Basis of objection:
1. The Mangoplah BESS site (given the rural environment and topography) has insufficient water holding capacity.
2. Mains water supply is not available to the proposed Mangoplah BESS site.
3. The mains water supply line running from The Rock to the village of Mangoplah has insufficient capacity to supply the volume of water required for the Mangoplah BESS.
4. Increasing the water supply burden on the line without a line upgrade will comprise water supply to existing connections.

Subject - Objection to the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System - SSD-77527735
As per attached pdf letter

Sir/Madam;
Subject: Objection against the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System – SSD-77527735.
I am writing to formally express my objection against the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) project proposed by Samsung C & T Renewable Energy Australia (SREA) Pty. Ltd., to be located within the property on 4178 Holbrook Road, Mangoplah.
I am a local farming resident located just outside the impact zone of this project and community leader working with the surrounding community in the areas of sustainable agriculture and Landcare. I have been engaged in local Regional Energy Accord activities and, whilst not adverse to renewable energy projects, I do not approve of this Project as I do not feel the risks to the local community have been adequately considered in the design of the project. Most importantly, however, I do not consider the risk:benefit considerations of the local community have been adequately addressed in the design of this project.
In my experience as an agricultural scientist, this land has been incorrectly classed as Class 4 land. It should be Class 3. As stated on page 76 of the EIS “the site selected for the BESS infrastructure features cropped agricultural land”. Imagery of the site also confirms the presence of cropping lines in the paddock. WWCC has expressly confirmed that land zoned in classes 1 – 3 should not be subject to projects such as this reflecting strong community sentiment nationally about the use of productive land for non-farming industries. Soils have been acknowledged as dispersive and could cause issues with water logging.
Community has expressed significant concern about the risks of insurance and fire. The EIS report identifies that temperatures could rise by a further 3.9 degrees during the life of this project. The impact of fires on the facility of fires started on the facility, whilst acknowledged in the EIS: “the Project will identify mitigation measures to reduce these concerns”, obvious mitigation strategies such as increased buffer zones around the facility have been ignored. Most farmers know that an 11 metre Asset Protection Zone on a 40 degree day with strong winds will do nothing. Further, vegetation placed within 3 m of the APZ will add further fire risk. With exception to this attempt to hide the installation from public view, It is evident, that the EIS is simply sticking to their original plans without making alterations to appease genuine local concerns. Bushfire plans should be made in partnership with the local bushfire brigades who will be the first responders in emergency management situations, not just head office. Community concerns about insurance, whilst “not proven” according to the EIS should NOT be dismissed.
“Landholder and community engagement is an important aspect of providing essential energy services to Australian communities”, with landholders considered as “critical partners and stakeholders in the delivery of major energy projects” (p. 1, The Energy Charter, n.d.).
My opinion and the view of my fellow local residents has been that efforts at community/stakeholder engagement have been disingenuous at best. Many would argue that it has been deliberately deceitful. There have been clear examples where the Project’s closest neighbours have not been consulted and the sending of letters to non-existent Mangoplah residents has been included in consultation metrics.
In the compilation of the EIS executive summary and report, there has been a deliberate overemphasis of wider community sentiment at the expense of the 95% opposition for the Project by the local community.
The conclusion to the Project identified in the EIS Engagement Summary report clearly states “strong opposition to the Project” and “widespread resistance, with minimal neutral or positive views, and many dismissing community benefit sharing as inadequate” - 95% of respondents to their online community feedback form opposed the Project.
Within the report it refer to core opportunities being:
✓ Generates local employment, economic stimulus and other local economic benefits ✓ Includes broader benefits to the community through a Community Benefit Fund (CBF) established via a proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) to be developed in consultation with WWCC. [It] Supports local initiatives that enhance community well-being and sustainability
Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia (SREA) Pty. Limited’s core opportunity is not only false (the jobs are unlikely to come from the local community, they will come from Wagga which does not have enough ‘tradies’ already, so probably not there either), but also misaligned with the needs of the local community. Their own online community feedback form revealed that nearly 75% of those surveyed saw employment as “not important”.
I view Community Benefit Sharing proposals within this Project to be tokenistic at best. Some paint on the Mangoplah hall walls and a bit of sponsorship for the local football club does not ‘measure-up’ to the risk to the local environment or surrounding communities should disaster occur. In truth, the benefits, particularly given the way it is worded within the EIS, will flow to Wagga Wagga City Council, not to local residents.
Respondent surveys show that over 90% of respondents were “very concerned” about the Project’s impact on water ways, land values, agricultural land use, the natural environment and neighbours. 95% of respondents oppose the Project. There has been no change to the sentiment of locals to this project indicating they have not met their own “commitment to engaging respectfully with the community and ensuring the Project is developed in a way that considers local interests and concerns”.
I reinforce the final statement of the EIS: “Overall, perceived social impacts particularly division, procedural unfairness, and loss of rural identity may outweigh potential economic or infrastructure benefits unless the project delivers tangible, equitable outcomes and adopts engagement practices that build trust and demonstrate genuine inclusion in decision making”.
This project has not met its social licence obligations. It has not allayed genuine community concerns around project risks, nor demonstrated any meaningful benefit to the community. This project should not be approved until such time as it does.
Sincerely,
Alison Southwell

Subject: Objection to the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System – SSD-77527735.

Because of the High risk of contamination to the soil around the proposed Mangoplah BESS project, leaching onto other landholders’ properties in the vicinity of the proposed Mangoplah BESS project.

I am writing to formally express my objection to the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) project proposed by Samsung C & T Renewable Energy Australia (SREA) Pty. Ltd., to be located within the property on 4178 Holbrook Road, Mangoplah. Because of the High risk of contamination to the soil around the proposed Mangoplah BESS project, leaching onto other landholders’ properties in the vicinity of the proposed Mangoplah BESS project.

The site is within close vicinity to the village of Mangoplah and is surrounded by agricultural and grazing land – to me it is not a place to build such a project.

The risk of soil contamination around the proposed Mangoplah BESS project site is high because of “Erosion and sedimentation as a result of earthwork activities. Site contamination from the use of contaminated fill material from off-site. Soil contamination from fuel or chemical leaks/spills or inappropriate material storage” (cited, p. 126, Umwelt, Environmental and Social Consultants, Territory Battery, 2024). Furthermore, earthworks associated with construction of the proposed Mangoplah BESS project, “would general spoil that could lead to increased sedimentation of nearby waterways…Earthwork activities could also lead to increased sedimentation of nearby waterways from on-site erosion caused by vegetation clearance…and site levelling…trenching for BESS cabling and transmission line. Construction of the electrical substation, construction compound and hardstand and laydown areas. Drainage works” (cited, p.126, Umwelt, Environmental and Social Consultants, Territory Battery, 2024).

Moreover, “These erosion and sedimentation impacts could be exacerbated by the increase in areas of impervious or lower permeability surfaces once the Proposal is operational. This would increase stormwater runoff rate and volume from the site and could lead to off-site erosion and sedimentation” (cited, p.126, Umwelt, Environmental and Social Consultants, Territory Battery, 2024). Moreover, into the many waterways and creeks that surround the proposed Mangoplah BESS project site, from the initial access off the Holbrook Road, through to the Mangoplah BESS and substation sites, which flow into Burkes Creek to the north of the proposed Mangoplah BESS project site, which then flows into the Murrumbidgee River.

Furthermore, according to the NSW Government in the Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines, Draft, “Contaminated land is land on which a substance occurs at concentrations above background levels which causes, or is likely to cause, a risk of harm to human health or the environment” (p.4). The Draft, goes on to state “Contamination can have significant environmental, social and economic consequences including: • the degradation of soil and water • the uptake of contaminants by plants and animals • increased risk of harm to human health and • restrictions on the development of land” (p.4).

This contamination, erosion and sedimentation, resulting from earthwork activities associated with the proposed Mangoplah BESS project is very alarming and of major concern if these contaminated sedimentary bodies were to flow into the nearby landholders’ paddocks, which in turn will not only be a biosecurity issue, but also a high risk to the existing soil within those paddocks. Moreover, the surrounding landholders are also concerned with how this contaminated soil will affect their health, as contaminated soil can pose risks to human health, including respiratory problems, skin irritation, and potential ingestion hazards, according to Raw Earth Environmental. Furthermore, according to the NSW Government, contamination can affect soil and water quality, impacting ecosystems and potentially contaminating food sources, which is also of major concern to the surrounding landholders to the proposed Mangoplah BESS project, as it can also affect their pasture grasses, crops and livestock, then in turn impact their income.

It deeply affects and concerns me that a rural community like Mangoplah is being exposed to this degree of risk of having the proposed Mangoplah BESS project built within close proximity to the village of Mangoplah but also very close to productive farming and grazing land. Additionally, the change of land use from farming to industrial will negatively impact Mangoplah’s rural setting and lifestyle. Please consider the environment, the cost to the Mangoplah community and surrounding farming families, many of whom have been here for generations, working hard to keep the area going, do not want the proposed Mangoplah BESS project to go ahead.

Subject: Formal Objection to the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System – SSD-77527735

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) by Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia (SREA) Pty Ltd at 4178 Holbrook Road, Mangoplah. After reviewing the available information, I believe the project presents substantial and unacceptable risks relating to hydrology, flood behaviour, environmental integrity, emergency safety, and land-use compatibility.
________________________________________
1. HYDROLOGY AND FLOOD RISK
The proposed site is situated within a landscape that is already prone to overland flow, waterlogging, and periodic flood events. The large-scale build footprint of the Mangoplah BESS—including access roads, concrete pads, substations, impermeable surfaces, and cut-and-fill earthworks—has the potential to significantly modify natural hydrological processes.

Key technical concerns include:
1.1 Increased Runoff and Altered Flow Paths
The introduction of extensive impervious surfaces will increase runoff volumes and velocities, potentially redirecting stormwater toward neighbouring properties and downstream waterways. Without detailed two-dimensional flood modelling using contemporary ARR (Australian Rainfall and Runoff) methodologies, the project cannot demonstrate that flood impacts will not be exacerbated.
1.2 Disruption of Natural Drainage Lines
The site appears to intersect or lie adjacent to natural drainage depressions. Even minor changes to these features—through infill, regrading, or vegetation removal—could initiate back-water effects, channel scouring, or ponding, compromising local hydrological stability.
1.3 Insufficient Evidence of Flood Mitigation
The application materials do not appear to provide:
• Verified pre- and post-development flood level comparisons
• Assessment of probable maximum flood (PMF) exposure or asset resilience
• Modelling of cumulative flooding impacts from nearby developments
• Demonstrated compliance with NSW flood-planning controls and emergency access requirements
Without these, the project cannot be considered hydrologically safe.
________________________________________
2. SAFETY AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT CONCERNS
2.1 Flood-Exacerbated Battery Fire Risk
Lithium-ion industrial storage systems pose well-documented risks of thermal runaway. If floodwaters reach electrical cabinets or supporting infrastructure, there is an elevated risk of short-circuit events, structural failure, or restricted access for emergency responders.
2.2 Evacuation and Access Constraints
Holbrook Road and nearby rural routes are vulnerable during heavy rainfall. Flood-induced isolation could delay emergency response, contradicting essential safety requirements for critical energy infrastructure.
2.3 Hazardous Chemicals and Containment
In a flood scenario, compromised containment systems could allow contaminants, electrolytes, firefighting agents, or degraded battery materials to enter soils and waterways.
________________________________________
3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
3.1 Vegetation Removal and Habitat Loss
The area surrounding 4178 Holbrook Road contains native grasslands, remnant woodland patches, and riparian features that support local biodiversity. Clearing or altering these areas will further fragment habitat and modify wildlife corridors.
3.2 Soil Disturbance and Erosion Risk
Cut-and-fill operations on sloped rural land greatly increase the risk of erosion, sedimentation, and downstream water quality degradation, particularly during high rainfall events.
3.3 Sensitive Ecosystem Hydrology
Local ecological communities, particularly those dependent on periodic moisture, may be adversely affected by changes in surface water distribution, leading to long-term environmental decline.
________________________________________
4. LAND-USE COMPATIBILITY AND COMMUNITY IMPACT
4.1 Rural Zoning Mismatch
The proposed Mangoplah BESS is a large-scale industrial installation. Its noise profile, security lighting, heavy-vehicle movements, and 24/7 operational nature conflict with the surrounding agricultural and rural residential land uses, diminishing amenity and altering the rural character.
4.2 Industrialisation of an Agricultural Landscape
The introduction of high-voltage infrastructure and battery arrays is inconsistent with the intended primary production and low-density rural settlement pattern of Mangoplah.
4.3 Risk to Adjacent Agricultural Activities
Changes to drainage and flood behaviour have potential to affect crop viability, soil health, livestock safety, and farm access.
________________________________________
Conclusion
Given the substantial unanswered questions and potential for harmful hydrological change, increased flood risk, environmental degradation, public and emergency safety hazards, and land-use incompatibility, I strongly request that the Mangoplah BESS proposal (SSD-77527735) be rejected or required to undergo significantly more detailed and independent assessment.
Until these concerns are fully resolved with transparent, peer-reviewed evidence, the project cannot be considered safe or appropriate for this location.

Subject: Objection to the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System – SSD-77527735.

Because of the High risk of contamination to the waterways, creeks and dams in the area surrounding the proposed Mangoplah BESS project, during the decommissioning of the BESS.

I am writing to formally express my objection to the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) project proposed by Samsung C & T Renewable Energy Australia (SREA) Pty. Ltd., to be located within the property on 4178 Holbrook Road, Mangoplah. Because of the High risk of contamination to the waterways, creeks and dams in the area surrounding the proposed Mangoplah BESS project, during the decommissioning of the BESS.

The site is within close vicinity to the village of Mangoplah and is surrounded by agricultural and grazing land – to me it is not a place to build such a project.

The “Potential groundwater quality impacts associated with decommissioning …In particular, spills or leaks of fuel or any other liquids used in vehicles or plant and Proposal infrastructure could lead to altered groundwater quality if transported into the underlying aquifer” (cited, p.110, Neoen, Territory Battery EIS, 2024), and can significantly contaminate waterways, creeks, and dams through various means, primarily runoff containing “chemicals needed for operation and maintenance such as transformer oil and battery coolant” (cited, p.110, Neoen, Territory Battery, EIS, 2024). Furthermore, these decommissioning activities can have long-lasting impacts on receiving water bodies, such as creeks and dams, when they received polluted runoff (Science of the Total Environment, 2024), this pollutant runoff from construction sites, includes oil, grease, heavy metals and nutrients from construction equipment and materials.

Moreover, decommissioning activities such as excavation and grading expose soil, making it vulnerable to erosion and can have a significant impact on the quality and quantity of receiving waters due to the introduction of additional runoff. The pollution of receiving water bodies during construction can lead to severe degradation of water quality. Furthermore, studies have shown that road construction across streams can lead to substantial increases in total suspended solids (TSS) downstream, these increased sediment and chemical loads can reduce water clarity, affect oxygen levels, and introduce toxins into the water, impacting and harming aquatic ecosystems. Moreover, “spills or leaks of chemicals used in construction of the Proposal could lead to impacts to groundwater quality if transported into the underlying aquifer” (cited, p.110, Territory Battery EIS, 2024), and into the many waterways and creeks that surround the proposed Mangoplah BESS project site, from the initial access off the Holbrook Road, through to the Mangoplah BESS and substation sites, which flow into Burkes Creek to the north of the proposed Mangoplah BESS project site, which then flows into the Murrumbidgee River.

This contamination to the waterways around the decommissioning of the proposed Mangoplah BESS project site, is very alarming and of major concern if this water supply is contaminated during the decommissioning of the proposed Mangoplah BESS project, as water is a valuable commodity to the residents of Mangoplah and more so to the surrounding landholders, who rely on clean water in the creeks that supply the dams on their farms for their livestock. More alarming, to the landholders around the proposed Mangoplah BESS project is the fact that “groundwater quantity and hydrology could be impacted by the Proposal through changes to the amount of stormwater seeping into the groundwater…” (cited, p.110, Umwelt, Territory Battery, EIS, 2024), moreover, this would involve an increase in the area of impervious or less permeable surfaces, which would lead to a localised increase in stormwater runoff…”(cited, p110, Umwelt, Territory Battery, EIS, 2024). This knowledge is further disturbing as there is an increased probability that this stormwater runoff will contain sediment, chemicals and other pollutants, as mentioned above.

As a new member of the Mangoplah community, it deeply affects and concerns me that a rural community like Mangoplah is being exposed to this degree of risk of having the BESS built within close proximity to the village of Mangoplah but also very close to productive farming and grazing land. Additionally, the change of land use from farming to industrial will negatively impact Mangoplah’s rural setting and lifestyle. Please consider the environment, the cost to the Mangoplah community and surrounding farming families, many of whom have been here for generations, working hard to keep the area going, do not want the proposed Mangoplah BESS project to go ahead.

This is yet again, another environmental disaster, waiting to happen
Once again this battery energy storage system will be affecting the local community Whether it be visual aspects ongoing noise potential for a major fire outbreak this list could continue on and on
I’d like to get to the heart of the issue the major problem we have is, it doesn’t matter how many objections from the local community , are submitted

The state planning Panel seem to be let’s pass this project we don’t have to live there, the community does not matter
They are paided by the taxpayers to look after the community !!!!!!
not offshore companies, and we need the support of the local Wagga city council to refuse these projects in our local LGA
This zero 2050 Target Is not achievable, let alone the effect it is going to have on the broad cross-section of Australians whether it be unaffordable power or Destroying local communities This renewable dream is turning into a train wreck. It’s about time our government woke up And revisited other alternatives before it’s too late

We are loosing too much agriculture land.
This is making our landscape ugly.
When this plant stops working where does it go??? Into landfill???
If you want to help the environment plant trees.

Objection to the Mangoplah Battery Energy Storage System - SSD-77527735
As per attached letter.