Narrabri Lateral Pipeline

Oppose the project for these reasons
CSSI - not valid for the benifit of the majority of Australian people. It is a way to bypass environmental and economic issues that affect the majority and make the minority wealthier.
Gas production is not required to increase, we already have enough for Australia. This project provides a get rich quick scheme to sell our resources overseas and keep our gas prices high in Australia.
High risk of contaminating water supplies in the artesian basin and surrounding farmlands that really are critical to Australians.
Increase fire danger in a high fire risk area.
Increase co2 into our atmosphere.
Project of no or little benifit to the health and well-being of Australians.

With the continuing scientific proof that climate change is already happening, we cannot afford to have any more gas projects created. Many people are now switching to renewable energy because they realise that to continue building gas pipelines will not help them, or the planet. Not only that but the change to the environment if this project goes ahead will be devastating, to say the least! Living in the Northern Rivers of NSW, I have already experienced the effects of climate change. Santos' record on its environmental impacts of such projects should wake us all up to realising they are dishonest in their descriptions of looking after the land, and, especially the water. There is also the effects that such a pipeline will have on the Indigenous peoples of the area involved.

I am a Gomeroi man, and I object to the NLP project.

I am incredibly concerned about the impact on Gomeroi cultural sites, and the follow on impact this will inevitably have on connection to the land, language and songlines. In May of this year, the National Native Title Tribunal imposed a condition that Santos could not undertake any future ground or surface work for the Narrabri Gas Project on or within 500m of Bohena Creek due to it's cultural significance. I do not understand why this condition should not apply to the NLP.
In line with this, the destruction of habitat of hundreds of diverse species of plants and animals, as well as many species that are currently endangered or threatened. Many of these are totems to us. The pipeline and the infrastructure that comes with it will divide the environment not just physically in terms of geography but also culturally, and will lead to blocked access for Gomeroi people to the land.

I am concerned about inadequate oversight and consultation hindering response to leaks and environmental damage as well as hindering prevention of future leaks and damage, combined with the Government's changes to gas leak reporting requirements in recent years. I am concerned for this due to methane leaks that have already occurred both in the Pilliga and in other Santos or Santos subsidiary owned gas projects.

There has not been adequate consideration in EIS and related assessments to the impact to waterways that are connected to the Great Artesian Basin, and just how much of a geographical area fits into this category. A leak during construction or extraction has potential to be one of the greatest unnatural environmental catastrophes on Australian soil since the follow on from Wittenoom or Maralinga. There are a total of 39 watercourse crossings proposed for the project, expanding the possibility beyond simply during construction or extraction.

These environmental impacts pose huge risks to the Aboriginal communities, non-Aboriginal communities and to agriculture both in the immediate area and places further away that fall in the same water catchment/Murray/Darling Basin system.

I do not believe Santos conducted consultation transparently and in good faith. The early December meeting should have waited until after the appeal hearing before the Courts in March 2026. I would like to hear specific strategies Santos used in obtaining informed consent from elders, community members and Native Title applicants with low levels of literacy.

This project presents a unique opportunity in a time where Federal Government has announced significant reforms focused at environmental protection, and where a significant part of the current State Government's election strategy was environmental promises, where a difference can be made in accordance with these promises and impending reforms.

I object to this project and the imminent threat of irreversible damage it poses.

I have been consulted on this project and in general provide support. I am a member of a number of community organisations in Baan Baa and feel there is general local community support for this project and the job opportunities it brings to the region. There has been excellent consultation procedures conducted with local landowners and the majority of the pipeline is situated in areas that do not affect areas of agricultural land use. Overall, I provide support for this project.

I strongly object to Santos' Narrabri Lateral Pipeline Project that complements their Gas Project because it will drill 850 coal seam gas wells in the Pilliga Forest a declared State Conservation Area for many endangered animals including Koalas and critically endangered birds. The piping network will clear 168 hectares of the Pilliga Forest and will cut a 30-metre-wide swathe through the Pilliga East forest. It will negatively impact the Great Artesian Basin a critical water source for rural NSW. Additionally, it will emit 127 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions and worsen climate change. 
Please see my attached document as my formal submission.
Thank you
Janice Haviland

Respectfully I submit the following objections to Santos' project to build the Narrabri Lateral Pipeline.
1. Santos' EIS is far from comprehensive. It fails to account for impacts on biodiversity, on water resources or, even more importantly, climate impacts associated with the project. Threatened and critically endangered species must be safeguarded. The impacts of disturbance and habitat loss for the Eastern Pygmy Possum, the Pilliga Mouse and a number of microbats is significant and likely to interfere with breeding. This is a risk too great to contemplate.

2. Santos have a poor international reputation for safely managing risk. Accidents under their management have been all too frequent. The company has a horror record of failures, to wit, a major oil spill in 2022 at Veranus Island WA, the Moomba plant explosion in 2004, and in 2014 a drilling rig accident in NT. I have no confidence that this project will be any better managed and I believe it is irresponsible to allow this corporation to undertake a project which has so many inherent environmental risks.

3. I note from the plans that this project crosses 7 creeks, 12 farms and will require 168 Ha of the Pilliga Forest to be cleared. I note too that the Gomeroi indigenous custodians hold much of the Pilliga as critically important to their spiritual and cultural needs and therefore to their livelihood. Bohana Creek in particular has special significance. Santos' project will undermine the integrity of this water body. It hardly needs to be pointed out that the National Native Title Tribunal ruled that there should be no disturbance within 500 metres of Bohana Creek. The plans do not account for this ruling! I am dismayed that in this day and age Australia continues to disregard the voice of custodians. Economics should not cripple the Gomeroi people.

4. Approval of this pipeline is stage one of Santos' plans to further damage the Pilliga with 850 coal seam gas wells. The CSG project is not needed anymore than the pipeline is needed. Everyone knows that Australia's gas is largely shipped overseas and that we buy it back at unaffordable prices. The international community openly laughs at the bureaucratic mismanagement of this resource. It's well past time that Australia ceased expanding CSG mining and related pipelines for the benefit of other nations while contributing little to nothing (other than a few jobs) to us. Doubtless Santos can only afford to undertake this pipeline project because the corporation pays no tax. We're not the lucky country, we're the stupid country.

In conclusion:
May I urge the Department to NOT APPROVE this project for the reasons set out.
I thank you for considering my submission.

Narrabri Gas Project lateral pipeline submission
Illawarra Knitting Nannas Against Greed
Fay Walker
Unit 2/19A Market St,
Wollongong
NSW 2500

The Illawarra Knitting Nannas Against Greed (IKNAG) are writing to oppose the lateral pipeline proposed by Santos to complete the joining of the Narrabri Gas Project to the proposed Hunter Gas Pipeline.

We are a group of environmentally aware grandmothers who are working together to ensure that greed, ignorance and power do not destroy this world that our children and grandchildren will be living in long after we are gone. When the science behind climate change and the evidence of our own eyes is ignored by people and corporations focused on maximising profits and maintaining their power and status, we act to protest against this wilful destruction and self-indulgence. We are outraged that the NSW government is, yet again, considering approving a fossil fuel project of this size at a time when all efforts should be focused on building our renewable energy and sustainable storage systems that support, not destroy, the environment.
The Narrabri Gas Project, which involves drilling 850 coal seam gas wells, and the connecting lateral pipeline will result in the devastation of the Pilliga Forest, a place of enormous cultural and environmental importance, and the farming communities in the region. When we, as a state and nation, should be moving to net zero emissions, this project goes against all such efforts and will become the sixth biggest source of greenhouse pollution in NSW.

The world is facing dire consequences from man-made climate change and yet the government is ignoring the science and considering approving this project. Construction for the lateral pipeline will clear 168 hectares of forest and will cut a 30-metre-wide swathe through the Pilliga East forest, causing serious damage for local fauna and impact on the Gomeroi Traditional Owners. The Gomeroi have a strong cultural connection to the Forest and the water resources within it and have decades of being poorly treated and ignored by those in authority. If this pipeline is approved, it will continue this historical abusive response of those in authority and major corporations to the traditional owners of the area. Instead of going down this path, we believe the government has an opportunity to preserve this amazing region for the good of the environment, wildlife and local communities and focus instead on developing the renewable energy sector to supply our energy needs.

Over many years, IKNAG members have fought against fossil fuel projects that have destroyed our environment and contributed to man-made climate change, all for the sake of the greed of those in power. We oppose this project and ask that the government consult with the traditional owners, farmers and members of the communities impacted to ensure that energy projects in the region are environmentally friendly and sustainable and NOT fossil-fuels.

Thank-you for the opportunity to contribute from a concerned community.
Yours sincerely,
Fay Walker
IKNAG representative

Hi, I oppose to the Narrabri Lateral Pipeline project strongly because I know that the climate emergency is a problem of today, not a problem of the "far future". What we need is the development of offshore renewable power (as has promised in parts of NSW and Victoria). It is doable, only if there is enough initiative and will to invest and transition. The city of Sydney has pledged that newly constructed homes and apartments need to be gas free to stem the worst effects of global warming. City mayors such as Clover Moore has promised with the gas ban and I believe this is the step in the right direction. I hope you can follow suit too, by initiating the ban on newly approved oil and gas projects.

Sincerely

I object to this project since its net effect will be to :
1. add to global green house gas emissions.
2. distract the NSW economy and workforce from the urgent work of transitioning our industry and infrastructure to activities that are sustainable beyond a few generations and restorative of trust in the good intentions of private enterprise.
3. break trust with Gomeroi people and their hope for understanding and good faith consultations as to how land, under their stewardship for so many generations, will be managed.
4. clear significant habitat of native species.
5. disrupt groundwaters

Please see attached. We ask that the Pipeline be rejected because the economic benefits claimed do not account for the negative externalities it will cause: especially to biodiversity and to greenhouse gas contributions, considering not only this pipeline component but the Narrabri Gas Project as a whole. We argue that the economic value to Australian consumers is questionable; that
Australia's future gas problem is an export, not a supply, problem; and that we can do better than opening new gas fields like Narrabri.

I strongly object to the Narrabri Lateral Pipeline. The Pilliga is sacred to the Gomeroi people. This is their land, it will destroy their water and land, also health. Santos has a shocking record of spillages and poisoning with their projects.
Australia needs to stand up to corrupt companies like Santos and stop the destruction of the environment and wildlife also, the wildlife all play an important part in keeping the environment healthy. Once destroyed, the Land and wildlife cannot be replaced. Santos will just walk away from the devastation with their pockets lined.
It is time to provide jobs for the people, to protect the land and wildlife, this in turn provides a healthy economy which will last well into the future, especially for young people.

I object to the construction of the Narrabri Lateral pipeline on the following grounds:
-it will disturb the alluvial ground water of Bohena Creek and six other major creeks
-It will impact agricultural and cropping land.
- it will increase the likelihood that Santos will drill 850 coal seam gas wells and make untold destruction across the Pilliga, including in a key recharge area of the Great Artesian Basin, risking drainage and pollution of Australia's greatest inland water source.

Given food security and protection of clean water are national and global concerns this development is inappropriate.

The Pilliga Forest is a place of enormous cultural and environmental importance. Gomeroi Traditional Owners have a strong cultural connection to the Forest, and it’s a recharge zone for the Great Artesian Basin water resource.
I strongly object to Santos' Narrabri Gas Project lateral pipeline. This is a damaging and polluting pipeline and will open up the Pilliga for Santos’ 850 well Narrabri coal seam gasfield. WE DO NOT NEED MORE GAS!!!!
Find below reasons for this objection.

Impacts on Gomeroi cultural heritage:
The Pilliga as a whole has deep spiritual, social and cultural significance for Gomeroi people. The National Native Title Tribunal acknowledged that all water resources, and Bohena Ck in particular, is of major cultural importance to Gomeroi people. The Tribunal said there should be no ground or surface disturbance within 500m of Bohena Ck without Gomeroi consent.
However, Santos plans to drill the pipeline right under Bohena Ck and across six other major creeks, disturbing the alluvial groundwater. The EIS does not discuss the cultural significance of the entire Bohena Ck for Gomeroi people at all.
Construction of the pipeline will also wipe out two known sites of significance and damage a further four sites. Gomeroi people have said the Pilliga’s integrity is central to their wellbeing and cultural practice and must be kept whole.

Impacts on farm land and forest:
The pipeline crosses 12 farms, and a little under half the land it will disturb is agricultural land, one fifth of the land to be disturbed is cropping land. The other half of the pipeline cuts through the Pilliga forest.
Construction will clear 168 hectares of forest and will cut a 30 metre wide swathe through the Pilliga East forest, causing serious damage for microbats and small mammals.
It will clear habitat and put at risk threatened species that have strongholds in the Pilliga, like the Pilliga Mouse, Eastern pygmy possum, and Corben’s Long-eared Bat.

Other issues:
Santos’ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the pipeline claims the economic “benefits” of the Narrabri gasfield and Hunter gas pipeline, but doesn’t take responsibility for the harm to biodiversity, water and climate from the bigger pipeline and gasfield.
The EIS should be amended to consider the full negative economic impacts of the greenhouse gas emissions from the gasfield and the two pipelines, which is likely to be very significant given Narrabri is predicted to be the sixth biggest source of greenhouse pollution in NSW.

The proposed Narrabri Lateral Pipeline should be declined given it is not needed to sure up Australia’s or NSW’s gas supply as the Port Kembla Import Terminal is a far better/superior solution and it doesn’t impact Australia’s biodiversity, ground water, forests, endangered species, first nations cultural and significantly important sites and other farming and land uses.

I note the following:
1. our government says Australia is expected to have a Gas shortage supply in a few years’ time probably for a few years until the lower cost energy sources are in place and have full capacity functionality (which is to bring down cost of living pressures).

2. CEO of Bluescope (one of Australia’s largest gas users) recently advised, in his speech to the National Press Club that their current gas supply contracts, which are soon to expire, have them purchasing gas for $10 a terajoule and their current competitors are purchasing gas for $2 & $2.40 a terajoule. The current spot price for gas is $18 a terajoule.
Therefore, it is not the volume of Australian gas supply which concerns Bluescope, it is the price of the gas they need to be commercially viable. (begs the question – Why open up expensive gas wells and build expensive pipelines if the major users are not going to commercially benefit?).

3. Santos’s own reporting of its proposed Narrabri Gas says that it will be their most costly/expensive to extract and convert to LNG and the proposed pipeline will be very expensive to build. Santos says it will provide this expensive gas to the Australian East Coast market (placing even greater cost of living pressure to Australian citizens) to free up its less costly gas for export to improve its profitability.

4. Santos gave an irrevocable undertaking, as part of its approval to build its Gladstone plant, that it would not purchase gas from the East Coast gas market. Santos in contravention to this undertaking has purchased gas out of the East Coast market every year to sure up its export contracted supply which has in fact caused/exacerbated shortages of gas supply to the East Coast market and put many businesses out of business and their employees out of a job ultimately reducing Australia’s manufacturing capacity. Santos also hid from public knowledge its gas emissions from its leaking Darwin storage tank as recently reported on TV.

5. The Import terminal at Port Kembla is built and functional and its owners have stated once there is a shortage of gas in Australia they will commence operating it. Squadron Energy’s Executive General Manager Operations Stuart Davis said the appointment of global expert Reganosa Servicios to manage the terminal’s onshore facilities, firmed up the Port Kembla regasification terminal as the best solution to the looming gas shortage on Australia’s east coast and remove the need for new gas fields to be drilled. Although this terminal is set to open in 2028 the company has said it would be ready to come online in 2027 if it was needed.

6. A number of subject matter experts advise that Santos’s proposed Narrabri Gas project pipeline will have significant negative impacts on primarily the biodiversity and ground water if constructed, where it is proposed to go, others mention its impact on the Pilliga forest and endangered species and traditional landowners have concerns to their cultural & significantly important sites and other landowners are concerned about the ongoing changed management practices on their cropping and other land usage to being sustainably commercially viable, if the proposed pipeline is constructed.

Other observations on the bigger picture to further explain why I object to Santos’s application for a Narrabri Lateral Pipeline and why it should be declined.

Santos has recently had 3 very interested buyers who pulled out proceeding with the purchase during their due diligence which says to me that Santos is not a good company as it would not add value to their existing company strategic and business plans.

Hence, I question the long-term commercial viability of Santos and its ability to deliver sustainably and responsibly on what it has stated it will.

My observation of Santos’s longer term commercial viability is also supported by Santos’s own doubts which are confirmed by their requests to their Australian government regulatory body to bring forward substantial amounts of their depreciation expenditure, which have been approved to the detriment of the purchasers of their gas (i.e. this additional expenditure is added to the sale price of the gas) placing additional living pressures on everyday Australians.

I genuinely question why our regulatory body approved this tax free method for Santos to improve its short term commercial viability at the expense of everyday Australian citizens (millions of dollars in Santos’s bank account with their depreciation expense giving them this money income tax free), especially given Santos pays only a very small percentage of its profits in Income Tax and the gas they sell us is actually a natural resource which belongs to every Australian citizen and its sale to Santos and other large corporates is being so poorly managed by our Government/s and their regulatory bodies (i.e. both current and previous Governments). Recently stated in Parliament that the gas industry gets over 50% of our gas for free.

We only need to look at how Norway properly manages the sale and taxation of their citizens oil and gas resources and the formation of their Sovereign Wealth Fund (which is now the largest Sovereign Wealth Fund in the world), and the benefits Norway’s citizens receive by having this fund (i.e. things like no Hospital costs and no education costs etc.). It has been well documented that our children have to pay more tax in HECS than the entire gas industry.

Isn’t it time Australia treated these large companies the same way that Norway treats theirs?

If Santos can only continue being financially viable via the support of our government (i.e. principally our PAYE taxpayers – whom Santos is already placing additional cost of living pressures on) then Santos should not be allowed to proceed with their proposed Narrabri Gas Project & Lateral Pipeline.

Many thanks for taking my concerns into consideration.

Yours sincerely

A Seccombe

I wish to express my strong support for the NLP project. I am indirectly employed by Santos and I rely on Narrabri's development for my ongoing livelihood. My work also involves close collaboration with numerous community organizations that rely on Santos' funding to deliver vital programs supporting education, health, and social outcomes across the region. I have seen first hand the incredible impact of Santos' CSR initiatives on the local community and broader region, and I know how much this will increase if this project goes ahead. For example, in September alone, the Santos Festival of Rugby injected an extra $2 million into the local economy over just two days. This was an enormous boost for a small regional town; every pub, restaurant, hotel, and shop was packed / booked out for the weekend, and local businesses reported record profits. Events like this demonstrate how Santos' investment not supports community programs but also generates tangible economic benefits for its local region.

I am deeply concerned about the amount of misinformation circulating in the media, largely driven by activist groups fundamentally opposed to oil and gas. Their rhetoric is alarmist and misleading, and it does not reflect the needs, perspectives, or priorities of the local community, specifically the vast majority of the Gomeroi people. These groups have no real connection to the area or the people who live here, yet they frequently spread false or exaggerated claims that undermine constructive dialogue and refuse to engage in a meaningful way. This type of misinformation is dangerous: it misleads the public, polarizes communities, and delays critical infrastructure that is essential for energy security. NSW imports 100% of its gas from interstate despite having vast local resources under the ground. There is a looming gas shortage facing the east coast, which is directly-contributing to rising gas prices, and consequently electricity prices, for households, businesses, and especially manufactureres in New South Wales.

The proposed pipeline is only 55 km and will be buried underground, and its environmental and community impact will be minimal. Importantly, it will allow ongoing farming, agriculture, cropping, and grazing activities to continue as normal, ensuring that local livelihoods and industries are not disrupted. Landholders hosting the pipeline will be significantly financially compensated for the inconvenience during constructions, and then can return to their normal land uses as before. Australia has a long history of demonstrating that industry and agriculture can coexist and thrive together, you only need to look at the success in Queensland to see the potential for NSW. This pipeline provides a critical transport route for locally developed gas to be connected straight into the NSW transmission network, helping drive down prices, as the cheapest gas is always the closest to the customer.

This project also represents a significant opportunity for the Gomeroi people. Through an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA), the project will deliver substantial benefits, including:
A Significant financial contribution to the Gomeroi community, to be managed by Gomeroi people
Employment and training opportunities for Gomeroi people
A Gomeroi ranger program
Contract advantages for Gomeroi businesses in tender evaluations
Numerous other initiatives designed to deliver tangible outcomes for the Gomeroi people

None of these benefits can be delivered if the pipeline is not approved.

In summary, the NLP project provides essential energy infrastructure, supports local communities and industries, delivers meaningful benefits to the Gomeroi people, and has minimal environmental impact. The current rhetoric from activist groups misrepresents the interests of the people who actually live and work here, and it risks delaying much-needed infrastructure and economic benefits. I strongly encourage its approval and timely progression so that NSW can thrive as a secure-energy state.

I am writing to strongly oppose the approval of the pipeline associated with Santos’ Narrabri coal seam gas project. This pipeline is not only environmentally damaging and polluting, but it would also open the Pilliga to the destructive 850-well gasfield proposed by Santos. Such a development carries unacceptable cultural, environmental, and economic risks that have not been adequately assessed or acknowledged in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
1. Impacts on Gomeroi Cultural Heritage
The Pilliga is a living cultural landscape of profound spiritual, social, and cultural significance to the Gomeroi people. It is not a collection of isolated sites but an interconnected whole. The National Native Title Tribunal has already recognised that all water resources within the Pilliga, particularly Bohena Creek, hold major cultural importance. The Tribunal clearly stated that no ground or surface disturbance should occur within 500 metres of Bohena Creek without the consent of the Gomeroi people.
Despite this, Santos proposes to drill its pipeline directly under Bohena Creek and across six other major creek systems. Such works would disturb alluvial groundwater systems that are deeply intertwined with Gomeroi cultural practice, identity, and responsibility to Country.
The EIS fails entirely to discuss the cultural significance of Bohena Creek as a whole, despite the Tribunal’s findings. This omission is unacceptable and renders the cultural assessment incomplete and misleading.
Furthermore, construction of the pipeline will destroy two known sites of significance and damage four others. Gomeroi people have repeatedly stated that the integrity of the Pilliga is central to their wellbeing and cultural practice and must remain whole. The pipeline would irreparably fragment this cultural landscape.

2. Impacts on Farmland and the Pilliga Forest
The proposed pipeline route crosses 12 farms, with almost half the land disturbed classed as agricultural land, including one-fifth being cropping land. At a time when food security, soil health, and rural livelihoods are under unprecedented pressure, it is irresponsible to introduce further disruption, risks to water, and long-term land degradation.
The remaining half of the disturbance footprint cuts directly through the Pilliga forest. Construction will require the clearing of 168 hectares of forest and the creation of a 30-metre-wide clearing through the Pilliga East. This clearing would fragment habitat, increase edge effects, facilitate weed invasion, and undermine the ecological integrity of one of the last large temperate woodlands in eastern Australia.
The Pilliga is a refuge for numerous threatened species, including the Pilliga Mouse, the Eastern Pygmy Possum, and Corben’s Long-eared Bat. These species rely on continuous, intact habitat. The proposed clearing and the construction noise, ground vibration, and vehicle movements associated with pipeline installation place these species at real and immediate risk.

3. Unaddressed Environmental and Climate Impacts
Santos’ EIS claims economic “benefits” from the Narrabri gasfield and the Hunter Gas Pipeline but does not take responsibility for the cumulative environmental harms of the entire development system.

The EIS does not consider:
- the full greenhouse gas emissions from the Narrabri gasfield
- emissions from the two connected pipelines
- downstream (scope 3) emissions from the combustion of the gas
- biodiversity losses tied to long-term forest fragmentation
- damage to groundwater systems central to both ecology and cultural heritage

Narrabri is predicted to become the sixth-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in NSW. Such an impact has clear economic costs through climate change, biodiversity loss, water stress, and escalating disasters that Santos has failed to acknowledge.
The EIS must be amended to assess the total negative economic impacts of the project, including climate-driven harms, rather than selectively claiming benefits while externalising all costs onto local communities, Traditional Owners, and future generations.

The proposed pipeline poses unacceptable risks to Gomeroi cultural heritage, farmland, the Pilliga forest, threatened species, water resources, and the climate. Its Environmental Impact Statement is incomplete, inadequate, and fails to meet the standard required for informed decision-making.
I urge decision-makers to reject this pipeline and the broader Narrabri gas development to protect the Pilliga, honour Gomeroi custodianship, safeguard biodiversity, and prevent major long-term climate harm.

I urge the NSW government to reject the Narrabri Lateral Pipeline on the following grounds:
- The pipeline will be drilled under Bohena Creek and across six other major creeks, disturbing the alluvial groundwater. This will have a negative impact on local agriculture and wildlife.
- The National Native Title Tribunal acknowledged that Bohena Creek and other water resources are of major cultural importance to Gomeroi people. The Tribunal said there should be no ground or surface disturbance within 500m of Bohena Ck without Gomeroi consent. This pipe would violate the integrity of a site of major cultural significance to Gomeroi people and they have not consented.
- Construction of the pipeline involves clearing 168 hectares of forest and a 30 metre wide pathway through the Pilliga forest. NSW needs to make every effort to retain native forest to mitigate climate change and rapidly declining biodiversity. This pipe will cause permanent damage to a significant forest ecology and the loss of a carbon sink, and damage to threatened species with strongholds in the Pilliga, like the Pilliga Mouse, Eastern pygmy possum, and Corben’s Long-eared Bat.
- Santos’ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the pipeline claims economic benefits of the pipeline to its gas field network, but doesn’t take into account the significant damage to biodiversity, water and climate from the bigger pipeline and gasfield. Nor does it account for the increased greenhouse gases that will be generated, as the pipeline would contribute to Narrabri becoming the sixth biggest source of greenhouse pollution in NSW. This is unacceptable at a time when NSW and Australia needs to avoid committing to any new fossil fuel extraction, in order to reduce our greenhouse emissions and the impact we are already experiencing in increasingly damaging bushfires, flooding and storms.
- Santos has a poor track record in environmental management of its gas operations. Notably it has concealed major emissions from its LNG plant in Darwin over many years. It cannot be trusted to minimise environmental impacts or to meet its commitments in the environmentally, culturally and agriculturally sensitive Pilliga.
- Renewable energy is growing rapidly in Australia and internationally, and it is cheap compared to the expensive gas that will be produced by Santos in Narrabri. If the NSW government approves this pipeline and therefore the huge Narrabri gas operation, we, the NSW taxpayer risk having to cover the cost of remediating a stranded asset and polluted environment, when Santos in a few years discovers international demand for gas has fallen and it abandons Narrabri because it is no longer commercially viable.

1. I am deeply concerned that my government is enabling the expansion of foosil fuel projects when it is clear that the burning of fossil fuel is damaging the planet, including the people and other species of NSW, now and inclreasingly in the future. The proposed infrastructure would enable the fossil fuel indistry to expand when it should be contracting. Planning permission should therefore not be granted. I appeal to you to do the right thing!

2. I am further concerned at the likely impacts of the proposed infrastruture on Gomeroi cultural heritage:
The Pilliga as a whole has deep spiritual, social and cultural significance for Gomeroi people. The National Native Title Tribunal acknowledged that all water resources, and Bohena Ck in particular, is of major cultural importance to Gomeroi people. The Tribunal said there should be no ground or surface disturbance within 500m of Bohena Ck without Gomeroi consent.
However, Santos plans to drill the pipeline right under Bohena Ck and across six other major creeks, disturbing the alluvial groundwater. The EIS does not discuss the cultural significance of the entire Bohena Ck for Gomeroi people at all.
Construction of the pipeline will also wipe out two known sites of significance and damage a further four sites. Gomeroi people have said the Pilliga’s integrity is central to their wellbeing and cultural practice and must be kept whole.

3. the proposal is likely to have impacts on farm land and forest:
The pipeline crosses 12 farms, and a little under half the land it will disturb is agricultural land, one fifth of the land to be disturbed is cropping land. The other half of the pipeline cuts through the Pilliga forest.
Construction will clear 168 hectares of forest and will cut a 30 metre wide swathe through the Pilliga East forest, causing serious damage for microbats and small mammals.
It will clear habitat and put at risk threatened species that have strongholds in the Pilliga, like the Pilliga Mouse, Eastern pygmy possum, and Corben’s Long-eared Bat.

4. Other issues include:
Santos’ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the pipeline claims the economic “benefits” of the Narrabri gasfield and Hunter gas pipeline, but doesn’t take responsibility for the harm to biodiversity, water and climate from the bigger pipeline and gasfield.
The EIS should be amended to consider the full negative economic impacts of the greenhouse gas emissions from the gasfield and the two pipelines, which is likely to be very significant given Narrabri is predicted to be the sixth biggest source of greenhouse pollution in NSW.

Dear Madam/Sir,

I hereby lodge my submission to the Narrabri Gas Project Lateral Pipeline.

I OPPOSE Santos’ destructive gas pipeline.

This lateral pipeline is the missing link for Santos’ Narrabri Gas Project. Santos wants to build a 55km high-pressure gas pipeline to carry 200 terajoules of gas a day from it’s gas drilling sites in the Pilliga forest, through farmland and across major creeks to the corridor of the proposed Hunter Gas Pipeline, near Baan Baa.

The pipeline would connect with Santos’ gasfield plan that involves drilling 850 coal seam gas wells in the Pilliga Forest. These wells will open up the Pilliga for Santos’ Narrabri coal seam gasfield.

This lateral pipeline is a damaging and polluting pipeline! The Pilliga Forest is a place of enormous cultural and environmental importance. Gomeroi Traditional Owners have a strong cultural connection to the Forest, and it’s a recharge zone for the Great Artesian Basin water resource.

My key points of objection are:

Impacts on Gomeroi cultural heritage:

* The Pilliga as a whole has deep spiritual, social and cultural significance for Gomeroi people. The National Native Title Tribunal acknowledged that all water resources, and Bohena Creek in particular, is of major cultural importance to Gomeroi people. The Tribunal said there should be no ground or surface disturbance within 500m of Bohena Creek without Gomeroi consent.

* However, Santos plans to drill the pipeline right under Bohena Creek and across six other major creeks, disturbing the alluvial groundwater. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) does not discuss the cultural significance of the entire Bohena Creekk for Gomeroi people at all.

* Construction of the pipeline will also wipe out two known sites of significance and damage a further four sites. Gomeroi people have said the Pilliga’s integrity is central to their wellbeing and cultural practice and must be kept whole. This pipeline places Gomeroi cultural heritage, farmland, water and habitat at risk.

Impacts on farm land and forest:

* The pipeline crosses 12 farms, and a little under half the land it will disturb is agricultural land, one fifth of the land to be disturbed is cropping land. The other half of the pipeline cuts through the Pilliga forest.

* Construction will clear 168 hectares of forest and will cut a 30 metre wide swathe through the Pilliga East forest, causing serious damage for microbats and small mammals.

* It will clear habitat and put at risk threatened species that have strongholds in the Pilliga, like the Pilliga Mouse, Eastern pygmy possum, and Corben’s Long-eared Bat.

My other concerns about this project:

* Santos’ Environmental Impact Statement for the pipeline claims the economic “benefits” of the Narrabri gasfield and Hunter gas pipeline, but does not take responsibility for the harm to biodiversity, water and climate from the bigger pipeline and gasfield.

* The EIS should be amended to consider the full negative economic impacts of the greenhouse gas emissions from the gasfield and the two pipelines, which is likely to be very significant given Narrabri is predicted to be the sixth biggest source of greenhouse pollution in New South Wales.

The proposed massive Narrabri Gas Project in the Pilliga forest and it’s associated high pressure gas pipelines threaten a lot of what people love about north west New South Wales.

With the ever-increasing effects of climate change on the country the Minns Government must refuse permission for this project. Green energy generation and infrastructure must now take precedence. The extraction and use of fossil fuels must be curtailed immediately. To divert from this way forward would be irresponsible.

I thank you for this opportunity to express my opinions on this matter.

For the only planet we have.

Colleen Wysser - Martin

I object to the project for the following reasons:
*The pipeline is going through productive farmland as well as the important Pillaga Forest. This pipeline will be put there permanently, it will remain there forever and will impact these land forever. There is no requirement for the owner of the pipeline to remove the pipeline at end of use, so it will be a negative legacy on the land that it crosses forever until it rusts and degrades.
* The pipeline crosses a number of waterways, in particular Bohena creek and the method of construction of the pipeline requires the use of directional drilling which will start at least 800 mtrs from the waterway, drill down through shallow water aquifers and will require the drilled hole to be pumped full of betonite (and other materials) slurry to maintain the hole integrity whilst the drilling occurs and then after to allow the pipeline to be pushed through the directionally drilled hole. This slurry will damage the aquifers and also the ecosystems that depend on groundwater systems ie. Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDEs). These ecosystems include a variety of habitats, such as aquifers, wetlands, springs, and terrestrial vegetation like forests and trees. They require access to groundwater to maintain their communities of plants, animals, and ecological processes. The ecosystems near Bohena creek rely on uncontaminated water, some of these ecosystems include:
Aquatic GDEs: These include ecosystems like rivers, wetlands, and springs where groundwater surfaces, and also subterranean ecosystems within aquifers and caves.
Terrestrial GDEs: This category includes ecosystems that rely on groundwater for all or part of their water supply, such as forests, woodlands, and even individual trees.
Subterranean GDEs: These are ecosystems that exist below the surface, such as cave systems and aquifer ecosystems, which are inhabited by unique species like stygofauna (aquatic animals that live in groundwater).
These ecosystems have not been properly studied in the project EIS nor has the damage that could occur to them been studied, identified or mitigated in the projects EIS.
*The pipeline will clear a considerable area of land which impacts the farms and forest, native animals living on that land.
*The pipeline will help enable the Coal Seam Gas industry to continue and expand the damage that is being done and will be done to our aquifers, in particular the Great Artesian Basin, this damage is permanent and will impact future generations negatively forever.
*The pipeline will allow more gas extraction and the fugitive methane gas release into our environment, further exacerbating climate change via green house gas emissions
In summary this pipeline will cause more harm than good and should not be allowed to be constructed. The project does not have any social license, as shown by the submissions to the PAC hearing 98% were against, it does not provide any substantial benefit to the community other than helping Santos to make money whilst they are not paying any royalties for the gas they extract. Do not approve this Pipeline!