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.
