The Environment Minister is seeking public input on whether the potential impacts of the proposed Bylong coal mine on the neighbouring Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area (GBMWHA) should be taken into the consideration of the project.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The NSW Department of Planning and Environment has recommended that the mine proceed, subject to stringent conditions.
However, under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act the Minister can reconsider an earlier decision on the basis of the availability of new information that was not foreseen at the time of the first decision.
And environmental group Lock the Gate has appealed to the Commonwealth to exercise this capability, citing two recently released reports that claim the Bylong Valley scenic landscape is of state heritage significance and linked to the adjacent GBMWHA and the neighbouring site could be negatively impacted by the project.
Invitation for public comment on whether it’s necessary to list World Heritage as a matter for consideration in Bylong, closes Friday, October 26.
“It is eleventh hour and we are trying our best to ensure that both state and federal governments have all the information in front of them about just how profound the impacts of this mine will be.
- Georgina Woods, Lock the Gate NSW coordinator
Lock the Gate NSW coordinator, Georgina Woods, explained that Minister can only rule on what’s put to her and that these new reports need to be tabled.
“At the beginning of consideration of an activity the Minister decides which matters of national environmental significance are applicable to the activity in question. And that decision was made several years ago for the Bylong coal mine and the Minister decided at that time that it was nationally threatened species and the water trigger that were applicable to the project,” she said.
“But there is a mechanism in the act to reconsider that decision and add additional matters if there’s new information that has become available since the first decision was made. So we wrote to the Minister saying ‘there is new information that indicates that there would be an impact of this project on World Heritage’, which is another matter of national environmental significance.
“And that’s because the Bylong coal mine is directly adjacent to the Blue Mountains heritage area and the new information is two-fold; firstly, the bio regional assessment that came out in the middle of this year which indicated that the water impact of the Bylong mine is going to extend into 137 sq km of the GBMWHA; and secondly, the independent report on heritage that was commissioned by the Heritage Council of NSW which puts the Bylong landscape in the context of contributing to the values of the adjacent world heritage area.”
Ms Woods admitted that it is late in proceedings, with the project heading to Independent Planning Commission public meeting at Parklands Resort, Mudgee, on Wednesday, November 7. And is hopeful of a speedy outcome as she said the various bodies involved in the approval process need to have the new reports put to them.
“It is eleventh hour and we are trying our best to ensure that both state and federal governments have all the information in front of them about just how profound the impacts of this mine will be,” she said. “We think it should be rejected not just for its impact on agriculture and water, but also for its impacts on the aesthetic values and beauty of the world heritage area that it’s right next door to.”
KEPCO Bylong Australia confirmed that they were invited to make a submission and will be doing so.
Submissions can be made to Department of the Environment and Energy by emailing epbc.referrals@environment.gov.au and must reference the project number (EPBC 2014/7133).
