Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia has submitted the 1,000MWh Boro solar-plus-storage project in New South Wales to Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.
The project combines a 150MW solar PV plant with a 250MW/1,000MWh, 4-hour duration battery energy storage system (BESS).
Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia is the local development arm of Samsung C&T Corporation, the South Korean conglomerate’s construction and trading division.
The project is proposed on a 410-hectare site approximately 40km south of Goulburn and 200km south-west of Sydney, across land within both the Goulburn Mulwaree Council and Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council local government areas.
Try Premium for just $1
- Full premium access for the first month at only $1
- Converts to an annual rate after 30 days unless cancelled
- Cancel anytime during the trial period
Premium Benefits
- Expert industry analysis and interviews
- Digital access to PV Tech Power journal
- Exclusive event discounts
Or get the full Premium subscription right away
Or continue reading this article for free
The construction disturbance footprint covers approximately 266 hectares, with the remainder of the site retained or used for access and ancillary infrastructure.
The solar PV power plant will use modules mounted on single-axis tracking systems, connected via underground cables to a central substation that will step up electricity to 330 kilovolts for export to a Transgrid 330kV overhead transmission line located to the south of the project.
The 1,000MWh battery storage system will be co-located with the solar PV plant and will connect via the same substation, with a new 330kV switching station linking to the Transgrid transmission infrastructure. It will connect to the wider National Electricity Market (NEM).
The project is classified as State Significant Development under the New South Wales Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, meaning the EPBC referral runs in parallel with a separate New South Wales state planning assessment.
Biodiversity surveys conducted across 2024 and 2025 identified no EPBC-listed species within the project area, and the referral concludes that no Matters of National Environmental Significance are likely to be directly or indirectly affected by the development.
Samsung C&T states in the referral that it currently has at least five development projects at various stages in New South Wales and two in Victoria, as well as two projects in Queensland, either under development or under technical study.
The Boro project’s capital investment cost is estimated at more than AU$30 million (US$21 million), though the referral does not provide a full project cost figure.
The Boro referral is the latest in a rapid sequence of EPBC submissions from Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia across multiple states.
Earlier this month, the company submitted the 150MW/600MWh Comet Park BESS near Leeton in the New South Wales Riverina for EPBC assessment, a standalone battery project connecting to the existing Yanco Substation and also progressing through the New South Wales State Significant Development pathway simultaneously.
In October 2025, Samsung C&T proposed the 200MW Block BESS near Townsville in Queensland, a modular battery system comprising 192 battery modules arranged in a grid configuration adjacent to the Ross River Substation, with operations planned through to 2059.
Never miss an Australian energy storage story. Sign up for our Australia newsletter and get the latest project announcements, policy updates and market analysis delivered directly to you.
Our publisher, Solar Media (part of Informa Group), will host the Battery Asset Management Summit Australia 2026 on 25-26 August at Amora Hotel Jamison in Sydney. You can find out more about the Summit on the official website.
Facts Only
* Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia submitted the 1,000MWh Boro solar-plus-storage project to the EPBC Act.
* The project combines a 150MW solar PV plant and a 250MW/1,000MWh, 4-hour duration BESS.
* The site is 410 hectares, located near Goulburn and Sydney within Goulburn Mulwaree Council and Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council.
* The construction disturbance footprint covers approximately 266 hectares.
* The solar PV plant uses single-axis tracking modules connected via underground cables to a substation stepping up electricity to 330 kilovolts for export to the Transgrid line.
* The 1,000MWh BESS is co-located and connects via the same substation with a new 330kV switching station to Transgrid infrastructure and the NEM.
* The project is classified as State Significant Development under the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.
* Biodiversity surveys for 2024 and 2025 identified no EPBC-listed species in the project area.
* The estimated capital investment cost is over AU$30 million (US$21 million).
* A previous project, Comet Park BESS (150MW/600MWh), was submitted for EPBC assessment near Leeton.
* Samsung C&T has at least five development projects in NSW and Victoria, and two in Queensland.
Executive Summary
Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia has submitted the 1,000MWh Boro solar-plus-storage project to Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. This project involves a 150MW solar PV plant paired with a 250MW/1,000MWh, 4-hour duration battery energy storage system (BESS). The proposed site spans 410 hectares near Goulburn and Sydney, situated within the Goulburn Mulwaree Council and Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council local government areas.
The construction footprint for this project covers approximately 266 hectares, with the remainder of the site retained or used for infrastructure access. The solar PV plant utilizes single-axis tracking modules connected via underground cables to a central substation that steps up electricity to 330 kilovolts for export to the Transgrid transmission line. The battery storage system will co-locate with the solar PV plant, connecting through the same substation and a new 330kV switching station to the Transgrid infrastructure and the National Electricity Market (NEM).
The project is classified as State Significant Development under the New South Wales Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, meaning an EPBC referral runs alongside a separate NSW state planning assessment. Biodiversity surveys conducted in 2024 and 2025 found no EPBC-listed species within the area, concluding that no Matters of National Environmental Significance are likely to be affected by the development. The total estimated capital investment cost for the Boro project is over AU$30 million (US$21 million).
Full Take
The framing of the Boro project positions large-scale renewable energy infrastructure within complex overlapping jurisdictional frameworks—state planning, federal environmental assessment (EPBC), and market integration (NEM). The process highlights how corporate energy development navigates regulatory and ecological hurdles simultaneously. The fact that the EPBC referral is running in parallel with a separate NSW state planning assessment underscores the multi-layered governance system affecting significant infrastructure.
The context of Samsung C&T's broader portfolio, with multiple projects across different states (NSW, Victoria, Queensland), suggests an operational pattern of developing complex energy assets across disparate regulatory landscapes. This scale and scope imply that navigating the administrative burden is a core component of the development strategy, irrespective of the environmental findings on biodiversity.
The result of the biodiversity surveys—finding no listed species—is a specific finding regarding national significance. However, this outcome does not equate to an absence of environmental impact in all respects, which often means that impacts on non-listed species or broader ecosystem functions remain relevant considerations outside the formal EPBC referral scope. The pattern suggests that compliance in large infrastructure is less about avoiding direct listed species and more about successfully managing intersecting state and federal planning requirements while accounting for the full footprint—the 266 hectares of disturbance—within the context of a high-stakes market mechanism like the NEM.
What are the assumptions made regarding the weight given to the parallel state assessment versus the EPBC referral when assessing the overall feasibility? How does the consistency in the submission history across states reflect a standardized approach, or is it an adaptation to localized regulatory environments? What secondary environmental metrics, beyond listed species, drive the project's long-term sustainability assessment?
Sentinel — Human
The text reads like a factual news report or press release focusing on specific infrastructure developments, exhibiting the structured detail expected from human journalistic reporting rather than synthetic generation.