Family from Kurnell with young children.
We are the Scarra Family. Proud home owners in kurnell.
We strongly object this mod proposal as a father of young children i cannot consciously look my children in the face if I was to allow capping of toxic chemicals so near to my child's pre school and their favorite tennis and basketball courts at the reccas.
They really enjoy viewing the wetlands around marton park and bird watching all of which is at risk if this pollution legacy is allowed to continue.
My recommendation would be to Reject Mod 7.
Demand off-site remediation, And look to rezone the space rezoning for tourism which would complement the new visitor center and the beautiful new whale watching station around the corner.
PFAS containment; floods risk wetlands (Mod7 Report (Sec 4 Pg 60
Fig 7-5 Pg 111)
• Threatened species; capping endangers runoff (Scoping Report
Pg 51: Fig 4-3 Pg 58)
• No audits & indefinite evade responsibility; PFAS cases harm
ecosystems. Zoning blocks green spaces (App G Pg 8, Sec 3 Pg 53,
Fig B-2 Pg 240)
Subdivision reduces accountability; jobs don't outweigh risks, we have to stop think short term and rather the longer term impacts to the environment especially within the Sydney basin.

Please see image from Google Earth showing damage to Mangroves. This will likely exacerbate if Mod 7 is allowed to pass and Ampol is allowed to redirect Oily Water Services.

Introduction:
I'm a Kurnell parent with three young children aged 2, 4, and 5, who attend the local pre-school right next to the Ampol site. We've lived here for 8 years, drawn by the coastal community, but now feel outraged and betrayed by Ampol's cost-cutting shift. Thanks for this submission opportunity; I've followed the site's environmental reports and joined local discussions on pollution impacts.
Opening Statement
- Mod 7 is an outrageous betrayal, abandoning mandatory commitments for full cleanup to cut costs and boost revenue for shareholders, ignoring health/safety/environment.
- It locks in toxins via capping, risking leaks/floods/disasters that endanger our kids at pre-school and reverse $60m government investments in Kurnell's economy.
- Subdivision multiplies stakeholders, diluting accountability and perpetuating pollution (air/water/odor/noise/waste), harming biodiversity, tourism, businesses, and our family's future.
Recommendations
- Reject Mod 7 outright—it's a profit-driven reversal of commitments that endangers lives; enforce original off-site removal to honor mandates and protect community.
- Mandate independent audits/public reporting with strict penalties for non-compliance, ending self-monitoring loopholes.
- Set enforceable timelines for complete remediation, blocking indefinite delays and enabling rezoning to parks/non-industrial uses over perpetual heavy industry.
- Prohibit subdivision to ensure single accountability, preventing finger-pointing in disasters/floods.
- Require environmental offsets/mitigation for all pollution types and biodiversity, reversing economic damage from undermining $80m+ government investments in tourism/businesses.
Evidence/Arguments
- With kids at pre-school next door, we're terrified of toxins leaching into play areas; local knowledge shows past refinery odors affecting schools, and PFAS studies link exposure to child health issues like immune disorders.
- I have also taken walks around the village recently. The Martin Park wetlands, backyards of bordering neighbours, the mangroves next to AusGrid are all polluted and destroyed. The sentiment towards Ampol is at a all time low. The community is not happy and negative momentum is building towards Ampol. Trying to hide different the overall Ampol strategy buried with multiple significant planning proposals has lost the communities trust and has resulted in angry, anxious and upset members - (Mod 7 for containment and infrastructure tweaks, a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) up to 1,000 MWh, and subdivision into energy/industry precincts (Scoping Report, Page 215))
- Keeps PFAS/hydrocarbons/asbestos on-site permanently, a bandaid saving Ampol costs but risking leaks/floods into bay/wetlands (Mod7 Report Sec 4 Pg 60; Fig 7-5 Pg 111).
- As a local, I've seen flooding events worsen pollution—Mod 7's levees are insufficient, allowing indefinite risks without real deadlines (Mod7 Report Sec 3 Pg 53). https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/News/Media-Releases/2023/EPAMedia230920-Ampol-to-pay-over-%24700000-after-oily-water-spill-in-Kurnell
- Locks E5 Heavy Industrial zoning forever, preventing parks/community spaces and entrenching pollution (air emissions, water runoff, odors from waste, noise from operations, waste mismanagement) that harms biodiversity/threatened species (Scoping Report Pg 27 & 51; Mod7 Report Fig 4-3 Pg 58).
- Indefinite monitoring without independent audits means endless uncertainty/ongoing disasters, betraying community—lack of audits risks undetected issues, worsening flooding/accountability voids (Mod7 Report App G Pg 8; Sec 3 Pg 53).
- Safety compromised by increased transport/roads usage from industrial activities, endangering pre-school commutes; tourism/businesses suffer as bay contamination deters visitors, like past spills hurting local economy and reversing $80m+ government investments (Mod7 Report Sec 8.1 Pg 215).
- Subdivision into Energy/Industry Precincts chases revenue, creates multiple stakeholders, reducing accountability in disasters like floods—who's responsible when fingers point? (Scoping Report Pg 27; Mod7 Report Fig B-2 Pg 240).
Positive Aspects
Ampol's strategy cuts costs/uplifts revenue for shareholders via subdivision, but these "positives" are illusions—none outweigh the betrayal, health threats to our kids, environmental damage, biodiversity loss, pollution across types, safety risks, and economic hits to tourism/businesses from locked zoning/subdivision chaos.
Closing
As a deeply concerned parent, please provide a detailed reply and arrange a meeting to discuss these serious family and community concerns—we're angry and demand action. July 17, 2025.