To whoever it may concern,
I would like to make this submission to object to the Mt Pleasant Optimisation Project.
My family and I live approximately 7km to the north of the Mount Pleasant mine.
My objection is simply based on the current licence having adverse effects on our property.
This relates to two main areas: dust and noise.
When I am working in my paddock I have a clear line of sight to the Mt Pleasant mine. On a number of occasions in the last few months I have photographed large plumes of dust moving over the town of Muswellbrook or heading towards Aberdeen. These dust plumes dissipate quickly. Sometimes I don't get a chance to photograph them, or get a clear photograph. It happens often and I have repeatedly requested the EPA to set up more stringent monitoring, because, you know, they are the pollution, not me or any other resident. When they have been reported to the EPA, the EPA say because they are operating within the conditions of consent, there is effectively nothing they can do. When I have spoken to the Mt Pleasant people, they say the same - ultimately they have a legal right to do what they are doing.
Basically, the conditions of consent are so loose, Mt Pleasant have a legal right to cover Aberdeen and Muswellbrook in dust. This can be backed up by not only my own photographs, but also air quality reports.
In regards to noise, I have had several instances now when work is being conducted in the furthest northern pit, that sound is audible at my house.
Of course, this won't trip any sound level meters, but it sounds like a train is constantly approaching, or an aircraft, and it simply doesn't fit in with the rural environment.
This sound will go on for up to 72 hours at a time. You can't help but notice it and it eventually becomes very annoying.
But, like the dust issue, Mount Pleasant are legally entitled to do this.
I object to any ongoing mining based on these problems that they have admitted they don't need to do anything about, because they are operating within the loose conditions of consent.
This is supposed to be a rural area, not heavy industrial. The prevailing winds are from the west and south, or a combination, so it is very likely that any dust generated will cover the town. Any further extension to the mining activity will only make these existing problems from the current operation worse.
The IPC must take into account that the current licence conditions are causing problems.
Fair and reasonable licence conditions need to be set, not a rubber stamp that allows further devastation so close to town, and certainly not an extension.

Regards, Matthew O'Connell

Please see attached submission in objection to the Proposal.

Commissioners,
I am writing to object to the Mount Pleasant optimisation project. The mining and thoroughbred industries have been coexisting for some time. However the continuing expansion of mining footprint around the Hunter Valley threatens that existence. Every IPC hearing related to this issue bears witness to stories of stymied investment in the thoroughbred industry owing to the negative impacts and perception of mining impacts. Practical measures such as 10k buffers have never been countenanced and instead it is left to ordinary people and businesses to fight to maintain their status quo. At close quarters these are incongruous industries owing to the negative air quality and visual impacts of mines. The risks are too great and the the benefits accrued by the mining operators should not `be at the expense of the thoroughbred industry and neighbouring community. Thank you for your time.

Des Hernon

I am concerned about the negative effects mining is having, and that this mine will have, on our community and environment.

I support the Mount Pleasant Optimisation Project for the following reasons:
- If the project doesn't go ahead the current direct workforce will lose their jobs including myself.
- If the project doesn't go ahead approximately 300 additional future job opportunities will be lost.
- The project brings major capital works and ongoing operating expenditure which support businesses.
- Mt Pleasant will contribute billions of dollars in royalties and tax contributions.
- Mt Pleasant has spent significant time and effort developing a rehabilitated landform (in collaboration with universities and specialists) that will outperform other mines in the area.
- Mt Pleasant will achieve best practice in all areas of mining as this is what needs to be done for a sustainable future in the industry.
- There is a coal demand gap that will need to be filled if Mt Pleasant Optimisation project doesn't go forward with other mines in the area getting closer to end of life.
- Mt Pleasant supplies a cleaner coal than most countries it supplies, which will only be replaced by an inferior coal that will contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Please see attached submission.