Public outcry against a proposed sand mine inside a PFAS contamination risk zone has reached boiling point, with residents questioning how the material could be exported offsite.



At a public meeting on Monday, residents surrounding the Williamtown RAAF airbase near Newcastle claimed it was double standard to allow the mine to remove soil and sand offsite while residents face restrictions on moving 'a wheelbarrow full'.

The $5 million quarry on Cabbage Tree Road in Williamtown has been deemed a state significant development and endorsed by the NSW Department of Planning and Environment.

It is now being considered for approval by the Independent Planning Commission (IPC).

All but one of the 125 original public submissions to the Planning Department opposed the project citing a range of potential issues, including PFAS chemical contamination, damage to surface and groundwater resources, traffic, safety, air quality and noise.

Map of the proposed sand mine site, in yellow, in Risk Zone C and the NSW EPA's Broader Management Zone. ( Supplied: NSW Department of Planning )

Residents told they cannot remove soil from properties

The project would produce more than three million tonnes of sand to meet demand in the building and construction markets of Sydney, the Central Coast and Hunter region.

By comparison, locals have told the IPC that they are not allowed to remove soil or spoil from their own properties unless it goes to an approved disposal facility.

Red Zone resident Brian Curry pleads with commissioners from the IPC to reconsider the proposed sand mine. ( ABC Newcastle: Nancy Notzon )

"Local residents are unable to even move wheelbarrows full of their own soil outside the boundaries of their properties, but we have this sick, twisted irony where companies are able to remove half a million tonnes a year for the next 15 years," said the president of Williamtown and Surrounds Resident Action Group Cain Gorfine said.

The project lies within Risk Zone C, the third-lowest risk category out of the four classifications identified by a human health risk assessment into the chemical contamination which stems from firefighting foam used on defence bases.

The classification identifies risks with consuming locally sourced food and water and swimming in contaminated water.

"It seems illogical, unjust and contradictory that this edict applies to some members of the community, but not others," resident Brian Curry told the Commissioners.

Concerns over sand being shipped across the state

The Planning Department's environmental assessment report, which found "the proposal is in the public interest and is approvable", cited advice from Professor William Glamore, of the EPA's PFAS Contamination Expert Panel, indicating "the capacity for PFAS to attach to sand particles was low, due to the relatively low ionic charge on these particles".

The Department said it relied on the proponent's own data to assess any potential level of PFAS in the mined sand.

"The Environment Impact Statement and related documents prepared for the development application showed no evidence of any PFAS chemicals either in the sand resources at the proposed quarry site, or in the underlying groundwater," a spokesperson for the Department said.

"The direction of travel of PFAS-contaminated groundwater from beneath the RAAF Base at Williamtown is not directly towards the quarry site, but farther to the east.

"The Department of Planning and Environment sought and obtained detailed submissions from many State agencies, including NSW Health, the EPA, OEH and the RMS.

"No agency or other party has suggested that the sand contains PFAS or is unsuitable for its intended final use, which is generally for use in making concrete."

Another blow for residents

Residents rejected the department's assessment, saying the risk of spreading contamination from the mine is too great.

What are PFAS chemicals? Officially known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances

Officially known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances They have industrial uses including in firefighting foams

They have industrial uses including in firefighting foams Global concern about the chemicals because they do not degrade in the environment and accumulate in wildlife and people, mainly through drinking water

"No level of contamination is acceptable," Mr Gorfine said.

"They can't be shipping around potentially toxic sand for the next 15 years out of an area that's been clearly and plainly listed as being in a red zone of contamination."

A number of residents also claimed the sand mine would further devalue their properties which have been severely impacted by the PFAS contamination crisis.

Several pleaded with the IPC to delay a decision on the project for at least three years, until a national investigation into the impacts of PFAS was finished.

Health officials say project should be referred on

Health officials have also weighed into the matter.

In recently released documents to the Planning Department, Hunter New England Population Health said it was satisfied requirements for imposed noise, water and waste would mitigate any impacts.

But "regarding the potential for airborne dust impacts", it advised the Department might consider referring the proposal to the NSW Government PFAS Advisory Committee.

The ABC was unable to contact the proponents of the sand mine.