Briefly:
1. the world is going green and in the process of educing the burning of coal, fossil fuels or anything to reduce green house effect. There is no evidence that burning/incineration of wastes is better than burning coal and/or fossil fuels. Further more ,incineration or burning of wastes: (such as plastic materials such as polyurethane, polypropylene, rubbers, woods, electronic board, medical and hospital accessories such as medical tubings, industry wastes, office wastes, retail wastes, to name a few to add to your imagination on what will be included in the wastes for burning) out of thousand of unrecoverable, non recyclable materials, will certainly generate toxic chemicals and gases that are known to be carcinogenic which are detrimental to human and live stocks. These carcinogenic by products (gases and ashes) not only affect immediate regions around the incinerator site, but also reaching easily to wider regions stretching all the way to more populated regionals and will certainly reach as far as Sydney, Canberra, Cooma and beyond, depending on the wind direction and seasons.

2. This Development Application should be referred to the Federation, ACT and VIC Department of Environment and Energy for independent assessments by different departments to ensure compliance with the EPAs as the emissions have the potential to cross borders contaminating air and water. In addition, this Development Application should also be referred to National, State and Territory Energy and Chemical Safety authorities as the impacts are far out reaching and not confined to just NSW regions

3. The efficiency of trucking millions of wastes from Sydney to the Woodlawn site to be burnt or a better word, incinerated should also be assessed for efficiency as trucking is one of the most inefficient form of transport as trucking emits green house gases.

4. Odour - this is noticeable problem especially on still morning. Veolia has acknowledged that they have been having problem with odour in the last few years and has yet to fix the problem. One of the Veolia media releases about management of odour problem is that Veolia will "monitor the weather and wind" or words to that effect. What that statement can be interpreted as Veolia has no solution to the odour problem, releasing of odour gases will be depending on weather and wind and hopefully the strong wind and weather will dilute the odour to an insignificant level to the immediate communities. Odour gases are detectable, what about the odourless carcinogenic gases? The Communities including National, State and Territory governments should be concerned about this, as pollutants, any pollutants, whether they are gases or particulars - odour or odourless; should not be allowed, particularly it is evidenced that some of the gases and particulars are carcinogenic and; some have health consequences that are not yet known currently.
Further, as Veolia cannot fix the odour problem prior to full operation, what hope do we have that Veolia will fix the problem after obtaining the Development Application

5. Overseas studies have all indicated that generating power from incinerators are outdated technology and they are slowly phasing them out. Incinerators remind the remanent of outdated technology. To build an incinerating power station in 2022 is absurd. Call it an "Advanced Energy Recovery Centre" does not hide the fact that it is a power station that burns waste or "rubbish" that cannot be recycled. What is worst than burning Coal is that no one know what is in that waste or "rubbish". Without knowing the contents of the waste, how the authorities determine what are the composition of the gases and particulars emitted into the environment.

The environment and health impacts are enormous and far reaching for generations. Hence, more intense scrutiny by various and relevant National, State and Territory authorities is required as the impacts are far reaching in distance and in expertises, from environment, industry, chemical, health, water, air and meteorology.

Hi, my name is Glen Harris, I live in the village of Tarago. I soundly object to Veolia’s proposed incinerator being built in our village of Tarago. I am of the firm belief that Veolia’s toxic industrial waste incinerator does not equal positive action towards climate change.

As a nation we are striving ultimately towards net Zero emissions. The date may move around depending on the government of the day however approving new projects that will increase and not decrease carbon emissions should be off all political agendas.
Veolia already operates an advanced recovery facility at the site with multiple community health and well being concerns that have never been properly addressed. These are not actioned by the NSW Government entities that give licence to their operation, nor a full and proper reparation received from Veolia themselves.

The fact that they have chosen to apply for this in a location with significantly less residents than greater Sydney speaks to how it would be received by the greater population of NSW. If there was no issues and it was environmentally friendly and alright to operate around people, livestock and nature then why can it not be built closer to the main source of the waste? The simple answer is that with a population of millions instead of hundreds the objects would have been too great and they would not have been able to build this facility.

The economic benefit of this proposal to the local area will be minimal if any at all. Instead with overwhelmed local governments and contracts for infrastructure maintenance well outdated the local area will go backwards instead of forwards. The only economic benefit is to Veolia’s bottom line. What happens if all the claims of environmental impact from Veolia are proven to be untrue and locals land and property values plummet? Veolia will not be held responsible. Let alone the local business and livelihoods that will need to be uprooted and relocated at a great loss to the individual, not the multinational corporation.

Within the purview of this proposal they need approval from the local area to proceed. So in closing I am strongly not approving its proposal and have not spoken to a single resident of Tarago, Goulburn, Bungendore and the surrounding areas that does support it.
Kind regards,
Glen Harris

My name is David Wind.
I strongly object to Veola's proposed incinerator being built in Tarago.
I believe the toxic gases and ash it will produce will poison our drinking water which is collected from the roofs of our houses,it will also pollute the soil and pasture which our livestock graze on which will in turn contaminate the food we eat.
It will contribute to climate change as burning plastic and bio waste can no way be less harmful than burning coal or any other fossil fuel.
This project would not be viable without government subsidy's I suggest the government use our taxes for safer more worthwhile purposes.
Regards
Dave Wind

I strongly disagree with this project as Tarago NSW is already used as a dumping ground for Sydney Rubbish.
I moved to Tarago over 12 years ago and since moving here we have put up with Rubbish Smell from the mine at Woodlawn and i feel more rubbish coming to our town will only increase the level of smell and pollutants put locally into our region.
Also the amount of trucks using our roads is just going to increase destroying our roads and leaving drip trails all over the road that smell for days from the rubbish contained within the containers on the trucks.
* Stop spoiling our country town i moved here for the fresh air not to live next to a tip/incinerator.
I fear for my kids and there health.
The Cole Family

I object to the continued approach of the NSW Government to an "out-of-sight, out-of-mind" approach to the management of Sydney's waste problems and the dumping of these issues onto rural communities such as Tarago. This isn't just vacant land that no one lives on, this is our community and we moved here for a reason. How about Sydney managing Sydney's waste streams just like we do, currently there is no incentive for Sydney to do anything to reduce waste.
Come for a drive down to Tarago and look at the state of our roads. I have already had one vehicle damaged by potholes caused by trucks. This project will increase the already dangerous numbers of trucks on Tarago's narrow and poorly maintained rural roads. I saw nothing in the project submission that suggested an approach to address road maintenance.
Already Tarago experiences odours from the current Veolia operations and this project will simply increase the amount of garbage arriving in Tarago, and intensify the odour problems.
I came to Tarago for the country lifestyle and the project will likely pollute the surrounding air, waterways and land with dangerous toxins such as mercury, lead and persistent environmental pollutants such as dioxins. This will likely pose serious health risks for nearby residents, myself and anyone drinking water from the surrounding water catchment or food produced nearby putting dangerous toxins into the human food chain (See source 3). Tarago and the surrounding region is a big agricultural producer of lamb, beef, chicken, wine, and other human food and livestock feed and in particular I came here to be abler to grow my own fresh produce. Reduce waste at the source do not pollute where I live.

My name is Adam Burns and I live in Collector (NSW). I am writing this as I strongly object to Veolia’s proposed incinerator being built in Tarago (NSW).

I believe that Veolia’s toxic industrial waste incinerator will negatively impact my family’s health, impact my property re-sale value and make Collector a less desirable transit stop for visitors (thus impacting local business).

As a local resident I implore you to scrap the incinerator. I will feel extremely let down by all involved if you do not listen to the people.

Regards,
Adam Burns

I object to the proposed development. Attached is my full submission.

My name is Susan Harrison and I live in Canberra. I am a tax payer and individual that wants reform on pollution. I object to Veolia’s proposed incinerator being built in Tarago.
The reasons for my objection are:
- the region is a 'clean air' region and does not need additional pollution
- people chose to live in the region (not in Sydney) because of they can breath clean air
- pollution into the air is a global issue and current trends are to avoid/reduce the impact of this type of pollution
- burning large amounts of waste produces masses of air pollution
- proactive prevention is the answer to reducing/avoiding pollution - not burning to create more
- spend your money on reducing waste - not burning it