Mod 1 - Extend Approval Lapsing Date

I wish to voice my objection to an extension of time being granted to AGL for this project.

Throughout AGL's undertaking of this project they have been shown on numerous occasions to have treated our community with disrespect and untruthfully. The level of compensation offers has been poor at best. We have had this issue tearing our community apart for over five years now. Enough is enough. AGL have been shown to be building this power plant as purely a way to sureup their product. We have numberous renewable power projects within our council area as well as neighbouring shires. They have had more than enough time to start their project and they have not purely because it is not financially viable. It wasn't at the time of approval and it will not be in another two years.

I urge the government to rule on the side of decency and deny this application from AGL.

I implore the NSW Department of Planning & Environment to refuse the application from AGL regarding the extension of time for the commencement of works. My family and I will be directly impacted by the power plant as it will be clearly seen from our home and it will have a direct impact on our quality of life and health. We have four children all of whose have spent the past 5 years living under the threat of their home being impacted upon by the power station.
During the initial planning and approval process I wrote a number of submissions and spoke at the community meeting which was hosted by your department to hear first hand the concerns within our community. I found it quite distressing therefor to hear of this latest submission third hand through friends as I was not contacted directly by AGL.
I note that in this latest submission AGL are yet again promoting the fact that they have purchased a large "buffer" area of land and that the plant itself is only taking up a very small amount of that area. What they have failed to highlight is that the plant would be located on the side of the buffer zone CLOSEST to the town of Dalton. Many homes are within direct line of sight of the power plant and there is significant potential that the properties and homes within Dalton itself will be impacted by vibrations from the gas powered turbines as well as any emissions from the plant while it is operational.
AGL plan to access ground water supplies for water for the plant and as we also rely on ground water there remains a risk of overuse or contamination of the supplies.
Since AGL originally proposed the power plant at Dalton there has been feedback from local Real Estate agents about the effect this is having on the marketability and prices of properties within the Dalton region, particularly for properties such as our with a direct line of sight of the proposed power station. Many people haven placed the possible sale of their properties on hold over the past 5 years while others have had to sell on a market impacted by the potential building of the power plant by AGL.
Like many rural communities Dalton's local primary producers have been doing it tough. Rural properties both adjacent to or within the locality face impacts from vibrations and emissions from the plant. With a growing number of local farmers embracing bio-dynamic or organic methods the emissions from the AGL plant may have significant if not disastrous impact.
For my family I desperately hope the application will be denied and we can finally start moving on with our lives without the threat of the possible buold hanging over our,and our children's, heads for another two years.
I have noted that your submission form ask me to disclose political donation yet AGL were fined $124000 in January 2017 for failing to disclose political donations which DIRECTLY related to a number of projects including the Dalton Gas Powered Power Station!
Yours faithfully, Louise Duncan

I write to express my displeasure and seek the Department's assistance to oppose or overturn AGL's requested "extension of time modification" to their current planning application related to the Dalton Power Project.
My Wife and I, and our four young children moved to the neighbouring town of Gunning in mid 2016.
We moved to Gunning as it was affordable compared to Canberra, provides a lovely country outlook and offered a close knit community, perfect for raising our young family, all within a commutable distance of my work in Canberra.
Now I learn of this proposed Dalton Power Station and we now have grave fears for the long term health and well being of all in the community and of course the ongoing viability of the region itself.
This concern extends to people, animals and livestock, environment, ecology, local farms, local businesses, etc. and of course property values for all, including people like me with a mortgage.
On the point of property values,
We moved to Gunning at the middle of last year and the first I heard of this proposed power station was as a result of this latest "extension of time modification" a week or so ago.
How is it possible something like this has remained so quiet? I can understand the motives of a seller to be quiet on such a proposal, buyer beware.
However, if there were any positive aspects to sway the community and popular opinion e.g. increase in local jobs, increased patronage to local businesses, for example, I would expect AGL to be doing their utmost to consult with and communicate with the community to sway popular opinion by way of letter box drops, for example. Alas I have seen nothing in my mailbox to that effect. As such I can only conclude AGL don't care about the local community or what they think. To adopt such an approach displays a lack of integrity and a level of arrogance that is sadly so prevalent with large corporations. i.e. Only interested in short term gains, while the long term good of anything falls by the wayside.
Speaking of arrogance and a lack of integrity I understand AGL were fined $124,000 in January 2017 for failing to disclose political donations which directly related to a number of projects including the Dalton Gas-fired power station.
I am concerned as all in the community are, but more so I am concerned for for the long term health, continuity and viability of the region.
I am sure there are numerous locations where such a power station could be built, if it is needed, which would be more appropriate and have a negligible impact.
Noting also the region has already been inundated by other forms of power generation, in the form of wind powered turbines / generators, seen by many as an eyesore in their own light.
I implore you to make a difference, a long term difference, a difference which matters and do what you can to oppose or overturn AGL's request.

I write this submission opposing AGLs proposed extension of time for commencement of work regarding Dalton Power Plant. I implore the NSW Department of Planning and Environment to refuse AGLs application. I wish to acknowledge my appreciation of the departments prosecution of AGL in regard to their failing to declare political donations relating to previous applications including the Dalton Power plant.
I am opposed to this proposal for a number of reasons.
I moved to Dalton 8 years ago, I bought my house because of the terrific views, the quiet atmosphere and the community values you find in a small town like this.
The views are particularly important to me as I am a part-time photographer landscape photography being an important aspect of my life, often the photographs I take are outside my doorstep or even through my windows in inclement weather. If this power plant was to go ahead the majority of my windows will have a power station view. Despite clearly being able to see my house from the proposed site I have never been approached by AGL to give me any indication of how it may effect my view or what measures they might take to reduce the impact on my view, an example of the lack of community consultation by AGL.
Noise is also an important consideration for me, I work part-time as a nurse on night duty, I moved to my current house because it is easier to sleep being a quiet country town. Any noise from the proposed plant would be quite detrimental to my sleep and in turn my health. I was so concerned about this possible noise threat over the past 5 years that I visited Uranquinty Power Plant a smaller Gas fired power plant then the proposed in Dalton, it was running only one generator and the noise was enough to have me worry about the impact the proposed Dalton plant would have on me.
AGL has not tried to fit in with our community and values, their lack of communication and consultation is evident this week alone when I myself found out by accident that they were proposing an extension of time for their proposal to commence work leaving little time to object through the appropriate channels.
The possibility of a power station over the last 5 years has seen me put my plans on hold with regard to renovating and improving my house, the uncertainty of property values in the area has been an added stress and I am only now beginning to think about renovating my house, the threat of a possible extension to this time is extremely disappointing.
Environmental impact and pollution are also a major concern of mine, I use rainwater at my house to water my vegetables, drink and shower in, the possibility of pollution of my water is worrying to me. As a keen photographer of wildlife I realise that there are many diverse flora and fauna in the area. 6 plants and 33 animal species are listed as vulnerable or endangered in the Upper Lachlan Shire, I have seen Powerful Owls, Hooded robins, Superb Parrots, Brush Tailed Rock Wallabies, Rosenberg's Monitors, Bats, Frogs and Southern Pygmy Perch in the area. These animals and plants are under threat from impact on their environment. Alteration to natural flow regimes of our waterways because of water use, sedimentation and pollution are a threat to the Southern Pygmy Perch. AGL plan to use bore water, initial testing of flow rates effected nearby bores used by farmers which they failed to acknowledge in their research, I am concerned that they may also fail to acknowledge other effects their bore may have including the possibility that multiple groundwater takes may have an effect on stream water flows and depletion of such flows. AGLs disregard to our environment is evident with their care of the site at the moment, they have failed to control noxious weeds, invasion of native plant communities by exotic weeds is not only a threat to our native plants but also our native animals. I am also concerned with the need for AGL to clear some native bushland in the construction process, clearing of native bushland including dead wood and dead trees is another threat to our wildlife and plants.
I spoke in opposition to AGL during the initial application at the NSW Planning and Assessment Commissions public hearing in Gunning in 2012 and my views opposing the Power Plant have only become stronger.

To Whom It May Concern

I am writing in relation to the application by AGL to extend the lapsing date of approval for the Dalton Power Project by two years, an action which I very much object to.

I have lived not far from the proposed power station site all my life. I know the area well and I know the community well. My family have farmed in this area for generations and we are all opposed to the construction of the power station, we have been since it was first proposed.

Firstly, in relation to the application extension submission period, I feel that two weeks is not enough time for AGL to appropriately inform the community of its intensions and for the community to have adequate time to consult and lodge individual submissions to the Department.

It takes time for a community to become informed about such projects, especially if there are new people to the area who may not have lived here five years ago, when the project was initially proposed. They have a right to be consulted, to have their say about what happens in their community. Two weeks is also not an adequate amount of time for locals to fully consider this application and to put forward their views.

Five years have passed since AGL last communicated its plans with the community, so they have had plenty of time to make the community aware of their plans and their application for extension, however they have chosen to leave it until virtually the last minute and offer the community as little time as possible to respond. It is definitely not the way to get small communities like Dalton and Gunning on side with the development.

This community that I speak of, I understand well as I have been a part of it for almost 25 years. If this power station were to go ahead it will not only destroy the character of the town, but will also pollute our local environment. It has been stated that the power station will be built on rural land, however this lies only 3km from the township of Dalton itself. We do not want a convoy of trucks to roll through Dalton and Gunning, creating dangerous traffic conditions and degrading our local roads further. We also don't want our peaceful community to be polluted with noise and vibrations whenever the plant is in operation. The power station will also bring no benefit to the community. There will be no local jobs created during the construction and operation of the plant.

The entire community is concerned about not only the short term impact to residents, but the long term impacts it may have to the town of Dalton and the farming community. The town will suffer because no one will want to live in a community with a power station in their backyard. Dalton may be small, but its attraction is that it is a quiet and beautiful area. New people will not want to move here and therefore the population of the township itself will decline, leading to a decline in local services and the viability of local schools and businesses.

I have also seen no studies or information to educate me on what the long term affects will be to the land. As I have already mentioned, I come from a long line of farmers who have seen many changes to the Dalton landscape over the past 150 years. The Gunning and Dalton areas are part of the richest wool growing region in the world and we would all like to keep it that way. Animals are affected by vibrations, air pollution and ground water pollution. Therefore farming production will suffer. This is without the added impact of land devaluation as a result of the construction of the plant.

Agriculture is a strong industry in this area, both in terms of local employment and livestock production. The farming industry is the backbone of the Dalton and Gunning communities, it's what they were founded on, and no one in this area would be prepared to put this at risk on such little information and consultation.

The Dalton Power Station will have real and devastating consequences for residents and our rural landscape. I would like to strongly register my objection to the application for an extension of the proposal and to the project itself.

Yours sincerely

Claire Medway

After hearing the news on the grape vine last week it was hard to believe that AGL l were coming back. we have had nothing or heard nothing from AGL in the past almost 5 years . This week we did get a flyer from them after we had already heard and dated after it was announced . It makes me sick to think that after nothing for so long they could come back wanting to extent their time by 2 years and make a modification which we are unaware of. Which could be far worse for us. We have followed the media and all the bad information on the fines and lies. They are not to be trusted as we have found out first hand.
I have lived here all my life only leaving for 7 years and coming back because this town is so peaceful. friendly. short distances to services and we love it. My family generation goes back a lot of generations all lived here.
When I look out my door, or sit out the back the last thing I want to see is view of turbines and I now have a beautiful view of the country side and we bought this property for that reason .
The noise also worries me because on a still night or day we hear the trains and truck on the highway from 11 km away what will these gigantic towers sound like from only 4 km away and the vibration .We actually look out over the town towards the turbines and It will not be good .In fact it will be an eye sore to the beautiful country side.
The pollution is another worry for us because being up high were we are on a foggy night or day the fog stays in the valley and pollution will do the same. We now also have extinct wild life which has been found over the past years and the pollution to our waterways would be harmful to them .
Another concern is our water supply which I might add the community is not happy about as the lines from gunning barely have enough pressure for us and to supply the gas plant we would have nothing. Using underground bores would have affect on other bores with the amount of water needed.
We have subdivided our property at a great cost to try to get out of debit and now the chances of us selling blocks is going to be even hard due to the fact property prices will drop according to real estate agents and banks will class us as high risk area not lending money for property. Many new building have gone up in our small town and mostly city people wanting out of the noisy polluted cities and moved here away from that.
After visiting other towns where there are turbines we don't want the same affect here and there are other forms of energy out there to consider which are cheaper and less harmful .
There are plenty of areas where there are no towns and communities to worry about why cant they find somewhere else. they just don't care who they hurt along the way and their history and lies prove that.

Even though I am 80 years of age and lived here all my life I don't want to see this town destroyed buy AGL who care nothing for small towns like ours. They have a path of destruction and I don't want to see my kids and grand kids go through that in this beautiful town. There is a lot of heritage and hard work that has made this town special . Their lack of communication and care to this town is very wrong. There are other places away from towns where they could build these giant turbines and not affect people health and lives.

I submit my strong obections to the Dalton Power Plant (DPP) that is being proposed by AGL.
When we purchased our property on Gunning in March 2015 we were unaware of the battle that had been waged and won by the community to stop the building of the gas-turbine power plant just 9km from our home.
We chose to leave Canberra and settle in Gunning as I moved towards retirement to live in this healthy and relaxed community.
I have since retired and we have made a comfortable home here. We have increased the viabilty of our property by installing solar roof panels, purchasing new water tanks, creating a cottage garden and managing the vegetation on the property to name but four of our many iniatives. All with the plan to be as environmentally friendly and as sustainable as possible.
The environmental impact on my home and the town and region is of great concern to me as it will negatively effect the quality of the rain water that is collected and used in my garden which will effect the produce we consume and gift to family outside this area. Hence having an effect on an even wider community.
Our property backs on to the lovely Meadow Creek and much energy has been used in clearing the ferel vegetation to make way for indigenous plants to support the wildlife.
6 plants and 33 animal species are listed a vulnerable or endangered in the Upper Lachlan Shire. Meadow Creek is one of the creeks that feed into the Lachlan River. Changes to the waterways will have a significant effect on all of the tributies that feed into such an important catchment to the Murrumbidgee and Marray Darling waterways.
Although AGL seem to think that by using bore water the water table would not effect the farming community. Testing proved this not to be so and farmers reported that the flow rates of the water in the bores on their properties was effected during the testing period, which was not included or acknowledged in the AGL research.
To add to my objection i would certainly question the environmental study carried out by AGL using Goulburn airport as the test area at postcode 2580.
The Dalton and also Gunning postcode is 2581.
Dalton is 540 metres above sea level and Goulburn is 702 metres above sea level. This alone indicates that there are many differences between the two locations including precipitation, wind velocity and temperature variances.
It seems a fair assessment to say that if the environmental study found Goulburn to have the suitable environment then Dalton would be deemed unsuitable and the proposal should be for the plant to be built at the Goulburn airport. I seriously don't think that this would be a suitable resolution as the Goulburn area is also an essential and productive pastoral region and needs to also be protected from pollutants.
A further serious objection is the plan to build the plant in NSW and the running of the plant will be remotely managed from Melbourne Victoria.
This would also then involve two juristictions. It would be naive to think that over the life of the plant that both state governments would oversee AGL in partnership, bearing in mind party allegiances and state legislations.
If the plant is to be oprated and managed in Victoria a suitable location should be sourced with as little impact on the local community as possible in Victoria.
I believe it was the original plan that this power would feed into Sydney, Melbourne and later Canberra.
Canberra is well on the way to producing all its own clean power and will not need to be supplied by the proposed plant.
My overall opinion is that at this time in Australia we need to move from power plants such as is proposed and use the millions of dollars in planned expenditure to develop healthy renewable energy.
If each suitable houshold, rural building, commercial building and others were issued with solar and or wind turbines with battery storage the country would be extremely power efficient.
The sale of power to overseas countries would take on a whole new perspective.
South Australia has had a serious rethink about the power needs of the state since the recent power failures and have made significant steps to resolving the shortages by engaging in plans to introduce renewable energy.
This should be what all government bodies in all juristictions are developing to ensure a healthy future of this country.
Please accept this correspondence as my submission to lodge my objection to the extension of the Dalton Power Plant plan by AGL.
Yours sincerely
Catherine Lyons

I am a partner in a farm adjacent to where the proposed AGL Power Plant will be built.

I am against the granting of a further two years to AGL. The Lapsing Date should remain at 19 July 2017. It is unfair to the community to keep this proposal up in the air. We are a small community and the possibility of this going ahead is causing significant unrest across the whole area. AGL should either go ahead with the power plant, or lodge another application if they wish to go ahead after that date.

Renewable energy is far preferable to the destruction that will be wrought by the proposed power plant. The damage to the environment will be significant not to mention the eyesore that all of us will be faced with.

I am concerned about the effect on our property values. As well as the property adjacent to this block, we also own other land which looks directly over where the proposed power plant will be.

I am also concerned about detrimental health effects due to emissions from the power plant. These health effects will have a significant impact both on livestock, people and wildlife.

I'm opposed to an extension of time for the following reasons:

1. AGL seeks to modify the project approval to extend the lapse date for a further two years to enable "AGL to review the DPP in line with current technology and energy market circumstances".

* Allowing AGL to review the DPP to assess "current/new technology" would be a shift away from the original approved proposal that clearly stated the technology to be used. An action to introduce different technology, including battery storage and more advanced turbines could substantially change the impact on the community and the environment than was stated in AGL's original submission.

* Consideration of "current/new technology" should only be considered via a new DPP application process and under the legislation and rules with which new proposals are considered, not the legislation (now repealed [Part IIIA]) under which the original project proposal was approved.

2. In the AGL request to extend the lapse date it is stated that "In October 2012 AGL announced the suspension of construction of the DPP due to difficult market conditions - including lower demand for electricity".

* AGL has had five years within which to make a decision to start building the power plant and it has chosen not to in this time. They have had 5 years to continually assess and consider changing market conditions.

* I contend AGL is seeking an extension on the basis that things "could" change from this point on, rather than what changes have occurred in the last 5 years. AGL is wanting an each way bet on the future and with it keeping a dark cloud hanging over our community.

3. AGL seeks to modify the project approval to extend the lapse date for a further two years to enable consultation with the local community, landholders and other stakeholders. AGL claims it wants to be a "trusted and respected member of the communities in which it operates". It claims it wants to engage beyond baseline regulatory requirements.

I make the following points:

* AGL has shown no commitment to the community in the last five years. AGL is a landowner here yet it has contributed nothing to the Dalton community since becoming a landowner here.

* There are new environmental concerns. The area has recently been identified as an environmental hotspot with the recent finding of the southern pygmy perch and the yellow spotted bell frog in our water ways. The frog was thought extinct for thirty years and is now part of a captive breeding program at no less than Taronga Zoo. A power plant will surely threaten these two endangered species. Further endangered ecological systems are threatened and OEH would have much to say on this and the recent research of migratory species like superb parrots through this area in a short period each year.

* Noise generated by the plant is a huge issue.

* AGL has shown complete disregard for its obligation to care for the land it owns. AGL has failed to control noxious weeds on its lands. The invasion of native plant communities by exotic weeds threatens our native plants and animals and it threatens the livelihoods of our farmers (AGL's neighbours).

4. AGL contend that extending the lapse date would not change the positive socio-economic benefits of the DPP. It talks of 5-10 long term jobs.

* Since the AGL announcement to suspend the DPP project the village of Dalton has grown. Families have moved here with no knowledge of the proposed plans by AGL.

People have made financial decisions about buying property and building in our community since the AGL announcement in October 2012. An extension of time for AGL would only serve to leave a cloud of concern and fear hanging over the new community members for the next two years.

It potentially has significant financial economic and environmental impacts on them that they did not foresee or were warned about. If the DPP is built those families may end up with property that is worth less than what they paid for it and borrowed to buy it.

* Dalton is a farming community and a tourist community. We are not technically qualified to work in a gas fired power plant. Conversely, I understand that the plant will be operated remotely, not by locals.

* People come here to experience a peaceful quiet country village. They will not come here, or stay if the village is overshadowed by a power plant spewing toxins into our air, our waterways and our country side. If we lose our reputation as a place of peaceful tranquillity then we will lose the people who want to live here and the people who want to visit. If we lose our people and our tourists then we lose our businesses and our jobs, our schools. We will lose our community. We lose far more than 5-10 (remote) jobs that probably won't even end up being in the area anyway.
* Further, the construction of the plant if it proceeds will be undertaken by Leighton's. I doubt the veracity of the AGL claim that construction will provide local jobs. Construction companies such as these bring construction crews in from outside the area, and set up self sufficient camps. Local business hardly ever benefits in these situations and if it does the gain is only ever short-term.

Finally we do not trust AGL - this is a firm that used Part IIIA to sidestep the planning process and have the project approved by the minister. They then sought to influence the Minister by making political Donations BUT not declaring them. They are not naïve . They knew full well what they were doing. They then admit liability and pay the maximum fine $22,000. A small price to do business in the least transparent, most dishonest and unethical way. Please refuse this application for an extension - for the good of all the people of NSW.

I am writing to object to the Dalton Power Project Application Number MP 10_0035 MOD 1.

A gas fired power station such as this, should not be seen in isolation as such a solution, without considering the impacts on the communities which will be subjected to it. An open cycle gas power station like the one proposed for Dalton, produces 85% of the emissions of a black coal fired power station.

The cumulative impact of highly persistent pollutants in harvested rainwater used locally for domestic drinking water are of critical concern to the community.

Those that choose not to subject themselves and their children to industrial noise and chemical exposure by relocating will not be compensated, yet AGL will generate profits for their shareholders out of the hardship and health risks they impose on the residents and tourism industry of the area.

If people are forced to sell their homes and properties to AGL, we will lose the volume of population necessary to continue our businesses, schools, trade and tourism in the district; the socio/economic fabric of our towns will be irreparably damaged. The possible construction of the Power Station poses a significant threat to the value of properties and business in the region. Any actual construction will be devastating.

AGL received their original approval under highly questionable legislation that was repealed in 2011 after a corruption scandal that brought down the then NSW government. This loophole legislation affords our communities little say in how our towns and lives will be affected.

By repealing it, the NSW Government has acknowledged the corrupt and unfair practices that had resulted from Part 3A. Corrupt and unfair practices such as AGL's undisclosed political donations during the assessment of the Dalton Power Project. The "transitional" provisions are also soon to be repealed. We need our elected representatives to not simply allow AGL to avail themselves of the processes under Part 3A, in order to be seen as doing something about energy security.

The impacts on the community are not acceptable. We urge our politicians to acknowledge the severity of the impact that this proposal has already had on the communities of Dalton and Gunning, and the devastating consequences for us if it ever proceeds. We do not believe the contribution to energy market security that such a peaking facility would make, justifies the harm that would be inflicted upon us.

AGL have also been found guilty of giving unlawful political donations to the NSW government during a period when this project was initially being considered.

For these reasons I object to AGL being granted a 2 year extension to consider this project.

Kind regards

I wish to lodge my objection to AGL's proposed extension of time for the commencement of work on the proposed gas fired power plant project at Dalton (DPP), NSW. AGL have not provided sufficient cause for extension. Their dishonest and illegal failure to declare Political donations, particularly in light of the call-in powers under which this project were approved, make this impossible at an ethical level to approve. It must not be extended. AGL's wish to `modify' the initial plan in an `open ended fashion' smacks of arrogance that we, the Australian people, should oppose. There is no reason AGL should not have their proposal scrutinised as per the normal process of approval. They are asking for an open ended "modification" option. AGL are not working with the community, are not fulfilling the conditions of the initial approval and must not be allowed to extend approval of this project. This objection is lodged as the extension does not meet the philosophy of 'good, clean and fair' as dictated by the Slow Food movement.

My wife and I purchased a 120 acre block at the Lachlan Hills Estate on Darbys Rd (also known as Dowlings Rd) which runs off Walshes Rd Dalton, and backs on to the AGL land where this proposal is planned.We chose to purchase this land as it offered a opportunity to own our own small piece of rural land for the peaceful enjoyment in our retirement years.The proposed power plant will have a significant adverse effect on our life and have a significant negative impact on our property value and health and well being.Our Lot no. is 265 Darbys Rd. Our solicitors undertook extensive searches prior to buying this property and none showed any proposed development of a Power Station nearby.

Having purchased a block of grazing land on Darbys Rd in 2014 I cannot recall ever being informed of this development during the purchase, I would suggest that AGL look into a more enviromently friendly development such as solar, I believe that this development will have a terrible effect on my grazing property, stock and local community. The land AGL wish to develop should remain as grazing land, why cannot AGL develop land for this project in a more remote area away from local communities.

I object to any extension to the approval lapse as it unreasonably extends uncertainty for the community.
Any application should involve an entirely new process and application with the associated cost to the proponent in order to dissuade the idea of holding a community to ransom, awaiting changes that make it favourable for the proponent.

The community is very unhappy with the proposed Gas Fired Power Station and I am very much with the community. My wife and I have recently moved into the area and would hate to see a wonderful community harmed by the introduction of this power station. My view is that if a community says no, big companies have a duty to listen these are people's homes and their lives.

Stop the proposal of the Power Plant.

Matt.

I object to the proposal to extend the lapsing date of the approval for the Dalton Power Project by 2 years.

Grounds:

1. Due process
1a. The initial approval was not for a baseload facility.
1b. This is a new proposal and needs a new assessment.
1c. I understand that AGL received its original approval under legislation repealed in 2011 after a corruption scandal that brought down the then NSW government.
1d. By repealing this legislation, the NSW Government acknowledged corrupt and unfair practices, such as undisclosed political donations allegedly made during the assessment of the original Dalton proposal.
1e. Hence it may be argued that the original assessment and approval were made under a defective head of authority which does not provide a legitimate basis for the project.

2. Changing Electricity Market and Technologies
2a. The South Australian government is strongly supporting renewables on a large scale, and is making a significant taxpayer-funded investment in them.
2b. The rate of development of battery and alternative generating technologies is such that in two years' time a gas-fired generator may well be obsolete and, if built, a stranded asset. For example, the Department of Defence is assessing molten salt batteries among other technologies to reduce its $6 billion annual expense for diesel fuel.
2c. Opinion is growing that the National Electricity Market is a failure, for instance that "...the current system is unreliable and untenable. That's not because of renewables as has been spuriously claimed, but because the private market has failed to deliver on any front - lower prices, greater system reliability or environmental sustainability." (Flinders University, 3 March 2017) AGL would appear to be pursuing a flawed and obsolescent if not obsolete business model.

I object to the AGL Dalton power project on the grounds that it will be detrimental to the local environment's flora and fauna and to the local people who have made this place their home.

I object to AGL's request for a two year extension of time for the commencement of work on the proposed gas fired power plant project at Dalton (DPP), NSW. AGL was given approval for a peaking gas power station for a period of 5 years, ending in June 2017.
AGL is now asking for a two year extension to allow them time to develop a new proposal for a baseload power plant. I object to the proposed extension on the following grounds:
1. The initial approval was not for a baseload facility. Therefore this is a new proposal that needs a completely new approval process.
2. This proposed change represents a massive increase in adverse impacts of the Dalton community. From a facility that would operate at times of peak load for between 2% and 15% of any year (7.3 - 55 days per year) to a facility that would be in continual operation.
3. The change of scope from a peak load to a baseload facility represents an up to 50 fold increase in the noise, pollution and operational risk to the local communities. The impact will be even greater if the capacity of the facility is increased beyond the currently approved 1500MW.
4. The amount and geographical impact of the air pollution created by a continually operating base load facility will also be increased. A new approval process should consider the impact on nearby population centres of Bungendore (downwind) and Canberra (large population) in winter, spring, autumn as well as summer.
5. Given the pace of development of battery and other renewable technologies is such that in two years this gas-fired plant is highly likely to be obsolete and, if built, a stranded asset. It is better to abandon the proposal now and invest in an up-to-date facility that incorporates renewable sources and energy storage.

I object to AGL's proposed extension of time for the commencement of work on the proposed gas fired power plant project at Dalton (DPP), NSW.

AGL has not provided sufficient cause for extension.

A dishonest and illegal failure to declare political donations, particularly in light of the call-in powers under which this project were approved, make this impossible, at an ethical level, to approve. It must not be extended.

AGL's wish to `modify' the initial plan in an `open ended fashion' smacks of arrogance that we, the Australian people, should oppose. There is no reason AGL should not have their proposal scrutinised as per the normal process of approval. They are asking for an open ended "modification" option.
AGL are not working with the community, are not fulfilling the conditions of the initial approval and must not be allowed to extend approval of this project.

This approval impacts me because it is well known that the time for burning fossil fuels has well and truly passed. The effects of global warming are already evident, they will continue to escalate even with the current concentration of Green House Gasses. It is essential that we now only develop renewable energy, otherwise my children and grandchildren will suffer the consequences of catastrophic global warming, as will everyone on the planet.

- I understand the initial approval was not for a baseload facility. As such, this is actually a new proposal and needs a new assessment;
_A baseload thermal power plant, with thermal storage can fulfill this task.
- I understand that the original approval was granted amid allegations that undeclared political donations influenced the decision. This should be addressed in the documentation for this application for extension, but does not appear to have been;
- this application covers prime agricultural land for what is essentially an `industrial' purpose. Any power plant of this nature should be located at existing `brownfield' sites;
- construction of a power station at this site would have a very significant negative impact on a successful, `best practice' agricultural operation;
- the extension requested is for two years. The pace of development of battery and other renewable technologies is such that in two years this gas-fired plant is highly likely to be obsolete and, if built, potentially a stranded asset. A more responsible approach for government would be to require power generators to develop proposals that embrace available and emerging renewable technologies that will ensure consistency and security of supply.