A REVIEW by the state’s Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) has found the proposed expansion of United Wambo’s open cut coal mine near Jerrys Plains “has merit” but more work needs to be done to address community concerns.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The commission was asked by the Minister for Planning last December to examine the proposed modifications to the mine, 16km west of Singleton, which would enable the extraction of an extra 150 million tonnes of coal over a 23-year period.
United Wambo is a joint venture between Peabody and Glencore with Glencore to manage the operations.
Gary Wills, presenting on behalf of the joint venture, told the PAC hearing in February the project would sustain the existing 250 jobs at Peabody’s Wambo open cut and create an additional 250 mine workers jobs and a further 120 construction jobs during the development stage.
Mr Wills described the project as a ‘brownfield’ site as 80 per cent of the proposed disturbance area is already mined or approved for mining.
Three commissioners – Mr Gordon Kirkby (Chair), Mr John Hann and Mr Tony Pearson – were appointed to review the merits of the project and examine the likely economic, environmental, social and other impacts.
As part of its review, the commission examined the Environmental Impact Statement, response to submissions and all other documentation relating to the project.
It also met with the applicant and Department of Planning and Environment, held a public hearing in Singleton to listen to affected residents’ views, and visited the mine site and surrounding areas. It received and carefully considered public submissions.
The commission has today released the final report from its review which identifies key issues which require more information or consultation before a full and thorough assessment of the project can be completed:
· air quality
· noise
· vibration and blasting
· biodiversity
· final land form and rehabilitation
· water resources
· visual impacts
· transition to joint venture
The commission’s preliminary view is that “subject to a satisfactory response to the findings and recommendations made in its (review) report, the project has merit”.
However, “the commission notes that its views may change on any determination decision, including because of the provision of additional information provided in response to this review, and the final assessment of the project or other relevant factors. The commission also notes that conditions of consent have not formed part of this review and would need to be given detailed consideration at the determination stage.”
The project now returns to the department for final assessment. It will come back to the commission at a later date for determination.