Mod 6 - Hour of operation and landfill cap

I request an extension to respond.
I object on the following points;
Air Pollution
Noise Pollution
Increased Traffic
Health risks
Conflicting information is given in the proposal.

I object to the proposal for the following reasons:
The noise reports for Modification 6 (increasing operating hours) make
incredibly unreasonable assumptions. For example, the operator
attended noise measurements are copied from a previous report for a
project already refused by the IPC (the `Energy from Waste' facility).
There are several problems with this:
1. These readings were taken in 2014 ("Operator attended noise
measurements have previously been measured and reported in the Energy
from waste Facility", pp 12-13 of Appendix B for Modification 6);
2. They failed to take into account the true nature of a facility
running 24 hours a day. The `night' readings were taken just after
midnight, rather than being at the times most likely to interrupt
sleep (e.g. 3-4am); and
3. Most importantly, the readings were based on the existing operation
of the facility. Modification 7 (MP 06_0139 MOD 7) aims to make major
changes to the site, including a new access road, additional
weighbridges and the construction of a large waste reception area. The
proponent is asking the IPC, and the public, to believe that these
changes will make no difference to noise levels.
The estimated impacts of Modification 6 (increased operating hours)
are based on Modification 7 (site access and layout) not existing This
is bizarre. Each application will obviously affect the other (unless
the proponent is not planning to use any of the new facilities during
the new hours that it is applying to operate).


When information is presented in a detailed table, like the changed
operating hours in Modification 6 (Appendix B, page 6), it can
obfuscate the real impact of the proposed changes. The table shows the
approved and proposed operating hours. For example, for the MPC and
PSE operations, they are currently approved to receive materials
7am-6pm Monday to Friday and 8am-4pm on weekends and public holidays.
The proposed hours are simply stated as "24 hours". When presented
like this, it does not make clear to the public that this is an
increase of 97 hours every single week. Given that a week is only 168
hours, this represents an extraordinary increase. It is 13 extra hours
a day, through the middle of the night, with the increased operations
planned in Modification 7. The application is asking the IPC and the
public to accept, on weekdays, that a facility currently operating for
only 55 hours Monday-Friday will have no significant impact by
operating an additional 65 hours Monday-Friday. It would give a more
accurate understanding of the impact if they were to say "We would
like to operate 218% the hours we currently operate on weekdays,
especially through the middle of the night".


Modification 6 should be refused until the full impact of Modification
7 operating 24 hours a day can be properly assessed. In the reasons
for its refusal to approve the previous `Energy from Waste'
application, the IPC noted that it took into account the
`precautionary principle'. I believe that this is a vital
consideration here given the enormous uncertainty surrounding the
impact of the two current simultaneous applications. There is also no
social worth to this application; the incentive of massively increased
private revenues has led to the company to act in bad faith through
this application process.


This application is only of private benefit for the company. It has
frequently made reference to its own priorities (its own "flexibility"
and "increased demand" from new construction projects). This is
another way of saying that they want to be free to operate when they
please in order to meet private demand, leading to private revenues.
There is no public interest. This likely explains why it has submitted
reports that, by their nature, cannot possibly be accurate. Despite
having such long documents to support its application, it could be
accurately summarised like this: We would like to make as much money
as possible, contribute nothing new to the community and make no
attempt at genuinely measuring the impact of our massively increased
operations

I object to the increase in hours as my house is very close to this
facility and I will be studying for my HSC and hopefully at university
in the near future and need to ensure I have adequate sleep. The noise
travels and I will be affected by this. It is not necessary to operate
24 hours a day. I hear noise from the facility throughout the day, I
do not want to hear it at night, particularly in the early hours of
the morning when I am trying to sleep. This increase in hours has no
benefit for me or my local community so I don't see why it should be
allowed to go ahead. It simply isn't fair for local residents like me.

I object to the proposal to increase the operating hours. It will have
nothing but a negative impact on the surrounding residential suburbs.
The noise will travel at night and I worry for my family who have to
work and study with the noise impacting their mental health. There is
no reason nor need for this facility to operate 24 hours a day, seven
days a week and it is not fair for those residents, like me and my
family, who will suffer only negative impacts. Nothing positive at
all.

I object to this proposal as I am a local elderly resident who deserves
to live out my days in peace. At 96 years of age, I should have my
weekends and nights interrupted by unnecessary noise, particularly
when it doesn't have any direct benefit to me or to anyone in the
surrounding residential areas. It's all about making money and I
reject the idea. If it could provide some benefit to my local
community or even my family, I would understand but all I see will be
my peace impacted negatively. That is not fair for me, not fair for my
family or my neighbours. This should not be allowed to go ahead.

This is disgusting! Already the smell and pollution from the water
management centre is as and yet you insist on making it worse! I moved
him 2 years ago with my husband because we thought this would be a
terrific neighbourhood to raise a family. Yet you are willing to put
our family's and community's health at risk, not just with pollution
but additional traffic.

Sydney is expanding. Soon enough, Western Sydney will be the main
business district for NSW and you are trying to inhibit our expansion.
The decision to increase waste and extend operating hours is not
acceptable , I it is disgraceful. I vote `no' as do many others.

I only found out about this proposal today, on the very last day before
submissions close 17/10/18. Given what we found out about the Genesis
facility & it's directors when the community fought to stop the waste
incinerator from going ahead I am saying no & ask you to do so as well
to this proposal. The DADI group which Genesis is part of is a repeat
offender in they way they have repeatedly broken rules set out on the
handling & disposal of asbestos. Minchinbury & other nearby
communities should not be made to suffer so this company can make even
more money. Why would you allow them to bring in more asbestos when
there is an existing problem with their handling of it ? This proposal
is also confusing & given what we know about this company I have to
wonder if this is a ploy to confuse & pull the wool over the
community's eyes. Please say no !

This proposal is very confusing, it says one thing in one section and
then something else in another. So which part are we meant to believe
? We fought to stop this company building a waste incinerator because
it's stupid to burn waste, because this company doesn't tell the
truth, & because they have broken rules on how asbestos should be
disposed of. Don't allow them to take any more asbestos than they
already are licensed to take. They shouldn't be allowed to take any
because of what they've done in the past. Please stop this proposal.

Now how can I be expected to know about this proposal if I don't have the
internet ? I'm an older lady & if my friend hadn't contacted me and
told me about the proposal I wouldn't have been able to have my say. I
do object because this company is up to no good. I know this because
they have broken the laws of asbestos disposal, and been fined for it.
I contacted Blacktown Council to see what they had to say and they
didn't know anything about it. Nor could they show me a copy of the
proposal because they looked but couldn't find it. This is not good
enough.

Please say no to this proposal because 1/ this companies history of
complaints & fines due to mishandling asbestos 2/ noise pollution 3/
confusing proposal that is misleading 4/ not enough time to place our
submissions

I object to the proposal because this company has continually broken the
law on how to handle asbestos. Because this facility is so close to
businesses and communities it represents a threat to everyone's health
and wellbeing. They should never have been given approval to take
asbestos at the Eastern Creek facility when they have a bad history at
every other place they & their sister companies have operated from.

I don't want this facility to be able to accept any more asbestos than
they are already allowed to. This is because of their history of
incorrect handling of asbestos. Too many people will be affected by
this companies neglect so please say no. The proposal itself is hard
to understand & contradicts itself. When my grandmother contacted the
council they didn't know anything about it & they didn't have a hard
copy of the proposal to show her, even though it said in the proposal
there should have been.

This proposal is a bad idea because it a) is confusing to read b) is
contradictory c) the company involved has a history of poor handling &
disposal of asbestos at every premises they have operated from,
including where they are now at Eastern Creek d) there was no hard
copy of the proposal at Blacktown Council & staff at the council
didn't know anything about the proposal when contacted by my
grandmother. This was despite it saying it would in the information
about the proposal.

I am very disappointed with Council and Department of Planning for
allowing the site which is close to the residential area to be used
for waste disposable and landfill by a proponent who is known for
multiple breaches and offences. It was a very wrong decision in the
first place. The amount of pollution is horrendous! Now he wants to
run it 24/7 and increase landfill capacity. The application and
supporting documentation provided by Genesis is conflicting, deceiving
and doesn't add up. In one part they state they want to increase
landfill by 300,000 tonnes per year and in another report they say
unlimited. Is this to confuse the Department of Planning? If you run a
business at 700,000 tonnes of landfill during business hours why would
you need to run the facility 24 hours, 7 days a week and quadruple the
number of trucks for only an extra 300,000 tonnes. Something fishy is
going on. Once the back road to his premises opens up (Archbold rd) ,
there is no doubt that the trucks will bypass the M4 and use this
shortcut to get into the M7. This is catastrophic as it's only 5
metres or so from homes. Exposing residents to even more pollution,
noise, and possibly to asbestos. It's just not justifiable.

I urge the Planning Department not to approve such a ridiculous
application. Please keep into consideration that this Proponent with
his shady track record still has the incinerator in his vision and
this may just be a back door entry in his excuse. I would think it
very unfair if we had to battle this like we had to battle against the
incinerator. It was so mentally and physically draining and totally
uncalled for, especially when you know it is wrong.

I also called Blacktown Council who could not locate a hard copy that
you have stated is available for our viewing of this application. Is
there a hard copy? Or are we being misled?

I also ask that an extension be given for lodging our submissions as
it was very short notice and many residents and opponents are unaware.

Thank you for your consideration and attention

My wife & I wish to start a family & we are greatly concerned about
living so close to the Genesis facility when they have repeatedly
broken laws on handling asbestos. This facility is surrounded by
homes, playing fields, schools and businesses who through no fault of
their own have their health jeopardised by this company's disregard of
the law. I am also concerned about the facility operating 24 hrs a day
because at night noise travels more. The proposal itself is misleading
and confusing, with the average person being unable to understand it.
I urge you to say no to this proposal & thank you for your
consideration.

As I wish to have a baby soon I object to this facility being allowed to
accept more asbestos than it is currently allowed. Given its history
of mishandling asbestos they shouldn't be allowed to take any. I am
worried I won't be able to sleep at night because this facility is so
close to my home. I had no hope of understanding this proposal at all
because it's too confusing.I should be able to understand something
that has the potential to harm my health, & the health of my future
children. Please say NO.

I am asking you to say no this proposal because of this companies history
of breaking the laws set out on how to handle & dispose of asbestos.
They have had repeated complaints & been fined, even at Eastern Creek
where they are now. I can't understand this proposal & it appears to
contradict itself. This may be intentional or it may be because this
company doesn't care about the community. Lastly I have no wish for my
sleep to be interrupted by trucks,& equipment operating at night. The
community was here first & as such our well-being comes first.

With several young children I am greatly concerned about their health in
relation to living so close to a business that has repeatedly broken
the laws which govern the handling asbestos. I am also concerned about
my family being able to sleep at night if this company is allowed to
operate 24hrs a day 7 days a week. We can already hear noise coming
from the side of the M4 already at night. I wouldn't have known about
this proposal if a friend hadn't contacted me. I have a child that
suffers with asthma & the dust that continually invades our home
causes many medical episodes so please don't allow them to bring any
more non recyclable waste near our community.

I object to the proposal because I have young children who have sensitive
airways who already react to the amount of pollution in the air.
Having only lived in the area for a short time I have noticed a lot
more dust in Minchinbury than where I previously lived. This company
has repeatedly broken the laws of handling asbestos so I am asking you
to say no to this proposal for the future health of my children & all
the children living around this facility.

Please find attached a copy of the submission.