I have serious concerns about water and consider that this project should be assisted under the ‘water trigger’ under Federal law. It is of the utmost importance that the potential impact on the Great Artesian basin should be seriously and rigorously assessed.
I am concerned that burying pipelines under creeks will impact on their flow and the water table.

All conditions required to protect the cultural heritage of the Gomeroi people should be protected in perpetuity.

The idea that listed threatened species could be impacted by this project makes this an unacceptable project. In a biodiversity crisis , this should be top priority.

Hello, I’m a tax payer, parent, teacher and zookeeper.
I’m opposed to the loss of habitat and climate distruction tgat will result from this project. Pilliga is a recognised biodiversity hotspot and includes 50 listed threatened species.
Additionally clearing and construction noise stress animals like koalas who become more susceptible to disease as a direct result.
Another major concern is water quality. This project risks the great artesian basin and this has not been adequately addressed in assessments. A leak could cause critical contamination.
We need to be future planning and moving away from this over reliance on fossil fuels.

This project has no environmental positives - I oppose it being built. We need to save Pilliga Forest habitat, the waterways to save pollution of Great Artesian Basin.
You need to listen and consult with traditional custodians and other active environmental groups & local community - to sustain other essential engagement with land management, farming etc

I support this project this project because it represents a strategically important investment for New South Wales and Australia’s energy future.

Energy security and affordability remains one of the most critical public policy challenges of our generation. Reliable and affordable gas supply plays an essential role in balancing the variability of renewable energy and supporting households, hospitals, manufacturing, agriculture, and transport. Secure energy is not just a commodity—it is the foundational infrastructure that enables modern society to function. Energy piped through this project will underpin society’s progress, economic competitiveness, and overall national resilience.

Equally critical are the local benefits. Large infrastructure projects provide meaningful employment pathways, which directly strengthen regional communities. The company has clearly outlined commitments to maximising local participation in the workforce and supply chain. In regions such as Narrabri and surrounding communities, jobs for locals matter—supporting families, small businesses, apprenticeships, and long-term community stability. Economic opportunity in regional areas reduces social disadvantage and ensures young people can build futures without needing to leave home.

In reviewing the EIS, the company has demonstrated clear planning, risk mitigation, and adherence to regulatory frameworks to protect biodiversity, land, water, and air quality. Its track record indicates a proactive approach to environmental management, emphasising monitoring, adaptive safeguards, rehabilitation, and best-practice construction controls. The company has shown it understands its responsibility to ensure environmental safety and has established that this commitment will continue throughout the project lifecycle.

For these reasons, I support the Narrabri Lateral Pipeline and encourage its progression in the interests of energy security, regional employment, and responsible environmental stewardship.

I object the project as a resident of nearby Dubbo who frequents this area.
The impacts to the water, the environment, and the connection of First Nations people to their Country, that this project would have is of significance.

The waterways within the extent of this project have not been considered adequately in EISs. Occurring over the Great Artesian Basin, the potential for contamination would have catastrophic impacts to communities in the area. Often reliant on bores, these communities would be forced to face these hazardous consequences. The town of Narrabri itself recently having contamination and water supply issues with their bores. To me this is the largest and most catastrophic impact of this project and must be considered with the utmost caution. Water is the most valuable resource to our Western communities and anything which endangers this, endangers entire communities.

Pilliga forest is one of the largest forested areas in Western NSW, acting as a refuge for many species which are unable to exist in the conditions that pastoral expansion has imposed on their environments.Many of these species are already listed as threatened.

Lastly, the Pilliga forest contains many areas significant to the Gomeroi people. These areas and their access must be protected and considered in this project's proposal. First Nations people are continually removed of rights to their cultural heritage, a theme very visible in recent projects covered in media accross the country.

Thank you for your consideration.

1 we dont need to export any more poluting gas only to make profits fir Santos.
2 protect our valuable and at risk inland water ways
3 the pipeline is going through valuable agricultural land
4 keep out of the Pilliga! Way too precious!

This proposed pipeline is set up to go through and destroy very valuable land. It will run through farm land, the food bowl of the nation, the Great Artesian Basin and the Pilliga Forest.
It will damage country important to the local Gomeroi nation. Water is very culturally significant to the Gamilaraay people and water levels have already been significantly affected by devastating droughts that plague that area. As someone who grew up in this beautiful country(Tamworth), to hear that this is even being considered is beyond disgusting. In no way can you say you care for the indigenous people and approve this plan. It is clear how much of a show your ‘care’ is.
This project should be assessed under the ‘water trigger’. Again, as a person who lived in Tamworth during the 10 year drought, this pipeline shows clearly that the farmers and rural communities aren’t being thought of. The basin provides water for the entire farming region surrounding it. Local farmers are concerned about contamination and changes to drainage of local water resources.

This pipeline is going to destroy Australia if it is approved. There are plenty of jobs currently available.
This isn’t your world you’re destroying. It’s our children’s, it’s our grandchildren. It’s the future of Australia. History is watching. Choose how you’ll be remembered.

In 2019 I ventured beyond the Great Dividing Range and for the first time experienced the Pilliga with its own unique forests, pink sandstone outcrops and caves, and hor springs the Great Artesian Basin. I had no idea at the time that this area, sacred to the Gomeroi and now me, was under threat.

I had no idea of the fracking that had happened, the 850 wells and the gas pipeline. All I knew was that it was above the Great Artesian Basin which provides a unique habitat for flora and fauna. Its water flows east, and west into inland water systems.

Now i know more. The pipeline and laying of 850 wells must be stopped. We need to protect the great artesian basin and its water sysytems, the flora, the fauna and the surrounding communities, especially the Gomeroi who have ancient ties to this ancient land.

What will be the short term gains? What do short terms company profits, mean when compared to long term destruction? Gas pipelines, that last only 200 short years, threaten precious water resources for future generations who depend on it.

'Jobs' is always an excuse in the extractive industries, but when it comes to making profits, jobs are sacrificed to processes of mechanisation, AI and FIFO workers. They do little to support local communities. Companies like Santos pay little to no tax, but if they were, that tax could fund real jobs in renewables.

A Gomerai women explained whats happening to the Pilliga as if its our body. The taking of hair off the skin (the land clearing), the mutilation of the flesh and the injection of poisons into our veins (the fracking and boring processes and toxicity in our rivers).

We cant let that happen. I urge the Department of Planning to think ahead on behalf of NSW and not succumb to the pressure exerted by the gas lobby to allow this travesty.

As a young person, an Australian who loves our one of a kind landscapes, and a student studying the renewable energy transition, I strongly object to this pipeline through the Pilliga Forest, and the detrimental impact it will have on biodiversity, climate change, and Country. The Great Artesian Basin has not been adequately considered in the assessment of this project, and the risks involved are simply too high to accept. The impacts on groundwater will have flow on effects to the entire ecosystem, increasing erosion, change creek flows, and risk contamination.

Introduction:
I am a landholder at Baan Baa Road, located within close proximity to the proposed Narrabri Lateral Pipeline (NLP). Due to the location of the tie-in point and the proposed Baan Baa construction compound, it appears likely that my property will be directly impacted by construction traffic, noise, dust, land disturbance and potential impacts to livestock and water resources.
Based on the information available, and the considerable uncertainty surrounding key aspects of the proposal, I oppose the project.
________________________________________
Proximity and Property Impacts:
The alignment, tie-in location and construction compounds place the project in the immediate vicinity of my property. The lack of detailed mapping showing exact distances between work areas, access roads and private properties prevents an accurate assessment of how directly or severely affected we will be.
My property supports livestock and contains several water sources essential for our agricultural operations. Any construction disturbance, chemical contamination, changes to drainage or noise intrusion has the potential to harm stock health and welfare.
Until detailed mapping and spatial impact analysis is released, landholders cannot evaluate the true extent of the risks.
________________________________________
Construction Impacts:
1. Traffic and Access Routes
The project documentation does not provide a definitive list of proposed access roads or transport routes. While it states that “existing roads, including highways, local roads and State Forest roads” will be used, this is insufficient for proper assessment.
Given our location relative to the Kamilaroi Highway and the Baan Baa construction compound, it is likely that construction traffic will travel near our boundary or on local roads adjacent to our property.
Key concerns include:
• heavy-vehicle traffic impacting road safety for rural residents
• increased dust, road degradation, and noise
• potential impacts to livestock movement and farm operations
• limited information about oversize load deliveries or night-time traffic
• lack of clear mapping showing proposed access points and upgraded tracks
Without clarity on traffic routes or volumes, residents cannot anticipate or mitigate impacts.

2. Noise and Vibration
Pipeline construction typically involves trenching machinery, haul trucks, hammering, generators and nighttime works depending on the schedule.
The proposal does not provide:
• predicted noise levels at nearby residences
• a buffer distance from construction zones
• an assessment of impacts on livestock, which can be sensitive to sustained or sudden noise
• any guarantees regarding work hours or after-hours operations
Given our proximity, we expect construction noise could be substantial.

3. Dust and Air Quality
Dust generated by:
• earthworks
• unsealed access roads
• heavy-vehicle movement
• stockpile handling
may:
• contaminate grazing areas
• affect livestock respiratory health
• foul water troughs and open water sources
• reduce amenity and liveability
No dust-control strategy specific to rural livestock properties has been provided.

4. Land Disturbance, Rehabilitation and Long-Term Impacts
Pipeline construction requires a right-of-way up to 40 metres wide, plus additional land for laydown yards, tracks and machinery turn-around areas.
Concerns include:
• loss of productive land
• soil compaction
• altered drainage
• weed spread
• integrity of rehabilitation on cracking-clay or flood-prone soils
• the long-term management of easements and restrictions on future land use
Rehabilitation commitments remain vague and lack measurable performance criteria.

5. Compensation and Landholder Protections
The proposal does not detail:
• how landholders impacted by traffic, dust, noise or disruption but not directly hosting pipeline easements will be compensated
• the process for claiming damages to fences, roads, stock, or water supply
• monitoring and reporting obligations
• minimum setback distances
Given the scale of works, comprehensive compensation and monitoring frameworks should be required.
________________________________________
Livestock, Water Sources and Agricultural Operations:
My property has substantial livestock and several water sources which may be exposed to:
• dust contamination
• noise stress
• vibration impacts
• potential chemical spills (fuel, hydraulic fluids, drilling additives)
• increased traffic inconsistent with farm operations
Livestock stress can cause behavioural issues, reduced productivity, calving problems, and in horses serious safety concerns.
No livestock-specific risk assessment has been provided.
Water sources require strict protection. Any sedimentation, runoff, chemical exposure or alteration to natural catchments poses a high risk to animal health.
The project currently provides no detailed assessment of these risks.
________________________________________
Lack of Detail and Inability to Properly Assess Impacts:
Across traffic, noise, access, land disturbance, water, biodiversity, and operational impacts, the project provides insufficient detail for landholders to make an informed judgment.
A project of this scale should not proceed to approval without fully developed:
• construction traffic routes
• noise impact assessments
• road-upgrade and maintenance plans
• livestock and water-source impact assessments
• rehabilitation performance criteria
• clear maps showing all work areas, laydown yards and access tracks
• a transparent compensation framework
• cumulative impact analysis alongside the Narrabri Gas Project
In the absence of these, the proposal cannot be adequately scrutinised.
________________________________________
Required Conditions (if the project proceeds):
If approval is considered, the following conditions should be mandatory:

Traffic & Access
1. Release of the full Construction Traffic and Access Management Plan (CTAMP) prior to approval.
2. Public mapping of all access routes, transport corridors and compound access points.
3. Commitments to maintain and repair all local roads used for construction traffic.
4. Advance notice to all residents within a defined buffer of any major traffic movements.

Noise & Work Hours
5. Clear limits on construction hours (no night works near residences).
6. Noise monitoring with accessible reporting.

Livestock & Water
7. Stock-safe fencing and traffic-control measures where construction activity intersects with livestock areas.
8. A water-protection plan addressing sediment, dust, chemical spill response, and runoff.

Rehabilitation
9. A measurable rehabilitation plan with soil restoration standards, weed management, and long-term monitoring.

Compensation
10. A defined compensation framework for:
• stock loss or stress
• water contamination
• road damage
• amenity loss
• operational disruption
________________________________________
Conclusion:
Given the lack of essential detail, the proximity to my property and the significant risks to agricultural operations, livestock, water security and rural amenity, I oppose the Narrabri Lateral Pipeline project in its current form.
The proposal does not provide enough information for affected landholders to understand or manage the likely impacts. Until the deficiencies outlined above are addressed, the project should not be approved.