Dear Sir/Madam
My home is just a few hundred metres from the Buttonderry Site of this proposed Coal Mine which, if approved, will extract coal from beneath my home and cause the land to subside. Most of the homes in my area are not connected to the town water supply or sewerage system. We rely on the rainwater collected on our roofs and stored in tanks of substantial capacity for all our requirements. All liquid waste is treated by on-site Aerated Waste Water Treatment plants. Air pollution and dust from the proposed mine will contaminate the air I breath, my drinking water, damage my roof and degrade the efficiency of my solar PV panels and solar hot water unit. Subsidence may cause damage to the house, tanks, pipes and Treatment Plant. Also the intention of storing detonators, explosives, 55,000 litres of fuel, 15,000 litres of Hydrochloric Acid plus hydraulic oil and chemicals so close to so many residents is of great concern. (See Appendix AB, Preliminary Hazard Analysis).

Some years ago at Chain Valley Bay (Lake Macquarie) there was serious land subsidence due to coal mining which damaged houses, flooded residential land and bushland causing many mature trees to die. A similar disaster could easily happen in Jilliby and Dooralong Valley on a far greater scale.

The original application by Wyong Areas Joint Coal Venture (WAJCV), Kores P/L, in 2010 was rejected by the previous NSW Government in March 2011 on grounds of unsustainability (ESD principles) and the Government's application of the Precautionary Principle. Nothing in the new application changes that concept as essentially it is a reworking of the previous application.The current NSW Government's "Aquifer Interference Policy" as intended should nullify the application at hand.

. The Wyong Water Catchment was protected under a proclaimed NSW Statute in 1950 (Gazette no 153 of the LGA 1919, 1950). The now extinguished Part 3a of the EPA Act overrode this Statute , so effectively the original protective measure should now be in place.
. Some 300,000 people in the Wyong and Gosford LGA's rely upon the 53% of their potable water emanating from these critical valleys. Recently the completed $80 million Mardi-Mangrove pipeline was funded by the Federal Government specifically to transfer water from this system to the Mangrove Dam on the escarpment during flood rains. The valleys above this mine regularly flood as agreed in the proponent's submission.

. In 1999 groundwater consultants, ERM Mitchell McCotter, found that transient pathways for water to travel downwards to the coal strata were evident and so bulk water would not be impeded on its downward path.
. Kores claim that there will be no effect upon the water supply due to impervious layers between the surface and the mine seam. Professor Phillip Pells, Senior Lecturer at the University of NSW dismisses these claims. Kores do admit to a so-called tiny loss of water rated at 2ml per day per square metre. This extrapolates over the whole mine area some 8 megalitres per day or 3000 megalitres each year once mining is complete. The professional uncertainties characterised within the Kores submission paint a very tentative picture for protection of the coast's natural potable water supply.

.The Peer Review by Professor Bruce Hepplewhite (page 258, Appendix H) questions many of the terms used and assumptions made during the geological modelling upon which subsidence and water loss are based. For instance (page 258, Appendix H) indicates...
.../2
"Page 73.- a similar issue of semantics occurs when discussing changes to stream alignment. MSEC states that there will be no significant changes, but what is regarded as significant? Can this be quantified at all?" ..and.. again.. "Page 74..(part).In discussion of valley floor closure and upsidence, it is noted that such behaviour is expected to occur in a number of valleys, but will be masked by overlying alluvium. It is noted that small zones of increased permeability might develop in the top few metres of the rock head beneath the alluvium, but due to the saturated overlying alluvium, these increased permeability zones will not result in any impact on surface water levels. This conclusion may be correct, but is it not possible that some conditions may exist due to localised geological changes, and changing climatic conditions such that the alluvium is not always saturated and some loss of water level in the streams may occur? "....

. Some 46 panels are to be mined, including in the Hue Hue Subsidence Area where 150 houses (Appendix H Map on page 240) mostly of modern brick design exist on subdivided acres and will be subjected to subsidence up to one metre but may well suffer further subsidence due to the existence of Awaba Tuff strata below the mine on which the remaining pillars are supported. Much discussion within the application refers to the uncertain nature and caution needed re the soft bedded Awaba Tuff leading to a scenario of adaptive management as mining begins to proceed. This type of experimental mining should only be carried out in an outback remote location and not under modern homes within the expanding outer suburbs of Wyong. The Department of Infrastructure and Planning should be alarmed by this and immediately inform the unsuspecting owners of the properties in the Hue Hue Subsidence District.

. A total of 245 houses (Append.H Page 130) will be impacted by subsidence from a conservative one metre to 1.6 metres throughout the mine area. A total of 755 Rural Building Structures will be impacted (Append. H >page 179) and 420 Farm Dams suffering subsidence to some degree (Append.H>page 187). As can be seen the projected damage inside the mining lease area would be catastrophic. The hinterland of the valleys are to be subsided 2.6 metres; Little Jilliby Jilliby Creek at the southern end is predicted to fall 2 metres; the main artery into the Jilliby/Dooralong Valley, Jilliby Road is destined to be subsided 1.75 metres in places, remembering that these valleys flood on a regular basis leaving residents isolated from all directions.

. Dust and noise from stockpiling and rail movements will impact on the established suburbs of Blue Haven, Wyee and all along the rail corridor from Morisset through Cardiff and southern suburbs to the port of Newcastle. The proponent fails to adequately address these ramifications. New burgeoning suburbs being created in northern Wyong shire will be impacted by the mining proposal. It is placed amid these developments and should not be considered based on known high rates of asthma and bronchitis as voiced by the medical profession for decades.
. 19 species of avian migratory waders in the area are protected under the Federal EPBC Act with binding agreements with China,(CAMBA) Japan(JAMBA) and Korea itself(ROKAMBA). The proposal directly affects these agreements.
.../3
The Director-General's Requirements are extensive and in most areas Kores have failed to address these adequately. The proposal should be rejected outright as the long term damage to the coast's water,infrastructure , amenity and health is breathtaking. The addition of the result of burning this resource within the next 30 years has not been evaluated upon damage to the earth's climate and will be wholly condemned as the trend to reject fossil fuels gains momentum.

An article in The Sydney Morning Herald (June 17, 2013) states "Most of Australia's coal reserves will have to be left unburned if the world is to avoid catastrophic global warming, according to a report from the federal government's climate commission". This is the message from the report - The Critical Decade 2013 - Climate change science, risks and responses. We need to heed the warning, be responsible and not add to the problem.

If the committee members have not visited the Jilliby/Dooralong area I would urge them to do so and see what we could lose if this mine is approved.

I object to the proposed mining lease being granted because it not only affects water security, but also will add to CO2 emissions.
The report said yesterday 60% of fossil fuels should stay in the ground. Alternative sources of energy need to be used.

I strongly object to the application and feel it is also wrong that residents need to continually 'fight' to have security of their homes due to these continual applications.
My husband owns a home in the Wyong area and I do not agree with the proposal.
Our water needs to be protected not put at risk.

To whom it may concern

I am deeply concerned to learn that the Wallarah 2 Coal Mine project is back on the agenda. After having avoided the potentially catastrophic consequences of such a plan a couple of years ago, thanks to the intelligence and forward-thinking of a previous State government, I find it incredibly upsetting that once again, we need to spend so much time and effort convincing this State government of the dire outcomes that such a plan is likely to produce.
To be specific, I am extremely concerned about the following impacts:
1) AIRBORNE COAL DUST PARTICLES: the effect this will have on the respiratory systems of residents in the area is of grave concern. Kores admits in their EIS that deaths will result. How is this acceptable?
2) SUBSISTENCE: some estimates put this at up to 2 metres in certain areas. How is it ok to have ordinary Australians' assets put at risk like this?
3) WATER QUALITY: the proposed mine will be situated beneath the Central Coast's major water catchment area. According to an expert in this area, Professor Philip Pells, this would have catastrophic implications for the quality and quantity of our drinking water as well as broader biodiversity issues for our waterways.

Please do not allow this to go ahead. Why should we suffer so that a foreign company can tear apart our beautiful surrounds in order to further pollute the world? You have been elected because we trust you to make intelligent decisions that protect the public from the greedy interests of groups such as Kores. I urge you to make the right decision for the residents of the Central Coast and NSW - and that means shutting down this proposal once and for all.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Maddison Safety is a 100% Australian owned and operated company. We have serviced the Mining Industry nationally for over 25 years.

Our company employs over 30 local people who work in various roles such as manufacturing, warehousing, admin, sales and marketing.

Approval for new projects such as Wallarah 2 is vital for our company to continue providing future employment and development for future years.

I object to this, on the basis that not enough research has been done into the long-term effects of this. Especially when such a large water catchment is in close proximity.

This kind of short-sighted development may ruin the land for future generations.

My property overlooks a permanent natural billabong which covers approximately 2 hectares, and is fed by Jilliby Jilliby Creek. This is not on my property, but is on privately owned land at 32 Dicksons Road.
The billabong and surrounding trees are used as a roosting area and nesting habitat for over 200 birds year-round, including egrets, ibis, swans and ducks, and occasionally spoonbills.

The proposed Wallarah 2 coal mine extends directly beneath this body of water. I am seriously concerned that subsidence caused by the mine will result in the disappearance of this surface water, and consequently the loss of this special habitat.

Additionally, the earthquake in Newcastle in 1989 has clearly identified that this is an earthquake prone area. I am fearful that the occurrence of an earthquake in this area after it has been considerably destabilized by underground longwall mining could have catastrophic effects on the local landscape.

The Idea of putting the Central Coast Water Catchment as more risk to depletion and pollution is deplorable.
Know standard event for coal mines and usually under estimated in EISes.
I have family and property interests in the area and ask who will compensate fully for subsidence to properties?
Coal mining contributes to pressures on Global Warming that should be avoided. The Exports will contribute to Foreign wealth and people as far as Newcastle will suffer the overheads of coal dust pollution

I object to this mine proposal on the Central coast.
I am concerned for the well being of the environment, the migatory birds whose habitat will be adversely affected as well as all the other wildlife.
The other huge concern is the damage to the water , this is a water catchment area for the central coast. Mining of this nature has already destroyed over 30 rivers in this country.
To even contemplate mining in a water catchment is ludicrous.
The risks are too high, you cannot fix the problem once you have damaged the aquifers as we have already seen.
Let hope common sense prevails and not mine in water catchments.

I object to the Wallarah coal mine proposal even though I do not reside on the central coast.
I am concerned for the health and well being of both my daughter and grandchildren that live on the coast.
The dust risks are too high and to compromise the water catchment is an irreversiable problem that mining will create.Mining in a water catchment is dangerous, once the damage is done hundreds of thousands of peoples drinking water is lost forever.