There has been no evidence provided as to why this is required. It wasn't required before so why is it required now.
The EIS states "Option 2: Do Nothing - The Crown Sydney Hotel Resort has always proposed to include part hotel and part residential uses, as envisaged under the Barangaroo Concept Plan. The redevelopment of Barangaroo and the ongoing operations of approved buildings is contingent on the ability for the individual buildings to be released to the market, critical in achieving the desired future outcome for Barangaroo South. Not creating the proposed stratums would significantly hinder the establishment and operation of the Crown Sydney Hotel Resort."
This statement suggests that this is dealing with different building when it's dealing with an individual building. It also just states it will "significantly hinder" the operation etc without any detail, where is the evidence or argument for this?

Approval of the expansion and reopening of the Russel Vale mine by an
organisation with a history of non-compliance with approval conditions
is a completely irresponsible and negligent act. The negative effects
of the mine on the water catchment and impacts on ground and surface
water, the noise and air pollution, the destabilising of overlying
mines and so on are well documented. Any approval of the mine owned
and operated by a negligent and corrupt group is an act of negligence
and wilful ignorance.

I object to this application as triple seam coal mining in this area
endangers the water security of 5 million Australians in a time of
severe drought, an occurrence that will increase in the future. This
project will not only harm the water security of the Australian
people, it endangers our ecological resources that exist in this
catchment area. Furthermore, the Revised Project Report intends for
one third of the coal product to be thermal coal. The burning of
thermal coal for power production desperately needs to be replaced
with more sustainable alternatives to reduce Australia's contribution
to human induced climate change, which has and will increase drought
and wildfire severity across Australia and devastate our natural
world. As a proud yet concerned resident of the Illawarra, I implore
you to deny this dangerous application.

I OBJECT to the proposed expansion of Russell Vale Colliery.

I object on three grounds:
1. The expansion of the mine will no doubt damage Sydney's water
catchment that is immediately above the mine site. This has happened
after previous long wall expansions under the catchment. Subsidence of
the land above the mines causes the bedrock under the catchment to
crack, meaning it no longer collects water. The attempts of coal
companies to plug up cracks with polyurethane foam is both laughable
and disgusting. Sydney is already in a state of drought - this is no
time for losing more water.
2. The mine expansion will contribute to further pollution of the
water and environment. Any water that remains in the catchment will be
polluted, and residents of Sydney and Wollongong will have to drink
it. Wollongong Coal Ltd. has also kept a giant slagheap of substandard
coal on their grounds, very close to residents. This provides coal
dust to the local community on windy days and turns creeks black. It
is one thing to send employees into hazardous conditions, quite
another to impose on the community an increased risk of respiratory
problems. Wollongong Coal has not been a good corporate citizen, and I
do not believe it ever will be, regardless of what conditions it may
be subject to. Please also look at the company's track record of
adhering to conditions - I doubt you will be impressed.
3. The contribution of this expansion project to climate change. The
producers of coal must be held responsible for the greenhouse gases
that their product produces. Climate change will affect me in my
lifetime (I am 21 years old), as it is already affecting those in
regional NSW, the Pacific Islands and throughout the tropics of the
world. By approving this expansion, not only will you be hurting the
local community, you will affect the entire world. We must all take a
stand against climate change, I know which side of history I want to
be on.

I OBJECT. This is a dangerous plan that I, as a citizen of Wollongong,
wholeheartedly reject and morally cannot support.

I OBJECT to this proposal for many reasons. (1) The company, based on
past history, cannot be trusted to adhere to approval conditions; (2)
the NSW govt (Planning and EPA sections) does not enforce approval
conditions - which effectively makes any approval conditions intended
to protect people and the environment, completely meaningless. (3) We
need to get out of coal mining and into alternative energy sources NOW
to limit the extent of climate damage. (4) The company will say that
we need COKING type coal for making steel and that it provides coking
coal, not just thermal coal. But there are already alternative ways to
make steel (without coking coal) but these are not being allowed to
progress because of the power of fossil fuel industry. (5) underground
coal mining like this should not be allowed in the water catchment,
let alone in special areas of the water catchment WCL operations have
already led to massive water losses (equivalent to water demand for
several suburbs of Wollongong) and Greater Sydney cannot afford more
water losses.

I object to the Wollongong Coal's Revised Preferred Project Report (PPR)
to the Russell Vale Underground Expansion Project 09-0013. I object as
a local resident who will be directly impacted by the mine and as a
person deeply concerned about the environment.

Some of the reasons for my objection are listed below.

1. Climate change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
Coal mining, whether for energy or steelmaking, produces the GHG
Emissions that are causing dangerous climate change. This project is
estimated to result in 11,624,000 tonnes of GHG emissions through the
mining and the burning of the coal.

2.A risk to Greater Sydney Water Catchment
The mining will take place in the Special Areas of the Greater Sydney
Water Catchment - areas that forbid public access because of their
sensitivity and strategic importance - and up to the shores of the
Cataract Reservoir.
Not only will the mining infrastructure, such as access roads and vent
shafts, disturb and damage the catchment, the proposal for Bord and
Pillar mining will result in up to 100 mm in subsidence.
The extraction for the Wonga Central Development Mains extends under
the Cataract Reservoir itself. Cataract is severely affected by
drought and is currently at only 29% of capacity. Mining should not be
permitted anywhere near Great Sydney water supply reservoirs.

3. Triple seam mining
The mining is particularly risky because a third seam of coal is being
mined beneath two previously mined seams. Triple seam mining has
little precedent and impacts are difficult to predict.
The proponent admits that instability in the overlaying old Bulli seam
workings may cause pillar collapse and subsequent subsidence of 1 to 2
metres. It is unacceptable of the NSW government to allow such risky
mining in the water catchment for 5 million people of Greater Sydney
in a time of drought.

4. The proponent is not fit and proper to hold a mining licence
Wollongong Coal and its parent company Jindal Steel and Power Ltd, are
currently the subject of an investigation by the NSW government's
Resources Regulator into whether or not they are a `fit and proper'
entity to hold a mining license. The company has a history of failing
to comply with conditions of approval. Even its auditors have
questioned its capacity to continue as a going concern; its current
liabilities exceed its current assets by nearly A$1 billion.
Wollongong Coal is not a `fit and proper' entity to operate a coal
mine in the water catchment of Australia's largest city.

5. Impacts on local community
The colliery site at Russell Vale is closer to dense residential areas
than any mine in Australia. Residential communities have suffered the
impacts from this mine over many years, including noise and
particulate pollution. In this day and age, Russell Vale is not a
suitable location for a colliery. Wollongong Coal plans to build a
coal processing plant at the Russell Vale Colliery and process coal on
site. The Russell Vale mine is the closest mine to any built up
residential area in Australia and is not a suitable area for coal
processing. Moreover, the proponent has been unable or unwilling to
comply with many conditions of past approvals and the NSW government
has proven to be unable or unwilling to enforce compliance. Residents
have no confidence in "conditions" or "commitments" to operate the
processing plant according to suitable standards.

6. The proponent has a history of non-compliance with approval
conditions
Previous applications and approvals promised numerous items to protect
the community and environment that have never been met by the
proponent. These include but are not limited to: truck loading
facilities, sound walls, covered conveyors, limited stockpiles, sealed
roadways and realignment of Bellambi Creek. Now in this new revised
project, Wollongong Coal is promising the same or similar things.
Wollongong Coal is currently operating right at this moment under
three non-compliances: the realignment of Bellambi Creek to protect it
from pollution and flooding (due Oct 2012); the removal of 200,000
tonnes of oversize coal that was illegally stockpiled on the adjoining
slag heap (due July 2019); and, the dedication of land to Council in a
1989 approval from Wollongong City Council (due 1990). All of these
obligations still have not been met.
A proponent with such a poor record of compliance should not be
considered for, let alone granted, approval to mine. The NSW
Department of Planning's inability or unwillingness to enforce
compliance (with the conditions that it itself has stipulated)
undermines confidence in the planning system.

We ask that you reject this application from Wollongong Coal and
commence a process to close the mine at Russell Vale permanently.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Yours sincerely,
Daniel O'Reilly

I object to the Wollongong Coal's Revised Preferred Project Report (PPR)
to the Russell Vale Underground Expansion Project 09-0013. I object as
a local resident who will be directly impacted by the mine and as a
person deeply concerned about the environment.

Some of the reasons for my objection are listed below.

1. Climate change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
Coal mining, whether for energy or steelmaking, produces the GHG
Emissions that are causing dangerous climate change. This project is
estimated to result in 11,624,000 tonnes of GHG emissions through the
mining and the burning of the coal.

2.A risk to Greater Sydney Water Catchment
The mining will take place in the Special Areas of the Greater Sydney
Water Catchment - areas that forbid public access because of their
sensitivity and strategic importance - and up to the shores of the
Cataract Reservoir.
Not only will the mining infrastructure, such as access roads and vent
shafts, disturb and damage the catchment, the proposal for Bord and
Pillar mining will result in up to 100 mm in subsidence.
The extraction for the Wonga Central Development Mains extends under
the Cataract Reservoir itself. Cataract is severely affected by
drought and is currently at only 29% of capacity. Mining should not be
permitted anywhere near Great Sydney water supply reservoirs.

3. Triple seam mining
The mining is particularly risky because a third seam of coal is being
mined beneath two previously mined seams. Triple seam mining has
little precedent and impacts are difficult to predict.
The proponent admits that instability in the overlaying old Bulli seam
workings may cause pillar collapse and subsequent subsidence of 1 to 2
metres. It is unacceptable of the NSW government to allow such risky
mining in the water catchment for 5 million people of Greater Sydney
in a time of drought.

4. The proponent is not fit and proper to hold a mining licence
Wollongong Coal and its parent company Jindal Steel and Power Ltd, are
currently the subject of an investigation by the NSW government's
Resources Regulator into whether or not they are a `fit and proper'
entity to hold a mining license. The company has a history of failing
to comply with conditions of approval. Even its auditors have
questioned its capacity to continue as a going concern; its current
liabilities exceed its current assets by nearly A$1 billion.
Wollongong Coal is not a `fit and proper' entity to operate a coal
mine in the water catchment of Australia's largest city.

5. Impacts on local community
The colliery site at Russell Vale is closer to dense residential areas
than any mine in Australia. Residential communities have suffered the
impacts from this mine over many years, including noise and
particulate pollution. In this day and age, Russell Vale is not a
suitable location for a colliery. Wollongong Coal plans to build a
coal processing plant at the Russell Vale Colliery and process coal on
site. The Russell Vale mine is the closest mine to any built up
residential area in Australia and is not a suitable area for coal
processing. Moreover, the proponent has been unable or unwilling to
comply with many conditions of past approvals and the NSW government
has proven to be unable or unwilling to enforce compliance. Residents
have no confidence in "conditions" or "commitments" to operate the
processing plant according to suitable standards.

6. The proponent has a history of non-compliance with approval
conditions
Previous applications and approvals promised numerous items to protect
the community and environment that have never been met by the
proponent. These include but are not limited to: truck loading
facilities, sound walls, covered conveyors, limited stockpiles, sealed
roadways and realignment of Bellambi Creek. Now in this new revised
project, Wollongong Coal is promising the same or similar things.
Wollongong Coal is currently operating right at this moment under
three non-compliances: the realignment of Bellambi Creek to protect it
from pollution and flooding (due Oct 2012); the removal of 200,000
tonnes of oversize coal that was illegally stockpiled on the adjoining
slag heap (due July 2019); and, the dedication of land to Council in a
1989 approval from Wollongong City Council (due 1990). All of these
obligations still have not been met.
A proponent with such a poor record of compliance should not be
considered for, let alone granted, approval to mine. The NSW
Department of Planning's inability or unwillingness to enforce
compliance (with the conditions that it itself has stipulated)
undermines confidence in the planning system.

We ask that you reject this application from Wollongong Coal and
commence a process to close the mine at Russell Vale permanently.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Yours sincerely,
Micaela O'Reilly

I object to Wollongong Coal mining near the water catchment. No mining
company should be allowed to do this and it beggars belief that the
NSW government would encourage a company to continue to threaten our
water supply when that supply is already seriously threatened by the
changing climate and other mining in the area. NO. NO. NO to a
continuation of mining in our most important water catchment. That the
company is a bad and foreign-owned corporate 'citizen' just makes this
whole scenario a shocking farce and, once again, points to a
government who is not governing in the interests of the environment
AND all of us who depend upon it.

I object to this coal mine expansion going ahead. (1) The company, based
on past history, cannot be trusted to adhere to approval conditions;
(2) the NSW Government (Planning and EPA sections) do not enforce
approval conditions - which effectively makes any approval conditions
intended to protect people and the environment, completely
meaningless. (3) We need to get out of coal mining and into
alternative energy sources NOW to limit the extent of climate damage.
(4) The company will say that we need COKING type coal for making
steel and that it provides coking coal, not just thermal coal. But
there are already alternative ways to make steel (without coking coal)
but these are not being allowed to progress because of the power of
fossil fuel industry. Even Judge Brain Preston accepted this position
in his summing up against Rocky Hill Coal Mine in Gloucester last
year. And also very importantly (5) underground coal mining like this
should not be allowed in the water catchment, let alone in special
areas of the water catchment. WCL operations have already led to
massive water losses (equivalent to water demand for several suburbs
of Wollongong) and Greater Sydney cannot afford more water losses. Not
to mention water pollution effects caused by coal mining. Why should
residents and businesses pay to support the water wastefulness and
water catchment damage caused by coal mining companies? There are
multitudinous reasons for this mine expansion NOT to go ahead, and
very few, poor reasons for it to be approved. Please do the
responsible thing and stop this project.