Sydney Alternative Media - independent, community, non profit, trustworthy

Home newswire ecology action
Environment Assessment Summary: Deceptive variations of Dept of Planning website version

Appendix A
 

Misleading and deceptive variations of the DOP website public notice version of the summary of EA 19 (pages), compared to printed and CD version of the EA.

 

Compiled 26-27th Jan 2008 by Tom McLoughlin, solicitor in NSW

 

 

The summary EA is found at

 

On exhibition - Major projects - NSW Department of Planning at

 

http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/major_projects.asp

 

viewed Saturday 26th Jan, Sunday 27th January 2008 specifically:

 

………………………….

 

  Proposal title: Hitchcock Road Sand Quarry Project (MP 06_0104)

  Description: PF Formation proposes to: extract up to 400,000 tonnes of raw materials a year for processing at the Central Wash Plant on Lot 198; use the existing on- and off-site quarry infrastructure; import clean material for recycling; and progressively rehabilitate the site

  Location: To the south of Maroota - at the intersection of Old Northern Road and Wisemans Ferry Road

  LGA: Baulkham Hills

  Exhibition locations:
- Department of Planning, Information Centre, 23-33 Bridge Street, Sydney
- Baulkham Hills Shire Council, 129 Showground Road, Castle Hill
- Dural Branch Library, Pellitt Lane, Dural
- Nature Conservation Council, Level 2, 301 Kent Street, Sydney

  Approval Authority: Minister for Planning

  Relevant Legislation: Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

  Proponent: PF Formation

  Submission to: Director, Major Development Assessment, Department of Planning, GPO Box 39, Sydney NSW 2001

  Start date: 5 December 2007

  Closing date: 31 January 2008

  Documents available: Project application, summary of the environmental assessment, Director-General's requirements for Environmental Assessment. The Environmental Assessment can be viewed online at: http://www.pfformation.com.au/__Pages/hitchcock road development news 1.htm

  Further inquiries: Michael Young on (02) 9228 6437

 

……………………

 

In particular embedded URL of  summary of the environmental assessment is http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/pdf/06_0104_summary_of_the_ea_for_dop.pdf

 

This version was copied to our hard drive and printed out to evidence the following variations from the CD/printed copy which are the same and widely in many significant ways from the DOP website version as follows

 

 

DOP website version of  summary of the environmental assessment in plain text versus printed EA printed version (duplicates CD version) discrepancies in bold text:

 

Page 1 #1 DOP web

 

This would require the surrender of the existing consent at an agreed time following the receipt of approval for the present application.

 

Print/CD version reads at p15 roman numbers

 

The current approval would remain in force until it ceases to have effect when the present application is approved under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

.............................................

 

 

Page1 #2 DOP web

 

 

The proposal would now include 10 parcels following the addition of three, including the former Maroota Meteorological Reserve site and its access roads and the removal of Lot 2 Dp555184.

 

Print/CD version reads at p15 roman numbers

 

The proposal would include 11 parcels following the addition of five more, including the former Maroota Trigonometrical Reserve site and its access roads and the removal of the one lot (Lot 2 DP555184)which is expected to be the subject of a separate application for sand extraction to Baulkham Hills Shire Council.

………………………………………………….

 

Page 1 #3 DOP web:

 

[no entry, refer end 4th last paragraph web copy]

 

Print/CD version reads at p15 roman numbers

 

 

The location of the parcels making up the site is shown on Figure 1.2. [end of 3rd last paragraph]

 

………………………………………..

The DOP website version in ‘Relationship between existing and proposed developments’  bottom of page 5 from 2nd last paragraph omits this content on p17 (roman numbers) of print/CD version:

 

The boundaries of the total area to be extracted would be similar to those included in the existing consent with these exceptions. The inclusion of Lot 1 DP223323 and Lot 214 DP753039 would allow the previous setbacks on the adjacent lots to be extracted where they are excluded in the present consent.

 

Lot 2 DP555184 is expected to be the subject of a separate application for sand

extraction and associated development to Baulkham Hills Shire Council under Part 4 of

the Act. In this case, the setbacks would be amended if an approval is obtained.

 

 

………………………………………….

The DOP web version page 6 departs from the print/CD version at p18-19 (roman) by adding the word “staged” at the first dot point, and then completely omitting this dot point in the latter:

 

• use of the existing access from Lot 1 DP34599 to Old Northern Road for transport of friable sandstone product not requiring processing at the central wash plant on Lot 198 DP752025;

 

……………………………………………

DOP web at p6:

 

Extraction Operations

The development would be undertaken in four main stages requiring approximately five years each to complete. Extraction would continue as currently planned under the

existing consent until a new approval is received.

 

 

Print/CD EA at p19 romans:

 

Extraction operations

The extraction operations are described in four general stages requiring approximately five years each to complete. In practice these would vary depending on site conditions and market demand. Extraction would continue as currently planned under the existing consent until a new approval is in operation.

 

 

……………………………………….

There are significant departures from yearly dates of phases and even dot point content missing in phases of extraction operations at p7 of DOP website version:

 

Phase One (2006 – 2010)

 

Phase Two (2011 – 2015)

 

Phase Three (2016 – 2020)

 

Phase Four (2021 – 2024)

 

The overall staging of the development is shown on Figure 3.

 

 

 

Print/CD version at p19 roman numbers

 

Phase One (2007 – 2011)

- completion of Pond 10 (overburden backfilled into Area B). [Missing in DOP web version]

 

Phase Two (2012 – 2016)

 

Phase Three (2017 – 2021)

 

Phase Four (2022 – 2025)

.

The existing status of the site is shown on Figure 2.3 and those areas proposed for future extraction on Figure 2.4. The overall staging of the development is shown on Figure 2.5. Ponds 11 and above would be located in future extraction areas. Their exact location is not yet known.

 

 

……………………………………………

DOP web at p7 under

 

Processing and Product Transport

All Tertiary sand would be transferred

 

Print/CD version at p20 roman numbers

 

Processing and product transport

All raw material requiring to be processed would be transferred

 

……………………………………………..

Paragraph missing from DOP web at p20 roman numbers print/CD version

 

Extracted and imported material not being processed at the central wash plant and requiring only on-site screening may be transported to market using the existing access from Lot 1 DP34599 Old Northern Road.

 

 

……………………………………………..

DOP web at p 10 under Rehabilitation and Final Land Uses

 

Sand has been extracted from part of the site to the depth allowed in

the existing consent and part of this area has been rehabilitated. These areas will not be reworked.

 

Most of the area is expected to be reclaimed to Class 3 agricultural land ….

 

 

Print/CD version at p21 roman numbers reads:

 

Sand has been extracted from part of the site to the depth allowed

in the existing consent and part of this area has been rehabilitated. These areas would only be reworked where a substantial volume of sand could be economically extracted.

 

A substantial part of the site would be reclaimed to Class 3 agricultural land

 

 

……………………….

 

DOP web at page 11

 

The following potential impacts of sand extraction have been investigated:

reduced groundwater availability to users;

reduced flow to streams;

increased turbidity in streams; and

lowering of the water table.

 

None of these are expected to occur as a result of the proposal which is expected to

lead to an increased potential for groundwater recharge to the deep aquifer with benefit to nearby users. No mitigation measures, in addition to those in place and reported in the annual management plan, would be necessary.

 

Print/CD version p22 roman numbers

 

The water levels in the monitoring bores have been continuously monitored using

automatic data loggers since 1999 and prior to that, water level measurements were

undertaken manually in some of the bores. A ten year record of groundwater levels is

therefore available. Hydrographs for all bores together with all relevant rainfall data

recorded at the PF Formation office site on Lot 198 DP752025 are available.

 

The consistent response of the water table in different locations in Maroota to

groundwater extraction and recharge and the lack of an overall long term decline in

levels suggest that the present extent of extraction from the Maroota Sand and

Hawkesbury Sandstone in the area are in a hydrogeological balance. The sand mining operators continue the monitoring of groundwater levels and quality through the extensive network of monitoring bores and, except in a single example on an adjacent site, maintain a buffer above the water table.

 

The following impacts of sand extraction are possible and have been investigated:

 

• reduced groundwater availability to users;

• reduced flow to streams;

• increased turbidity in streams; and

• lowering of the water table.

 

None of these are expected to occur as a result of the proposal which should lead to an increased potential for groundwater recharge to the deep aquifer with benefit to nearby users. No mitigation measures, in addition to those in place and reported in the annual management plan, would be necessary.

 

Contingency plans, should they be required, cannot be limited to the sand miners, whose records show that they are careful managers of the groundwater resources and that their activities are in balance with the hydrogeological regime. In the event of a serious decline of the water table which could derive from a combination of extended drought and increased extraction, contingency measures could only be effectively developed and implemented within the overall context of agricultural and sand mining usage in the area based on an evaluation by the Water Management Act managers using accurate records of all users.

 

……………………………….

 

On DOP web at page 11 under Surface Water text and figures vary on the “Southern Catchment” :

 

The site, including Lot 2 DP555184 can be divided into three catchments. Based on

containing all runoff from the 100 year storm event, the following basins would be required

on completion of the proposal.

Northern catchment 16 hectares 8,600 cubic metres

Southern catchment 52 hectares 24,000 cubic metres

Eastern catchment 29 hectares 12,600 cubic metres

 

On Print/CD version at page 23 roman numbers:

 

The site, including Lot 2 DP555184, can be divided into three catchments. Based on containing all runoff from the 100 year storm event, the following basins would be required on completion of the proposal. The basin within the eastern catchment would need to be located on Lot 2 DP555184 and is not included in the proposal.

 

Northern catchment (16 hectares) 5,500 cubic metres

Southern catchment (52 hectares) 39,000 cubic metres

Eastern catchment (29 hectares) 12,000 cubic metres

 

 

In the same section DOP web version at page 12

 

The northern and southern catchments drain to existing detention basins as part of the onsite surface water management system while the eastern catchment discharges to the natural drainage system via a large existing dam on Lot 2 DP555184 which is not included in the proposal.

 

Omitted from Print CD version.

 

………………………………

 

DOP web at page 12 -13 in part reads in the topic Noise :

 

The noise assessment comprised three components:

operational noise impacts at local sensitive receivers in the vicinity of Lot 198;

traffic noise impacts resulting from the proposal at locations on Wisemans Ferry Road and Old Northern Road; and

cumulative noise impacts at various selected locations taking account of the

proposal and other adjacent sand extraction operations.

Each of these assessments was based on operational and traffic scenarios which

represented a worst case condition to provide a comparison with criteria designed to

manage industrial noise emissions.

Noise levels during operation marginally exceed the respective noise criterion at three

locations. These relate to minor exceedances of the night time criterion during the period from 06.00 to 07.00 hours during periods when particular meteorological conditions were prevailing (north-west wind or temperature inversion). One receiver is predicted to experience a minor exceedance (1dBA) during operational hours. However, this is not likely to occur in practice as the operational scenario tested assumes that all equipment is working simultaneously. Lower received noise levels would therefore be experienced at the various assessment locations.

Existing day time traffic noise levels are within the Department of Environment and

Conservation’s recommended assessment criterion of 60 dBA at all assessment locations and the worst case predicted increases in peak daytime traffic noise levels are 1.2 dBA. However, existing night time traffic noise levels exceed the recommended assessment criterion of 55 dBA at five locations. The worst case predicted increase in peak night time traffic noise levels is 1 dBA.

 

The print CD version at p 25 roman numbers reads:

 

All operational scenarios modelled represent worst case situations where all fixed and mobile plant and equipment likely to be used over the life of the project is operating simultaneously. This situation would not be experienced in practice and correspondingly lower received noise levels would result at the assessment locations. Noise monitoring at adjacent locations undertaken over the past ten years and reported annually to Baulkham Hills Shire Council has shown that the relevant criteria are not exceeded. As changes to operating methods or the volume of material to be extracted are not proposed, it can be concluded that the modelled Impacts are overstated.

 

Modelled noise emission levels at various assessment locations are below relevant criteria during the early morning period when trucks are operating along the haul road except for marginal exceedances at one location under prevailing north west winds and three locations under temperature inversion conditions. However, the use of the night time criterion for this period (06.00 to 07.00 hours) for rural areas is considered unduly stringent in the NSW Industrial Noise Policy (Department of Environment and Conservation 2000).

 

All locations predicted to experience noise level increases have been subject to

operational noise from sand extraction and transport activities for at least seven years and the continuation of these operations can be expected to result in little overall perceived change. However, in the event of complaints concerning noise from any affected local resident, monitoring would be undertaken at the site, discussions held with the affected residents and appropriate mitigation measures agreed and implemented.

 

………………………………

DOP web version under topic Air quality at p 13 reads in part:

 

Predicted emissions are not expected to differ from those currently experienced. Air

quality monitoring undertaken over the past six years has indicated that emissions

generally remain below the annual average dust deposition goal of the Department of

Environment and Conservation of 4g/m2/month. It is unlikely that future emissions would exceed the applicable air quality goal even in combination with future PM10 and total suspended particulate concentrations generated by other local operations.

 

Print/CD version reads same topic at page 25-26:

 

The results of the assessment indicate that:

• maximum 24-hour average PM10 concentrations at the nearest dwelling are

predicted to be 11.0 μg/m3. It is unlikely that the 24-hour average goal of 50 μg/m3 would be exceeded due to the proposed operations even with existing PM10 concentrations;

• annual average PM10 concentrations at the nearest dwelling are predicted to be a maximum of 1.6 μg/m3. It is unlikely that the annual average goal of 30 μg/m3 would be exceeded due to the proposed operations even with existing PM10 concentrations;

• annual average TSP concentrations at the nearest dwelling are predicted to be a maximum of 3.4 μg/m3. It is unlikely that the 90 μg/m3 NHMRC goal would be

exceeded due to the proposed operations even with existing annual average TSP concentrations; and

• annual average dust deposition levels at the nearest dwelling are predicted to be a maximum of 0.2 g/m2/month. It is unlikely that the proposal would result in any additional exceedances of the goal of 4 g/m2/month.

Results from the dispersion modelling indicated that off-site dust concentrations at all nearby dwellings would be below relevant air quality goals as a result of the proposed operations at the Hitchcock Road site. Predicted additional impacts resulting from the proposal are minimal.

 

 

 

 

Enter content here

Enter supporting content here

non-profit media about your environment, in a human rights and social justice context