These are points lacking in the EIS and I would like to see addressed

* Minimal emission designed coal wagons (covered coal wagons)
* All (7) stockpiles for coal to be in contained facilities
* All conveyers, feeders and transfer stations to ships to be covered. Even I know the proposed use of water spraying to limit dust is outdated, inefficient, energy intensive and due to location of T4, environmentally dangerous.
* Cumulative impacts of this project in conjunction with the current operations and of future planned projects for Newcastle Port
* All air monitoring stations constructed and operational before construction takes place.
* Health impact study on cumulative effects from coal mines to port, it is not just what happens on the site, it about the cumulative effects this site will create

And I want to see some proactive actions taken by the proponents that will be in the best long-term interests of Newcastle residents,
* The facility design to be state of the art - reducing and offsetting its energy consumption and production via solar installations on suitable buildings (amongst other things)
* Transport options, Cormant Rd must be linked to the inter city by-pass. This link must be constructed prior to the commencement of T4.
* Guaranteed no risk to further soil contamination and leaching into surrounding wetlands and the Hunter River. We already know the site is contaminated and is in a flood plain
* No threats to acquire sections of the National Park or impacts on the Ramsar Wetlands and endangered wildlife and flora. Let's see the plans for restoration and compensatory habitat and the bank account which will finance work into the future
* Infrastructure and noise levels - including cumulative and incremental, time specific impacts due to increase in ambient noise levels (remembering we're talking about a 24/7 operation) including train and ship movements (which will nearly double once T4 is operational) so that impacts remain BELOW what is considered acceptable.
* Impacts beyond the construction footprint for T4 HAVE to be considered - it's not good enough to state that PWCS don't have to consider things "beyond the operations control of PWCS" when it's their project that is generating those problems. Think about CO2 emissions.
* Economic justification for the project has go beyond the typical spin doctoring and double speak of their EIS. Latest reports to both State and Federal governments have stated on numerous occasions that the only people who are really benefiting from the present mining boom are those connected to the mining sector.
* PWCS state that their T4 Project will add approximately $10 billion to the Hunter economy. I want to see a breakdown of how much of that $10 billion will actually benefit Newcastle LGA and how much the project will cost the Newcastle LGA community to accommodate the construction of the facility.

There is little time left for the community to express what they expect to see from the expansion of coal loading facilities at Newcastle. I don't like the fact that the community has been treated like a doormat for the mining industry.
If the Government is really serious about community consultation, then give the community fair time to respond to the T4 proposal.


Claire Charles,
36 Crebert Street
Mayfield
Home phone 4967 2495
Mobile 0419 00 3390

See attached submission.

Submission in attached document.

NPA wishes to make a submission to thePort Waratah Coal Services Terminal 4 inquiry, objecting to the rezoning of lands that were earmarked for addition to the Hunter Wetlands National Park, objecting to the threat that development poses to the Ramsar site and objecting to the loss of significant habitat for migratory waders. We note that this development clashes with several important international agreements to which the Australian Government is a signatory and we provide the following attachment in support of our objection. Note that this material supports that made by the HBOC, a group with intimate local knowledge of the site in question.

Please see attached pdf file