted in December 2015.
The extension will remove 354 hectares of remnant native vegetation and have an impact on 24 threatened species and ecological communities - more than the current approval. The biodiversity offsets will not provide sufficient habitat for the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater.
The cumulative impacts on biodiversity, Aboriginal cultural heritage, water sources, greenhouse gas emissions, community and rural industry have not been rigorously assessed.
The mine will produce an additional 20 million tonnes of greenhouse gasses a year, exacerbating the impacts of climate change. This is at odds with Australia's commitments under the Paris Accord.
The area has significant Aboriginal cultural heritage values that have not been assessed in a regional context.
The extension removes existing buffer zones for the Munghorn Gap Nature Reserve.
The extension will leave three final voids that will permanently scar the landscape and harm waterways for hundreds of years.
The ongoing impacts on groundwater and surface water systems will be greater than predicted.
The predicted job numbers are overstated compared, with the current workforce extracting the same volume of coal.
Peabody Energy is in deep financial distress and may not be fit to meet all its obligations.
The contract to supply AGL's Bayswater Power Station can be met by the current approval.
The proposal to continue extracting low quality coal while causing irreversible environmental and social damage cannot be justified.